Waste Management of Canada…

Waste Management of Canada has reviewed the Excess Soil Regulatory Proposal (EBR Registry Number: 013-0299) and would like to express concerns regarding temporary soil storage.

The proposed regulation allows for 2 types of facilities to be used for temporary soil storage: soil banks and temporary excess soil storage sites (TESSS). The MOECC notes that it does not distinguish between soil processing sites and soil banks as it is anticipated they will operated in conjunction at the same location and is requiring that these facilities obtain and operate under an Environmental Compliance Approval, further requiring that these site post financial assurance and be subject potentially to additional requirements, as receiving sites, of the “Reuse of Excess Soil at Receiving Site” guidance document. Alternatively, it is proposed that TESSSs, under control of a “public body or project proponent”, will not be subject to an ECA, financial assurance requirements, and are not considered receiving sites. This will put private entities (owners/operators of soil banks/processing sites) at an economic disadvantage due to the need to comply with increased requirements and conditions. Both public and private entities should be subject to the same operational requirements in operating a soil storage facility, whether a soil bank or TESSS.

Although it is not proposed to allow soil processing or mixing at TESSS locations, it will be difficult to prove and enforce whether mixing occurs or not, especially when the generators have an interest in finding the lowest cost option to manage soil.

It is proposed that TESSSs can be operated without an ECA or financial assurance, if a proponent has charge, management or control of the TESSS property but does not have to own the property. This could create a situation where excess soil could be stored for up to 2 years, potentially contaminating the land used for the TESSS. The proponent could disappear leaving the responsibility for contamination with the land owner or Province, without any financial assurance means to aid in remediation. This situation could be largely avoided if TESSSs were required to operate under an ECA and post financial assurance, similar to soil banks.

The proposed regulation further proposes that soil could be stored at a TESSS for up to 2 years and it could be interpreted that a TESSS is part of a project area. This would allow for excess soil to be exposed to elements, subject to soil turning (which is proposed to take place without an ECA) and stored for up to 2 years. These activities in conjunction could be sufficient to change soil chemistry and thus “process” the soil without any conditions or approvals. As soil processing sites and/or soil banks would require an ECA and be subject to increase requirements this is another example of how public and private entities, fulfilling the same function, are not treated equally under the new regulation. Further, as the same equipment is typically used for soil turning and mixing, it will be very difficult for the MOECC or other agency to timely inspect and regulate activities at a TESSS.

The MOECC has proposed a very tightly regulated process to track and manage excess soil but has created an inherent weakness in the system and an un-level playing field between public and private entities by proposing to allow TESSSs to operate without any approvals. Therefore we respectfully request that the MOECC disregard the TESSS concept and require all sites temporarily storing soil be considered receiving sites, such as a soil bank, and be subject to ECA requirements.

[Original Comment ID: 209779]