Havana Group Supplies Inc. - Order to prevent discharge of contaminants

Two conditions from the draft Order were modified based on comments received from the public.

Generally comments submitted were in support of the Director’s Order.

We have prepared individual responses to some submitted comments

Comment

The soil specialist of the site was in charge of the fake soil contract for metro linx CN/GO. The sign that used to be at the Waterdown Garden site identified the soil specialist. I have picture of the proof. Others responsible for pushing and stacking the dirt were well aware it was contaminated but continued to push and stack the bad dirt. Look into this.

Our response

The ministry is aware of and was in regular contact with the qualified professional managing the receipt of soil to the site on behalf of Havana Group Supplies Inc. The qualified professional identified to the ministry unacceptable loads of material that were received at the site. This information is detailed in the Officer’s Report that the Director’s Order is based on. Corporations are legally responsible for the actions of their employees.

Comment

1. The address provided for Havana Group Supplies Inc. (HGS) is wrong. They are no longer at Suite 102, 3310 South Service Road, Burlington, ON. They have not been at this address for months.

2. Should directives also go to other companies? There have been frequent changes of ownership and executives. Why is Havana Group Supplies Inc. the only corporate recipient?

3. Additional persons have played a role in this issue. Why have they not been named in the Director's Order?

4. In accordance with subsection 17 of the EPA, the Director may order the person to prevent further damage and repair the damage that has occurred. We would like assurance that this issue will be addressed on a priority basis given that this assault on our land and water has been on-going for years.

5. The wells on the Waterdown Gardens (WG) site have likely been compromised given the reckless business practices exercised at the site. The impact to safe drinking water on neighboring properties, and other persons downstream, is likely. The directive requires WG to properly decommission wells on the property. We want confirmation that the firm hired to complete this work has been vetted and determined to have no affiliation with the subjects named on the Director's Order. We would also like a copy of the full report on the status of the decommissioning as well as test results for any water discovered.

6. Past performance of these companies is a clear predictor of future performance. This community does not want to be on continual alert for environmentally degrading practises at WG. We do not share the MOE's optimism that permits and work orders will lead to changed practises. Total secession of operations is the desired out come. It is also the safest and fairest outcome to those in the community that have endured this situation.

7. If materials are ever removed from the WGS site, the new, regulated, authorized receiving location should be named and the procedure fully documented. (Page 7, 3.4.)

8. It is unclear to us how financial penalties are levied against persons charged under the EPA. We encourage all available options be considered in this regard up to and including financial exhaustion.

Please ensure that Community Liaison Committee Against Waterdown Gardens is included on the distribution list for any future correspondence on this matter.

Our response

1 – Thank you for this information. The ministry has verified the last known official address for the company is as stated on the order.

2/3 - The ministry does not have sufficient grounds to include other companies and/or persons on the order as there has been no information indicating that any other parties have been involved in the receipt of excess soil at the site.

4 – Once issued, an environmental officer will be assigned to enforce the timelines set out in the Order.

5 – Item No. 8 has been modified to ensure that the licensed well contractor hired is satisfactory to the Director. Reports submitted to the ministry are available to the public subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

6 – The ministry does not have sufficient evidence at this time to justify the issuance of a stop order. At all times, the municipality regulates the land uses within its jurisdiction.

7 - Items No. 6 and 7 of the Director’s Order identify where any contaminated soil will be moved to.

8 – Currently, administrative monetary penalties apply only to a specific sector of companies with industrial discharges to surface water. Under Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choices Act, 2019), the Environmental Protection Act was amended to introduce broader legislative authority to issue administrative monetary penalties for violations under the Act. A regulation under the Environmental Protection Act will be drafted in the Fall of 2019 in order to implement administrative monetary penalties.

The ministry does not include community members in regulatory correspondence with named entities. However, the public can request copies of documentation and communications subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Comment

Last year there were a suspected 24,000 loads of soil delivered to this site on Hwy 5. Neighbours and passersby had to deal with mud and debris daily on a posted 80km road. We had to put up with slippery conditions for months and many complaints seemed to go unanswered to put any sort of stop work order. Then to find out much of this was contaminated?! I would like to know how on earth it was let to go on for so long?! What is the environmental impact to the surrounding water table? What will be the maximum length of time before the government steps in and removes the contaminates out themselves? How can this be prevented from happening again? Where will contaminated soil be allowed to be moved to? How can it be removed in a manner that will not cause the same amount of hazardous driving conditions along Hwy 5 as was originally experienced.

Our response

In the Havana Group Supplies Inc. soil site situation, the drag-out of mud from a site to the road falls under the jurisdiction of the municipality and/or Ministry of Transportation.

Item No. 9 has been modified to require sampling of groundwater from any on-site wells which have not been abandoned in accordance with Regulation 903 and are still viable prior to decommissioning.

The ministry endeavours to have the perpetrator of pollution pay for the cost of clean-up and rehabilitation consistent with the polluter pays principle. If significant environmental harm is caused, the ministry will work to ensure that the environment is rehabilitated to the extent feasible.

The ministry is proposing to amend the Environmental Protection Act to address excess soil management in Ontario. These changes would strengthen enforcement tools available to front-line provincial officers in order to better ensure clean air, clean water and clean land for Ontario families.

Items No. 6 and 7 of the Director’s Order identify where any contaminated soil may be moved to.

Comment

Soil Dumping Environmental Mess, Inquiry 'Too little-too late'. Many of us in the rural area close to the Hwy 5 site and those west of the site that travel on Hwy 5 have tried to raise concerns to officials of the local and provincial government about the soil dump and the non stop parade of dump trucks in 2018. We were largely ignored till 2018 when allegations of "mob" connections were made. Sadly another case of ignoring rural area residents concerns. The Ministry of Transport failed to monitor heavy truck traffic to ensure load weight compliance. Ministry of the Environment staff when contacted referred concerns to anybody but them. The local MPP and current City of Hamilton Alderman failed to reply to/or acknowledge emails of concern. Everyone waited till the 'culprits' had vacated the operation. The proposal is a complete waste of time. You already know what is on the site. You already know that all the 'principals' will be protected from consequences by the bankruptcy of Waterdown Garden. All that this inquiry will do is acknowledge that the site must be cleaned up likely at the expense of the taxpayer and no Ontario or City of Hamilton government official will be named as 'responsible' for letting this happen. Further, it will validate that this kind of behavior can be repeated elsewhere in this province. It has already happened again within the boundaries of the City of Hamilton and is likely happening elsewhere in this province.

Our response

The ministry does not regulate the transportation of clean soil. Once the ministry received confirmation that a small amount of soil on the site was contaminated, ministry officers followed the compliance approach set out in the ministry’s “Compliance Policy Applying Abatement and Enforcement Tools” which has resulted in the issuance of this Director’s Order to achieve compliance.

The ministry is proposing amend the Environmental Protection Act to address excess soil management in Ontario. These changes would strengthen enforcement tools available to front-line provincial officers in order to better ensure clean air, clean water and clean land for Ontario families.

Comment

This order is not near extensive enough, I am a neighbor to this property. This property is an agricultural 1 zoned property with no exemptions, it is also located in the Greenbelt. The order should state a stop of all operations, except removal of dirt debris and illegally build buildings and return property to its original farm level of about twenty years ago. There should be a removal order against HGS to get all dirt they deposited off the site, about 24000 loads worth. There should be a secondary order against Waterdown Gardens prior to HGS involvement to remove all other soil and contaminants. All government party's where deliberately finding loopholes so as to not take action and always ignored neighbors complaints. All stated issues in this order where discussed in meetings with MOE, police and City officials, and always brushed aside. This order in my opinion should be acted on immediately, and the city should pick up the cost and can take the quilty partys to court to recover the money.

Our response

Item No. 1 of the Director’s Order addresses the issue to cease receiving material at the site until the ministry determines that compliance with all aspects of the Director’s Order has been achieved.

Item No. 4 of the Director’s Order requires the parties to assess the material received at the site by Havana Group Supplies Inc. and to remove any material from the site that contain contaminants.

There are several orders that have been issued to the current owner and previous operators of the site regarding the removal of waste materials.

Once the ministry received confirmation that a small amount of soil on the site was contaminated, ministry officers followed the compliance approach set out in the ministry’s “Compliance Policy Applying Abatement and Enforcement Tools” which has resulted in the issuance of this Director’s Order to achieve compliance.