EBR Posting 013-0251…

EBR Posting 013-0251 Regarding ARA Licence #3261 We have read the proposal posted on the EBR. We cannot support the application and have the following list of concerns and questions regarding the proposal. We understand the following: -we understand the proposal is for a major site plan amendment, which we understand from ARA policy 6.00.03 means that the entire site or a portion of the site will be backfilled to original grade. -according to the MNR contact person on the EBR posting, the grading will happen in 2 phases -the depth of fill is proposed to reach 14 metres in some areas -the site is in proximity to environmentally sensitive areas and a significant wetland as per the CSM schedules -the site is also in the area of influence of a waste disposal site -we know that some sort of study was done regarding setbacks from sensitive features -we understand that a site inspection that resulted in a compliance violation (or something to that effect) took place on 2015. We understand that fill materials were being imported to the site, however the site plan did not allow for the importation of fill. We understand, in discussions with staff from the Town of CSM, that staff understood that the previous MNR officer was aware of and allowed the filling, however once a change of MNR officers occurred, the proponent was directed to stop filling and apply for a major site-plan amendment We have questions about the following: Regarding the September 2015 MNR inspection report: We would like to understand the amount of fill that was brought in, the source of the fill, whether there is appropriate documentation for the fill sources, the quality of the fill imported, whether there was any audit testing done on the fill once it was deposited on the lands. We asked the MNR contact person these questions. He did not know this information and indicated this information was not included in the 2015 inspection report. It was also indicated that that the officer was new and had not yet visited the site. We asked the MNR officer if he knew why the proponent wanted to fill, for what purpose. What is the land use intended? What studies, reports, surveys etc., were done to justify the amount of fill that is proposed? The MNR officer did not know these answers indicating this information was not relayed to him. We wanted to understand the quantity of fill being proposed to be imported into the site. The MNR contact person indicated that he had a site plan that showed contours but not the volume of fill proposed. Concerns: Given the reality of the fill industry in terms of the importation of contaminated fill and illegal dumping, we are concerned with the lack of action items imposed on the proponent when it was discovered that they had been dumping contrary to their site plan. The quality of the fill must be assessed so as to ensure the sensitive surrounding features, including groundwater, will not be impacted by any potential contaminants that may have been imported to the site. The CSM Township, like many other neighbouring townships has experience with contaminated fill being dumped on a property in its jurisdiction- i.e. a private sheep farm in Bailieboro. Please see the following link describing the story: http://news.ontario.ca/ene/en/2015/03/earthworx-industries-and-its-director-fined-84500-for-deposit ing-contaminated-soil.html We are concerned that approving this type of application sets a potentially dangerous precedent going forward for the MNR. We feel the filling of pits, simply to have a repository for excess fill can undermine good and expeditious rehabilitation practices. As many receiving sites, or contractors for fill receiving sites, get some sort of payment or benefit from the deposition of the fill, the filling may become more about the business of filling than about a good rehabilitation. As well, backfilling this site, some areas up to 14 metres, may take a considerable amount of time compared to just sloping and greening the site to blend in with the neighbouring greenspace. Other types of land use changes may be limited as at least part of the site is in the area of influence of a closed waste disposal site. We are also concerned with the fact that the MNR has not committed to incorporating new draft polices and Regs. re: excess soil. The current A.R. policy with regards to fill importation (A.R. 6.00.03) is extremely deficient in addressing all the necessary checks and balances that should go into managing a fill receiving site. The MOECC released their Excess Soil Best Management Practices in January 2014 and we do not see the recommendations incorporated into policy 6.00.03. We are not confident at this point that things will be any different with the regards to the new proposed draft excess soil regs. The lack of proper management of fill can lead to potential adverse effects for the environment in terms of contamination of land and groundwater and impairment of groundwater recharge areas due to differences in the geotechnical properties of the incoming fill compared to the natural background soils.. Also to consider is quality of life issues for those in the vicinity of these sites who may have already had to endure years of extraction and now will have to endure years of potentially unnecessary filling in order to achieve some undefined end use. We note that MNR does not have a specific policy regarding managing fill, outside the very few conditions in the policy 6.00.03. We note that each district may do its own thing. We have seen one protocol regarding fill management at aggregate sites and have been told that it is not practiced across the province. The only protocol of which we are aware is the following: “MNR Aurora District Off site fill acceptance protocol”. Although we have concerns about some aspects of this protocol and it does not completely reconcile to the MOECC BMP, we are more concerned that other districts, as discovered through our research, have no protocol at all. The realty of the fill industry necessitates that source sites, receiving sites and regulators are clear in what is required in order to protect the environment. We would like to understand whether the MNR has requested a fill management plan from the proponents that encompasses things such as on-site fill management procedures, procedures for segregation of incoming fill loads, tracking procedures, an auditing process, a contingency plan for bad fill, a qualified person (as defend by reg. 153/04) on site to sign off on fill quality and review source site reports etc.. We would also like to understand if the Ministry is aware of any of the planned sources of fill. We would like to understand if the Ministry has been given a timeline for the rehab. Could the rehab happen any sooner should less fill or no fill be permitted? Is the filling absolutely necessary for rehab? Despite all this, should these items be provided, there is still the concern that fill was dumped contrary to the site plan and our understanding is that the Ministry is not aware of the quantity, quality or source of the all the fill deposited and the application should not be approved on that point alone. The Ministry must also consider what precedent it wants to set. The lands are partly surrounded by sensitive areas. We know that not every truck load of fill can be tested. It is not practical or economical. With large amounts of fill, there is the potential that some levels of the over 120 contaminants listed in the MOECC Table 1 can be exceeded. As the area is in proximity to sensitive areas, we do not feel this site is appropriate for receive large quantities of fill. Finally, it is also a concern that the last Ministry inspection was in 2015 and we understand one has not been done since. We understand that Ministry staff may have upwards of 200 or more sites under their purview. We question whether the necessary oversight can happen in these circumstances. We have found self-regulation of large scale fill receiving sites has resulted in many contaminated and overfilled sites. A google search for contaminated fill in Ontario will lead you to some stories as well.