Re: Waste Management Terms of Reference
for Carp Road Landfill expansion

Comments sent to Ministry of Environment
From Ottawa City Council and others:


 

 

 

 



CFRA REPORTS:

The City of Ottawa is recommending a broader scope of Waste Management's proposed Terms of Reference for the Environmental Assessment for its new Environmental Centre in Carp.

The Ministry of Environment will have the final say on approving the new facility at the Carp Road landfill, but Council has approved dozens of strict conditions it wants imposed on the plan.

The recommendations include a full Environmental Assessment demonstrating that all alternative disposal techniques are not feasible before a new landfill is considered, a property value protection program be developed and broad public consultations.

Waste Management is proposing a new Environmental Centre, which includes a new landfill.

Council has approved $75-thousand in funding to assist local community groups through the potential Environmental Assessment process.

The Ontario Government is being urged to develop a policy to divert 60 per cent of industrial and commercial waste from landfills.

Mayor Larry O'Brien says residents in Stittsville have "done its part" in dealing with the Carp Road dump, and he will try to find another location for the new landfill if one is needed.

O'Brien told Council that the city "will look for other locations within our jurisdictions or slightly outside, but it's time to put an end to the expansion of the Carp landfill."


 

 

 

 

 

City recommendations, as amended:

 

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT 74

 

1.                   PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF A NEW LANDFILL FOOTPRINT AT THE WEST CARLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CENTRE


Conditions de rÉfÉrences proposÉes pour une Évaluation environnementale de la superficie d'un nouveau site d'enfouissement au centre environnementale West Carleton

 

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS,  AS AMENDED

That Council endorse the comments contained in Document 1 as the City’s comments on Waste Management of Canada Corporation’s Proposed Terms of Reference for an Environmental Assessment of a New Landfill Footprint at the West Carleton Environmental Centre, and direct staff to forward the approved comments to the Ministry of the Environment and Waste Management of Canada Corporation, as amended by the following:

1.                  That the City of Ottawa urges the Minister require Waste Management to modify its terms of reference in accordance with the comments contained in the staff report and any amendments or additions to those comments approved by this Council.

2.                  That a meeting of Ottawa City Council representatives and City of Ottawa staff with the Minister of the Environment and Ministry staff is organized as soon as possible in order for the Ottawa contingent to explain the City’s position.

3.                  That the Ministry put in place programs and policies necessary to move the ICI sector from its current 17-per-cent diversion rate to the Ministry’s target of 60-per-cent diversion before considering new or expanded landfills to dispose of residual ICI wastes.

4.                  That if the proposed terms of reference aren’t rejected, the City of Ottawa’s comments include the following statements on the proposed terms of reference, and that the City encourages the Minister to include these principles as requirements in the finalized terms of reference for the EA:

a)                  Waste Management must conduct a full EA to ensure the examination of all major issues, including demonstrating that all alternative disposal techniques are not feasible before a new or expanded landfill is considered;

b)                 The “Good Neighbour Zone,” as described in the terms of reference, is defined as the geographical boundaries of the City of Ottawa and the County of Lanark;

c)                  ICI, residential, and construction waste and contaminated soils can only be accepted at the Carp Road facility if they originated from the City of Ottawa or the Good Neighbour Zone as defined above;

d)                 Waste Management must develop a program to assure there will be no future ground water impact by conducting an in-depth study to identify and develop an comprehensive ground water protection and monitoring program;

e)                  Waste Management must conduct an in-depth study to identify and develop a program to immediately report any evidence of ground water contamination to the City of Ottawa and the public in a timely manner; 

f)                   Waste Management must conduct an in-depth study to identify and develop a fulsome program to address and compensate for all property value impacts within a one-kilometre radius of Waste Management’s Carp Road lands;

g)                  The terms of reference must include, and the EA must assume, a requirement that as ICI diversion per centage rates increase in the Ottawa area and Good Neighbour zone, the total allowable tonnage accepted at the landfill, if approved, would decease at the same per centage rate from a start total of 400,000 tonnes per year;

h)                 Waste Management must develop a program to provide an annual report to the City of Ottawa on all requirements of any certification of approval provided by the Ministry should approval be granted;

i)                    Waste Management must conduct an in-depth study to identify and develop a fulsome program to report all odour and litter complaints to the City of Ottawa and the public, including time and location of the complaint, nature of the compliant, when the compliant was responded to, how the problem was, or will be, addressed, and when the problem was addressed; 

j)                   Waste Management must conduct an in-depth study during the EA to forecast all potential economic impacts of any potential expansion of its operations on Carp Road businesses and identify and develop a comprehensive program to mitigate the impacts, and/or compensate area business owners if mitigation attempts fail; 

k)                 Waste Management must facilitate a broad public consultation process during all stages of the EA involving a broad representation of interested parties, including, but not limited to, community associations, environmental and public health organizations, the City, conservation authorities, and any other party that expresses an interest in participating;

l)                    Waste Management must, as part of the broad public consultation, establish a stakeholder liaison committee consisting of representatives from the local community and the City of Ottawa to facilitate the flow of information during the EA process, including regular meetings for Waste Management to provide updates on progress and issues related to the EA, including, but not limited to, any evidence that affects any of the assumptions or conclusions contained in the terms of reference; 

m)               Waste Management must conduct broad public consultation on work plans for all specific impacts assessment studies in the EA before the studies start; 

n)                 Waste Management must conduct further public consultation, and the City and the public must be given time to make submissions to the Ministry on any amended terms of reference Waste Management may file in the future; and

o)                  Waste Management must fund an independent review by independent experts, chosen by the City in conjunction with the stakeholder group, on all aspects of the EA and the results of the EA, updates on this review must be filed with the Ministry and given to the City of Ottawa and the stakeholder liaison committee members regularly, and the final review report must be filed with the Ministry and given to the City of Ottawa and the stakeholder liaison committee members in a timely manner.

5.                  That the City of Ottawa’s comments on the proposed terms of reference include that Waste Management must delete all references to the past agreement in its terms of reference.

6.                  That if Waste Management refuses to delete all references to the past agreement in its proposed terms of reference, the City of Ottawa urges the Ministry of the Environment to order them deleted and put no weight on them during any part of the EA process including finalization of the terms of reference. 

7.                  That, in order to provide a level playing field for the affected communities, the City of Ottawa commit up to $75,000 from the Solid Waste reserve fund to be distributed to community groups in the area surrounding the Carp Road facility to help the groups retain experts to assist them during the EA process; and

8.                  That Staff be delegated the authority to determine which groups receive money and ensure that appropriate rules with respect to the distribution and usage of the funds are followed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other Coverage and Comments:

Mayor urges re-think over landfill options
Residents near Carp Road site have suffered enough: O'Brien
Ottawa Citizen - July 15, 2010

Comments from President, Bob McKinley, of the Rural Council of Ottawa-Carleton (RCOC)
www.ruralcouncil.ca/RCOC-Comments-re-WM-ToR.htm

Comments from Past President, Bruce Webster, of the Rural Council of Ottawa-Carleton (RCOC)
www.ruralcouncil.ca/Comments-on-WM-ToR-100713.htm

Quotes:

-Marlene Laverty-Labelle, WM Project Advisory Committee - Community Rep (Stittsville) - Responsible to ToR:
"
Premier McGuinty, Ottawa is your hometown.  I implore you to help put a stop to an archaic technology and Champion the Nation’s Capital by initiating modern technology to set the highest of standards for others to follow, not only in Ontario but throughout Canada.
HOW IRRESPONSIBLE OF US AS A SOCIETY TO EVEN THINK OF LEAVING A LEGACY OF LANDFILLS TO OUR CHILDREN."

-Councillor Alex Cullen - (July 14, 2010 Council Meeting):
"We do need to send a message to the Ontario Government that business as usual for ICI waste is not acceptable. ...There are alternatives that are better for the environment, for the economy and certainly for communities."

-Comment from Ottawa City Staff, Amended Report - (See 4.a, above):
"Waste Management must conduct a full EA to ensure the examination of all major issues, including demonstrating that all alternative disposal techniques are not feasible before a new or expanded landfill is considered"

(Editorial Note: The RCOC hopes that the MOE holds WM's 'feet to the fire' on its examination of "all alternative disposal techniques." Both should review the RCOC's "WHITE PAPER ON LANDFILL WASTE DIVERSION", for some obvious conclusions: www.ruralcouncil.ca/energyfromwaste.htm.)

-Bruce Webster, Past President of the Rural Council, (RCOC):
"At a time when the Ontario Ministry of Environment is striving for landfill waste diversion targets of 60%, it seems counter-constructive for Waste Management, Inc to be applying for a 200% increase in landfill capacity at its Carp Road Landfill site.
...
Both the public and the Ministry of the Environment must have an opportunity to review a qualitative and quantitative analysis of all of the alternative options, including perhaps some of those previously not evaluated, before realistically expecting a ruling from the MOE on any potential merits of their request for landfill expansion.
...
Landfills at one time were the only choice - NOW THEY SHOULD BE THE LAST CHOICE."

-Councillor Marianne Wilkinson - (July 14, 2010 Council Meeting):
"There is a time to work on alternatives. We should be pushing for alternatives and not pushing for landfills, which are no longer being used in many countries of the world."

-Mayor Larry O'Brien - (July 14, 2010 Council Meeting):
"It's time to put an end to the expansion of the Carp Landfill."

-Bob McKinley - President of the RCOC -(Full text)
"... new technologies will soon make landfills an embarrassing relic of past thinking."

-Councillor Shad Qadri - (July 14, 2010 Council Meeting):
It's not about NIMBY. The reason it's not about NIMBY is, in terms of the motion, it is done, not to mention that we should be exporting our garbage somewhere else. We're not in favour of that. No one is.
It's not a NIMBY issue. The issue is that there are better ways of handling technologies, better ways of handling EFWs. There are better ways of handling garbage today.
The solution you need today is not what you were doing in the 1920s.
...I read a couple of comments from the Minister, that he made over the last year or so, when he was talking about landfills, and he said on April 27th, 2010: 'There's no longer tolerance for the old ways of dealing with waste. We all know that we can do better than digging holes and burying this garbage.'
It's not about NIMBY. It's about the fact that we had better start moving forward and doing something better with our garbage -- with our waste stream.
Our hands were forced by the Minister to look after our residential waste, three years ago; '60% diversion'.
We may not be there, yet. But, our staff and the city have done a great job of that -- trying to move toward that.
I think it's time we forced the Minister's hand, by moving this motion forward and saying, 'Mr. Minister: We're opposed to landfill expansion, period! It doesn't matter where it is!'"


Post Submission Comments:


Excerpts from The Ottawa Citizen – Letter to the Editor - July 24, 2010

Diversion isn't virtuous
 
”Where exactly does all the material being "diverted" from landfill actually go? It's no environmental saving to spend resources "diverting" material from landfill so that it can sit in an industrial yard somewhere until it is ultimately landfilled somewhere else or catches fire since no one wants it.
 
…If the recycling of paper and food scraps and plastic blister packs actually made any sense, if it "saved" anything, the "industrial-commercial-institutional" sector would be doing it already. Indeed, they would have been doing it long before it made sense for individual households. That they are, in general, not, is pretty strong evidence that what environmentalists and municipal politicians call "recycling" is not actually effective, that it is not about actual environmental protection, but the appearance thereof. What it's really about is confessing our sins of consumerism to Gaia -- giving politicians an excuse to meddle.”

James Carruthers
Crysler, Ontario

The Ottawa Citizen


RCOC Editor's Note:
The above comments are reinforced by the National Post article of Dec 3/09:
How your blue bin hurts the environment - National Post:
The recycling conundrum: How your blue bin hurts the environment - N. Post

More background on 'waste diversion' is available at:
http://www.ruralcouncil.ca/energyfromwaste.htm




___________________________________________________________________________

HOME  |  ABOUT USSITE MAP  |  CLOSE PAGE  |  CONTACT US
 

www.RuralCouncil.ca