Mr. Gord Miller
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
1075 Bay Street, Suite 605
Toronto, ON
M5S 2B1

Dear Commissioner Miller,

I write in support of the application for review of section 27 of the Environmental Protection Act submitted by Concerned Citizens and others.

As one of the many citizens who have tracked developments related to the Richmond landfill in Greater Napanee for years I am only too aware of two key relevant facts. First, the existing landfill is leaking into the vulnerable aquifer from which neighbours draw potable water for domestic and agricultural use. Second, attempts by the site’s owner to expand the facility to accept mega-tonnes of additional garbage at or beside the same site continue after fifteen years!

Given the obvious trend in Ontario for fewer and fewer landfills of larger and larger size and the fact that these facilities have the capacity to contaminate the environment for centuries, it seems obvious that they should ONLY be sited in the safest possible locations. You have described the site of the existing Richmond landfill as among the worst in the province to locate such a facility. Minister Broten refused its expansion in November 2006 for reasons related to its unsuitable hydrogeology. Why, then, are we continuing to consider its expansion in 2013?

Our experience has made it clear that, without amended legislation, unsuitable locations such as the Richmond landfill site will continue to be proposed for mega-landfills and massive efforts will be required to ensure they are NOT approved. This is not a responsible approach to waste management.

I therefore join those who urge the Ontario government to amend the Environmental Protection Act, as requested in the EBR Application for Review.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Munro

If you experience smells, noise, dust, water problems, or see anything that could impact the environment in any way please follow these steps:

(Note: When you call make sure you state clearly that this is a complaint and make a note of the date and time and name of the person you speak with. Give the details of the situation and ask them to respond to you in by phone, email (if you have it) and in writing about what action has been taken to resolve the problem.)

1) Call Waste Management: Contact Linda Cooper at (613) 388-1057 or email her at lcooper1@wm.com (if Linda is not available please ask who is handling complaints)

2) Call the Ontario Ministry of the Environment: (613) 549-4000 or 1 (800) 267-0974 and ask for Dave Arnott at extension 2693 (If Dave  is not available please ask who is handling complaints)

3) State and make a note of: The time, date and specific nature of the problem, who you talk to and their comments. Request that they get back to you verbally and in writing as soon as the problem is resolved with details on  the action taken. Make sure you are satisfied.

4) Inform Marilyn Whalen at: (613) 396-2696 or email at Marilyn_c1@hotmail.com. Please provide all of the details so that Marilyn can keep a log of complaints and their resolution.

5) Record the time, date and details of the resolution, when you get a response from WM or the MOE.

6) Inform Marilyn Whalen at: (613) 396-2696 or email at Marilyn_c1@hotmail.com about the resolution, and save a copy of the written reply.

The Lennox and Addington Stewardship Council has existed for the past seventeen years. The volunteers are the life blood of this community organization. From diverse backgrounds, they have come together in a common cause, “Caring for the land together.” The many successful projects with local landowners reflect this land ethic, to sustain the natural heritage of Lennox and Addington County for future generations. This natural landscape is our heritage and one day we will pass its care to the next generation of stewards. Hopefully, they will inherit a healthier and enhanced natural environment. It is a diverse landscape that the residents of Lennox and Addington call home. From the rugged shield in the north, the Napanee and Salmon River Watersheds, wetlands, woodlands, farm land, and the precious resource of groundwater that flows beneath, to the shores of the Bay of Quinte, we have much to preserve.

It is with great concern then, that we the members of the Lennox and Addington Stewardship Council view the Beechwood Road Environmental Centre (BREC) proposal. Our concerns pertain to the landfill portion of the proposal and include the following:

• The BREC site is adjacent to the now closed Richmond Landfill site. The former Waste Management (WM) landfill expansion proposal was denied by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) in 2006 on the basis of the fractured limestone geology. The geology remains the same.

• In the Quinte Regional Groundwater Study (Dillon Consulting Limited, 2006) it states “The high vulnerability of the aquifer makes the entire Study Area susceptible to contamination.” In the event the liner should leak there is little or no natural soil barrier to filter the leachate. (Wilf Ruland, hydrogeologist).

• The Walkerton Tragedy (2001) changed forever the perspective of protecting water at its source. Many residents rely on groundwater for their drinking water. Justice O’Connor stated in his report, “Actions must be taken to prevent the contamination of sources of our water.”

Stewardship connects people to the land. The Lennox and Addington Stewardship Council members have strived to create this land connection. In the words of the pioneer land steward Aldo Leopold, “When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.” Is BREC the vision you have for this portion of the Salmon River watershed? We must ponder this question carefully. It is the next generation that will inherit our decision.

Sincerely,

Peter Good

Chair LASC

To the Editor:

Despite Waste Management’s efforts over the last 14 years to try to convince people that they are the owners of the “facts” nothing could be farther from the truth.  The fact is their last attempt to expand the Richmond Landfill was turned down in 2006 by the Minister of Environment because they did not understand the complex geology of the site, even after nearly a decade of trying.  The Minister agreed with the facts put forth by the citizens and their experts.
 
During the last expansion attempt people were told that the landfill was not leaking because the bedrock was as tight as pavement.  In 2012 the company is now promoting a geological conceptual model that is the complete opposite of what they had previously supported.  They now believe the fracture system of the site is so well connected that they can easily detect and capture any moving leachate by wells separated tens to hundreds of metres apart.  By any measure, such a dramatic flip-flop of understanding after such a long period of getting it wrong is a cause for concern and skepticism.
 
The on-going hearings of the Environmental Review Tribunal into the soundness of Waste Management’s Richmond Landfill site licence will assess the company’s understanding of hydrogeology and monitoring in order that the existing landfill can be safely closed.  In allowing an appeal to proceed, the Tribunal stated that, “The Tribunal finds that the landfill either is currently producing or could produce significant harm to the environment.”   This is strong language which lines up with what concerned citizens and surrounding communities have been saying for 14 years. 
 
If anything, this story should demonstrate the complex geology of the Richmond Landfill site; the risk to the water which people and livestock rely on for drinking; and the lack of wisdom by Waste Management in trying again to build a megadump on fractured bedrock in Napanee.
 
Stephen Bruce Medd
Greater Napanee

To the Editor:

Last week the first in what will be a series of public hearings that took place in Selby. These formal legal hearings are part of Ontario’s Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT). The Concerned Citizens are challenging the adequacy of the Environmental Monitoring Plan at the closed Richmond Landfill, site of the proposed BREC mega-dump.

We are indeed fortunate to have such a process which has allowed citizens to challenge the agreements made between their government (the MOE) and big business (Waste Management).

Based on the comments made by all parties at this first hearing there are discussions taking place. These might lead to the MOE and Waste Management accepting many of the recommendations made by the citizens, which had previously been ignored.

At their public information session on Wednesday June 27, Waste Management acknowledged that there are indications that the Richmond Landfill is leaking toxic leachate beyond the footprint of the dump and close to or beyond Beechwood Road.  They could not or would not offer contingency plans to contain leaks in the fractured bedrock environment. This is one of the issues that the citizens are challenging at the ERT.

The schedule for the ERT hearings would conclude in late January or early February. In the meantime there appears to be no sense of urgency on the part of the company or the Ministry of the Environment to contain the leaks.

Jeff Whan

Roblin, ON

The following are a sample of the comments people have made on this site or on our petition during the week of June 1st to 7th, 2012.

June 7; Barbara in Napanee Ontario:

As a young student in this town I would rather see our community prosper than suffer from even more inadequate water supply to homes in the area.

June 5; Margaret in Shannonville Ontario:

I have lived in the area near the Napanee Dump all of my life and I do not want to see the Wells comtaminated by this nor the smell to make the neighbourhood a unpleasant place to live or visit.  STOP THE DUMP!!

June 4; Stuart in Shoreham-by-Sea in the United Kingdom

I have been lucky enough to visited this area Ontario a number of times and I’m gutted to hear about this proposal. Short sighted in an area of great natural beauty.

June 4; George:

I don’t believe Waste Managment should have the dump expanded or any other type dump site in our municipalty what so ever.

June 4; Martin in Napanee Ontario:

This community believed that the Richmond Landfill was not to be expanded. Now we’re having to fight it again? Why are we going through the same process again? Tell WM, “NO!”

June 4; Gerry in Belleville Ontario:

The hazardous liquids and material being dumped into the landfill site are effecting local air quality and leaching into our water systems.  We have no idea the amount of underground damage that has been caused already or what the long term effects will be.

June 4; Hannah in Toronto Ontario:

Creative recycling solutions are prefurable to toxic waste build up.

June 3; Harry:

Doctors have said it is danrerous geoligistst s,government people have said the same.This dump is unsafe for this area as has been proven.Leave the people of this area of Ontario alone STOP it now..Harry

June 3; Douglas in Napanee Ontario:

This site has been assessed and found most unsuitable for a dump.  Why, in these days of government restraint and cutbacks, are we reopening this issue?  Surely, the MOE has more important work to do than wasting scare resources on reexamining a site that was deemed unacceptable.

June 2; Barclay in Chicago Illinois in the US:

The dump is improperly built and poorly managed and is a danger to the future generations of people that are going to live on our continent.

June 1; Tom in Napanee Ontario:

it is a very very poor site for a dump. we need a better solution to the garbage problem.

There is nothing new to say about this situation. The geology is the same, the technology is the same, the location is the same, the liner is the same. Many experts have said this is an unsuitable place to have a dump. Waste Management put this community through hell for eight years in the last expansion proposal and that proposal failed. Despite that they are back with what amounts to the same proposal. Nothing has changed!

I look forward to the day when I CAN state something new. Something like: “Thank you Waste Management for withdrawing your flawed BREC landfill proposal and ending the torment and expense being unfairly imposed on this community.” Or “Thank you Waste Management for finally agreeing that this is a Bad Place to have a dump!”.

Mike Bossio
Chair, CCCTE
LeakyLand.com

One of the documents we have which was issued by the MOE on Sept 30, 2010 is Condition 35 of your Certificate of Approval which orders you to close the Landfill by June 30, 2011.  The complete order can be viewed here(pdf). It states:

‘ The Owner shall ensure that no waste is received for disposal at the Site after June 30, 2011 and the site is capped with final cover material in accordance with the timelines presented below.’

Given that this order has been issued, Randy, we were surprised that you would state in your open letter to the public:

‘The Ministry of the Environment did not order the closure of our landfill’

As part of our request for an Environmental Tribunal Review of the monitoring of the closed landfill, we have affidavits from Waste Management and the MOE. In his affidavit sworn on Feb 17, 2012, Kyle Stephenson, MOE Hydrogeologist states:

‘The current work includes an assessment of impacts identified directly south of the landfill in the area of a particular group of domestic wells. These wells have been included in the monitoring program. In addition to sampling these wells in an ongoing monitoring program, the ministry has also required provision of bottled water or whole house water supplies.‘

Given that the MOE has required you to provide the water supply we are surprised that you imply that you have voluntarily done so.

In the same letter ad you claim:

‘At Waste Management, we believe it is essential that we are open and transparent with the community..’

This reminds us that your company refused to make public their recent Financial Assurance Calculations for the Richmond Landfill on the grounds that they contained ‘competitive information’. We were only able to obtain this information from the MOE through a formal Freedom Of Information request.
What we found when we finally accessed their calculations was that the company had reduced the contamination life span from 300 years (their own calculation in the previous EA) to 39 years. There was no explanation offered for the change. This had the effect of reducing the Financial Assurance funding that is required by law for the operator to set aside (among other things) to fund future remediation efforts (if required).

We are very disappointed that you were not entirely open and transparent in the public letter that you posted in the local Napanee papers (with statements that contradict the public record).  It certainly raises questions about other claims made by Waste Management.

None of this inspires confidence in your ability to manage the well-documented risks of landfilling here.  The first important step to risk management is to truthfully acknowledge that the risks exist.

The following are a sample of the comments people have made on this site or on our petition during the month of May, 2012:

May 28; Marla in Kingston Ontario:

I care about our environment – especially our water resources!

May 28; Melanie in Marysville Ontario:

I live in the area and can’t believe they would locate a landfill site on Fractured bedrock. I have 80 acres and I see the rocks moving every year. Cracks open all the time. If it’s happening on my land it’s happening at the site of the dump. How would they ever control a leak? I believe they can’t!

May 26; M.L. in Roblin Ontario:

If the BREC dump is allowed to go through this could spell environmental disaster for the watertable supplying farms and homes in the area.  The top layer is a thin pool of fresh groundwater overlying deeper highly saline water, saltier than seawater. By covering this area with a dump, there may not be enough rainwater getting into the ground to recharge the fresh water level.  As well, in case of a failure in the system in place on the closed Richmond landfill,WM has a contingency plan to use a blast trench which would bring saline water to the upper levels contaminating the potable water level.  WM is proposing to build this new megadump  in  an area of land that is near the  headwaters area of  Marysville Creek which  supports a year round fish habitat and flows into the Bay of Quinte.

May 23; Noelle:

Good information here. I am running a day camp “Earth Camp” and plan to visit this site with the kids. Our generation is one of excess and waste. We buy what we do not need, are gifted what we do not want, and dispose of it all within the season. The three are great but if we all remember one R it should be Reduce.

May 23; Malcolm:

The fact that Waste Management is even asking to expand their facility is horrendous.  This company is a soulless, opportunistic group of investors who evidently have no ethics, and no morals.  The destruction they have already accomplished over the past half-century (dead wells, polluted groundwater, stench) is considerable, but that damage was done when we (the locals) didn’t know any better, and our government permitted such travesties to occur.  Now, we know better, and we need to minimize any future pollution as best we can.  The Waste Management proposal is simply obscene, and it must be stopped.  Period.

May 22; John in Centreville Ontario:

We need a provincial/national waste management policy that would make manufacturers responsible for their packaging,that would make composting mandatory,etc. Rural communities must not be the dumping grounds for urban waste.

May 21; Ian in Napanee Ontario:

The situation has been studied – to death – for over 10 years and the answer is always the same.  This is not a safe location to locate a megadump!

May 21; Kylie in Cowansville Quebec:

I believe it is a bad environmental choice to expand a dump on land which has already been shown to be susceptible to groundwater contamination. I don’t see why a case already won has to be fought again by citizens.

May 20; Marilyn in Marysville Ontario:

Responsible location of landfills is equally important as responsible handling of waste.

May 20; Mike in Kingston Ontario:

I believe this proposal is very UNSAFE for the surrounding community. I do not trust Waste Management’s ability to maintain the site safely for the next 100 years.

This week marks the beginning of the next round in our fight to protect our economy, lifestyle, health and future from a mega-dump expansion to the Richmond Landfill, re-branded the “Beechwood Road Environmental Centre,” to be located in Greater   Napanee.

My village of Roblin understands the consequences of poison leaking into fractured bedrock. Tests have found petroleum product in our wells. The Ministry of the Environment (MOE) has been unable to precisely identify the source or contain the spill because of the “complexity of fractured bedrock” on which the village stands. Wells are polluted, businesses are struggling, real estate values are dropping.  A tragedy.

Because of risks of poison leaking through the bedrock, the MOE did not approve the previous application by Waste Management for a mega-dump and ordered the old dump closed and sealed.

In spite of the facts, Waste Management denies off-site impacts of the old leaking dump. They have been charged by the MOE with violations. They have chosen to ignore recommendations made by experts retained by concerned citizens who believe the monitoring of the existing dump is inadequate. Because of this, citizens have requested an Environmental Tribunal Review.

During the upcoming Environmental Assessment, Waste Management will again claim that the risks associated with this enterprise are minimal. Science will prove otherwise. The MOE, neighboring municipalities and concerned citizens groups will spend time and money fighting a battle previously won. Another tragedy.

Since its failed attempt, Waste Management has made many donations to local charities. It has wrapped the dump with green. However, a new name and proposed sorting and composting facilities do not hide its intent to place a mega-dump on the same unsafe site.

Last time we set a record with the MOE for letters opposing the Waste Management proposal. Let’s do it again.

Jeff Whan

Roblin, ON