The draw was held at the Lonsdale Women’s Institute on May 15, 2013. Canada’s celebrated ceramic artist Harlan House had the honour of drawing the winning tickets.

The winners are:

Prize                                               Donated by                                                              Winner

Yard Tractor                                    Stan’s Fix-it, Belleville                                              Elliott McConnell
Gas Generator                                Rick Phillips, Tyendinaga                                         Devin Beaudrie
RIMS Mirror                                     Bon Eco Design, Tamworth                                     Katie Gorman
Coffee Maker                                   Home Hardware, Napanee                                     Kati Mitchell
Gift Certificate                                  Jos Anthony, Belleville                                            Betty Hicks
Gift Certificate                                  A & B Precast, Belleville                                          Janel Whalen
Gift Certificate, Gray’s Drugs           Anonymous                                                             Sandy Dier
Gift Certificate                                  Mike’s Tire Service, Selby                                       Clair Stafford
Gift Certificate                                  Camden East Gas Station                                       Iain Craig
Gift Certificate                                  Waterfall Tea Room, Yarker                                    Shelly Battaglia
Gift Certificate                                  Country Traditions, Napanee                                  John Walsh
Gift Certificate                                  Starlet Boutique, Napanee                                      Carol Pascoe

We would like to thank the prize donors and the dozens of volunteers who sold tickets.

Special thanks to the many hundreds who overwhelmingly supported this important cause by buying tickets.

The Environmental Review Tribunal whose last public meeting was in Deseronto on Friday April 12 seems to have been the reason for the flight of fancy expressed in WM’s ad. Despite WM’s attempted spin, observers at the ERT meeting learned that WM had in effect “put their hands up” and agreed to many of the demands of the local concerned citizens group who had brought Waste Management before the Environmental Review Tribunal. Waste Management admitted that their landfill is leaking off-site and that their leachate monitoring is inadequate and that they have no suitable plan to contain the leaking leachate.

So now, it appears, Waste Management’s PR department is working overtime in trying to turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse by insinuating in their ad that they are good corporate citizens who led an effort to reach an agreement for better monitoring of their leaking landfill. This would be like the leaders of WW 2 Japan claiming to have been virtuous and peace-loving because they signed the documents of surrender at the end of the Second World War.

Meanwhile, back in Waste Management’s parallel universe, they are claiming that “there is no risk to public health or the environment” from the leachate migrating from their landfill. And, most astounding of all, they are continuing to push for a permit for a massive new landfill at the same site!

Stay tuned as Waste Management is sure to bring us more episodes from their Parallel Universe.

Sincerely,

Brian Hughes
Napanee, Ontario

By taking Waste Management and the MOE to the Tribunal your Concerned Citizens Committee has accomplished the following:

- Scientific proof that the Richmond Landfill has been leaking offsite
- Agreement that Groundwater and local wells are impacted
- No one knows how far the leak is going and where it will stop
- Agreement that it is very difficult to monitor and contain leaks at this site
- A new mandatory Public Notification Plan that will require Waste Management
- to inform the public of any occurrence that might impact the environment
- notification must include posting on the internet
- all stakeholders must be notified
- A new Odour Management Protocol
- Pre-scheduled surveys to monitor odour conditions
- Local citizens must be involved
- Logs will be maintained
- When defined limits are exceeded mandatory action is required
- A formal complaint questionnaire must be completed
- A defined work program that WM must complete
- Expanded monitoring parameters
- investigate the extent of the leaks
- WM must bring the landfill into compliance with its license

Given all of the above it is my opinion that there is no way that the MOE could approve the request from Waste Management to build a 400,000 tonnes/year dump right beside the contaminating Richmond Landfill.

I am pleased to have been involved in the process that forced Waste Management to work together with us.

Pont 10 on page 3 states:

” As a result of settlement discussions, the parties agree that there is evidence that leachate is migrating off-site from the Landfill and causing off-site groundwater impacts in excess of Reasonable Use limits under the MOE’s Guideline B-7, contrary to the ECA. The parties also agree that, due to the complexity of the site hydrogeology and a lack of groundwater monitoring wells downgradient of the area of known off-site contamination, further hydrogeologic investigations would provide additional information that would assist in resolving the issues in dispute in this appeal.”

To read the complete document click here : ERT 12033o4

Sir

My jaw dropped when I read the large ad in your paper last week from Waste Management. At first I wondered if they were referring to the same Environmental Review Tribunal meeting that I had attended in Deseronto on April 12. My first reaction was followed by a begrudging admiration for the PR office of Waste Management in taking on such a total defeat and trying to spin it as some kind of victory. It reminded me of how the Pentagon would refer to a defeat as a “tactical withdrawal” during the Vietnam War.

So, realizing that Waste Management was trying to claim some kind of “moral victory” (another euphemism for defeat) from essentially “coming out with their hands up” at the ERT meeting, I understood that they were trying to save face and fool our local residents once again. I suspect that WM’s senior management viewed their surrender as more spinable than defeat. But make no mistake about it, the capitulated to most of the demands of the local concerned citizens regarding their landfill. WM has now at long last had to publicly admit that their landfill is leaking off-site. They’ve also had to admit that their leachate monitoring program was inadequate and that they do not have a credible plan for containing the leak.

Despite their admissions of inadequacy at the ERT and “assurances” that “there is no risk to public health or the environment” from their leaking landfill WM continues to try to convince us that it is still a good idea to build a new and much much larger landfill at the same site, on the same fractured limestone bedrock. Of course the bottom line for Waste Management is that they stand to make the huge amounts of money by importing massive amounts of garbage to our community.

Sincerely
Brian Hughes
Napanee, Ontario

Attn: Don Wright

Don,
The Concerned Citizens are calling for Waste Management (WM) to immediately and permanently withdraw its Beechwood Road landfill application (BREC).
With respect to the Richmond Landfill, all parties including WM and the MOE agree:
- the dump is leaking off-site
- the groundwater is affected
- neighbouring wells are impacted
- no-one knows how far the leak is going and where it will stop
- it is very difficult to monitor this site and contain the leaks
- we are now in a contingency situation and WM has presented no solutions to stop this contamination beyond buying land and water rights.

We note that the MOE rejected the last EA with far less being known about this site. There is no way that the MOE could approve the BREC landfill given the known problems from the Richmond site. If WM were to withdraw and discontinue its BREC proposal, this would allow WM, the MOE, and all of us to focus on cleaning up the Richmond Landfill. We would save all parties countless dollars that would be wasted in continuing the EA process for an un-approvable landfill. Most importantly, this is the right thing to do.

In walking away from the BREC, WM would go a long way in illustrating that it is the good responsible green corporate citizen that it claims to be.
We look forward to your reply to this request.

Regards,

Mike

Mike Bossio,
Chair, CCCTE

To The Editor:

I am compelled to respond to the advertisement run by Waste Management titled ‘Working Together Works’. The company infers that the dialogue and sharing of all information was voluntary. I would like to remind everyone that the exchange took place only after the company had rejected previous Concerned Citizen recommendations and they had consequently hauled the company before the Environmental Review Tribunal. The data exchange revealed a long history of indication of leachate leaks into groundwater. During the time when this information was in the hands of Waste Management we were told that it was not leaking. The claim in this recent advertisement that ‘There is no risk to public health or the environment’ is another example of denial from this company. What about the residents of the houses where testing has compelled the MOE to order WM to supply whole house water? People living in these houses had been using their well water for years. Has there been no risk to their health? What about the acknowledged indications of leachate in the groundwater beyond the boundaries of the dump? No one knows the extent of these leaks. There is no approved plan to contain the leaks. Leachate is made up of thousands of chemicals many of which pose serious risks to human health and the environment. This company has lost all credibility in our community.

Jeff Whan
Roblin On

Despite agreement, landfill fight goes on

By Seth DuChene
Editor

Any impression that Waste Management and its critics were close to finding some common ground on the now-closed Richmond Landfill and the proposed Beechwood Road Environmental Centre following the results of a preliminary Environmental Review Tribunal hearing on Friday were quickly dashed on Monday.
On Friday, the ERT consented to passing an ‘interim order’ relating to the closure conditions of the Richmond Landfill, following months of negotiation between WM, the Ministry of the Environment and various concerned citizens and other groups. The order effectively takes a number of matters in dispute regarding WM’s closure plan — a plan which is still the subject of an appeal to ERT by the Concerned Citizens Committee of Tyendinaga and Environs, the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte and others — off the table.
On Monday, however, the CCCTE reiterated the fact that a handful of other outstanding concerns remain regarding the closure plan; further, the group argued that the findings stemming from the ERT process demonstrate that plans for the proposed BREC facility — which would feature a landfill roughly four times the size of the current facility — should be abandoned immediately.
Central to the CCCTE’s demand that BREC be abandoned is the fact that testing results have shown that landfill leachate has impacted groundwater off the landfill property, results which came to light during ERT discussions. Also, an earlier proposal to expand the Richmond Landfill was rejected by the MOE in 2006 due to environmental concerns.
“In my opinion, the BREC landfill proposal is inappropriate, it’s unacceptable and it’s contrary to the public interest,” said CCCTE lawyer Richard Lindgren of the Canadian Environmental Law Association. “The BREC proposal makes no environmental sense, and it should not be approved or pursued at all, especially since WM already has one landfill site that is impacting groundwater. We don’t need another one right next door.”
Lindgren’s sentiments were echoed by the CCCTE’s hydrogeologist Wilf Ruland. “Essentially, this was simply the wrong place to put a landfill,” he said. “There are much better settings around the province, and it would behoove the company to draw the obvious lessons from the misadventure with the Richmond Landfill and abandon its efforts to put a new, bigger landfill right next door.”
Ruland said the offsite contamination was a “major problem” that has yet to be resolved. “The extent of the offsite contamination is currently not known, and it’s going to be hard to track it down… because we’re in this fractured bedrock setting,” he said. “You can drill a well very close to where contamination is moving, a few metres way, and yet not find it. The contamination is moving down discreet fractures in the bedrock, and if you don’t hit the fracture that the contamination is moving down, then you’ve missed it. There’s lots more work needed to try to find out how far the contamination has gone.”
Randy Harris, manager of Waste Management’s Richmond Landfill, said that the company had no plans to drop the BREC project, stating that the ongoing environmental assessment will investigate all concerns relating to the project.
“We’re in the middle of a very extensive environmental assessment for BREC right now. The information that we’ll gather will be presented to the general public and discussed, and any concerns or questions will be answered at public meetings or in private if they’d prefer. Then we’ll submit that, when it’s completed, to the Ministry of the Environment to determine its technical merit,” he said.
Harris also said that the offsite testing results are being addressed. “There are some elevated aesthetic parameters in a (neighbouring) property and we found them. We found them because we had done a lot of work in finding the ‘low head’ for the groundwater and where the groundwater flows,” he said. “We’re putting in additional wells. If anything, we’re showing that (the groundwater) can be monitored.”
Later, he said, “There is going to be a lot of discussion… and we look forward to that discussion. There is a lot of history with modern-day liners and technical discussions that exactly address those concerns. I hope these folks… take part in those discussions. It will be up to us to show them and the ministry that the groundwater will be protected with these types of liners, along with a monitoring program. Those discussions are coming up and we’re looking forward to them.”
Lindgren said that if WM continues to proceed with the BREC environmental assessment, the company can expect a fight. “If they want to keep that train wreck in motion, fine, that’s their choice,” Lindgren said at the press conference. “I guess I put them on notice that we intend to drop the gloves and we’ll pummel the documents until we get the result we’re looking for, which is another rejection of the same dumb landfilling idea at the same dumb site.”
Monday’s press conference contrasted sharply with Friday’s preliminary hearing, which was focussed on issues in which the two sides were in agreement rather than at loggerheads. With Friday’s hearing, WM, the MOE, the CCCTE and others were able to reach agreements on some outstanding issues relating to the assessment and maintenance of monitoring wells; a new and extensive odour monitoring program; expanded testing parameters for potential leachate contamination; and a new and expanded public notification system should an event occur at the site.
All these issues were part of the CCCTE’s appeal of the Richmond Landfill closure plan. With an interim order issued by the ERT, however, the new provisions have been added to the plan and are no longer in dispute.
At the preliminary hearing, Lindgren says the hearing — expected in October, if there is one needed at all — will be focused on “the contents of the site’s environmental monitoring plan, and the nature and extent of the contingency measures that might be at this particular site.”
The parties are expected to continue to hold discussions regarding the outstanding issues between now and the fall. The provisions set out in the interim order should come into force within the next few weeks.
Representatives from the CCCTE on Monday argued that many of those now-agreed-upon provisions and protocols should have been in place much earlier.
“What we’re talking about is a whole series of ongoing investigations that need to be undertaken, that should have been undertaken a decade or more ago. We’re basically playing catch-up work, trying to bring this site into the modern day and the hydrogeological understanding up to the modern day,” said Ruland of the old Richmond Landfill site.
“Let’s not forget that for 15 years we’ve been making recommendations to deaf ears, and we had to drag them kicking and screaming to this ERT to finally get them to sit down and seriously consider the recommendations that Wilf and Richard and many of us in this room have been making for a very long time,” said Mike Bossio, chair of the CCCTE. “Whatever way WM wants to try to position this, the fact of the matter is that they’ve done everything they can to not find leachate on this site. Now we’re going to force them to be accountable and do everything possible to find it, to find it and try to figure out what to do about it.”
“There are going to be questions on BREC,” said Harris immediately following Friday’s hearing. “The BREC project includes a state-of-the-art, 21st Century landfill, engineered properly, and there are going to be questions on that. Instead of doing this in the press, saying, ‘It can’t be done safely or monitored safely,’ I challenge (the CCCTE and others) to come and sit down at the table, just like we did with the closed Richmond Landfill, and have technical discussions. If there are ways to improve on the liner design or the monitoring, or doubts, let’s have that discussion.”

Mediation returning results in dump dispute
By Meghan Balogh, Napanee Guide

Friday, April 19, 2013

Progress has been made regarding an appeal to the Environmental Review Tribunal on Waste Management’s handling of the Richmond Landfill.

On Friday a continuation of the preliminary hearing presented the results of recent mediation between all the parties involved: Waste Management (WM), the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), the Concerned Citizens Committee of Tyendinaga and Environs (CCCTE), the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, and the Napanee Green Lights.

Four of seven conditions of WM’s Environmental Compliance Approval, appealed by the CCCTE last April, have been resolved through mediation.

“I would like to congratulate the parties, counsel, and consultants and experts on the enormous amount of work that has been done,” said Environmental Review Tribunal member Maureen Carter-Whitney, who chaired the preliminary hearing on April 12 at the Deseronto Community Centre.

She addressed counsel for all parties, as well as a small gathering of public citizens and media.

“The mediation and many meetings that have taken place in the past few months have led to fruitful results, which is apparent by these agreements.”

Richmond Landfill site manager Randy Harris is pleased with the progress.

“We have reached an interim agreement on quite a few items, and it came through hard work and technical and scientific discussion with a group of very intelligent people,” he said after the hearing on Friday. “We took our monitoring plan, listened to their concerns, incorporated some of their concerns that made sense. If it makes these people in this room more comfortable with what’s happening out there instead of having doubts, that’s a good thing for everybody involved.”

The agreements reached so far include details about things like public notification and annual reporting.

“…Things like the annual reporting, public notification, odour protocol. Those are the kinds of things that have been wholly resolved within the appeal,” said CCCTE counsel Richard Lindgren at a press conference on Monday morning. “But there are still three really important conditions relating to environmental monitoring plans and contingency plans for groundwater, surface water, and leachate. Those are big issues that are still unresolved, and that’s the subject matter of the work that Waste Management is going to be undertaking over the course of the summer, before the hearing starts in the fall.”

Also, pointed out hydrogeologist Wilf Ruland on Monday, the notion of “resolution” is not a final one.

“All that resolved means in this context is that a long series of technical recommendations that I made in my witness statement in this appeal process have been agreed to by the company,” he stated. “What we’re talking about is a whole series of ongoing investigations that need to be undertaken — should have been undertaken a decade or more ago. We’re basically playing catch-up here….

“Where we’ve resolved things, it’s that I’ve recommended that off-site drilling needs to occur to try to track the contamination. I’ve identified different parameters that are needed to try and determine where leachate is and isn’t, something the company has been vastly confused about for decades.

“We’ve resolved how the investigation is to be undertaken. We certainly haven’t resolved how far the contamination has gone, we haven’t resolved what needs to be done about it once we’ve got it mapped out.”

The Richmond Landfill has been closed since 2006. Members of the CCCTE say that the site has not been properly monitored since its closure, and want WM to focus their efforts on tightening up monitoring of the site and the land surrounding it, where leachate has been detected.

“The facts are no longer deniable,” said CCCTE chair Mike Bossio at the press conference on Monday morning. “All parties, including Waste Management and the MOE, agree that the dump is leaking off-site. The ground water is affected. Neighbouring residential wells are impacted. Nobody knows how far this leak is going or where it will stop. It is very difficult to monitor this site and contain the leaks that are coming from this site.”

“There are four non-health-based parameters on the southern portion of our property,” said Harris in an interview Monday. “We found it and we’re going to look after it.”

The CCCTE has put forward a statement in which they call for WM to discard their plans for the Beechwood Road Environmental Centre, which currently is undergoing an Environmental Assessment.

“If approved, the BREC landfill will be four times bigger than the Richmond Landfill site and essentially built on the same fractured bedrock and on top of the same vulnerable aquifer as the Richmond Landfill,” said CCCTE legal counsel, Richard Lindgren, on Monday. “In my opinion the BREC proposal is inappropriate, unacceptable, and contrary to the public interest. [It] makes no environmental sense. It should not be approved, it should not be pursued at all.”

“The Concerned Citizens are calling for Waste Management to immediately and permanently withdraw their Beechwood Road expansion application,” stated Bossio. “There is no way that the MOE could approve BREC with what is now known about this site. This would allow Waste Management, the MOE, and all of us to focus on cleaning up the mess that we now have on our hands. This will save millions of taxpayer dollars that would be wasted in continuing the Environmental Assessment process. This is the right thing to do. If they truly believe that they are the good, responsible, green corporate citizens they claim to be, then they would do the right thing and end this once and for all.”

Harris is not convinced by the CCCTE’s parallels between the Richmond Landfill and what he describes as the “state-of-the-art” landfill being proposed with BREC.

“Comparing a landfill that was built 50 years ago is like comparing apples and oranges. Liner systems that are in place today, it can’t be compared to a landfill today. There are many studies on double liner systems, [and they are] all positive. The liner is second to none, 21st century.”

Harris says that people should be far more concerned about the thousands of dumps in Ontario that are outdated and have no containment systems in place. He says that he knows the CCCTE wish to see BREC taken off the table. He says that’s not going to happen.

“We’re right in the middle now of doing the Environmental Assessment work that’s required by the province. We will continue that work. Our job is to show break project and landfill portion can be done to protect the environment. We’re going to proceed — why wouldn’t we? We wouldn’t if we didn’t feel it could be done safely. We know we can do it, and do it safely.”

Harris would like to see similar discussions as have happened over the Richmond Landfill occur for BREC.

“I challenge them to sit down with us on BREC and let’s have the same type of discussions. I think that would be great. I think they must see now that we’re very approachable, and that we take their concerns seriously. We’ve always said, ‘sit down with us, give us what your concerns are and hopefully we can address it.’

“….We’d love to get their feedback, but not in the press, not in letters to the editor. Sit down at the table, give us your concern, bring the press to the table, and let’s have a discussion on it and do it right. That’s the idea and I hope they see that.”

Waste Management

117 Wentworth Court,

Brampton, ON, L6T 5L4

Attn: Don Wright

Don,

The Concerned Citizens are calling for Waste Management (WM) to immediately and permanently withdraw its Beechwood Road landfill application (BREC).

With respect to the Richmond Landfill, all parties including WM and the MOE agree:

            – the dump is leaking off-site

            – the groundwater is affected

            – neighbouring wells are impacted

            – no-one knows how far the leak is going and where it will stop

            – it is very difficult to monitor this site and contain the leaks

- we are now in a contingency situation and WM has presented no solutions to stop this contamination beyond buying land and water rights.

We note that the MOE rejected the last EA with far less being known about this site.  There is no way that the MOE could approve the BREC landfill given the known problems from the Richmond site.   If WM were to withdraw and discontinue its BREC proposal, this would allow WM, the MOE, and all of us to focus on cleaning up the Richmond Landfill.  We would save all parties countless dollars that would be wasted in continuing the EA process for an un-approvable landfill.  Most importantly, this is the right thing to do.

In walking away from the BREC, WM would go a long way in illustrating that it is the good responsible green corporate citizen that it claims to be.

We look forward to your reply to this request.

Regards,

Mike

Mike Bossio,

Chair, CCCTE