The Environmental Impacts of Ontario’s Small and Aging Landfills – Who Is Keeping Track?
Contents |
Introduction
Ontario’s landfills – whether closed, dormant, or active – are an ongoing source of public concern. Ontarians have made extensive use of the Environmental Bill of Rights since its enactment to raise concerns about landfills. This past year was no exception, with landfill concerns surfacing through applications for investigation, review, and leave to appeal. Meanwhile, many municipalities continue to struggle with waste management – they don’t have any place in Ontario to send their waste and are forced to export to the United States. Consequently, increasing the total capacity or the daily fill rate of currently operational landfills is becoming a common response to dwindling landfill capacity in the province.
The combination of public concern and demand for landfill capacity has prompted the ECO to examine the adequacy of provincial frameworks for monitoring and regulating Ontario’s landfills and for providing the public with information about these sites. Significant shortcomings have been identified in MOE’s approach to landfills management, some of which are considered here and may be revisited by the ECO in future years.
Signs of trouble – the Edwards Landfill site
The Edwards Landfill, located in Haldimand-Norfolk County, illustrates the impacts of some of these shortcomings in MOE’s approach to landfills. An effort is under way to transform this site from a rural community landfill with a fill rate of 10 tonnes per day to a site approved to accept up to 500 tonnes per day of institutional, commercial and industrial waste from across Ontario. MOE approved the amendment to the landfill’s certificate of approval (C of A) in February 2005 (see the ECO 2004/2005 Supplement, page 66, for more details). Area residents sought and were granted leave to appeal MOE’s decision, and as of June 2006, a preliminary hearing was under way. The ECO also received an EBR application for review arising out of concerns related to the Edwards site (see the Supplement to this report, pages 192-197).
Shortcomings of the province’s approach to landfills – and the associated impacts observed in the Edwards Landfill case:
- Lack of publicly accessible, up-to-date information on landfill sites – The most recent version of MOE’s Inventory of Waste Disposal Sites, published in June 1991, lists the Edwards Landfill as an active rural site posing the highest hazard to humans. No other details about the site are provided in the inventory.
- Lack of a comprehensive plan to update waste management Cs of A – A site investigation and waste characterization study of the Edwards Landfill was conducted in 2001 – 10 years after the site was classified as posing a hazard to humans – and appears to have been undertaken because of the owner’s desire to expand both the service area and daily fill rate at the site, and not as part of any MOE effort to update the requirements of the site’s C of A.
- Further, in 2002, MOE made what it described as an administrative amendment to the C of A to establish the site’s total waste capacity, something that had never been done for the site. Administrative amendments do not have to be posted to the Registry for public comment and, thus, the public had no opportunity to comment on the establishment of the waste capacity of the Edwards site.
- Two-tiered system of standards – Until recently, the Edwards Landfill was subject only to the basic landfill standards set out in s. 11 of Regulation 347 (General Waste Management), under the Environmental Protection Act, even though the landfill site was identified as posing the highest hazard to human health. (On a positive note, MOE has required the owner to satisfy the tougher 1998 landfill standards as a requirement prior to pursuing increases to the site’s service area and daily fill rate.)
Keeping track of Ontario’ s landfills
The last inventory of waste disposal sites in Ontario was released by MOE in June 1991. Inventory information includes: site location, types and percentages of waste present, status of site (closed, dormant, active), and classification of a site based on whether it poses any risks to human health or the environment. No details are provided regarding site age, approved total waste capacity, presence of engineered site controls, frequency of site inspections, whether a site complies with applicable provincial standards, date when certificate of approval was issued, etc.
Given that the ministry’s 1991 site inventory is 15 years out of date, the ECO made repeated requests to MOE in spring 2006 for current information on landfills, but to no avail. Further, in response to a 2005 EBR application for review that included a request that the inventory of Ontario’s landfill sites be updated and enhanced, MOE indicated that it lacks the staff and financial resources required to develop a new electronic inventory; obtain and input data; develop regulations to compel landfill owners to report information; operate, maintain, and continuously update the inventory; and continuously audit information provided by landowners. This is a startling admission and it suggests that MOE lacks the information necessary to monitor and regulate Ontario’s landfill sites effectively. In stark contrast, jurisdictions elsewhere have developed publicly accessible information systems that not only provide extensive, up-to-date information, but also confirm that these jurisdictions are tracking compliance at their landfill sites. California’s “SWIS” program, described below, is a very good example.
California’s Integrated Waste Management Board and the Solid Waste Information System (SWIS)
The State of California’s Integrated Waste Management Board Website provides up-to-date information on the state’s solid waste facilities, operations, and disposal sites via the Solid Waste Information System (SWIS). For each facility, SWIS provides information about location, type of facility, regulatory and operational status, waste types authorized for disposal, local enforcement agency and inspection and enforcement records. The website also identifies waste facilities that are in violation of the state’s minimum standards. See www.ciwmb.ca.gov/SWIS/. Standards for Ontario landfills
There are two sets of regulatory standards, MOE indicates, that “may” apply to municipal waste landfill sites in Ontario. All sites are required to comply with the ‘Standards for Waste Disposal Sites’ set out in s. 11 of Reg. 347. Key environmental protection requirements set out in s. 11 include:
- Prohibitions on the discharge into watercourses of drainage that may cause pollution.
- Waste placement sufficiently above or isolated from the maximum water table to prevent impairment of groundwater, and sufficient distance from potable water supplies so as to prevent water contamination – unless adequate provision is made for the collection and treatment of leachate.
- Construction of low permeability berms and dykes, where necessary, to prevent the migration of contaminants off-site.
- Sites with the potential to pollute water must be monitored and, if necessary, measures taken for the collection and treatment of contaminants and for the prevention of water pollution.
More stringent requirements were established in 1998 through O.Reg. 232/98 (Landfilling Sites). However, these stronger requirements apply only to:
- Municipal waste landfill sites with a capacity of > 40,000 m3 and that were established on or after August 1, 1998.
- Every municipal waste landfill for which an alteration, enlargement or extension is proposed on or after August 1, 1998 that involves an increase in the site’s total capacity to >40,000 m3.
(For more information, see the ECO’s 1998 annual report, page 147.)
These requirements include:
- Design specifications for groundwater protection, including a site specific design option and two generic design options.
- Mandatory air emissions control (landfill gas collection) for sites with a total waste capacity of > 3 million cubic metres.
- Assessment of ground and surface water conditions.
- Design requirements for buffer areas, final cover design, surface water and landfill gas control, and the preparation of a site design report.
- Operation and monitoring requirements for site preparation, groundwater and surface water monitoring, daily cover, record keeping and reporting
- Requirement for a leachate contingency plan.
- Site closure and post-closure care provisions.
- Financial assurance requirements for private sector landfills.
Therefore, a two-tiered system of landfill standards exists in Ontario – both the size and the age of a site determine whether it is subject to one or both sets of regulatory standards. And while MOE has failed to provide the ECO with the actual statistics, it is safe to say that the majority of Ontario’s landfills are subject only to the more basic Reg. 347 s. 11 requirements.
Protocol for Updating Certificates of Approval for Waste Management
In 2005, MOE finalized a series of protocols for updating Cs of A for waste, air , sewage and water works. (For additional background see the Supplement to the ECO’s 2004/2005 report, pages 81-84.) MOE’s 2005 Protocol for Updating Certificates of Approval for Waste Management has the stated objective of making the requirements of existing Cs of A more consistent with the requirements of newly issued Cs of A.
However, the protocol contains no plan to systematically work through and upgrade the Cs of A for all existing landfill sites – especially those older sites not subject to the 1998 landfill standards. Further, the protocol is triggered only by MOE action, and the ministry’s potential action appears to be more focused on new or expanding sites rather than on old sites.
MOE “may” review an existing C of A when:
- An owner makes an application to MOE for a change to existing equipment, processes, production rates or for an expansion of plant capacity (excluding applications for minor changes and administrative amendments).
- Ministry staff, through the course of compliance, inspection or enforcement activities, identifies a facility that is appropriate for a more in-depth assessment.
- MOE targets specific sectors and/or types of facilities with more significant potential environmental or health impacts based on overall ministry and government environmental protection priorities.
The protocol also describes the public’s right, under the EBR, to make an application requesting the review of an existing landfill C of A as another route that can trigger a C of A update, but the ECO has documented only one case where such a review was granted – the Kitchener Street landfill in Orillia, which was reviewed in 2005 (see the Supplement to the ECO’s 2005/2006 report, pages 176-182).
ECO Comment
Gaps in the current provincial framework for monitoring and regulating Ontario landfills suggest that there is a critical need for MOE to implement a more rigorous system for tracking all aspects of landfill status. The ECO therefore urges MOE to update its landfill inventory and make it readily accessible to the public. MOE should consider developing and implementing an inventory system comparable to California’s SWIS system in order to track all aspects of a landfill’s status, including compliance with applicable provincial standards, and to make this information readily available to the public through on-line access.
The ECO believes MOE already has access to this information and that it should be made public. If MOE requires further authority, we urge that the ministry exercise its power, under s. 176(4) of the Environmental Protection Act, to develop regulations requiring landfill proponents to report on the status of their sites, including on compliance with provincial standards.
The ECO also urges MOE to develop a comprehensive plan to update the requirements/ standards applied to aging, active landfill sites, both large and small, approved prior to August of 1998. This could be achieved by following through on the objective outlined in the Protocol for Updating Waste Management Certificates of Approval – by developing and implementing a comprehensive plan to revisit and update the Cs of A for these sites in order to incorporate, to the extent possible, the newer landfill standards. This would help MOE to shift to a more proactive approach for updating landfill requirements, rather than relying on triggers such as proponent applications for site modifications.
| Recommendation 3:
The ECO recommends that MOE update and enhance its landfill inventory and make it accessible to the public. |
| This is an article from the 2005/06 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article:
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2006. "The Environmental Impacts of Ontario's Small and Aging Landfills - Who is keeping track?." Neglecting our Obligations, ECO Annual Report, 2005-06. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 33-38.
