Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-062-05 . Cl~-!lJglOn REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, May 9,2005 Report #: PSD-062-05 File #: PLN 33.12 .K 6''8.1; c Pf.7, -,;} 0 ~ - 05 By-law #: Subject: REPORT OF THE EXPERTS PANEL ON SOUND-SORB, EBR# XAOSEOOOS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-062-05 be received; 2. THAT Council endorse the Recommendations (Attachment 2) of the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb; 3. THAT the Minister, the Honourable Leona Dombrowsky, be requested to implement the Recommendations immediately; and 4. THAT the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington, Durham Region Planning and Health, Ministry of the Environment (York-Durham Office), John O'Toole, MPP, the City of Oshawa, the Township of Scugog , Protect the Ridges, interested parties and delegations be forwarded a copy of this report and advised of Council's decision on this matter. Submitted by: ~ 0"' ~J)' es-~ Reviewed by: -- Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer v 8. Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning Services FLlDJC/df 22 April 2005 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-062-0S PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On February 25, 2005 the Ministry of Environment released the report entitled "Report of the Experts Panel on Sound Sorb" via the Environmental Registry, requesting public review and comment by May 26, 2005. 1.2 In February 2004, a panel of independent experts was established by the Ministry to review all available reports, studies and data on the material called Sound-Sorb. The purpose of the review was to determine whether or not Sound-Sorb poses any adverse effects to human health and the environment when used for the intended purpose. 1.3 The two tier expert panel and review process was developed because of the questions that stakeholders, including the Municipality of Clarington have raised regarding the product, Sound-Sorb, and it's classification as a product rather than a waste. 1 .4 Sound-sorb is a material comprised of paper fibre biosolids and soil. The paper fibre biosolids are produced as waste from paper recycling processes (eg. Atlantic Packaging). The production of Sound-Sorb (mixing the paper fibre biosolid with soil) was deemed by the Ministry of Environment to meet the exemption requirement of Ontario Regulation 347 s.3(2)1 for waste management. 1.5 The Ministry requested that the expert panel address three specific questions: 1. Does Sound-Sorb have an adverse effect on the human health or the environment? 2. If yes, to what degree and what mitigation measures, if any, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risk to acceptable levels? 3. Given the intent to apply the findings across the province, are there any site conditions which may be more sensitive to the use of Sound-Sorb? 1.6 Council has previously passed three resolutions #C-516-03, #C-336-02 and #C-321-01 concerning Sound-Sorb (attachment 1), which express the concerns of the Municipality with regard to the spreading of Sound-Sorb and paper fibre biosolids. 2.0 COMMENTS 2.1 Staff participated in tier two (the stakeholders) of the Expert Panel on Sound-Sorb. 2.2. Protect the Ridges, the Municipality and other interested parties have been pursuing the Ministry of Environment for many years with regard to their regulation of paper fibre biosolids and Sound-Sorb. While MOE has initiated a number of studies intended to respond to the concerns there have been significant problems in methodology, testing techniques and time lags in completing these studies, thus no specific, corrective actions have been forthcoming from them. 2.3 The Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb provides the Ministry with recommendations (attachment 2) that would address some, of the issues that the Municipality of Clarington and its citizens have with Sound-Sorb. Specifically, the REPORT NO,: PSD-062-0S PAGE 3 recommendations that proper regulatory controls be implemented and that proposed sites for new berms should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal of better protection for human health and the environment are noteworthy. 2.4 An initial step towards addressing the issues relating to Sound-Sorb would be to implement the recommendations of the Expert Panel. 3.0 CONCLUSIONS 3.1 Given the previous actions of Council it would be consistent and prudent to continue to demand that the Ministry of Environment take appropriate actions with regard to Sound- Sorb and paper fibre biosolids especially as they relate to human and environmental health concerns. 3.2 The attached Recommendations from the Report of the Expert Panel on Sound-Sorb should be endorsed by the Municipality and the Minister, the Honourable Leona Dombrowsky be requested to implement the recommendations immediately. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Resolutions #C-516-03, #C-336-02 and #C-321-01 Attachment 2 - Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb, Recommendations, Pages 25-29 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Protect the Ridges, Deb Vice Ellen R. Reed, Ministry of the Environment District Supervisor, Ministry of the Environment Margo McNab ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution #C-516-03 Moved by Councillor Rowe, seconded by Councillor Schell WHEREAS there are fears and concerns for public health and the safety of drinking water especially with the wells and groundwater near the Oshawa Skeet an Gun Club berms and the areas of Clarington where paper sludge and/or "SoundSorb" has been dumped or stored; AND WHEREAS the public has the right to timely testing and reports from the Ministry of the Environment when drinking water safety is at risk; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Clarington Council calls for a moratorium on the dumping of paper sludge, "Soundsorb" and "Nutrisorb" or any other such similar product in the Durham Region; and BE IT RESOLVED THAT Clarington Council demands in the strongest terms a Public Inquiry into the actions of the Ministry of Environment specifically the York/Durham Ministry of Environment Offices and their lack of response and failure to disclose, to this longstanding water safety issue; and THAT this resolution be circulated to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of the Environment, Durham Region's MPP's, Region of Durham, all municipalities within the Region of Durham and Protect the Ridges. Resolution #C-336-02 Moved by Councillor Rowe, seconded by Councillor Schell THAT a letter be sent to the Protect the Ridges Committee, Durham Region Health Department, John O'Toole, MPP, reiterating the Municipality of Clarington's concerns with respect to the spreading of biosolids and advising that we support their efforts in this matter. "CARRIED" Resolution #C-321-01 Moved by Councillor Rowe, seconded by Councillor Schell WHEREAS the storage and/or spreading of biosolids, especially paper sludge, has been and continues to be under regulation by the Ministry of the Environment, however, when this same waste mixed with sand and called Soundsorb is being stored in enormous quantities on lands bordering Clarington on the Oak Ridges Moraine, it is not subject to these same regulations; AND WHEREAS the effects of both the biosolids (Le. paper sludge) and Soundsorb on the soil, the air through bioaerosols, and most significantly, on the water are unknown but which may have a direct, detrimental, indirect or cumulative long-term impact on this sensitive Moraine environment and the health of residents of the Municipality of Clarington; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT a letter be sent to the Ministry of the Environment urging immediate attention to timely well and water testing in the affected areas and that the results be released on an on-going basis. Also that the information from the Biosolids Coordinator, the Benefits Study and the Bioaerosol testing be made available in a timely, on- going basis and that the Ministry include biosolid waste products such as Soundsorb under its regulations; AND FURTHER THAT a letter of support be sent to Mr. John O'Toole, M.P.P. encouraging him to redraft his Private Member's Bill (formerly known as Bill 149), a Bill to amend the Environmental Protection Act to regulate the spreading of sewage sludge and biosolids; AND FURTHER THAT letters be sent to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Natural Resources, expressing our concerns regarding health and environmental issues relating to the unregulated storage of biosolids such as the paper sludge in Soundsorb on the lands on the Oak Ridges Moraine in north Oshawa bordering on Clarington; AND FURTHER THAT a letter be sent to the Minister of Consumer and Commercial Relations expressing our concerns regarding the biosolid waste (paper sludge) in Soundsorb and requesting that they allow the Ministry of the Environment to regulate the use of Soundsorb in the same manner that biosolid waste is regulated; AND FURTHER THAT the Municipal staff investigate options available to Council to control the use and distribution of Soundsorb in the Municipality; AND FURTHER THAT the City of Oshawa, the Township of Scugog, the Protect the Ridges Coalition, the Durham Region Health Unit, Mr. John O'Toole, M.P.P., and the Clarington Agricultural Advisory Committee be advised of this resolution. "CARRIED" ATTACHMENT 2 5.0 Answers to the Three Questions 5.1 Question 1: Does Sound-Sorb, as used as a berm construction material, present a risk to human health or the environment and what is the nature of that risk? The Expert Panel felt that it could not come to a conclusion on all of the possible risks to human health and the environment based on the data it had. It also felt that a more systematic collection of data at berms would not provide a comprehensive assessment of the risks. On the other hand the Expert Panel believed that the bulk use of PFB in berms could be managed in a way that would reduce any risk to human health and the environment to a minimum. The Expert Panel came to the conclusion that this material could with proper regulatory control be used to construct berms without causing an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. 5.1.1 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 1. The re is no need to ban the use of PFB mixed with mineral soil (Sound-Sorb) for bulk use in berms. 5.2 Question 2: If yes, to what degree and what management measures, if any, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risks to acceptable levels? The berm at the OSGC has not been in place long enough for significant leachate to reach the monitoring wells. The berm also have not been in place long enough to determine the risk for anaerobic decomposition of the material that would render the leachate more acidic. No evaluation had been done of possible soil contamination at the site where the berms were located. The Expert Panel believes that there is a potential for anaerobic decomposition of the PFBs in Sound-Sorb material creating an acid leachate. Because of the historical use of lead on gun club sites there was a possible risk of mobilization of lead from soil beneath berms. The high level of organic material in the berms also presented a risk of elevated biological oxygen demand (BOD) for surface water receptors at sensitive sites. 5.2.1 Recommendations The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 2. The re is no need to remove the OSGC berm provided long-term monitoring ofthe groundwater is continued. 25 3. Ex isting berms at other gun clubs should have a hydrogeological assessment. A monitoring regime in accord with the algorithm found in Chapter 4 should be established. Removal of a berm would only be appropriate as a mitigation option if contaminants in excess of the Ontario Drinking-Water Quality Standards were found in groundwater leaving the site or significant risks to human or environmental health were found on an SSRA or other risk assessment. The Expert Panel came to the conclusion that PFBs before being used as a berm construction material should be composted for the following reasons: . the anecdotal reports from several Tier 2 members indicated that Sound-Sorb when it was initially used in a berm generated enough heat to prevent the growth of vegetation for one growing season even when a layer of compost was applied on top; . concern had been raised by Tier 2 that E. coli had been found and pathogenic organisms were potentially present in PFBs; . TPH was the only COPC in excess of Table 1 criteria in the PFBs. The specific TPHs would to some extent biodegradable in a compo sting process. The uncertainties with respect to these concerns could be alleviated by compo sting. The recently amended Ontario Composting Guidelines (MOE May 2004) are adequate for this purpose and should be applied. 5.2.2 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 4. PFB should be composted before its use in a berm. It could be argued that, like other composts, the composted PFB should no longer be considered a waste. However the bulk use of composted PFBs presents several concerns: . the compo sting process is not complete at the point the Ontario Compo sting Guidelines would be met; . depending on environmental conditions where berms were constructed the further decomposition could become acidic and generate an acid leachate; . the use of composted PFBs in berms concentrates large quantities of the material in one location. The sites where Sound-Sorb has been used have a potential for soil contamination by the historic use oflead. The Expert Panel believed that site-specific factors therefore were relevant to the safety of the use of this material in bulk and that the site locations where it was used should be regulated. The Panel felt that monitoring the site was an efficient way to manage this use, both with respect to costs and reassurance to the community. 26 5.2.3 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 5. Before a berm constructed ofPFB and mineral soil is placed at any new location, a hydrogeological assessment should be done, and a SSRA done if the assessment indicates that one is necessary according to algorithm found in Chapter 4. The use of the proposed site for a new berm should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 5.3 Question 3: Given the intent to apply the findings across the Province, under what conditions should Sound-Sorb not be used or its use restricted? 5.3.1 Caveats Regarding the Conclusions The Expert Panel noted that according to current regulation the existing berms could contain wastes other than PFBs. To the Panel's knowledge, none of the sites where existing berms are located had been assessed for possible contamination of the soil at the site before the berm had been constructed. These considerations reinforce the need for monitoring groundwater wells around the existing berms in perpetuity. The Panel recommends that monitoring wells be used for new berms as well because information on the potential leachate from mature berms is not available. The Panel does not exclude the possibility that extensive further study ofthe PFB material and a thorough assessment of the hydrogeological situation at a particular site might provide sufficient evidence for the MOE to permit the use of the PFB material at a specific site without monitoring wells. The Expert Panel recognizes that the berms are likely to be covered with a thin layer of compost from yard waste/green box sources to assist vegetation of the berms. The Panel did not have data on the composition of and did not come to any conclusion with respect to the actual compost used at OSGC. Such compost should meet MOE composting guidelines. The Experts Panel did not come to any conclusions with respect to the safety of PFB for application to agricultural land (composted or not composted) with regard to human health, environmental or agricultural criteria. There are five current uses of PFB onto land in Ontario: . As a soil amendment on agricultural land; . In land reclamation in the Weiland area; . As a soil mulch in the horticultural industry; . As a component in Nitro-sorb, where it is mixed with composted leaf and yard waste; . As a component of seed bedding materials in the nursery industry. The MOE may choose to use legal instruments equivalent or better than Certificates of Approval. The recommendations set out minimum requirements. The MOE may add additional requirements as it sees fit as new information becomes available. Under the management algorithm proposed here the MOE could require, based on its own investigations, monitoring for 27 other substances for which evidence exists or becomes available. Paper fibre biosolids are a waste. Their bulk use in the environment even after compo sting requires regulatory control. Paper fiber biosolids are used in a number of other bulk applications for land application mixed with compost or as a sole soil amendment. The Terms of Reference for the Expert Panel did not include these uses. The Panel felt that Sound-Sorb should not be used in an uncontrolled manner as an exempt waste as it is at present. The Panel believes that regulatory instruments that would control Sound-Sorb in its use in berms should provides the means to exert the regulatory control that the MOE may deem appropriate for other bulk uses of PFB. 5.3.2 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 6. Paper fibre biosolids should be controlled by Certificates of Approval or legal instruments that provide equal or better protection for human health and the environment at all stages from its generation through transport, composting and final use in the construction of berms. The use of paper fibre biosolid material mixed with mineral soil should also be subject to MOE control with respect to its preparation and use in the environment by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 28 6.0 Recommendations 1. There is no need to ban the use of PFB mixed with mineral soil (Sound-Sorb) for bulk use in berms. 2. There is no need to remove the OSGC berm provided long-term monitoring of the groundwater is continued. 3. Existing berms at other gun clubs should have a hydrogeological assessment. A monitoring regime in accord with the algorithm found in Chapter 4 should be established. Removal of a berm would only be appropriate as a mitigation option if contaminants in excess of the Ontario Drinking-Water Quality Standards were found in groundwater leaving the site or significant risks to human or environmental health were found on an SSRA or other risk assessment. 4. PFB should be composted before it is used in a berm. 5. Before a berm constructed of PFB and mineral soil is placed at any new location, a hydrogeological assessment should be done, and a SSRA done ifthe assessment indicates that one is necessary according to algorithm found in Chapter 4. The use of the proposed site for a new berm should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 6. Paper fibre biosolids should be controlled by Certificates of Approval or legal instruments that provide equal or better protection for human health and the environment at all stages from its generation, through transport, composting and final use in the construction of berms. The use of paper fibre biosolid material mixed with mineral soil should also be subject to MOE control with respect to its preparation and use in the environment by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 29