GFL Environmental Inc - Environmental Compliance Approval (waste)

One of the comments includes concern about the existing level of fugitive dust in the area to be made worse by an increase in the daily receipt rate. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:

• Conditions are included in the Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) to deal with the mud track out and the fugitive dust emissions.
• As a minimum, GFL must implement control and prevention measures included in the latest best management practices plan.
• Additional requirements regarding truck covers and truck filling to prevent spills in-transit were included in the conditions.
• Conditions also require that GFL ensures road cleaning using wet sweepers that do not emit dust from the equipment.
• GFL is also required to clean wheels of the trucks leaving the site.
• Upon verification of mud track out by the ministry staff, GFL will be required to take immediate additional steps to eliminate the mud track and the fugitive dust emissions, including but not limited to installation of a truck wheels washing station or another equipment equivalent in terms of cleaning effectiveness and efficiency, at each: 38 Fenmar Drive and at 39 Fenmar Drive locations.

The other comment includes the following concerns.

1. concern is regarding dilution of contaminated soils. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Condition is included to prohibit mixing prior to characterization of soil and only mixing of similar soils is allowed.
   • Condition is included to prohibit any dry soil or the processed soil intended for deposition at a reuse site to be mixed, bulked or blended with any other dry soil, processed soil or rock or any other material if the principal purpose of the mixing, bulking or blending is to reduce the contaminant of concern concentrations in the soil.
2. concern is regarding testing of incoming soils, about validity of source site characterization and confirmation testing at the site and about absence of Qualified Person (QP) oversight at the source site unless there is a Phase 1 or Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Conditions are included to specify in detail the expectations of characterization at the source site or characterization at the site. The requirements include the sampling frequencies, methods, the parameters to test for and the analytical methods and the required lab accreditation.
   • Current O. Reg. 406/19 requirements include a QP requirement for the source site characterization personnel.
3. concern is regarding having a QP at the processing site. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • The ECA requires trained personnel to carry out all approved activities at the site and the training requirements are set out in the conditions.
4. concern is regarding separating soil from the different source sites, prior and post treatment. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Approval includes conditions that require soil separation on the basis of various criteria: characterized vs not, for treatment vs for transfer and based on the final end-use destination.
   • Conditions require piles of different quality soils to be separated.
5. concern is regarding confusion with use of terms “biocell” and “biopile”. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Even though “biocell” is used in the design and operations report, term “biopile” is used in the ECA with references to mechanical aeration. This approach is consistent with other approvals where a “biocell” includes perforated piping for active aeration and which is intended to treat soils with heavier contamination levels. The approval includes definitions to describe the biocell and the biopile to clearly identify the differences between the two methods of treatment.
6. concern is regarding a requirement to test for specific (listed) contaminants for soils are ready to be shipped. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Since the processed soil is an excess soil, conditions in the ECA require that the characterization requirements from O. Reg. 406/19 are followed.
   • Conditions are included to specify the characterization requirements for transfer to waste disposal sites.
   • Conditions are included to prescribe monitoring of the bioremediation process to track progression of the treatment.
7. concern is regarding sampling from the surface of piles. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Condition is included to require the processed soil sampling to be done using the sampling procedures, including methods, equipment and techniques, for collection of representative samples and for handling of the samples as set out in the Section B of Part I of the Soil Rules or as recommended by the accredited laboratory service provider carrying out the analytical testing.
8. concern is regarding prohibiting soil deposition on environmentally sensitive sites. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Since the treated soil leaving the waste disposal site for re-use is an excess soil under O. Reg. 406/19, conditions are included to specify the deposition locations in accordance with O. Reg. 406/19.
   • If the soil does not meet the reuse site requirements, it must be shipped to an approved waste disposal site or to any other site approved to accept such waste by an appropriate government agency of equivalent jurisdiction.
9. concern is regarding justification criteria for the acceptance of the soil for the particular reuse site and concern that the volumes of soil destined for a reuse site are inconsistent with the rationale document. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
   • Since the processed soil leaving the waste disposal site for a reuse is an excess soil under O. Reg. 406/19, conditions are included to specify the deposition locations as per the requirements in O. Reg. 406/19.
10. concern is regarding ministry notification of the processed soil returned to the site or tested and found to be non-compliant with the site’s re-use criteria. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
    • Since the processed soil leaving the site for a re-use is an excess soil under O. Reg. 406/19, its handling at a reuse site is prescribed in O. Reg. 406/19.
11. concern is regarding inconsistency in the process design (re use of aeration lines vs mechanical aeration) and to require subsurface monitoring and testing. The ministry addressed this concern as follows:
    • The approved processes are biopiles with mechanical aeration and biocells with perforated pipe aeration if mechanical aeration is shown to be ineffective.
    • Monitoring conditions include the specific requirements for subsurface monitoring and testing.
    • Condition requires use of the sampling procedures, including methods, equipment and techniques, for collection of representative samples and for handling of the samples as set out in the Section B of Part I of the Soil Rules or as recommended by the accredited laboratory service provider carrying out the analytical testing.