The Ministry of Environment should immediately order the closing of the controversial Richmond Landfill site, Gord Miller, Ontario’s Environmental Commissioner, recommends in his annual report, released yesterday (tues).

"The (commissioner) believes that there are compelling environmental reasons for (the ministry) to require the immediate, orderly closure of the site and no compelling social or economic reasons for continuing to keep it open," Miller states, in the report.

The site is operated by Waste Management of Canada. Spokesman Wes Muir, reached yesterday afternoon in Toronto, said he could not comment.

"We haven’t had a chance to review the report at this time and we’ll be providing comment at a later date," Muir said.

In 2006, the Ministry of the Environment rejected Waste Management’s bid to expand the landfill so that it could accept up to 750,000 tonnes of trash annually.

"The Richmond Landfill has been assessed for possible expansion and found to be deficient technically, an improper place to put a landfill site," Miller told the Whig-Standard, during a teleconference interview yesterday after the release of his report.

The site is still approved for 125,000 tonnes of garbage each year, but it is quickly running out of space and is now taking less than 15,000 tonnes yearly, Muir said.

The company has a closure plan that is under review by the ministry.

"We think there’s probably about three to four years left if you were to take the amount of waste that we have and that we anticipate will go in," he said.

Miller said it’s time for the ministry to close a "sad chapter in waste management" in the province

"They’ve been sort of sitting back and allowing the closure plan to be developed and taking a rather passive point of view even though they acknowledge the technical problems with the site," he said.

Environmental groups and neighbours of the site have been campaigning for years to have the site closed and have sought better monitoring of pollution leaking from the property.

Environmental lawyer Richard Lindgren represents two groups that have fought to have the landfill closed, a concerned citizens coalition and the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte.

The groups say they are delighted with Miller’s recommendation.

"My clients’ concerns have been vindicated by the Environmental Commissioner’s report, and we look forward to timely action by the Ministry of the Environment to order immediate site closure," Lindgren said, in a release.

Miller cannot force the government to take action.

It’s believed that more than 20 million litres of leachate, a potentially toxic mix of fluid that percolates through the trash, is leaking into the ground each year.

Three groups filed applications a year ago through a provincial process demanding that the Ministry of the Environment stop Waste Management from putting any more trash in the site as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The groups also asked that the landfill be closed and a monitoring and reporting program be established to determine the "nature, extent and environmental fate of the leachate plume generated at the site."

It’s feared the leachate is leaking into and contaminating groundwater supplies and a nearby creek.

Waste Management maintains that its 70 groundwater monitoring wells show no impact to groundwater or surface water.

The ministry rejected the applications. It stated that the site is in compliance with a provisional certificate of approval and the ministry had already asked for changes to the monitoring program to allow the ministry to determine if water around the landfill is being affected by garbage juice leaking from the dump.

Miller’s report notes that the landfill was built on thin soil and fractured bedrock at a time before the Environmental Protection Act set strict guidelines for the establishment of landfills.

One of five sections of the landfill was built without a liner to block the flow of garbage juice.

Miller is critical of the Ministry of Environment’s rejection of the application filed last October.

"The (commissioner) believes (the ministry’s) decision to deny this application was unjustified," Miller writes in his report. "MOE’s contention that the ‘eration of the Richmond Landfill in accordance with its (certificates of approval) … does not have potential for harm to the environment’ contradicts the expert hydrogeology opinions provided by its own staff and the applicants."

Miller writes that the ministry’s statements and actions "undermine its decision to deny this review."

"Not only is the geology of the area inherently unsuitable for waste disposal, neither (the ministry) nor (Waste Management Canada) has identified any pressing need or public good for allowing the site to continue to receive wastes," Miller’s report states.

"Since the site currently receives only about 10 per cent of its historical volumes of waste, the (commissioner) does not believe that there would be any undue social or economic hardship to the area if the site were closed."

Waste Management could apply again to expand the site.

"We have not publicly announced any plans right now, we’re looking at our options right now … and what we would do with that current site," Muir said.

He said there is a shortage of landfill space in the province.

"We’re shipping over 3 million tonnes to Michigan and now upstate New York," he said. "A lot of waste from eastern Ontario is going to upstate New York because there just simply is a lack of disposal capacity in the province of Ontario."

Miller questions whether there is a landfill shortage.

"If the capacity is in such short supply, why is the fill rate (at Richmond) so low?" Miller wondered.

"They’ve dropped off from being a major landfill to filling at a very slow rate as they get towards their maximum capacity."

A recent spell of rainy weather may derail efforts to complete Freeport’s landfill project prior to the arrival of winter.

Sue Grans, spokesperson for William Charles Construction, said Wednesday the contractor remains optimistic about finishing the project this fall. However, Grans acknowledged recent weather has put the project’s completion in jeopardy.

“We feel comfortable that we are on schedule,” Grans said. “But the rain has not helped and the days are getting shorter.”

William Charles Construction is the project’s primary contractor. However, the closure effort includes the City of Freeport, engineering firm Fehr-Graham & Associates, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Ben Bushman, project manager for Fehr-Graham, said Thursday he expects the majority of the landfill’s cover system to be completed this fall. However, contractors may struggle to establish the necessary “grass cover.”

“All of the earth moving will be complete this fall,” Bushman said. “Everything else is weather dependent, primarily the seeding.”

The vegetation, Bushman explained, serves more than an aesthetic purpose.

“If we cannot get adequate grass cover, we will run the risk of erosion, mainly due to the spring thaw,” he said.

Playing from Behind

The odds were stacked against William Charles Construction from the beginning.

After collecting five bids for the landfill closure project, the City of Freeport awarded the project to Loberg Excavating in June. The contractor’s $1.6 million bid was more than $300,000 lower than the initial bid from William Charles Construction.

The decision quickly drew criticism from the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150.

At a June 1 City Council meeting, union representatives argued Loberg’s lack of landfill-specific experience (the contractor had never conducted the closure of a landfill) would ultimately lead to problems.

Two months later, the city was forced to find a new contractor after Loberg Excavating failed to secure a performance bond for the project. The city negotiated directly with William Charles Construction and the Freeport City Council voted unanimously to award the contract to the company. William Charles began the project within weeks.

“They were able to mobilize very quickly,” Freeport Community Development Director Shelly Griswold said. “And for the first few weeks, we had sunny weather. Unfortunately, we have had rain since then.”

The city first identified the need to close the landfill in 1995, and saved approximately $1.5 million in its landfill closure fund. The city plans to pay William Charles Construction $1.9 million for the project, which is about $300,000 more than the city was slated to pay Loberg.

Wes Muir, director of communications for Waste Management, said the recommendation contained in Gord Miller’s annual report came as a surprise to his company. The site, he said, has active certificates of approval issued by the Ministry of the Environment.

“We were disappointed the environmental commissioner chose not to contact us to discuss this matter with us,” Muir said. “The Ministry of the Environment objected an opposition group’s request to close the site. What they came back with late last year is that our landfill is in accordance with its certificates of approval and … the ministry inspects our site for compliance.”

Muir said the monitoring looks into ground and surface water as well as air quality. Results indicate the site is safe, he said.

However, in his annual report released Tuesday, Miller said the landfill is “inherently unsuitable for waste disposal.”

Muir said that is Miller’s opinion and, in the report, his comments of disagreement with the MoE are simply that, one man’s opinion.

“We have never been contacted by the commissioner or the commissioner’s office to talk about this matter and we would welcome the opportunity for he and his staff to come to our site and review our data,” Muir said.

Miller’s recommendation does not necessarily mean the site will close prematurely — it is estimated the site can continue receiving garbage for another three or four years — and Muir would not speculate on what may happen should the MoE follow through on the immediate closure. He said the site can still receive approximately 10,000 tonnes of garbage per year.

Richmond Landfill received waste from a number of area municipalities but Muir admitted a lot of garbage from eastern Ontario is currently being shipped to Michigan and New York.

“There’s a lack of capacity in this province, specifically acutely to eastern Ontario,” he said. “We have made a decision on where we are going to go in respect to future plans but we’ve been listening to the Napanee solid waste advisory committee and we’ve been looking at the provincial policies on waste diversion and we’ve been opening up a lot of waste diversion and recycling initiatives as we ramp down land filling,” he said.

The potential closure of the dump, however, would not have a direct impact to Belleville as none of the trash generated by residents here finds its way to the Richmond Landfill site. The city’s garbage is all trucked to Michigan and New York.