Petition to the Auditor General of Canada

Re: Petition

To the Auditor General,

I am a Canadian resident of Powell River B.C. and wish to submit the following environmental petition relating to an environmental matter in the context of sustainable development.

The local pulp and paper mill owned by various companies over the years and currently owned by Catalyst Paper sits at the forefront of this petition.

In the early 1990’s, the company was owned by Macmillan Bloedel.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s the mill started disposing of toxic waste in a gravel pit very close to the residential neighborhood of Wildwood in Powell River B.C. It never asked for permission, never consulted the community on what it was doing. Later, when it became apparent that they were disposing toxic waste there, they were forced to get a provincial permit for the landfill. Regulations were lax at the time and the landfill flew in under the radar. The cow had already been stolen and the province closed it’s eyes to the barn door that needed shutting. All of this caught up with the company (then Macmillan Bloedel) in the late 80’s when it was discovered that there was gross contamination of the site and that toxins were percolating through the local groundwater and into the drinking water source (Powell Lake) for this section of the city. There was concern that the regional aquifer had also been contaminated. Dioxins were measured in groundwater and at the local springs leading to the lake at over 200 times the maximum allowable limit…26,706 pg/L.

The site was ordered closed by the ministry of the Environment in 1994. In 1995 an asphalt cap was placed over the site to lessen the flow of contamination.

The following excepts were taken from documents sourced and a report made by Doug Chapman, a local resident, in 1995.

HBT Agra was retained by Macmillan Bloedel, and this consulting firm did sampling and came out with a report on October 14, 1992.

Referring to the Agra report in an internal Ministry of the Environment document dated October 20, 1992, Biologist Brent Moore stated as follows:

"I am very concerned about some of the levels reported in this document. At site 89-5. the 2,3.7.8 TCDD TEQ is in excess of 3000 pg/L. while the accepted discharge level for a Special Waste treatment facility is 15 pz/L. Chlorinated phenolics levels are also quite high, with pentachlorophenol and 2.3,5,6 tetrachlorophenol values reaching 12 and 16 ug/L, respectively, at station 89-3. Other parameters, such as total sulphides, copper, iron and even nickel, are of sufficient concern at some to the monitoring stations. Safety levels for all these parameters have been exceeded in the reported data sets. The Industrial Section may wish to consider whether this location is actually a contaminated site."

An internal Ministry of the Environment memo dated November 13, 1992 makes the following comments:

"The contaminant types and indicated levels are sufficient to cause general concern as well as to require further investigation and remedial action by MacMillan Bloedel"

"As the alkalinity in the vicinity of the landfill is high, probably the result of leaching mill wastes, the ability to solubilize and transport organics is increased. This is perhaps reflected in PAH being detected in all water samples taken. In general PAH is not that soluble and the fact that PAHs are so widely dispersed throughout this system is a cause for alarm”

"As stated by HBT Agra, not all the flow from the landfill area can be accounted for by the volume seeping from the scarp face; there must be a groundwater component from the landfill area directly into Powell River that has not vet been investigated."

Finally, this same November 13,1992 memo makes the following comment:

"No further material which may act as future contaminant sources should be deposited at this landfill"

  An internal MOE memo which discusses a conference call among 6 MOE officials and environmental scientists makes the following comments about concerns with the contamination leaching from this site:

-- the nastier chemicals are starting to be mobile.

-- safe to assume that it is much worse than current data due to stratigraphy.

-- dioxins are probably the biggest concern.

-- even if capped, there could be a spring.

-- a lot of the semi-impermeable barrier has probably been stripped off.

-- one dioxin is 200 times drinking water limit.

-- make sure people don't drink water from streams- they could be fishing.

 A November 10, 1992 letter from MOE to Environment Canada concerning the contaminants reaching Powell Lake states that MOE "was considering making an Abatement Order regarding the polluted site to ensure a timely response by the company."

 

On November 27, 1992 a meeting was held with officials from MB, Ministry of Health, Environment Canada, MOE and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. At this meeting MB agreed on principle to take certain actions. As a follow up to this meeting, a letter was sent to MB outlining the matters that MB had agreed upon at the meeting. This letter states:" The company has agreed to identify and assess alternatives for preventing further contamination of the ground water and river. Options considered should include closure and capping of the landfill, pump and treat interception system, barrier walls, siting of a new secure landfill facility, waste elimination and reduction at source or development of alternate uses or recycling wastes. I would expect to receive a written presentation of this assessment by the end of January, 1993.”

 

An internal Ministry of the Environment memo dated July 8, 1993 discusses the results of certain studies that had been done to determine whether fish were being contaminated by the toxic chemicals being discharged from the landfill. The studies had determined that fish located in a fish hatchery downstream from the contaminated spring and seeps flowing into Powell Lake had been contaminated. This memo from Laurena Hansel, an Ministry of the Environment biologist discusses the contaminated fish in the hatchery as follows:

"However, the consistency of elevation in the hatchery fish warrants some consideration. In all cases the hatchery fish samples had the highest levels of 2 3.7.8-fCDD equivalents. It may suggest that the hatchery fish continuously exposed to water from the vicinity of the landfill are bioaccumulating organics, even though the levels are very low."

The memo further states:

“The suggestion that long-term exposure to the Lake water results in accumulation in fish may bear consideration with respect to domestic consumption of the same water supply."

It is significant that bearing in mind that this site was highly contaminated, MB applied for and was given permission to store 6000M3 of hazardous waste at this site in August of 1993. This waste consisted of soil contaminated with hydrocarbons and Ministry of the Environment allowed MB to store this waste at the landfill site in a manner that was contrary to the B.C. Special Waste Regulation. In other words, an exception was made for MB so that the company could store this waste without complying with the strict terms of the regulation.

In a January 25, 1994 internal Ministry of the Environment memo the following comments are made by a Soils and Hydrogeology Specialist with the Contaminated Sites Unit:

"I realize that there may be a public perception problem with allowing the continued operation of a landfill where we have serious concerns about the environment; fortunately, this has not occurred so far."

 

Hopefully, the previous comments have given you a taste of the kind of contamination that was experienced at this site and the culture of collusion that tends to protect industry by shielding the truth of the situation from public view.

Since then, several things have happened.

The landfill was capped in 1995 and the Ministry of the Environment allowed the company to build a “mini engineered landfill” on the corner of it. Testimony and photographic evidence indicates that the liner of this mini landfill seems to have been purposely punctured and shredded while it was being built in order to decrease the flow of leachate that needed to be collected and treated. It would continue to flow into groundwater unimpeded. The company began trucking its mill flyash to a secure site in Washington after it was discovered that dioxin laden flyash dust was blanketing the local community.

Last year they decided it was too expensive to continue hauling the flyash to Washington, and proposed a permit amendment to build a 90 foot high mountain of flyash on top of the asphalt cap of the old contaminated site, and the “mini-landfill”. The company acknowledges in its report that this would likely compromise the integrity of the cap, a direct contravention of provincial siting guidelines (which it changed wording of in it’s technical report to make it seem as if it met all requirements.) This would allow contaminants to further poison our environment.

Because the local and B.C. government have such close ties with industry (there are ongoing ombudsman investigations) many citizens of this town do not feel reasonably assured that their health and safety is being safeguarded and that the environment will be protected. The site is in extremely close proximity to local homes (within 75 meters…90 homes within 300 meters), the ocean (the site is on the coast directly overlooking the ocean) a dammed river (Powell River) and the local drinking supply (Powell Lake).

Testing for contaminants has been entirely turned over to industry and there is testimony by former mill employees that there has been deliberate skewing of reports to satisfy provincial requirements.

The citizens of Powell River don’t know where to turn. I don’t know where to turn.

Given the foregoing, I request that the responsible departments do the following:

 

• Will the Department of Fisheries and Oceans test levels of contaminants in fish and verify if contaminants are present and if so whether they are likely to have been caused by contaminants from the landfill site or their by-products?

• What is the Department of Fisheries and Oceans doing to stop any further leachate from entering watersheds including Powell River, Powell Lake and the ocean.

• Given that we have been advised that the landfill liner was breached during construction to allow unseen seepage, would proper the proper department undertake specific investigation and action to determine if the liner has been punctured or breached, and if it is operating as an effective barrier to the migration of pollutants?

• Would the proper department initiate independent testing of both the soil and water around the site and downstream of the site to assure that it remains free and clear of contamination?

• If the soil and water are determined to be contaminated, will the proper department undertake direct action to remediate conditions at the contaminated site?

• Given the potential for deposits of flyash to break and otherwise deform the asphalt cap that was placed to stem the flow of historic contamination and movement of toxins, will the responsible departments either prevent construction of the landfill addition or commence action to prevent enabling of the permit amendment, so breakage will not occur?

• "A strategy identifying opportunities to eliminate the formation of dioxins and furans by the coastal pulp and paper industry will be developed through a multi-stakeholder process by December 31, 2001 to provide a framework for continual progress towards the elimination of dioxin and furans." (Canada-Wide Standards for Dioxins and Furans, p.5) Given the above agreement by the CCME in it's document Canada-Wide Standards for Dioxins and Furans, what action has been taken by Environment Canada to assure dioxin elimination for the protection of Canadian citizens and that interim Canada Wide Standards are set at levels that offer protection to the public? What is it doing to make sure these standards are strictly enforced?

• Will Health Canada conduct tests on local individuals and livestock to determine if contaminants have entered and bioaccumulated within the local food chain? 

• Given the highly toxic nature of dioxin contamination, will Health Canada release information on Cancer rates and the rates of other dioxin related conditions in the immediate vicinity? Will Health Canada conduct studies to determine if there is a present and immediate hazard to this population from contaminants related to this landfill?

• It is evident from the above history that the Ministry of Health, Environment Canada and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans have all known about this problem for well over 15 years. They concluded long ago that there was serious contamination at this site requiring the intervention of their departments to safeguard public health and protect the surrounding water and soil. What will their departments do to make sure that we are not once again endangered by this site because of the short sighted whims of local corporations? What will they do to guarantee that the good decisions they once made are not overturned behind their backs? What will they do to guarantee the remediation or at the very least the permanent closure of this site so that local residents are not threatened every few years with new lurking challenges to their health and safety?

 

We’re deeply worried out here. Please help us!

 

Please also see www.prlegacy.org for supporting documentation.

Basic Facts:

• Catalyst proposes to build a mountain of industrial waste on top of an unstable highly toxic capped and unlined landfill in extremely close proximity to an established neighbourhood.

• Proposed Height: A massive increase in "flyash", (toxin containing residue from power boilers) towering 9 stories high! This would create the highest man-made structure in the Powell River area! (aside from the mill itself)

• Footprint: 15 acres, or 6 hectares, or the size of 10 football fields, or 3 city blocks.

• Location: The landfill is sitting on a slope directly above the dam on Powell River. The area has been assessed as “a relatively high seismic risk”. The landfill is sitting on a highpoint above the surrounding area.

• Weight: 1.3 MILLION tons on top the old landfill, leading to possible groundwater contamination.

Proximity:

• The whole community of Wildwood is in close proximity to the landfill. At least 7 houses are within 100 meters, a food-serving business is within 150 metres, a children's daycare center is within 300 metres, 90 homes are within 300 meters, and the local elementary school is directly downwind of the landfill. The community is zoned residential/agricultural, and there are at least 3 organic farms, and many other farms and gardens located nearby.

• The only route to and through Wildwood and all locations north, Highway 101, passes within 100 meters of the landfill and for over ½ kilometre is within 300 meters of the landfill.

• The landfill has a daily, persistent and aggravating impact on local residents and travelers.

Health Risks:

• Powell River/Catalyst flyash contains highly mobilized carcinogenic dioxins and furans.

• Powell River/Catalyst flyash also contains silica dust that causes lung cancer, silicosis, emphysema, and asthma.

• Contaminated leachate may be poisoning local drinking water, and entering Powell River and Gulf of Georgia.

Dust:

• Despite remediative attempts by Catalyst, and claims to the contrary, dust continues to be generated from the site and from the trucks delivering the flyash.

• The company is now depositing the flyash in a "mini-landfill" next to the sealed original landfill, as a semi-liquid slurry which dries to a solid state. This is easily abraded to allow dust to be picked up again by passing winds. Also, once the moisture content is removed from this solid, it easily reverts back to a dust and returns to an airborne state.

• No testing on stability of flyash slurry has been done or is contemplated. Recent changes of reduction of limestone to boiler make the flyash slurry less stable.

• Due to prevailing wind patterns, any dust from the landfill goes directly to the local neighbourhood. (This is already happening with the current operation of the "mini-landfill".)

• The proposed increase in height of 20 meters would have the effect of greatly increasing the airborne dust factor, due to added vertical surface area, thereby affecting many more areas including the Townsite. The elementary school in Wildwood is about 575 meters from the landfill — directly downwind.

Leachate:

• Massive amounts of leachate are escaping the site’s collection system. A large percentage of the leachate is apparently going straight into the groundwater, which drains into Wildwood’s source of drinking water, Powell Lake. It also drains into Powell River and the ocean.

• By law any leachate must be collected and treated. Yet there are about 20,000 m3 of leachate escaping each year.

• There have been spills in Townsite, on Wildwood Hill and at the road that turns into the landfill. These are washed away with hoses. The slurry laden water drains into the river and lake.

• There is nothing to prevent Catalyst from burning contaminated fuel and dumping the toxic residue on the landfill. 

Flawed Public Process:

• No public hearing has been scheduled prior to application submission.

• The Ministry of the Environment has changed their policy: No public voice is allowed at decision-making table.

• There is no means of public input except through Catalyst.

• The flawed technical assessment released to the public, is a “draft” report. This is the only version of the report available for public scrutiny prior to the application submission, and forms the basis (besides our letters) upon which the landfill expansion decision will be made.

• Their assessment never takes into account the social and economic impact on the community! Impacts on environment are minimized, and the people ignored.

Zoning:

• The landfill has Section 21 M3 zoning even though it is not Section 21 land. The mill intends to apply for zoning change to expand even further.

• Part of the existing site has "R-2 Rural'' zoning and is being used as a landfill. This non-compliance with local zoning has been known to the company since at least May 1994, yet nothing has been done to correct this.

• The City Council remains completely silent on this issue.

• Repetitive conflict of interest: City Council is in a business partnership with Catalyst.

• The City has a responsibility to protect our water in the river and the lake from contamination. Water is NOT excluded under Section 21 Zoning.

This is an unprecedented and irresponsible plan:

• Proposed 9 stories high, 15 acres, 1.3 million tons on unstable toxic waste dump sloping to river, dam and drinking water and sitting over fractured bedrock, so tracing contamination of groundwater is almost impossible.

• There are fixed-income, retired people, and lower income families living next to the industrial waste dump who can't move away. Many of whom have asthma and other health issues.

• It is an anachronism to have a toxic waste dump in a residential neighbourhood in today’s environmentally conscious culture, and with today's cancer rates within the Canadian population.

• Quote from CEO of Catalyst’s major shareholder: “As for dealing with the public, and you may quote me, screw ‘em.”

• Our economic base is shifting away from a mill-centered economy. If we as a community allow this plan to be implemented, families from other areas would be less likely to move here, bringing new businesses and skills that are sorely needed.

way from a mill-centered economy. If we as a community allow this plan to be implemented, families from other areas would be less likely to move here, bringing new businesses and skills that are sorely needed.