Tuesday December 15: deadline for comment on Aggregate Resources Act review

AWARE News Network

Tuesday December 15 2015 is the deadline for the public to comment on the Ontario government’s plans to update the Aggregate Resources Act.

Access the government’s ‘Blueprint’ at the Environmental Bill of Rights registry, EBR#012-5444. 

Submit your own comment (by tomorrow) either by email to arareview@ontario.ca  or by mail to Katie Rosa, Aggregate Resources Officer, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Policy Division
Natural Resources Conservation Policy Branch, Resource Development Section, 300 Water Street, Peterborough Ontario K9J 8M5

The following is the text of the submission from AWARE Simcoe

AWARE Simcoe supports many of the proposed changes to the Aggregate Resources Act outlined in the Blueprint for Change paper. Please consider our further comments to achieve and enhance the goals set out in the Blueprint paper for stronger oversight, environmental accountability, improved information and participation and increased and equalized fees and royalties.

Proposed ARA Policy Framework and comments on proposals

Proposal (a) Enhanced requirements for studying impacts related to the natural environment, water, cultural heritage, noise, traffic and dust. Comment: We support these requirements and would add that visual impact and social impact studies also be required. There should be a limited noise assessment undertaken for sites with no processing to determine appropriate mitigation of noise levels.

Proposal (b) New study requirements for applications on agricultural lands. Comment: Aggregate extraction applications on Class 1-4 and Specialty Crop prime agricultural land, important ecological areas, areas with significant habitats of endangered and threatened spaces and species; provincially significant wetlands and, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSIs) should be prohibited.

Proposal (g) New time frames, notification areas and consultation requirements. Comment: Notification through the EBR is inefficient and ineffective. Direct notification to area residents is needed.

Proposal (j) New requirements for requests to lower extraction depth below the water table. Comment: Extraction below the water table should be prohibited.

Proposal (k) New application for small, temporary extraction operations on farms. Comment: Although MNRF will consult with the municipality for zoning information, the proposed requirement should include provision for notification to area residents within a determined notification radius.

Proposal (l) New requirements for proposals to extract stockpiles of Crown-owned aggregate. Comment: Revise proposed requirement to include consultation with area municipality and residents. Proposal (n) New ability to waive application requirements in unique circumstances. Comment: Clarification is necessary in the proposal that “would allow the Minister to exempt an individual or company from complying with the regulations, in order to provide the flexibility to waive application requirements in unique or unexpected situations or to support the streamlining of processes.” It is unclear what would constitute “unique” or “unexpected situations”. We are concerned this could be subject to abuse.

Proposal (r) Enable a new ‘permit by rule’ approach for low-risk activities, removing the requirement to apply for a permit or license if certain condition or rules set in regulation are followed. Comment: Revise requirement to allow for consultation with the local municipality and residents. Proposal lacks details re what conditions are to be met by regulation.

Proposal (s) Establish new rules and maximums for the extraction of aggregates from private land for personal use that will not require a license. Comment: Revise requirement to include posting of a sign on the property to provide information to residents and the municipality.

Proposal (v) New ability to establish conditions on existing aggregate sites related to source water protection plans. Comment: Funding for municipal staff to deal with compliance issues should be included in fee structure.

Proposal (w) Standardize references and interpretation of tonnage limits across the policy framework, clarifying that the total tonnage limit includes both blended and recycled materials. Comment: There should be incentives to increase use of recycled aggregate.

Proposal (aa) Streamlining and changing the frequency of self-compliance reports from yearly to every 2 years. Comment: Frequency of reports should remain on an annual basis.

Proposal (ac) Enable self-filing of amended site plans for minor changes in certain situations. Comment: This proposal needs clarification of what regulations are proposed.

Proposal (al) New ability to waive fees on private land sites. Waiving fees on private land sites is proposed to deal with “unique or unexpected situations” or if alternate transportation methods (rail/water) are used for aggregate transportation. Comment: Further clarity is necessary for this proposal.

Proposal (as) Housekeeping amendments to improve clarity and reflect current practices. -Allowing flexibility in determining whether the Minister should be a party to an OMB hearing for an application if the Ministry has no outstanding concerns. Comment: The Minister should still consider position of other stakeholders before decision is made not to have MNRF staff involved in a hearing.

Other Recommendations:

• Fees, levy and royalties must be set high enough to offset all costs of municipal infrastructure and staff salaries and show a net benefit to the municipality. What are the specific increases to cover the financial burden to a municipality?

• Inspection of licensed sites by municipal staff should be funded and insured by the province from the aggregate reserve funds to maintain compliance with requirements of the site plan.

• Require proponents to undergo impact(s) study of aggregate operations on neighbouring properties.

• Proposed changes do not address the need for better integration between the land use planning and license approval processes and the sharing of technical resources to evaluate and monitor licensed sites.

• Enhance capacity of MNRF to carry out inspections and enforcements

• Require time limits on extraction operations to recognize the PPS provisions that the land use is interim in nature and require rehabilitation and monitoring.

• Require integration of timelines and public consultation provisions of ARA with Planning Act.

• Assurance is necessary that the aggregate industry will be properly regulated and monitored and that adequate resources are in place to do so.

• Apply sunset clause to licenses (“interim use” of land require time limits on extraction) and rescind licenses beyond the sunset date.