Operations at the Golden Landfill are causing frustration on both sides of the fence.
On one side, Andrea Weissenborn of Akamina Woods Developments Inc. which owns the 75-acre property adjacent to the landfill, has made several complaints to the Columbia Shuswap Regional District regarding litter and perimeter groundwater.
Weissenborn’s issues are also cited in a June 8 report in which the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy (MOE) presented the CSRD with 11 reasons why the Golden Landfill’s inspection record is being referred for an administrative penalty.
The report is a follow-up to a planned landfill inspection conducted on May 11 by MOE Environmental Protection Officer Keith Connolly. The purpose of the inspection was to assess compliance with the operational certificate (OC) that authorizes management of waste and recyclable material at the site. If the operational certificate is non-compliant, the waste management plan (SWMP) is also considered to be non-compliant.
In frustration, Ben Van Nostrand, team leader of the CSRD’s Environmental Health Services, says an update to the solid waste management plan (SWMP) was approved by MOE on June 3, 2019 and the OC was last amended on June 30, 2021.
“The permit is written in such a way as we’re never going to be in compliance,” he says. “I think we’re demonstrating efforts across the board to try to satisfy the province.”
One of Connolly’s issues is that landfill staff are not ensuring the facility does not cause a nuisance, specifically with respect to offsite litter, birds and wildlife attraction. “In order for the CSRD to access the property for litter pick-up, we need to contact the owner and provide her with 48 hours notice,” he says. “That makes it a challenge as we could clean up the property and there could be a windstorm the next day, the ministry could come out then, and we’d be out of compliance.”
In a June 26 email to CSRD Chief Administrative Officer John MacLean, Board Chair Kevin Flynn and all regional district directors, Weissenborn repeated her concerns and dubbed a clean-up planned for June 28 inappropriate “when plant foliage is in full bloom, ground nesting birds are in the area and a lot of the garbage is now obscured by the growing plants.”
“We ask that the responsible CSRD directors and the CAO put a stop to this unreasonable action and thus do not destroy plants and wildlife habitat at this sensitive time of year,” she wrote, suggesting the CSRD failed to do an adequate clean-up in the spring. “Instead, we ask that the CSRD focus on stopping the nuisance at its source as required by the Ministry of Environment.”
Van Nostrand says the regional district has made several costly improvements: an eight-foot electric fence has been installed along the property line rather than the more often used five-foot fence, and 200 metres of driving range type nets have been erected to prevent litter from reaching Weissenborn’s property. As well, he says the landfill’s active phase is about 100 metres from the fence and in 2021, CSRD has spent $100,000 on ditching and rip-rapping to keep water on the landfill side.
Van Nostrand visited the landfill on June 28 and says a crew spent five hours on the property where they collected a total of one bag of garbage. He says staff make every effort to cover garbage as quickly as possible. He is aware that as well as presenting her complaints to the CSRD, Weissenborn is contacting the ministry directly.
Area A Director Karen Cathcart is indignant in defence of the CSRD and Van Nostrand.
She says she was shown before- and after-photos of the number of bags of litter staff had picked up in the earlier spring cleanup, and describes the site as being “absolutely immaculate.”
“As soon as the litter is picked up, the deer and birds bring it back,” she says. “You would have to have someone there 24/7 to have no litter.”
Cathcart is also annoyed that Connelly is taking phone calls from the property owner.
“When the ministry responds to citizens before the CSRD, it’s not acceptable and it’s not appropriate,” she says, noting Van Nostrand has submitted reports to MOE in the past and, in some cases, had no response for two years. “They say Covid and staffing levels are the reason, but they need to get their ducks in a row now and the ministry and their directors need to be accountable themselves, and respond accordingly.”
Another area of contention in Connolly’s report is failure to operate the fence at 6000 V, not measuring the fence voltage at least once per day, and not maintaining records that demonstrate compliance with the OC. But a random look at the records shows that voltage has been checked every day except for Sundays and Monday of the 2022 Thanksgiving weekend.
Van Nostrand says the voltage is low during the winter months when bears are sleeping. His complaint is that MOE demands that the voltage be maintained at 6,000 volts in Golden and in Revelstoke, where high snow pack can destroy the fence, causing annual damage in the range of $6,000.
The site for the landfill was chosen in the 1970s because it was out of town and away people, Van Nostrand says. It was also up high, away from the river in the valley. Since that time, subdivisions have been created with what Van Nostrand calls million-dollar homes in a development across the street from the landfill.
Environmental standards have improved and requirements to monitor groundwater have increased. CSRD has established wells at the perimeter of the landfill and a network of groundwater monitoring wells upstream of the town’s groundwater intake.
“There is evidence of impact from the landfill at the wells at the perimeter of the landfill, however there’s no evidence that the landfill is impacting the town’s water supply,” he says, pointing out the nearby subdivision is serviced by city water, not groundwater. “Monitoring sites beyond landfill borders don’t show impact.”
[gps-image name=”33207685_web1_230706-GOS-Landfill_2.jpg”]
Van Nostrand says CSRD is not ignoring the province in terms of the implementation the waste management plan but says, budget issues, finding people do the work, Covid issues have caused some delays.
Asked for comment on CSRD’s concerns with Connolly’s report, MOE responded with a June 30 email citing the regional district’s failure to “ensure that the facility does not cause a nuisance including with regard to birds, rodents, insects, odour, noise, dust, litter, vector and wildlife attraction.”
“These conditions are based on established best management practices and provincial policy as presented in 2016 BC Landfill Criteria,” reads the email. “The specific conditions imposed at Golden also reflect the past site performance, the physical setting including impacts on neighbouring properties, complaint and compliance history and the outcomes of public and agency consultation.”
An independent statutory decision maker will review the file and decide whether or not to move forward with the administrative penalty process, notes the email.
As to the future, the Golden Landfill will be under review as will all other CSRD waste management practices.
“We are embarking on a solid waste management plan review and do intend to explore the Golden landfill and potentially alternative options for that plan review,” says Van Nostrand, noting that possible options include closing the landfill and hauling waste to another CSRD site, something that would result in a
“massive increase” in tipping fees.
Speaking as a CSRD director, Ron Oszust says he is happy and supportive of investing dollars into the process as it will be a very thorough, full-spectrum study of all available options.
Van Nostrand adds that the massive, two-year solid waste management plan update will require extensive public consultation. CSRD has established a project page with all information regarding the review as it rolls out. Go online to CSRD Connect.
Also massive is the two-year solid waste management plan update, which will require extensive public consultation. CSRD has established a project page with all information regarding the review as it rolls out. Go online to CSRD Connect.
READ MORE: Boaters in B.C. urged to take measures to prevent mussel invasion
