ontaminated Sites:
reparing for the Site Profile

We mentioned in our January, 1994
newsletter that Lidstone, Young,
Anderson will be offering connnents
an the draft regulations for the new
contaminated siles legislation (Bill
26) as they become available. The leg-
islation will not come into effect until
the regulations are complete. The
Ministry of Environment has indi-
cated that the draft regulations will
be released in three parts; as of May
1, 1994 Parts 1 and 2 have been re-
leased for comment. The Ministry re-
mains committed to enacting the Act
and regulations by October 1, 1994,
however, this is becoming an increas-
ingly unlikely timeline.

Part 1 of the regulation addresses
the site profile, the site registry
and fees while Part 2 focusses on
remediation standards, proce-
dures for contaminated soil relo-
cation, remediation approvals and
groundwater quality standards.
Part 2 also clarifies an earlier con-
cern with respect to municipal in-
terest in easements or rights of
way. Section 7 now states that
where a tnunicipality is a current
or previous owner of an easement
_or right of way, it will not be held
responsible for remediation as
long as it did not contribute to the
contamination. Although many
components of the regulations
merit attention, of particular inter-
ust to local government and the

subject of this review is the site
profile.

Section 20.11 of the amended
Waste Management Act establisnes
the “triggers” for providing 4 site
profile (for example, zoning o:
land that a person knows or rea-
sonably should know is or was
used for industrial or commercial
purposes) while section 2(1) of the
regulation provides for the timing
of providing a site profile (for ex-
ample, when a person submits a
written request for sub-division).
Therefore, depending upon the
particular type of approval sought
from a municipality, the time for
providing a site profile will differ.

The regulations define “site pro-
file’ as the information provided
by a person required to submit a
site profile in a site profile form in
Schedule 1 of the regulation. The
site profile itself is a ten page
document which requires the ap-
plicant to disclose information on
such topics as their understanding
of what the land was used for in
the past; evidence of potential
contamination concerns on the
land; and the information sources
the applicant has used to corn-
plete the site profile. Once the site
profile is completed it will be sub-
mitted, in many cases, toa mu-
nicipality. What does the munici-
pality do with these site protiles?

Unde the dratt
reo u tie My hpnPAGEnicipalicy

|
|

4
‘

in saa

...the local government needs
only to determine that the site
profile has been completed; it
need not analyze the sub-
stance of the answers

ako

receives a site profile it shall “de-
termine if the site profile is a satis-
factorily completed site profile”
and notify the applicant if this is
not the case. At first blush this
seems an onerous task. However,
“satisfactorily completed site pro-
file” is defined in section 1(1) of
the draft regulation to mean that
all questions in the site profile are
answered and particularly that in
Part IV of the site profile, that all
questions are answered either
“yes”, “no” or “don’t know.” In
other words, the local government
needs only to determine that the
site profile has been completed; it
need not analyze the substance of
the answers. A local government
can charge up to $50 for such a
review.

Once the municipality has com-
plied with section 3(1) it raust for-
ward the site profile to the Minis-
try of Environment regional waste
manager if any of the questions in
Part [V of the site profile have
been answered “yes” or “don’t

- continued page 8-