You have a question?

Please see our FAQ's below or,

Please write to the CLCLC and we will strive to provide an answer as soon as possible.  If this quick link does not work, please write us an e-mail at info@clclc.ca .

FAQs

Questions relating to the CLCLC

What is the CLCLC?

The Carp Landfill Community Liaison Committee (CLCLC) is a multi-stakeholder committee that was established in December of 2007 as part of a settlement agreement (settlement agreement) between Waste Management (the owner/operator of the Carp Rd. Landfill), the Ministry of the Environment and the Coalition of Citizen Groups Opposed to the Expansion of the Carp Rd. Landfill and nine individual appellants.  The Settlement Agreement was the result of an appeal launched in January 2007 by the Coalition and 13 original appellants regarding an approval by the MOE for air emissions at the Carp Rd. Landfill on grounds related to odour and benzene emissions.

Who sits on the CLCLC?

See our Membership section; membership

How was the membership selected?

The representatives from the City, the MoE and WM were designated by their respective organizations.  Representatives from the community were selected based on their previous engagement with the appeal process (2 of 7) while the others were invited to join based on their previous involvement in the community and demonstration of interest in the matter.

What authority does the CLCLC have?

The CLCLC has no decision-making authority and serves solely as an advisory body and as the primary vehicle to communicate with and between the community and Waste Management regarding operations at the Carp landfill.

What is the CLCLC’s mandate?

The CLCLC serves as the primary vehicle to follow up and to ensure that the obligations, as set forth in a Settlement Agreement between a number of local appellants, the Ministry of the Environment and Waste management and approved by the Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) and signed on September 27, 2007 are being fulfilled;

The CLCLC also serves as the primary vehicle to communicate with, and between, the community and Waste Management in an effective and timely manner on all matters pertaining to the WM Ottawa Landfill Facility.

How can I participate on the CLCLC?

• You can participate by visiting this website on a regular basis to find updates.
• Questions can be adressed to the CLCLC by writing to the CLCLC .
• In the event that a Member of the CLC resigns, or is unable to continue for whatever reason, the CLC shall seek candidates using the local newspapers, the CLCLC Web site and/or by whatever other means as may be deemed appropriate by the CLC. Resumes shall be reviewed and the final selection shall be made by the CLC.  Interested candidates can also express their interest in becoming member of the CLCLC at anytime by writing to the CLCLC stating their interest and sending a short resume.

Q&A to WM about site usage plans (16 Apr 2009):

Waste Management has provided responses to the following questions that were asked as part of CLCLC discussions.

When will the landfill gas to energy plant be tested and powered on?

WM RESPONSE:  All of the operational work should be completed imminently.  We are looking for clarification from the provincial government on a couple of minor matters, though, before committing to a startup date.

Based on your present and predicted intake, when will the current landfill be filled to capacity?

WM RESPONSE:  This question is difficult to answer definitively because plans change and we find from time to time that technical factors alter our assumptions.  For the moment, though, projecting solely based on our current rate of intake over the last three months, for example, the site would reach its approved contours around 2014.  You are aware, though, that the provincial officer order currently contemplates closure type stuff occurring in 2011.  Of course we will comply with all of our legal obligations.

What are Waste Management’s plans for expansion and does the company have a timeline for the submission of its Terms of Reference for Environmental Assessment and/or targeted expansion date, if any?

WM RESPONSE: We are definitely planning a project at some point in the next while.  Unfortunately, though, dates are very uncertain.  There are a number of technical, financial and other internal corporate objectives that must be achieved before we will be in position to put a pin in the date.  Rest assured, though, that we intend to consult thoroughly with the community -- not just checking boxes -- in connection with any proposed project.

Are there other plans for the current site such as a recycling or sorting facility?

WM RESPONSE: There will be a significant diversion component to any proposed project.  We have no definitive plans at all, though.  This topic, as well, will be the subject of community consultation.

Does that company have any plans for a Waste to Energy facility on the site?

WM RESPONSE: At least at this stage, it seems remote that the city and/or province will be inclined to make the significant financial and waste stream commitments required to finance a waste to energy facility and, accordingly, this possibility is nothing more than a watching brief at this stage.

Is the company considering any other uses for the site?

WM RESPONSE: If there is a use as part of the wider project, that will be the subject of community consultation.  If there is anything planned at any time outside of that, of course the CLC will be informed as soon as the proposal is initiated.  Our very clear purpose (other than to minimize the intrusiveness of the waste related uses) is to do something with the site that will help it make a substantial contribution to the community.  Many suggestions have been made.  We look forward to compiling them, considering them and then selecting in an open and transparent fashion.

Are there other plans for the site that might be of interest to the Community?

WM RESPONSE: Similarly, that is exactly what we consider the CLC to be an appropriate forum for.

Questions received from the Community:

How much higher will the existing pile of garbage get?  It's by far the biggest landmark in our area. (7 June 2009)

WM informs the CLCLC that the present landfill site is approved to approximately 45 metres above ground level. The site is currently at that level at the western end of the landfill while another three to five metres remains available to be filled on the remainder of the site. (12 June 2009)

Why don’t we get a high efficiency incinerator like T.O. ? It doesn’t smell and it produces
quite a bit of electricity as well!

Thank you for your inquiry to info@clclc.ca regarding the use of a high efficiency incinerator `like Toronto`.  The City of Toronto has opted to not invest in a Waste to Energy (WTE) facility, however, the Region of Peel (west of Toronto) operates a WTE facility located in Brampton. In 2008, Durham Region approved a WTE facility that is presently under assessment and scheduled to open in 2013.

Meanwhile, in Ottawa, the City has partnered with Plasco Energy Group to pilot a new plasma arc technology to treat waste. You can find out more about this emerging WTE technology by visiting http://www.plascoenergygroup.com/.

In addition, we would like to point you to a recent report by Stittsville - Kanata West Ward Councillor Shad Qadri regarding the holistic waste-resource management practices, including the use of  modern incineration facilities, employed in Sweden. This report suggests the City review incineration.  The report, and other information can be found on Councillor Qadri's website at: http://www.shadqadri.com/resource_manag.htm

In closing, your inquiry has been forwarded to Councillors  El-Chantiry and Qadri as well as to Waste Management for their information and consideration.  Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have further questions.

WM also provided their own response to the same question:

Thank you for your recent enquiry to the Carp Landfill Community Liaison Committee (CLCLC) regarding potential for incineration of waste in Ottawa.  Waste Management is a member of the CLCLC.  We understand that you have received a response from the CLCLC to your enquiry.  As a member of the CLCLC we have no comment.

However, as Waste Management, our position is that the use of thermal technologies is complex issue that depends upon key provincial and local public policy decisions regarding waste management and recycling, economics related to capital and operating investments, and the scalability of emerging technologies to reach the commercial level as needed in Ottawa.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have further questions.

Regards,

Tim Murphy, MCIP, RPP
Waste Management of Canada
 

I am doing a school report and I was wondering the size of the landfill. Any information is appreciated, thanks (18 January 2010)

Thank you for your question. Waste Management Canada Inc owns a site of ~104 hectares with 35 hectares licensed for waste disposal. The current landfill is 1140 meters long by 300 meters wide and 50 meters high; it covers the 35 hectares (ha).  The current landfill is at about 98.5% capacity and measures approximately 8.74 million cubic meters. In addition, there used to be an older landfill which measured approximately 9.4 hectares but is now closed since 1986  This old landfill is also part of the WM site.

My husband and I are debating on buying a house in Stittsville. We noticed the smell there a couple years ago but have now noticed the smell is pretty much gone after the upgrades have been made. We are interested in building but are a little worried about how it intends to expand. We have read that meetings were to be held near the end of 2009. I can not find any recent news on the matter. Can you please tell my any updates? (20 January 2010)

Thank you for your inquiry.  Our understanding is that Waste Management will be coming forward with a proposed project for the site in the coming months.  The company has not provided the CLCLC with any more details on the timing or content of the proposal including possible plans for a new or expanded landfill. 
Please note that “the site” entails more than the current landfill but all the land owned by WM around the landfill site.

A Multi-faceted question covering many elements received on 20 January 2010 and a point by point response:

My husband and I are looking to purchase a home in Stittsville.  It's a beautiful home and we love the community, however we are very concered as the community is within a 3 mile radius of the Carp landfill.  The specific community, if it helps with your response to our questions, is  "Name withheld upon request"  .  We love the community as I said, however we are extremely concerned about its proximity to the landfill.  Before making a final decision about whether we want to move to this community, we have the following questions on which we seek your guidance:
 
1.  Based on reading information on the FAQ section of your website, it appears that the site may be closed sometime in 2014.  However it also states that there is a provincial order that contemplates closure in 2011.  What significance does the provincial order date have?  Does it mean the site is required by order to be closed in 2011?
 
2.  Once they close the site, WM will obviously need a new site to dump the city's waste.  If they do not expand the Carp landfill, where will WM go?  Is it possible they could move the new landfill to a site outside of Carp, or is the only option an extension of the existing Carp facility?
 
3.  We fully understand from reading your webite that odour reports have decreased significantly, however odour is not the only issue for prospective residents.  There is a stigma attached to living in such close proximity to a landfill, which may potentially affect property values.  Knowing that WM may very well seek to extend the site (and thus expand its radius), why should any citizen of Ottawa purchase a home in this area?
 
4.  What plan is there, if any, to protect property values in this area?
 
We are seeking clear and unbiased answers to our questions, as the landfill issue is now the only gating issue in our decision to purchase a home in "Name Witheld upon Request".  We do not want the home builder's response (as they are obviously trying to sell us a home) or WM's canned PR response (as they are also biased).  Rather we are seeking a very honest and unbiased response from an independent party that has deep knowledge of the current operations and future plans for the landfill.  Upon reading your website, it appears that your organization may be the best to respond to our questions.  Thank you for the work that you do.  I am very much looking forward to your response.
 
Please feel free to contact me via phone at 613-xxx-xxxx.  By the way we are hoping to make a decision on our new home in a few days, therefore your early response will be much appreciated!

Thank you for your inquiry.  We appreciate your questions and hope our responses will be satisfactory.  You have correctly noted that we post the Q&A’s we receive on the FAQ page of our site to make the information as available as possible.  We make our best effort to not post any personal info with the questions and will remove reference to the Community in question or your name when we post the response.  I hope this is OK for you.

Please note that WM is a member of the CLCLC and may offer additional responses to your queries.  The CLCLC does not speak on behalf of WM.

Here are point by point responses to your questions:

1- The Provincial Officer Order (POO) supersedes the projected capacity date based on daily intake.  The company must comply with the Provincial Order and complete the Beanie Cap installation by Sept 2011 thus closing the landfill cell.  If they desire, the company may request an amendment or a waiver to the POO but the Ministry of Environment (MOE) have no obligation to oblige.  Please note that even if the landfill cell is closing, the site will continue to operate with for example, the landfill gas to energy plant, the required landfill cell maintenance and possibly other non-landfill related operations.

2- The company owns a site of ~104 hectares of which 35 hectares are licensed for waste disposal. The current landfill is ~1140 meters long by 300 meters wide and 50 meters high; it covers the 35 hectares (ha).  It is today at ~98.5% capacity.   

The Carp Road Landfill is a privately owned Landfill that has historically been accepting mostly Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) waste.  ICI waste is under the jurisdiction of the Provincial government.  The City has jurisdiction over residential waste only and has made the decision to send residential waste to the Trail Road Landfill which is owned and operated by the City.  The City recently launched its Green Bin Program to divert organic waste from landfills.  The City of Ottawa is actively exploring alternatives to landfilling. A recent report by Stittsville Ward Councillor Shad Qadri outlines the holistic waste-resource management practices, including the use of modern incineration facilities, employed in Sweden. This report suggests the City review incineration.  The report and other information can be found on Councillor Qadri's website at: http://www.shadqadri.com/resource_manag.htm.  You may have also read about the partnership between the City of Ottawa and Plasco (www.plascoenergygroup.com).  The company has developed a Plasma Gasification Technology to generate energy from waste and has a pilot project underway at the Trail Road landfill in Ottawa. 
There are alternatives for both the City and Waste Management to handle residential and ICI waste in the future.  An expansion of the Carp Road Landfill is not the only available option.  Having said that, it is the CLCLC’s understanding that Waste Management will be coming forward with a proposed project for the Carp Rd. site in the coming months.  The company has not provided the CLCLC with detail on the timing or content of the proposal including possible plans for a new or expanded landfill on or near the Carp Rd. site.

3- The decision to purchase a home in the area is purely personal based on various inputs.  The CLCLC, which was established as part of a settlement agreement in response to some local residents’ actions, is trying to ensure the site is operated in accordance with regulation and in a way that respects the local environment and community.   Many of the issues addressed by the CLCLC stem from conflicts because of the proximity of the landfill to growing communities and an expanding city.  Two west-end city councillors, Eli El Chantiry and Shad Qadri, serve on the CLCLC.  Perhaps your broader questions on city-specific issues could best be handled by them. We would be happy to pass your inquiry on.  However, per the CLCLC’s Terms of Reference, the Committee has no authority to influence Waste Management decisions or policy.

4- The CLCLC has a mandate to discuss a potential Property Value Protection Plan (PVPP) with the Waste Management.  Unfortunately, the Committee has not made any significant progress on this issue.  We are, however, aware of individual homeowners who have worked directly with the company to negotiate individual agreements.  The details of these agreements have not been made public.   While Waste Management is not obligated to establish a PVPP, the CLCLC will continue to engage in serious discussions with the company on this issue in the weeks and months ahead.  Any comments, questions or ideas on PVPP that you might want to share with us would be most welcome.

While I am sure we have not addressed all of your questions and concerns, I hope that our response provides you with some additional information as you weigh your decision. Meanwhile, please do not hesitate to contact the CLCLC further should you have any additional questions.

You have another question?

Please write to the CLCLC and we will strive to provide an answer as soon as possible.  If this quick link does not work, please write us an e-mail at info@clclc.ca .