HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-052-11 Addendum •
Leading the Way REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting: COUNCIL
Date: June 7, 2011 Resolution #: By-law #: N/A
Addendum to
Report #: PSD-052-11 File #: PLN 33.3.10
Subject: DURHAM-YORK ENERGY FROM WASTE PROJECT
CLARINGTON COMMENTS ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
APPLICATION (AIR)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that Council adopt the following:
1. THAT PSD-052-11 and Addendum to PSD-052-11 be received;
2. THAT a copy of Report PSD-052-11, this Addendum and Council's decision be
forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Region of York, and the Ministry of
Environment; and
3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-052-11 and any delegations be
advised of Council's decision.
Submitted by: '` =rrv.� Reviewed by:
avid J. Crome, MCIP, RPP in Wu,
,**r Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
FL/sn/df
7 June 2011
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 2
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 At the May, 30th 2011 General Purpose and Administration Committee,
Committee was provided with a presentation by Ms. Abigail Salb of SENES
Consultants Ltd. Ms. Salb listened to the delegations provided by members of
the public. When asked by Committee to comment, she provided an overview
and background context for the public comments and requests. No additional
items were identified to be considered in the Resolution.
1.2 As indicated in Section 3.3 of the PSD-052-11 SENES had to date not received
dispositioning comments from the Regulator or Proponent when the Staff report
was written. Additional comments would be communicated to Council in an
addendum report for the June 7th, 2011 meeting. Staff and Ms. Salb have taken
the opportunity in this Addendum report to make suggestions that clarify the
intent of the Resolution.
1.3 Comments were received on May 26th from MOE (the Regulator) prior to SENES
submitting their Peer Review to GPA Committee. The information provided by MOE
was provided in a May 31St memo to Council members as requested by Councillor
Neal.
1.4 Staff and SENES have not received any additional responses from MOE. Nor have
comments been received from the proponent (the Regions), their contractor
(Covanta) or consultant (Golder).
1.5 Staff have identified that with regard to Recommendation 2 c) the full intent of the
Peer Review was not included in the wording of the Resolution. Therefore, it is
recommended the wording "If technically feasible from an operational
perspective" be added.
1.6 Staff and SENES are concerned that the requirements added in
Recommendations 2 e) and f) could be misconstrued by the Ministry since they
are a request to be added to the Certificate of Approval. Rather the intent would
be to determine on a bi-weekly basis for a start-up period of approximately 3 to 6
months that the emission levels of dioxin and furan levels and mercury are below
the limits established in the Certificate of Approval. If they are below this level
then the frequency of the analysis could be adjusted accordingly. As such it is
recommended that the recommendation 2 e) and f) be amended to read "....and
the frequency of sample collection and analysis be initially set at biweekly
and reduced over time if the results being obtained are as projected;".
1.7 The Municipality through the Peer Review has requested that MOE include
specific requirements. MOE at it sole discretion will determine whether to include
these in the C of A or not. Recommendation 3 as recommended by Committee
would involve the Municipality in the review of the draft C of A which would be
redundant at that point in time. Staff are recommending that Recommendation 3
be deleted and the remaining recommendations renumbered (as set out below in
Section 2.3).
ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 3
1.8 Staff received additional comments from Ms. Wendy Bracken on June 3rd, 2011
(Attachment 1). These comments were additional to Ms. Bracken's delegation to
GPA. Because Council had previously directed Staff and SENES to expand the
scope of the Peer Review to specifically deal with the comments by Ms. Bracken
on PM2.5, Staff asked SENES to comment on the suggestion that "Clarington's
comments include a request to the Minister to include continuous monitoring of
particulate matter and organic matter as conditions in the C of A."
1.9 SENES have provided comments on continuous monitoring for particulate matter
and organic matter (Attachment 2). SENES advises that the Durham York
Energy Centre has been designed with several "fail-safe" systems for monitoring
and control. Thus it is likely that the facility will remain in compliance. Since
compliance can be verified by either source testing or via use of continuous
emissions monitoring systems, the way in which the target is achieved is up to
the proponent and regulator. As such adding additional requirements into the C
of A would not at this point improve the robustness of the proposed facility design
with regard to emissions.
2.0 CONCLUSION
2.1 SENES Consultants Ltd. presented the results of their peer review to Committee
on May 30, 2011. SENES listened to the public delegations and when asked by
Committee to comment provided an overview and background context for the
public comments.
2.2 Staff provided SENES with the additional comments from Ms. Bracken. Staff are
not experts in air quality and are relying on the expertise of the peer review team
to prepare the Municipality's comments on air quality issues.
2.3 SENES have reviewed this Addendum to Report PSD-052-11 and are in
agreement with the following revised resolution:
"WHEREAS the Regional Municipalities of Durham and York submitted
application on March 3, 2011 to the Ministry of Environment under Section 9 of
the Environmental Protection Act, O. Reg 419/05, for a Basic Comprehensive
Certificate of Approval; and
WHEREAS to demonstrate compliance with air emission, the application
submission was supported by an Emission Summary and Dispersion Modelling
(ESDM) Report; and
WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington retained SENES Consultants Ltd. to
review the Certificate of Approval Application — Air and the ESDM to ensure that
the conditions set out in the Environmental Assessment Approval and the Host
Community Agreement are appropriately addressed in the Certificate of
Approval; and
ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 4
WHEREAS SENES' review of the Certificate of Approval application and the
ESDM identified a number of issues that should be addressed by the Ministry of
Environment in their review and approval of the application;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
1. THAT the Report by SENES Consultants Ltd. and all recommendations
contained therein (Attachment 2, under separate cover) be adopted as the
Municipality of Clarington's comments on the Application for a Certificate
of Approval —Air for the Durham-York Energy from Waste Project;
2. THAT the Municipality of Clarington requests the Ministry of Environment
to include the following as conditions in the Certificate of Approval —Air to
be issued for the Durham-York Energy From Waste Project in order to
make them legally binding:
a) That annual stack testing be conducted as per MOE A-7
Guidelines;
b) That testing be carried out such that the waste stream represents
the typical waste composition being fed into the facility;
c) If technically feasible from an operational perspective, that the
performance condition of 9 mg/Rm3 be applicable to total PM2.5
(filterable and condensable) as set out in the conditions of EA
approval; and
d) That re-modeling be required should the source testing show
emission rates higher than those used in the ESDM;
e) That an AMESA or similar cartridge system be considered to be
installed to continuously sample for dioxins and furans and the
frequency of sample collection and analysis be initially set at
biweekly and reduced over time if the results being obtained are as
projected; and
f) That an AMESA-M or similar cartridge system be considered to be
installed to continuously sample for mercury, and the frequency of
sample collection and analysis be initially set at biweekly and
reduced over time if the results being obtained are as projected;
3. THAT at the time of the renewal of the initial Certificate of Approval, 5
years after commissioning (approximately 2018), that there be no
"grandfathering" of emission limits and other relevant conditions so that
the relevant standards at that time can be incorporated;
4. THAT a copy of Report PSD-052-11, this Addendum and Council's
decision be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Region of York, and
the Ministry of Environment; and
ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 5
5. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-052-11 and any
delegations be advised of Council's decision.
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Ms. Bracken's e-mail of June 3, 2011
Attachment 2: SENES e-mail of June 7, 2011
Attachment 3: Report PSD-052-11
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Mirka Januszkiewicz - EFW Project Team
Gavin Battarino, Ministry of the Environment
Wendy Bracken
Tracey Ali
Kerry Meydam
Doug Anderson
Linda Gasser
Attachment 1
To Addendum Report to PSD-052-11
From: Wendy Bracken
Sent: June-03-11 1:24 PM
To: Langmaid, Faye
Subject: Urgent Information re: Report PSD - 052 -11
Dear Faye,
In reviewing and preparing my comments for the CofA, I went through the new revised and
approved MOE's Guideline A-7:Air Pollution Control, Design and Operation Guidelines for
Municipal Waste Thermal Treatment Facilities, dated October 2010.
There are clearly things in the Guideline which are important for Clarington.
In my delegation, I referenced Appendix 1 of the Guideline which clearly lists Particulate Matter
as "Total suspended particulate matter, including condensables" in the list of typical test
contaminants at municipal waste thermal treatment facilities.
I also said in my delegation that Clarington's report should include a recommendation
for continuous monitoring of particulate matter to the Ministry. Section 3.2 lists both
particulate matter and organic matter as parameters that will be considered for continuous
monitoring.
I had read the A-7 Guideline before,but was not aware of how strongly continuous monitoring
of particulate matter is encouraged. The Guideline also states in Section 3-2,page 15 that:
"The Ministry encourages the use of high sensitivity continuous particulate matter
monitoring systems over opacity monitoring since particulate emissions have a
direct environmental impact."
The C of A application,however, only proposes opacity monitoring. (Section 1.3.1.5.2,page 10
of ESDM Report),
It seems that continuous monitoring of particulate matter could also in the future provide for
more frequent analysis for a variety of metals (like cadmium, lead,etc) as the same section of the
Ministry guideline also states that:
"Owners and operators of thermal treatment facilities may also be able to monitor a
variety of other parameters periodically, continuously or on a long-term basis to
support the results of source testing and/or to provide better data on annual
emissions. For instance where a continuous or long-term monitoring system
provides samples for measurement of one pollutant, it may be possible to
periodically analyze these same samples for quantification of other pollutants, e.g. a
filter catch ofparticulate matter could also be analyzed for a variety of metals."
I think it is critical that Clarington's comments include a request to the Minister to include
continuous monitoring of particulate matter and organic matter as conditionsin the C of
A. Annual stack testing of particulate matter, as proposed in Exhibit 5 of the ESDM Report of
the CofA(Air) application is absolutely not adequate given what is known about the currrent
levels of particulate matter(PM2.5) and the high health concern with the additional PM (and
especially PM2.5)pollution from the incinerator. Annual stack testing of organic pollutants, too,
is not adequate.
I also think that such a request would be entirely in keeping with the Host Community
Agreement as Section 3.3 of that agreement states that "Durham shall ensure that, where
technically possible, the EFW Facility utilizes 24/7 monitoring systems for such parameters as
are deemed appropriate by the Ministry of the Environment."
And, again,clearly the Ministry of the Environment encourages continuous monitoring of
particulate matter.
I hope you will give very serious consideration to this and take action to address it for Council on
Tuesday.
With thanks,
Wendy Bracken
Attachment 2
To Addendum Report to PSD-052-11
From: Abby Salb [mailto:asalb @senes.ca]
Sent: June-07-11 11:42 AM
To: Langmaid, Faye
Subject: Comments on Organic matter, Particulate Matter- continuous monitoring
With respect to continuous monitoring for organic matter, A-7 notes the following:
"It is noted however that the limits for organic matter and carbon monoxide are set out far the purpose of
process control, ie to ensure good combustion in the piece of equipment that is used for combustion of gases
generated during the thermal treatment of municipal waste. Therefore, the limits for OM and CO are expected
to be complied with in the undiluted gases exiting such combustion equipment."(not necessarily in the exhaust
to the environment.)
Also,
"it may not be essential to include CEMs for both OM and CO since these parameters are used as performance
indicators of the combustion process." Since the facility will be equipped with a CO monitor(which will be
used for process control) a CEM for organic matter is not necessary, nor warranted.
In terms of particulate matter, compliance can be verified by either source testing or via use of a CEM system.
While the A-7 guideline does""encourage the use of high sensitivity continuous particulate monitoring systems
over opacity monitoring—" CEM systems for particulate matter are not commonly used in Ontario at the
present time, and thus there is not a great deal of operational experience with these units here. However, it
should be noted that they are used in some cases in the U.S, and in Europe where facilities emit PM over a
certain threshold (which varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction).
Opacity is used as a surrogate for PM emissions and provides qualitative information on the operation and
maintenance of particulate control equipment. Use of a continuous system would be important for facilities
that emit over a certain threshold of PM or whose emissions result in point of impingement concentrations
close to the regulatory limit. However, the proposed Durham York Energy Centre :
(a) Has a particulate control system, which is expected to effectively control PM emissions.
(b) has an opacity monitoring system
(c) has maximum model predicted concentrations well below the regulatory limit(POI limit).
As such, use of a CEM for particulate matter emissions is not necessary from a practical perspective. The
facility contains several "stop-gaps" in terms of monitoring and control, and thus it is likely that the facility will
remain in compliance, provided that the particulate control system is operating correctly. The opacity monitor
will provide the feedback to indicate when the system is NOT functioning effectively.
With respect to use of CEMs and the possibility of analyzing the "filter catch"for other contaminants (such as
metals),this is dependent upon the fundamental principle of the CEM that is selected. Some work on the basis
of light scattering, others on mass accumulation, etc, and thus this is NOT an option in all cases.
Regards,
Abby
Attachment 3
To Addendum to Report PSD-052-11
Leading the Way
K` EPOR
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: May 30, 2011 Resolution #: By-law#:.N/A
Report #: PSD-052-11 File #: PLN 33.3.10
Subject: DURHAM-YORK ENERGY FROM WASTE PROJECT
CLARINGTON COMMENTS ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
APPLICATION (AIR)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
'WHEREAS the Regional.Municipalities of Durham'and York submitted
application on March 3, 2011 to the Ministry of Environment under Section 9 of
the Environmental Protection Act, O. Reg 419/05, for a Basic Comprehensive
Certificate of Approval; and
WHEREAS to demonstrate compliance with air emission, the application
submission was supported by an Emission Summary and Dispersion Modelling
(ESDM) Report; and
WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington retained SENES Consultants Ltd. to
review the Certificate of Approval Application — Air and the ESDM to ensure that
the conditions set out in the Environmental Assessment Approval and the Host
Community Agreement are appropriately addressed in the Certificate of
Approval; and
WHEREAS SENES' review of the Certificate of Approval application and the
ESDM identified a number of issues that should be addressed by the Ministry of
Environment in their review and approval of the application;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:.
1. THAT the Report by SENES Consultants Ltd. (Attachment 2, under separate
cover) be adopted as the Municipality of Clarington's comments on the
Application for a Certificate of Approval —Air for the Durham-York Energy from
Waste Project;
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 8_50
REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 2
2. THAT the Municipality of Clarington requests the Ministry of Environment to
include the following as conditions in the Certificate of Approval — Air to be issued
for the Durham-York Energy From Waste Project in order to make them legally
binding:
a) That annual stack testing be conducted as per MOE A-7 Guidelines;
b) That testing be carried out such that the waste stream represents the typical
waste composition being fed into the facility;
c) That the performance condition of 9 mg/Rm3 be applicable to total PM2.5
(filterable and condensable) as set out in the conditions of EA approval; and
d) That re-modeling be required should the source testing show emission rates
higher than those used in the ESDM;
3. THAT the Council of the Municipality of Clarington hereby requests the Ministry
of Environment provide the Municipality with the draft Certificate of Approval —Air
for review and comment prior to issuance of the final approval;
4. THAT at the time of the renewal of the initial Certificate of Approval, 5 years after
commissioning (approximately 2018), that there be no "grandfathering" of
emission limits and other relevant conditions so that the relevant standards at
that time can be incorporated;
5. THAT a copy of Report PSD-052-11 and Council's decision be forwarded to the
Region of Durham, the Region of York, and the Ministry of Environment; and
6. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-052-11 and any delegations be
advised of Council's decision.
Submitted by: Reviewed b
David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP ranklin Wu,
Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
FL/sn/df
26 May 2011
8-51
REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 3
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 At the March 28th, 2011 Council meeting, resolution #C-167-11 was passed:
"THAT the Director of Planning Services be authorized to re-engage
SENES Consultants Ltd, to prepare comments on the application to the
Minister of Environment for Certificates of Approval for the Energy-From-
Waste facility at a cost of $18,345.56 with a report and presentation to the
General Purpose and Administration Committee...."
and a further resolution #GPA-307-11 was passed on April 4, 2011:
"THAT the Director of Planning Services be directed to advise SENES
Consultants to expand the scope of the Peer Review to the Certificate of
Approval for the Energy-From-Waste proposal to address PM2.5 to a
maximum cost of$3000."
1.2 SENES's proposal is Attachment 1. The scope of work to be undertaken by the
Consultant was limited to the Certificate of Approval Application - Air and how the
application addressed the conditions set out in the Environmental Assessment
Approval conditions and the requirements of the Host Community Agreement.
1.3 Staff have obtained approval from the Region to have the Region's consultant
provide the computer model and other pertinent information directly to SENES,
including the Emission Summary and Dispersion Model (ESDM) study upon which
the application for the Certificate of Approval for air is based..
1.4 Staff have notified the Regions and Ministry of Environment (MOE) that the
Municipality will be making comments on the Certificate of Approval - Air, and
requested that approval not be granted until after the comments from Clarington
have been received and considered.
1.5 Staff and SENES met with Ms. Wendy Bracken, who is one of the representatives
from EFWAC (the Energy from Waste Advisory Committee) to the Ambient Air
Monitoring Working Group, to review her presentation to GPA from March 28, 2011.
Specific attention was given to her comments regarding PM2.5, and the way in which
data is being calculated and displayed in the Certificate of Approval Application —Air
as compared to the conditions of EA Approval.
1.6 The Clarington representative on the Ambient Air Monitoring Working Group is
Janice Szwarz, Senior Planner who has been involved in the discussions with
SENES and attended the first meeting of the Working Group on April 28th
2.0 PROCESS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL(S)
2.1 The Environmental Assessment for the Durham —York Energy from Waste
Project was approved by the Minister of Environment on November 19, 2010
subject to a number of stringent conditions.which, for the most part, will be
achieved and implemented through the Comprehensive Certificate of Approval to
be issued for the project.
REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 4
2.2 The Comprehensive Certificate of Approval Application for Air, Noise, Waste and
Stormwater was submitted to the Ministry on March 3, 2011. The review by
SENES Consultants is limited to the Certificate of Approval - Air portion of the
application. Staff has expertise in noise/vibration and stormwater issues, but
typically do not review the Certificates of Approval for noise/vibration and
stormwater for projects. Rather, as with all projects that involve the submission of
a noise/vibration study and a stormwater study, Staff will review the design and
engineering of the EFW facility through the Site Plan application process to ensure
that the proposed construction meets the requirements of these studies.
2.3 The Municipality has two opportunities to review and comment on the Certificate of
Approval: at the application stage (e.g. this review) and later when the MOE issues
the draft Certificate of Approval.
2.4 It is expected that MOE will issue a Draft Certificate of Approval - Air in the near
future. Because this project received an approval under the EA Act, the Draft
Certificate of Approval - Air will not be posted to the Environmental Bill of Rights
website. Rather the proponent (the Regions) have committed to posting the
information to the project website. It will be important that the Municipality review
the Draft Certificate of Approval as it will be our second opportunity to comment
and ensure that the requirements set out in the Host Community Agreement, the
Conditions of EA Approval and the peer review of the application for the Certificate
of Approval —Air (Attachment 2 under separate cover) have been addressed.
2.5 The Consultant and Staff believe that the resolution, as set out in Recommendation
4 to the Ministry of Environment seeks to ensure that the conditions of the EA
Approval and Host Community Agreement with regard to air emissions are
adequately addressed in the Certificate of Approval. It does not, in our opinion,
constitute "an objection" as set out in the Host Community Agreement.
3.0 COMMENTS ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL APPLICATION
3.1 SENES Consultants will be presenting the results of their peer review to
Committee on May 30, 2011. SENES's Report, Peer Review of the Durham-York
Energy Centre ESDM Report is Attachment 2 and will be distributed under
separate cover.
3.2 Staff have provided SENES with clarification as to the Municipality's concerns and
other factual information. Staff are not experts in air quality and are relying on the
expertise of the peer review team to prepare the Municipality's comments on air
quality issues.
3.3 SENES have to date not received dispositioning comments from the Regulator or
Proponent. We have requested these be submitted by May 31St. Dispositioning
comments will be communicated to Council in an addendum report for the June 6th,
2011 meeting.
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid
REPORT NO.: PSD-052-11 PAGE 5
Attachments:
Attachment 1: SENES Consultant Ltd. Proposal
Attachment 2: SENES Consultant Ltd.: Peer Review of the Durham-York Energy Centre
ESDM Report (under separate cover)
List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision:
Mirka Januszkiewicz - EFW Project Team
Gavin Battarino, Ministry of the Environment
Wendy Bracken
Tracey Ali
Kerry Meydam
Doug Anderson
Linda Gasser