*Please note that there is…

*Please note that there is nothing in this comment that prevents it, from a privacy point of view, from being posted publicly with the final decision notice on this posting.

Dear Madam/Sir,

Please accept this submission as Environment Hamilton’s formal comments on ERO No 019-2671 – a proposal from the MECP Director to ‘utilize their powers under subsection 20.13, paragraph (b) of the Environmental Protection Act to proactively amend Stelco Hamilton’s ECA (Air) by adding new terms and conditions.

ECA(Air) Amendment Proposal & SSS Extensions
We understand that this proposal is directly related to proposals to extend the company’s site-specific standards (SSSs) under Ontario Regulation 419 – Local Air Quality. We have already submitted comments on these extension applications, and have raised a number of concerns about the process followed to put these extensions forward as well as the substance of the extension applications. At the most fundamental level, we are concerned that the SSS extensions fail to include any provisions designed to ensure that the company demonstrates continuous emissions improvements under their SSSs over the course of the 2.5 year extension period that the MECP Is proposing. There are no efforts to phase in more stringent SSS values over that timeframe and no requirements for the company to develop and implement an enhanced action plan.

Our understanding is that the amendments to ECAs (Air) for all Iron and Steel Sector facilities in Ontario will effectively replace orders that accompanied the SSSs during the period 2015 – 2020. These orders required mills to follow very prescriptive operations and maintenance procedures where their coke oven plants are concerned. At the most fundamental level, we support the incorporation of these operational requirements into the ECAs (Air) of these plants. Including these requirements as ECA (Air) conditions will ensure that Ontario’s Iron and Steel Sector facilities continue to abide by these performance requirements into the future; in effect these amendments will maintain the current status quo.

Need to Strengthen & Enhance Coke Oven Performance Requirements
Having said this, we also urge the MECP to carefully review these operations and maintenance procedures with an eye to strengthening and enhancing these requirements. These requirements are based on performance criteria set out in the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (US EPA) Method 303 – By-product Coke Oven Batteries. However, it is our understanding that the MECP did not fully adopt all aspects of Method 303 when it first required Ontario’s Iron & Steel Sector to implement these coke plant procedural requirements. For instance, in the US, more stringent opacity requirements are imposed for ‘short’ versus ‘tall’ coke oven batteries, but in an Ontario context, our understanding is that both short and tall ovens are subjected to the less stringent opacity requirements that apply to tall batteries. We would like to see each oven type regulated in a manner suitable to the oven –with more stringent requirements for short ovens that reflect US EPA rules. This is just one specific example of how US EPA Method 393 requirements are more stringent. There are likely other elements of the US EPA rules that are worth adopting and implementing here in Ontario too – especially now that our iron and steel facilities have had a number of years to work on improving their coke making facilities. We are requesting that the MECP revisit US EPA Method 303 and ensure that Ontario’s Iron and Steel Sector – including this specific facility – are held to the highest performance standards in order to ensure the protection of human health and the environment.

We are also aware that, in some instances, even more aggressive performance measures have been imposed on coke plants operating in the Allegheny County area of Pennsylvania – by the local health authority. We are requesting that the MECP to review any additional requirements imposed on coke plant operators in Allegheny County, through the Allegheny County Health Department, and that the MECP consider imposing these requirements for coke plants being operated by the Iron and Steel Sector here in Ontario –including at this facility.

Need for On-Going Commitment to Public Consultation, Openness & Transparency
We also believe it is critically important that MECP take appropriate steps to ensure that formal public consultation and the greatest level of public openness and transparency is maintained as these efforts to bring Ontario’s Iron and Steel Sector into compliance with Regulation 419 continue. We are requesting that the Director add a condition to the ECA(Air) for this facility that requires the company to continue to hold Community Liaison Committee meetings on at least a quarterly basis. The company must be required at these meetings to share detailed updates on its progress with meeting the coke plant operating requirements proposed for inclusion in the ECA (Air). Ideally this will mean not just demonstrating on-going compliance with the operations and maintenance requirements set out in the 2015 -2020 SSS order, but that the MECP will include additional requirements as we have requested above, and that the company will use CLC meetings to report back to the public on progress in meeting these additional requirements. Our interest is in seeing the MECP continue to require the company to be open and transparent with the community – sharing regular updates that, ideally, demonstrate that the company is achieving continuous emission improvements over time.

Cumulative Effects & the Need for More On-Site Ambient Air Monitoring
Finally, we continue to have significant concerns about the emissions of harmful contaminants from this facility – including the confirmed human carcinogens benzene and benzo(a)pyrene. This facility has been required in the past to perform monitoring at strategic locations on its property – but only for limited periods of time as part of requirements to secure SSSs. Further, the only other means by which the public can access actual measured ambient air levels of these contaminants is from 3 in-community monitors operated by the Hamilton Air Monitoring Network. We believe that there is a fundamental need for more monitoring data regarding emissions of key contaminants from this facility – a need that is that much more urgent given that these contaminants come not just from point sources, but from many fugitive sources.

In contrast to the limited monitoring occurring in and around the steel facilities in Hamilton, we understand that, through Clean Air Sarnia & Area (CASA), petrochemical facilities are doing property line monitoring for benzene using passive monitors, and that these facilities must regularly post the monitoring results publicly so that the community has access to this information. The CASA website provides a map that shows the locations of these property boundary monitors – multiple benzene monitors at each site – that are used to measure ambient levels of benzene. See https://www.cleanairsarniaandarea.com/reporting/property-line-monitorin…

As the MECP will be well-aware, both Sarnia and Hamilton are considered to be ‘hotspot’ airsheds where contaminants like benzene and benzo(a)pyrene are concerned. Emissions of these contaminants are problematic enough that the MECP has taken steps, through the ‘Cumulative Effects Assessment in Air Approvals’ pilot policy in these two communities in order to ensure that expanding or new facilities do not further add to the existing burden of emissions of these substances in these industrial airsheds. Given the reality that ambient levels of these contaminants are cause for concern in both communities, and given that Sarnia industries have been required by MECP, since 2018, to undertake property boundary monitoring of benzene, we are formally requesting that the MECP impose similar requirements for the Iron and Steel Sector, including this facility. More specifically, we are requesting that the Director include conditions in this ECA (Air) that require the facility to install benzene and benzo(a)pyrene monitors at appropriate locations around its property boundary in order to be able to regularly monitor and publicly report the monitoring results in the same way that the MECP already requires Sarnia facilities in the Petrochemical Sector to do for benzene. We note that this will likely include locating monitors around both coke plants and their associated by-products plants.

We also note, with concern, the fact that Stelco’s current ESDM (2019) indicates that the company is exceeding the upper risk threshold where sulphur dioxide emissions are concerned. While we understand that desulphurization measures are coming to address the SO2 challenge, we worry that the timelines are very long for an impact that can be acute. We request that the MECP also consider how ECA (Air) conditions might help to phase in efforts to reduce SO2 emissions in a more timely manner (sooner than 2025). We have attached the company’s ESDM Executive Summary to our submission.

Status of Review of Cumulative Effects Policy?
It is also worth noting here that the MECP’s ‘Cumulative Effects Assessment in Air Approvals’ policy, which came into effect in April of 2018 is now past due for a promised review. In the ERO decision on this policy, the MECP listed ‘Next Steps’ that include ‘reviewing this cumulative effects policy within two years’. Further, the MECP indicates that the review will ‘consider other air dispersion models, and ‘further analyze air quality data and other data sources to identify additional contaminants, and geographic areas that could be included in the policy’. Finally, the MECP indicates that the review will include ‘communicating and engaging with communities on the policy and its review’. We urge the MECP to update the public on the review of the ‘Cumulative Effects Assessment in Air Approvals’ policy. We are not aware of any effort to initiate this review and we note that it is now overdue. See details regarding the policy and associated next steps in the ERO post https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/013-1680 .

We thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this proposal to amend Stelco's ECA (Air).

Yours truly,
Lynda M. Lukasik, PhD
Executive Director
Environment Hamilton
llukasik@environmenthamilton.org