Cette consultation a eu lieu :
du 23 juillet 2021
au 22 août 2021
Résumé de la décision
The variance is approved
Détails de l'emplacement
Adresse du site
3975 KEELE ST
DOWNSVIEW,
ON
M3J 1P1
Canada
Détails de l'emplacement du site
Bulk plant
Promoteur(s)
SHELL CANADA PRODUCTS
400-4TH AVENUE SW, PO BOX 100 STATION M
CALGARY,
AB
T2P 2H5
Canada
Détails de la décision
Shell Canada may use native materials that may exhibit a permeability greater than 1 × 10-6 cm per second for a minimum period of 72 hours under the full hydrostatic head of product within the dike.
Documents justificatifs
Consulter les documents en personne
Certains documents justificatifs peuvent ne pas être accessibles en ligne. Si tel est le cas, vous pouvez demander à consulter les documents en personne.
Veuillez communiquer avec le bureau mentionné ci-dessous pour savoir si les documents sont accessibles.
How to Appeal
Cet avis de décision peut être porté en appel. Vous avez jusqu’à 15 jours à partir du 27 août 2021 pour entamer le processus d’appel.
Veuillez lire les renseignements suivants attentivement pour en savoir plus sur le processus d’appel.
Comment interjeter appelClick to Expand Accordion
If you’re an Ontario resident, you can start the process to appeal this instrument decision.
First, you’ll need to seek leave (i.e. get permission) from the relevant appellate body to appeal the decision.
If the appellate body grants leave, the appeal itself will follow.
Seek leave to appeal
To seek leave to appeal, you need to do these three things:
- prepare your application
- provide notice to the minister
- mail your application to three parties
1. Prepare your application
You’ll need to prepare an application. You may wish to include the following things in your application:
- A document that includes:
- your name, phone number, fax number (if any), and/or email address
- the ERO number and ministry reference number (located on this page)
- a statement about whether you are a resident in Ontario
- your interest in the decision, and any facts you want taken into account in deciding whether you have an interest in the decision
- the parts of the instrument that you’re challenging
- whether the decision could result in significant harm to the environment
- the reason(s) why you believe that no reasonable person – having regard to the relevant law and to any government policies developed to guide decisions of that kind – could have made the decision
- the grounds (facts) you’ll be using to appeal
- the outcome you’d like to see
- A copy of the instrument (approval, permit, order) that you you are seeking leave to appeal. You’ll find this in the decision notice on the Environmental Registry
- Copies of all supporting documents, facts and evidence that you’ll be using to appeal
What is considered
The appeal body will consider the following two questions in deciding whether to grant you leave to appeal:
- is there is good reason to believe that no reasonable person, with respect to the relevant law and to any government policies developed to guide decisions of that kind, could have made the decision?
- could the decision you wish to appeal result in significant harm to the environment?
2. Provide your notice
You’ll need to provide notice to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks that you’re seeking leave to appeal.
In your notice, please include a brief description of the:
- decision that you wish to appeal
- grounds for granting leave to appeal
You can provide notice by email at minister.mecp@ontario.ca or by mail at:
College Park 5th Floor, 777 Bay St.
Toronto, ON
M7A 2J3
3. Mail your application
You’ll need to mail your application that you prepared in step #1 to each of these three parties:
- appellate body
- issuing authority (the ministry official who issued the instrument)
- proponent (the company or individual to whom the instrument was issued)
SHELL CANADA PRODUCTS
400-4TH AVENUE SW, PO BOX 100 STATION M
CALGARY,
AB
T2P 2H5
Canada
The Registrar
Divisional Court (Toronto Region)
130 Queen Street West
Osgoode Hall - Room 174
Toronto
M5H 2N5
Phone: (416) 327-5100
Fax: (416) 327-5549
Inclure les éléments suivants:
Il ne s'agit pas d'un avis juridique. Veuillez vous reporter à la Charte des droits environnementaux de 1993 pour connaître les exigences exactes prévues par la loi. Consultez un avocat si vous avez besoin d'aide avec le processus d'appel.
Communiquer avec nous
Proposition initiale
Détails de la proposition
TSSA granted Shell’s Keele Terminal a variance for this purpose on May 11, 2000. Shell is requesting the variance be updated to include the new berm extension area.
Liquid Fuels Handling Code (LFHC) Requirements that Would Not be Met:
3.3.1.3.2 The floor and walls of every dike shall be constructed to be compatible with
the liquid being stored, shall be leak tight, and shall be made of a material that has a maximum permeability of 1 × 10-6 cm per second for a minimum period of 72 hours in order to withstand the full hydrostatic head of product within the dike.
Why the Code Would Not be Met
The use of this available quantity of native materials for the berm extension construction would avoid Shell having to import clay from external sources and dispose of this native material.
Equivalent Safety Measures
The combination of the materials of construction combined with Keele Terminal’s environmental monitoring and prevention and emergency response plan provide a tank berm with an equivalent level of safety to that of the Code requirement. Details of each element are discussed below:
1. Natural Containment Features
Preliminary testing of the native subgrade and reworked native fill that would be used to construct the berm extension shows similarity to soil comprising the berm walls and floor of the existing main tank farm. The data indicates that existing native soil that will comprise the berm extension floor should meet the permeability requirement in the Code, but the extension walls will have a permeability similar to the existing berm walls.
2. Environmental Monitoring
a. Annual monitoring of wells located outside the tank farm berm would flag any changes in groundwater conditions. Monitoring of headspace vapour readings and depth to groundwater in selected monitoring wells is carried out, and groundwater samples from selected existing monitoring wells are collected and submitted for laboratory analysis. The results are compiled into an annual report
b. Monthly leak detection is carried out in monitoring wells installed down gradient of aboveground storage tanks located within the existing main tank farm berm. The monitoring includes measurement of the headspace vapour readings and inspection of the groundwater surface in each well for presence of floating free-phase product. All results are recorded and compiled and maintained in Shell files. No leak detection wells will be added to the berm extension as it will not contain any tanks.
c. The Keele Terminal is staffed 24 hours per day. The operators conduct regular inspections of the tank farm berms during their rounds.
d. Storm water that accumulates in the existing main tank farm berm is visually inspected for evidence of potential petroleum hydrocarbon impact before it is pumped through the existing oil/water separator system operated in accordance with a Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA). Storm water accumulations in the berm extension would be managed in the same way. A related application for ECA amendment has been submitted to the MECP.
3. Product Release Prevention Measures
Petroleum product releases can occur due to equipment failure or tank overfilling. A tank rupture is not considered a credible product release scenario. The Hazard and Effects Management Process (HEMP) is a structured and systematic analysis methodology involving the Identification, Assessment and Control of hazards and the Recovery from effects caused by a release of the hazards. Continued application of HEMP over a number of years has resulted in comprehensive engineered controls and robust management systems which together ensure that risks associated with Shell’s operations are managed to levels which are As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).
The following barriers ensure the risk of product release is minimized, and in the case of a loss of primary containment (LOPC), the volume released to the tank farm is limited:
a. The maximum working level or normal fill level (NFL) is the highest level to which a tank is routinely filled with product under normal operations;
b. A pre-rail car or pre-pipeline verification calculation is carried out to validate that sufficient ullage is available below the NFL in the receiving tank;
c. Audible High Level Alarm (HLA) after NFL both inside the control room and outside on the terminal property indicates to the Operator that an action is required. The Operator will immediately stop rail car unloading and/or immediately contact the pipeline operator to request the flow to the tank be diverted or stopped.
Note, a DRT (demonstrate responsive time) exercise is performed every year to validate the alarm settings;
d. Audible High-High Level Alarm (HHLA) both inside the control room and outside on the terminal property indicates to the Operator that immediate action is required. In addition, it triggers an automatic shutdown of the product inlet motor operated valve (MOV) to the tank;
e. Hourly reconciliation procedure by Terminal Operators requires investigation when out of tolerance;
f. Instrumentation is maintained per manufacturers’ recommendations and testing is carried out on a monthly basis;
g. Tanks are inspected and maintained per API 653 requirements.
4. Emergency Response Protocols
The Keele Terminal utilizes the Shell Incident Management System (Shell IMS) in the event of an emergency. The elements of the Shell IMS model were developed and refined from actual incidents and are derived from the Incident Command System. Shell maintains and exercises its Emergency Response Plan (ERP) which ensures that any product release is immediately addressed through a standard approach to emergency response. A copy of the ERP is available at the Terminal and an electronic copy is available on the ShellNet. The “Roadmap for Initial Assessment and Response” details all steps to be followed from the moment a LOPC is detected or if the potential for product release is identified. In the ERP, all relevant product containment and clean up equipment is listed as well as emergency contacts, emergency service providers, regulatory notification requirements and remedial action plan.
Documents justificatifs
Consulter les documents en personne
Certains documents justificatifs peuvent ne pas être accessibles en ligne. Si tel est le cas, vous pouvez demander à consulter les documents en personne.
Veuillez communiquer avec le bureau mentionné ci-dessous pour savoir si les documents sont accessibles.
Commentaire
La consultation est maintenant terminée.
Cette consultation a eu lieu 23 juillet 2021
au 22 août 2021
Commentaires reçus
Par l'entremise du registre
0Par courriel
0Par la poste
0