*Please note that there is…

*Please note that there is nothing in this submission, from a privacy point of view, that prevents it from being publicly posted along with the final decision for this proposal.

June 13, 2021

Dear Madam/Sir

Please accept this submission as Environment Hamilton’s formal comments on ERO No 019-3241 – ArcelorMittal Dofasco G.P. – Approval of a Site Specific Standard – which proposes to extend the company’s site-specific standard (SSS) for benzo(a)pyrene.

Environment Hamilton concerns regarding the process to extend this SSS:
While we recognize that Regulation 419 grants powers to the Director to amend a site-specific standard (SSS), we remain concerned regarding the context in which the extensions to SSSs at ArcelorMittal Dofasco are being pursued. The MECP’s proposal to extend the B(a)P SSS by 2 years concerns us as it is made with no associated lowering (making more stringent) of the existing SSS for this timeframe and no requirement for the company to implement any updated action plan requirements, in order to ensure that continuous progress is made to reduce air emissions of this contaminant.

Instead, the MECP provides the following reasons for the 2-year extension:
Extending the expiry dates of the site-specific standards will provide a compliance approach for this facility while we develop and consult on a proposed technical standard for the integrated iron and steel sector.

However, the provincial process to develop a technical standard for the integrated iron and steel industry has been underway for almost three years now – and arguably even longer than this if one factors in the time that had already been spent for discussions between the MECP and industry stakeholders prior to community stakeholders being invited to participate in the process. Community stakeholders – including Environment Hamilton - were invited to participate in a provincial stakeholder working group for the development of a technical standard for integrated iron and steel mills in August of 2018 – with meetings starting in September of that year. Given this reality, we expressed concern when three other SSSs were extended back in December in rushed circumstances. At that time, we were naively hopeful that the fact that B(a)P was not included with those other SSSs meant that the MECP was going to do something to ensure that there were additional actions imposed to realize continuous progress over the next 2 years in reducing air emissions of this potent human carcinogen. We even worked with several other community stakeholders (from Hamilton and Sault Ste Marie) to push for the MECP to require the mills to take more action – or at least initiate an enhanced perimeter monitoring program to better understand B(a)P concentrations and sources. After several meetings with MECP staff, we were left feeling optimistic we might see some requirements only to learn, via the ERO posting, that no additional requirements beyond the existing Action Plan to 2020 have been imposed. This experience has been incredibly frustrating!

Further, as the MECP confirms in the ERO posting, we could find ourselves at the end of this process with one or more company stakeholders opting not to sign on to the technical standard and, instead, to exercise their right to simply apply for new site-specific standards. Again, our concern is that, while all of this unfolds, industry will be permitted to coast along under existing SSSs potentially for as long as the next 2 years. The fact that this arrangement is being proposed without any associated requirement to review and add to an action plan also leaves us puzzled regarding the requirement of the SSS that MECP staff often repeat – that SSSs require demonstration of continuous improvement in reducing emission levels of the contaminants of concern. As explained in the MECP document ‘Guide to Requesting a Site Specific Standard’, ‘(T)he goal of the site-specific standard regime stet out in sections 32 to 37.1 of O.Reg 419/05 is continuous improvement of emissions that will occur as new technologies become available or economic circumstances change’ (see: https://www.ontario.ca/page/guide-requesting-site-specific-standard). This core requirement of SSSs is extremely unlikely to be met during the SSS extension period as no SSS requirements are being established by MECP to ensure that continuous improvement of emissions will occur. We believe this is counter to the purpose of SSSs and potentially counter to the regulatory requirements for SSSs as set out in Regulation 419. We raised this concern in our previous responses to earlier SSS extensions and we raise it again with this posting!

Need for Confirmation that Community Openness and Transparency Will Continue
We are also urging the MECP to take steps to formalize a requirement that ArcelorMittal Dofasco continue to provide community members, through the company’s community liaison committee (CLC), with quarterly updates regarding progress in improving the emissions of contaminants of concern including benzo(a)pyrene,

In conclusion, we have deep concerns about the MECP process associated with extending ArcelorMittal Dofasco’s SSS for benzo(a)pyrene. Ideally, we want to see the MECP take steps to ensure that any extension of ArcelorMittal Dofasco SSSs is done in a manner to ensure that the Regulation 419 goal of continuous emissions improvements is achieved. Failure to do so, we believe, will constitute failure to uphold the regulatory compliance requirements set out for SSSs in Regulation 419.

We thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal.

Lynda M. Lukasik, PhD
Executive Director
Environment Hamilton