Response to ERO application…

Response to ERO application 091-2771 -

Digital Specialty Chemicals Limited- Environmental Compliance Approval (air)
Instrument type: Environmental Compliance Approval (air)

This submission is a request to reject the ECA application as it stands due to the inability of the community to fairly comment on the application and its potential impact. The legality of the submission is in question and justification is identified in the below submission.

This application is submitted under the Environmental Registry of Ontario and is intended to allow the public to comment on proposals that may affect the environment. This is provided under the "Environmental Bill of Rights".

Upon reviewing the high level proposal additional details were requested of the ministry, and the community was told that access to the ECA application and corresponding details was not publicly available because it contains what the proponent claims is business confidential information. The community clearly cannot comment on a proposal that has no information, as it is impossible to determine the impact on individuals, communities, schools, wildlife etc.

The ministry worked with the proponent and determined that a 'redacted' application could be provided. The application was eventually provided with over half of the chemical emissions redacted (including some that were identified as over the ministry emission limits), and none of the backup material to determine those emission rates available. This application does not provide the public enough information as required by legislation in order for a fair and proper assessment of the impact this proposed development will have on the West Hill Neighbourhood. This clearly is not healthy for an open and transparent process, nor is it legal according to ministry guidelines/documents and regulations.

The community requested access to the unredacted information from the ministry and was told that the proponent has marked the ECA application business confidential and therefore cannot release it to the public. Upon challenge we were advised to work with the proponent to gain access to more information.

Several meetings with the proponent ensued and the proponent would not release unredacted information, we discussed utilizing and NDA and it was agreed that the proponent could work through that process and would get back to us with the next steps. A follow on discussion ensued where the proponent stated that the signing of an NDA by our community members was not acceptable to them, and would only release the information to a licensed assessment company in Ontario. We collectively did not feel this was acceptable but with lack of time available went about the task of trying to secure access to an assessment firm.

An eventual assessment was performed and provided significant concerns with the application, but without the ability to define specifics about any emissions or other items on the emissions list. The report is attached for completeness.

Because of the concerns raised, it was deemed a concern from the community that redaction of the critical emission information into the environment was not valid nor legal, hence our request for a rejection of the current ECA until the community as a whole can determine the impact through a transparent process.

According to legislation and guides provided by the government the following items are clearly identified:

1 - Most of the information in an ECA application is considered public information with the exception of the following information, which is considered confidential:
- an individual’s name
- telephone number
- payment information
- site plans and building drawings for security sensitive sites
The community has no issue with the redaction of this information.

2 - In addition - regarding additional confidential information: the ministry can keep as confidential trade secrets or scientific, technical or commercial information that has been supplied to the ministry in confidence that could harm the competitive position of an applicant if it was released. The Director must comply with these requirements when assessing all requests for information on file with ECA applications.

Has the ministry approved the redaction of most of the emission data, and confirmed this is indeed business confidential? If so, we object to this ruling on the grounds that current legislation (455/09) agrees that calculations (if deemed confidential) may be withheld but the chemical names and emission amounts must be disclosed.

Has the ministry and/or proponent confirmed this information is considered confidential business information (CBI) as defined in the WHMIS process? If so can we receive confirmation as the proponent has not provided such confirmation.

3 - Was a pre application submission meeting with the proponent completed as suggested in the ECA application guide and if so did the ministry agree to the confidentiality requirements of the submission?

Summary:

It is clear that if a submission that cannot be assessed, that is not transparent, cannot address the needs of the community. The intent of the ECA process is receiving input from the community, this application if approved, does not allow that input . Additionally, it will set a significant and very dangerous precedent for future ECA applications, as all future proponents will deem their application confidential and make it impossible for the community to provide valuable input.

We are therefore requesting rejection of this application as it stands and access to the entire application with only ministry approved redacted information withheld. We require access to all information relating to emissions impacting our environment, including the names and emission rates of all chemicals.