Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement
Progress Report 2008
| TOC | Previous | Next |
Section 1: Commitments
Acid Rain Annex
Overview
The Acid Rain Annex to the 1991 Air Quality Agreement (AQA) established commitments
for both countries to reduce emissions of the primary precursors to acid rain, sulfur
dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). The commitments include prevention of air quality
deterioration, visibility protection, and continuous emission monitoring. Both countries have
been successful in significantly reducing the impact of acid rain on each side of the border.
Despite these achievements, studies in each country indicate that although some damaged
ecosystems are showing signs of recovery, further efforts are necessary to restore these
ecosystems to their pre-acidified conditions.
Key Commitments and Progress: Sulfur Dioxide Emission Reductions
CANADA
Canada has been successful in
reducing emissions of SO2, a
principal cause of acid rain. In 2006,
Canada's total SO2 emissions were 2
million tonnes, or about 38 percent
below the national cap of 3.2 million tonnes.1 This
represents more than a 55-percent reduction
from Canada's total SO2 emissions in 1980 and a
35-percent decrease from the 1990 emission level
(see Figure 1). This overall reduction in national
SO2 emission levels can be attributed to the SO2 emission reductions undertaken as part of the
eastern Canada Acid Rain Program. SO2 emissions
in the seven easternmost provinces were 1.4 million
tonnes in 2005, or nearly 40 percent below the (now
expired) eastern Canada cap of 2.3 million tonnes.
Figure 1. Canadian SO2 Emissions from Acid Rain Sources, 1980-2006
Click to enlarge
Source: Environment Canada, 2008
The largest source of SO2 emissions in Canada
continues to be the base metals smelting sector, which
accounted for more than 30 percent of national SO2 emissions in 2006, despite a greater than 50-percent
decrease in SO2 emissions from this sector since 1990.
Canada is committed to further reducing acidifying
emissions through the more recent Canada-wide
Acid Rain Strategy for Post-2000. This strategy
serves as a framework for addressing the country's
acid rain problem. The long-term goal of the strategy
is to achieve critical loads for acid deposition for
aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. A critical load
is the maximum amount of acidifying deposition an
ecosystem can tolerate in the long term without being
damaged. As part of the Strategy, the provinces of
New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Ontario
set new, stricter SO2 emission reduction targets that
are 50 percent below their 1985 eastern Canada Acid
Rain Program targets, to be achieved by 2010 (2015
for Ontario). Provincial measures planned to meet the
stricter SO2 targets include setting caps on emissions
from power generating stations, refurbishing industrial
and power generating sources with pollution control
equipment, and reducing the sulfur content of fuels.
All provinces are well on their way to meeting their
new SO2 targets.
Despite these efforts, the control of acidifying
emissions has not occurred to the extent necessary
to reduce acid deposition below critical loads
and ensure the recovery of aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems.
UNITED STATES
The United States succeeded in
meeting its commitment to reduce
annual SO2 emissions by 10 million tons
from 1980 levels by 2000. Additionally,
in 2007, emissions of SO2 from the
electric power sector in the United
States fell below the 2010 national emission cap of
8.95 million tons for the first time, achieving the U.S.
commitment three years early.
Most of the reductions in SO2 emissions in the United
States are due to the Acid Rain Program (ARP)
established under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments. The ARP requires major reductions of
SO2 and NOx emissions from the electric power sector,
the highest SO2 emitting sector. Under the ARP, the
SO2 program set a permanent cap on the total amount
of SO2 that may be emitted by electric generation
units in the contiguous United States starting in 1995.
The reductions are phased in over time, with the final
2010 SO2 cap set at 8.95 million tons.
To achieve SO2 emission reductions, the ARP uses
a market-based cap and trade program that allows
flexibility for individual combustion units to select
their own method of compliance. The number of SO2 allowances allocated in a given year to a particular
unit is determined by Clean Air Act provisions, and the
total allowances allocated each year must not exceed
the national cap. Every year, each individual source
must hold enough allowances to cover its annual
emissions. Unused allowances can be sold (traded)
or banked (saved) for future use. Banking allowances
gives sources the flexibility to determine how they will
comply with program requirements over time.
In 2007, the ARP's SO2 program affected 3,536
electric generating units (EGUs). The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allocated
more than 9.5 million SO2 allowances under the
ARP. Actual emissions from affected sources were
8.94 million tons of SO2 (see Figure 2), down from
9.4 million tons in 2006 and below the 2010 cap of
8.95 million tons. Additionally in 2007, the number
of banked allowances grew, from about 6.3 million
available for 2007 compliance to approximately 6.7
million available for 2008 and future years.
Figure 2. U.S. SO2 Emissions from Acid Rain Program Electric Generating Units, 1980-2007
Click to enlarge
Source: EPA, 2008
In addition to the electric power generation sector,
emission reductions from other sources not affected
by the ARP--including industrial and commercial
boilers and the metals and refining industries, and
the use of cleaner fuels in residential and commercial
burners--have contributed to an overall reduction of
annual SO2 emissions. National SO2 emissions from
all sources have fallen from nearly 26 million tons in
1980 to less than 13 million tons in 2007 (see www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends).
Key Commitments and Progress: Nitrogen Oxides Emission Reductions
CANADA
Canada has surpassed its NOx emission reduction target at
power plants, major combustion
sources, and metal smelting operations
by 100,000 tonnes below the
forecasted level of 970,000 tonnes.
This commitment is based on a 1985 forecast of
2005 NOx emissions; in 2006, industrial emissions
of NOx totaled 765,480 tonnes. The country is
continuing to develop programs to further reduce
NOx emissions nationwide.
Transportation sources contribute the majority
of NOx emissions, accounting for just over half
(52 percent) of total Canadian emissions, with the
remainder generated by power plants and other
sources (see Figure 28: U.S. and Canadian National
Emissions by Sector for Selected Pollutants, 2006). Additional information on Canadian
emissions can be found at www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/cac/Emissions1990-2015/emissions_e.cfm. The
Canadian government recently passed stringent
standards for NOx emissions from on-road and off-road
sources effective from 2004 to 2009.
UNITED STATES
The United States has achieved and
exceeded its goal under the Acid Rain
Annex to reduce total annual NOx emissions by 2 million tons below
projected annual emission levels for
2000 without the ARP (8.1 million tons).
Title IV of the Clean Air Act requires NOx emission
reductions from certain coal-fired EGUs. Unlike the
market-based SO2 program, the NOx program under
the ARP uses rate-based emission limits based on
boiler type to achieve reductions.
In 2007, 978 coal-fired units were affected by the
NOx program. Of those units, all 978 met their NOx emission requirements under the ARP. Emissions
of NOx from all NOx program-affected units were 3
million tons, and total NOx emissions from all sources
covered by the ARP were 3.3 million tons (Figure 3).
This level is 4.8 million tons less than the projected
NOx levels for 2000 without the ARP, or more than
double the NOx emission reduction goal under the
Acid Rain Annex.
Figure. 3 U.S. Title IV Utility Unit NOx Emissions, 1990-2007
Click to enlarge
Source: EPA, 2008
While the ARP is responsible for a large portion of
these annual NOx reductions, other programs--such
as the Ozone Transport Commission, the NOx Budget Trading Program (NBP) under EPA's NOx State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call, and state
NOx emission control programs--also contributed
significantly to the NOx reductions that sources
achieved in 2007.
Emissions/Compliance Monitoring
CANADA
Canada has met its commitments
to estimate emissions of NOx and SO2 from new electric utility units
and existing electricity units greater
than 25 megawatts (MW) using a
method comparable in effectiveness to
continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS),
and to investigate the feasibility of using CEMS by
1995. Continuous emissions monitoring installation in
Canada's electric utility sector has been widespread
since the late 1990s. In 2008, almost all new and
existing base-loaded fossil steam plants with high
emission rates have operating CEMS. Coal-fired
facilities, which are the largest source of emissions
from the sector, have SO2 and NOx CEMS installed at
more than 94 percent of their total capacity.
Under Canada's Regulatory Framework for Air
Emissions, unveiled in April 2007, the government
indicated its support for requiring maximum use of
continuous emission monitoring technology to ensure
effective compliance and enforcement. Details on the regulatory framework can be found in the New Actions on Acid Rain, Ozone, and Particulate Matter section of this report.
Under Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory
(NPRI) mandatory reporting program, electric power
generating facilities are required to report their air
pollutant emissions annually.
UNITED STATES
The ARP requires affected units to
measure, record, and report SO2 mass
emissions and NOx emission rates
using CEMS or an approved alternative
measurement method. The vast majority
of emissions are monitored with CEMS,
while the alternatives provide a cost-effective means
of monitoring mass emissions for smaller and/or
cleaner units. Figure 4 shows the percentage of SO2 emissions monitored using CEMS.
Figure 4. Monitoring Methodology for the Acid Rain Program, Total SO2 Mass
Source: EPA, 2008
Affected sources are required to meet stringent
quality assurance and control requirements and
report hourly emission data in quarterly electronic
reports to EPA. In 2007, the average percent of
monitoring data available (a measure of monitoring
systems' reliability) was 98.7 percent for coal-fired
units. This number is based on reported monitor
data availability for SO2 monitors (99.1 percent),
NOx monitors (98 percent), and flow monitors
(99 percent).
 Using automated software audits, EPA rigorously
checks the completeness, quality, and integrity of
monitoring data. The Agency promptly sends results
from the audits to the source and requires correction
of critical errors. In addition to the electronic audits,
EPA conducts targeted field audits on sources that
report suspect data. In 2007, source compliance with
ARP emission monitoring requirements was more
than 98 percent, with only 43 units out of 3,526 out
of compliance. All 43 units were small units that did
not require further follow-up from EPA. All emission
data are available to the public within two months of
being reported to EPA. Data can be accessed on the
Data and Maps Web site maintained by EPA's Clean
Air Markets Division at http://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/.
Acid Deposition Monitoring, Modeling, Maps, and Trends
Airborne pollutants are deposited on the earth's
surface by three processes: 1) wet deposition (rain
and snow); 2) dry deposition (particles and gases); and
3) deposition by cloud water and fog. Wet deposition
is comparatively easy to measure using precipitation
samplers, and wet sulfate and nitrate deposition are
regularly used to assess the changing atmosphere
as it responds to decreasing or increasing sulfur
and nitrogen emissions. In Canada, to facilitate this
comparison, measurements of wet sulfate deposition
are typically corrected to omit the contribution of sea
salt sulfate at near-ocean sites (less than 62 miles, or
100 kilometers [km], from the coast).
Figures 5, 6, 7 and 8 show the U.S.-Canada spatial
patterns of wet sulfate (sea salt-corrected) deposition
for four years: 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005. Figures 9, 10, 11 and 12 show the patterns of wet nitrate
deposition for the same four years. Deposition
contours are not shown in western Canada because
Canadian experts judged that the locations of the
contour lines were unacceptably uncertain due to the
paucity of long-term measurement sites in all of the
western provinces except Alberta. To compensate for
the lack of contours, wet deposition values in western
Canada are shown as colored circles at the locations
of the federal/provincial/territorial measurement sites.
Figure 5. 1990 Annual Sulfate Wet Deposition
Figure 6. 1995 Annual Sulfate Wet Deposition
Figure 7. 2000 Annual Sulfate Wet Deposition
Figure 8. 2005 Annual Sulfate Wet Deposition
Source: National Atmospheric Chemistry (NAtChem) Database (www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/natchem/index_e.html) and the
National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP)
The four maps indicate that wet sulfate deposition is
consistently highest in eastern North America around
the lower Great Lakes, with a gradient following an axis
running from the confluence of the Mississippi and
Ohio rivers through the lower Great Lakes. The pattern
from 1990 to 2005 illustrates that significant reductions
occurred in wet sulfate deposition in both the eastern
United States and much of eastern Canada, particularly
in the periods from 1990 to 1995 and 2000 to 2005.
By 2005, the region receiving more than 20 kilograms
per hectare per year (kg/ha/yr) of wet sulfate deposition
had essentially disappeared, with the exception of
three small areas: at the Illinois-Indiana border, at the
West Virginia-Ohio border, and at the Pennsylvania-Maryland Border. The wet sulfate deposition reductions
are considered to be directly related to decreases in
SO2 emissions in both Canada and the United States.
The emission reductions are outlined in the Key Commitments and Progress: Sulfur Dioxide Emission Reductions section.
The patterns of wet nitrate deposition (Figures 9, 10, 11 and 12) show a similar southwest-to-northeast
axis, but the highest deposition area is located further
north than that of sulfate. Reductions in wet nitrate
deposition have generally been more modest than for
wet sulfate deposition, except during the period from
2000 to 2005, when large NOx emissions reductions
occurred in the United States and, to a lesser degree,
in Canada.
Figure 9. 1990 Annual Nitrate Wet Deposition
Figure 10. 1995 Annual Nitrate Wet Deposition
Figure 11. 2000 Annual Nitrate Wet Deposition
Figure 12. 2005 Annual Nitrate Wet Deposition
Source: National Atmospheric Chemistry (NAtChem) Database (www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/natchem/index_e.html) and the
National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP)
Wet deposition measurements in Canada are made by
the federal Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring
Network (CAPMoN) and networks in a number of
provinces/territories, including Alberta, Northwest
Territories, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia.
Dry deposition estimates are made at a subset of
CAPMoN sites using combined air concentration
measurements and modeled dry deposition
velocities--the so-called inferential technique. In the
United States, wet deposition measurements are made
by two coordinated networks: the National Atmospheric
Deposition Program/National Trends Network (NADP/
NTN), which is a collaboration of federal, state, and
nongovernmental organizations (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/), and the NADP/Atmospheric Integrated
Research Monitoring Network (AIRMoN), which is a
sub-network of NADP funded by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/AIRMoN/). Dry deposition estimates in the United
States are made using the inferential technique based
on modeled dry deposition velocities and ambient air
concentration data collected by EPA, the National Park
Service (NPS), and the Clean Air Status and Trends
Network (CASTNET) (www.epa.gov/castnet).
Wet deposition measurements in the United States
and Canada are comparable, and the data are
available from the individual networks and from
a binational database accessible to the public at
www.msc-smc.ec.gc.ca/natchem/index_e.html.
Dry deposition estimates in the two countries, while
demonstrating the importance of dry deposition
to total deposition in certain areas, are not as
comparable. This appears to be due to major
differences in the inferential models used to calculate
dry deposition velocities and fluxes. The United States
and Canada are working collaboratively to reconcile
these differences and obtain validation data to
evaluate the models.
Preventing Air Quality Deterioration and Protecting Visibility
JOINT EFFORTS
In October 2007, a joint U.S.-Canada
visibility workshop was held in
Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. EPA, the U.S. Federal Land
Managers, and Canadian government
representatives came together to
review the history of the U.S. visibility
program, including visibility impairment
monitoring and tracking, and to share
information and lessons learned from
joint analyses between the two countries,
discuss international transport in general, and
investigate future collaboration.
CANADA
As reported in previous progress
reports, Canada is addressing
the commitment to prevent air quality
deterioration and ensure visibility
protection by implementating the
Canadian Environmental Assessment
Act, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act
(CEPA) of 1999, and the continuous improvement
(CI) and keeping clean areas clean (KCAC) principles
that are part of the Canada-wide Standards (CWS)
for PM and ozone. The federal government's Turning
the Corner initiative to regulate air pollution emissions
across Canada has the potential to benefit visibility.
Federal and provincial environmental assessment
legislation requires that air quality be considered
for all major new point sources or modifications to
existing sources to ensure that Canadian objectives to
protect human health and the environment are met.
Mandatory provincial reporting processes require
new and existing sources to file notifications, which
are reviewed to determine the scale of environmental
assessment appropriate to each case. CEPA
prefers to use pollution prevention in its approach
to environmental protection. Implementing similar
principles--pollution prevention, CI, and KCAC--is
also part of the CWS.
There are numerous locations across Canada where
ambient levels of PM and ozone are below the CWS.
Actions are required to ensure that levels in these
areas do not rise to the CWS, but rather, are reduced
over time, and that clean areas are maintained. For
example, although Metro Vancouver experiences
good regional air quality relative to most other
Canadian urban areas, the region adopted a new Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in October 2005 to
maintain and improve air quality in the Lower Fraser
Valley airshed. The new AQMP aims to minimize
the risk to human health from air pollution, improve
visibility, and reduce metro Vancouver's contribution
to global climate change. As the CWS for PM2.5 (particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns)
is being met throughout the Lower Fraser Valley and
the CWS for ozone is exceeded only in the eastern
part, the AQMP supports the CI/KCAC provisions
of the CWS. Also, visibility degradation in the Lower
Fraser Valley occurs at concentration levels of PM2.5 well below the CWS. The AQMP's emission reduction
actions aim to reduce direct emissions of PM and
ozone, as well as PM precursors.
The province of British Columbia has recently taken
steps to establish a framework to specifically address
visibility. An interagency Visibility Coordinating
Committee consisting of representatives from the air
quality management agencies was formed in 2007
and is now exploring the development of a visibility
management program for urban and rural areas.
The early work of the committee involved a multistakeholder
workshop on visibility management and
a report on visibility management options in British
Columbia. This report can be viewed at www.env.gov.bc.ca/air/airquality/pdfs/view_ahead.pdf.
Current efforts are focused on a review of visibility
standards/goals for urban and rural areas in the
United States and an assessment of the U.S.
Regional Haze Rule. The results of these initiatives
will inform a path forward for the development of a
visibility management pilot program for the Lower
Fraser Valley.
UNITED STATES
The United States has various programs
to ensure that air quality is not
significantly degraded by the addition
of air pollutants from new or modified
major sources. The Clean Air Act
requires major new stationary sources
of air pollution and extensive modifications to major
existing stationary sources to obtain permits before
construction. The permitting process is called New
Source Review (NSR) and applies to both areas that
meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) (attainment areas) and areas that exceed
the NAAQS (nonattainment areas). Permits for
sources in attainment areas are prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) permits, while permits
for sources located in nonattainment areas are
Nonattainment Area (NAA) permits.
PSD permits require air pollution controls that
represent the best available control technology
(BACT). BACT is an emission limitation based on
the maximum degree of reduction of each pollutant
subject to regulation. BACT is determined on a case-by-
case basis and considers energy, environmental,
and economic impacts.
NAA permits require the lowest achievable emission
rate (LAER). BACT and LAER must be at least as strict
as any existing New Source Performance Standard
(NSPS) for sources. One important difference
between NSR permits and the NSPS program is that
NSR is applied on a source-specific basis, whereas
the NSPS program applies to all sources nationwide.
The NSR program protects the air quality and visibility
in Class I areas (i.e., national parks exceeding
6,000 acres and wilderness areas exceeding 5,000
acres). The federal land management agencies are
responsible for protecting air quality-related values,
such as visibility, in Class I areas by reviewing and
commenting on construction permits.
The Clean Air Act established the goal of improving
visibility in the nation's 156 Class I areas and returning
these areas to natural visibility conditions (visibility
that existed before manmade air pollution); the 1999
Regional Haze Rule prescribes the requirements
that states must meet to reach that goal by 2064.
In July 2005, EPA finalized amendments to the
Regional Haze Rule. These amendments require
the installation of emission controls, known as best
available retrofit technology (BART), on certain older, existing combustion sources within a group of 26
source categories, including certain EGUs that cause
or contribute to visibility impairment in Class I areas.
Many of these older sources have never been regulated,
and applying BART will help improve visibility in Class
I areas. States were required to submit their Regional
Haze SIPs by December 17, 2007. The first planning
period establishes an assessment of expected visibility
conditions in 2018. The SIPs are revised every 10
years, and states revise their visibility goals accordingly
to ensure that reasonable progress is being made
to achieve natural visibility conditions. There is also
a reporting check every five years, in which states
report their interim progress toward reaching the goals.
Additional information on EPA's Regional Haze Program
can be found at www.epa.gov/visibility/program.html.
Figure 13 shows the annual average standard
visual range within the United States for the period
2000 to 2004. "Standard visual range" is defined
as the farthest distance a large dark object can
be seen during daylight hours. This distance is
calculated using fine and coarse particle data from
the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments (IMPROVE) network. Increased
particle pollution reduces the visual range. The
visual range under naturally occurring conditions
without pollution in the United States is typically 45
to 90 miles (75 to 150 km) in the East and 120 to
180 miles (200 to 300 km) in the West. Additional
information on the IMPROVE program and visibility
in U.S. national parks can be found at http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/.
Figure 13. Annual Average Standard Visual Range in the Contiguous United States, 2000-2004
Click to enlarge
Source: Spatial and Seasonal Patterns and Temporal Variability of Haze and Its Constituents in the United States, Report IV, November 2006, IMPROVE, National Park
Service
Consultation and Notification Concerning Significant Transboundary Air Pollution
JOINT EFFORTS
Canada and the United States
are continuing notification
procedures-initiated in 1994--to
identify potential new sources and
modifications to existing sources of
transboundary air pollution within 62
miles (100 km) of the U.S.-Canada
border. Additionally, the governments
can provide notifications for new or
existing sources outside of the 62-mile region if they believe there is potential for
transboundary air pollution. Since publication of
the 2006 United States-Canada AQA Progress
Report, Canada has notified the United States of
eight additional sources, for a total of 52 Canadian
notifications. The United States has notified Canada
of nine additional sources, bringing the total number
of U.S. notifications to 56.
Transboundary notification information is available on
the government Web sites of each country at:
Canada:
www.ec.gc.ca/cleanair-airpur/CAOL/canus/canus_applic_e.cfm
United States:
www.epa.gov/ttn/gei/uscadata.html
Following guidelines approved by the Air Quality
Committee in 1998 for a consultation request by a
party on transboundary pollution concerns, Canada
and the United States report ongoing progress on
joint discussions concerning Essar Steel Algoma, Inc.
(ESAI), formerly known as Algoma Steel Inc., in Sault
Ste. Marie, Ontario.
Essar Steel Algoma, Inc.
The EASI mill is an integrated primary steel producer
located on the St. Mary's River in Sault Ste. Marie,
Ontario, approximately one mile from the U.S.-Canada border.
The Canada-U.S. Algoma informal consultation group
was formed in 1998 to address concerns regarding
local cross-border pollution. Representatives from the
United States and Canada hold regular discussions
to coordinate monitoring programs in the Sault Ste.
Marie area and to address progress in abating potential
transboundary air pollution from the EASI facility in
Ontario. Air quality monitoring on the Canadian side
has been ongoing since the 1960s, and monitoring on
the U.S. side was initiated by the Intertribal Council of
Michigan in 2001. Sampling of fine PM and toxic air
pollutants continues on both sides of the border.
During the last two years, Canadian and U.S.
representatives have continued to meet to discuss
progress toward reducing emissions from EASI and to
share results of air monitoring studies. In November
2006, the data analysis subgroup of the Algoma
informal consultation group completed a report
summarizing results of the ambient air monitoring
program in the binational area between 2001 and
2003. The executive summary and full technical
report are posted on the EPA Region 5 Web site at
www.epa.gov/region5/air/.
To date, the air measurements recorded at the Michigan
sites do not violate U.S. ambient air quality standards,
nor do they exceed air toxics levels of concern for long-term
exposure. However, several pollutants, including
total suspended particulates and coarse particulate
matter (i.e., particulate matter less than or equal to 10
microns, or PM10), exceed Ontario air quality criteria in
the west end of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.
Trend data from the consultation indicate that
although emission rates have declined, total steel
production at EASI has increased. The combined
impact of these changes on air quality is not yet
known, and local agencies are still receiving U.S.
citizen complaints.
In 2007, the Intertribal Council of Michigan installed
a camera, facing toward Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario,
as part of the Midwest Hazecam Network (see
www.mwhazecam.net). The Intertribal Council
provided the bilateral consultation group with a
series of photographs documenting reddish particle
plumes emanating from EASI on multiple dates. The
consultation team discussed the photographs in
October 2007. Ontario Ministry of the Environment
(MOE) staff confirmed that the emissions were coming
from a blast furnace at the company's plant. The
blast furnace was largely uncontrolled at the time, but
EASI has committed to install a particulate-controlling
baghouse on the unit by December 31, 2008.
In September 2008, MOE confirmed that ESAI was in
the process of constructing a permanent baghouse
and that the company was operating portable
baghouse units in the interim. In order to meet the
demand for increased steel production, another pre-existing
blast furnace at ESAI was restarted in August,
2008. MOE reported that this unit is also operating with
temporary particulate controls and that ESAI made
a commitment to build a permanent baghouse by
December 2009. The EASI bilateral consultation group
will continue to monitor and report on this facility.
1 One tonne is equal to 1.1 short tons. [Back]
|
