Review of the SWARU Incinerator
The SWARU incinerator in Hamilton, Ontario, which has been operating since 1972, burns approximately 40 per cent of the city’s municipal waste. Local residents have been raising concerns about this incinerator since the late 1980s, particularly about its dioxin emissions.
In the year 2000, the facility emitted approximately 5.5 grams of dioxins and furans, measured as Toxic Equivalent Quotient (TEQ). Municipal waste incineration, Canada- wide, emits a total of approximately 8.4 grams per year of dioxins and furans, according to an estimate by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.
This suggests that SWARU’s emissions contribute over 60 per cent of the total dioxin and furan emissions from municipal waste incinerators across Canada. Two applicants applied for a review under the Environmental Bill of Rights of the SWARU incinerator’s three certificates of approval (Cs of A), covering waste disposal, ash solidification and air emissions. The applicants were concerned that increasing tonnages of waste were being incinerated over time, that fly ash was not properly managed, and that air emissions, noise and odour were excessive.
The applicants stated that SWARU’s waste disposal C of A was originally issued in 1972, with no restrictive conditions attached. The applicants were also concerned that the ash solidification C of A allows SWARU to mix hazardous fly-ash with cement kiln dust to stabilize it, and then dispose of it in a municipal landfill. However, the applicants’ main concern was with the air emissions C of A, issued in 1996. The applicants stated that SWARU emits exceedingly high levels of dioxins, furans and other toxic substances that pose significant health risks to the community. They also had a general concern about ongoing noise and odour problems, and believed that the Cs of A for waste disposal and air emissions needed new conditions attached that would address these concerns.
The Ministry of Environment and Energy informed the applicants in August 2000 that the ministry would, over the coming year, undertake a “focused review.” MOEE’s review team included staff from three separate parts of the ministry: the West-Central Regional office, the Standards Development Branch and the Environmental Assessment and Approvals Branch. This review team carried out a more comprehensive review than originally anticipated, looking into most aspects of SWARU’s operations. MOEE completed the EBR review in August 2001, and released a detailed list of recommended changes to the incinerator’s three Cs of A, responding to almost all of the concerns of the applicants. The ministry also noted that it had identified the potential for fugitive dust emissions from ash handling and the existence of questionable analytical data for processed ash. The latter issue has been referred to the police for further investigation. The ministry also found that the operator/municipality failed to submit reports semiannually on its ash treatment, as required by the C of A. The ministry’s Investigations and Enforcement Branch investigated and chose not to recommend charges.
MOEE staff reviewers recommended numerous changes to the Cs of A. In July 2002, MOEE proposed comprehensive amendments to the approvals for SWARU, and committed to posting them on the Environmental Registry for public comment.
Depending on what kinds of changes are eventually made to the Cs of A for SWARU, the results of this EBR review may become a modest environmental success story. In this case, the applicants resorted to using the EBR after finding that other mechanisms were not effective in addressing their environmental concerns. The applicants provided detailed evidence for their concerns, as well as a clear rationale for their requested changes to the Cs of A for SWARU.
The ministry, for its part, made a good decision in agreeing to carry out a review under the EBR. MOEE staff completed a thorough review of SWARU operations, and should be commended for their detailed recommendations to strengthen the Cs of A for the incinerator. The fact that MOEE decided to involve staff with a range of specialties and backgrounds probably helped to improve the quality of the review that was undertaken.
If the changes recommended by ministry staff are eventually incorporated into SWARU’s approval documents, the operation of this facility will undoubtedly improve significantly, and its environmental impacts on both local residents and the broader region of southern Ontario are expected to be reduced. However, the amendments for SWARU’s Cs of A had not been finalized by August 2002. Although MOEE can impose the terms and conditions of a new C of A, proponents of facilities have the right to appeal such amendments to the Environmental Review Tribunal if they consider them too onerous or otherwise problematic. Since hearings before the Environmental Review Tribunal can be time-consuming and costly, there can be advantages to both parties to avoid such a hearing. If negotiations become too protracted, however, both local residents and the environment will suffer. The ECO will continue to monitor MOEE’s progress on amending these instruments.
In late 2001, the City of Hamilton re-evaluated the future of this aging incinerator, especially in light of the fact that without changes to its air pollution control systems, the facility will not be able to meet the new Canada-Wide Standards for Dioxins and Furans, which will come into effect in 2006. Hamilton City Council endorsed a Waste Management Master Plan, which includes plans to close the incinerator.
The SWARU incinerator is just one example of a facility operating under certificates of approval that no longer reflect current standards of environmental protection. The fact that many facilities in the province have outdated approvals for air emission controls has been a long-standing concern for the ECO and was the subject of a recommendation in the ECO’s 1996 annual report. The Provincial Auditor’s 2000 annual report similarly noted that MOEE needed to update many outdated Cs of A, and that the ministry did not have an adequate system in place to review the terms and conditions of the existing Cs of A to ensure they met current environmental standards. MOEE formally agreed with the Auditor’s finding and committed to improvements through a new Integrated Divisional System. It would be useful for MOEE to provide a public update on the progress of these ministry-wide improvements.
| Recommendation 15:
The ECO recommends that the Ministry of Environment and Energy strengthen the certificates of approval for the SWARU incinerator by implementing the recommendations of ministry staff. |
| This is an article from the 2001/02 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2002. "Review of the SWARU Incinerator." Developing Sustainability, ECO Annual Report, 2001-02. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 123-126.
