ARCHIVED - Response to Comments on Revision of "Thermal Power Generation Emissions - National Guidelines for New Stationary Sources", issued under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, May 1993

• 2.1 Consultations with Stakeholders
• 2.2 Link to other Federal/Provincial Processes
• 2.3 Regulation versus Guidelines
• 2.4 Harmonization with U.S. Limits

2.1 Consultations with Stakeholders

Summary of Comments

• The Guidelines have been mislabeled as "National Guidelines". By convention, the term "national" is only applied to an item when all provincial and territorial governments have agreed to the item.
• Proposed revisions to the Guidelines were developed in isolation of any stakeholder input. The consultation of "technical personnel from industry... regarding control strategies and technologies for air pollutants", as stated in Section 1(1) of the proposed Guidelines, has not occurred.
• A team-oriented approach should be developed to determine new emission limits and management techniques. The Alberta Clean Air Strategic Alliance (CASA) process was cited as an example.
• There was a lack of provincial input during the development of the Guidelines.
• The process schedule was too short for sufficient stakeholder understanding and involvement.
• Further consultation should occur before the final Guidelines are published.
• Stakeholders should be consulted on the conclusions that Environment Canada will form from the March 22^nd, 2002 workshop and the formal comments.

Response

Environment Canada agrees that the Guidelines should not be labeled as 'national'. Henceforth, they will be referred to as "Guidelines".

Environment Canada had ongoing discussions with stakeholders on the need to revise the Guidelines from 1996 until the proposed revisions were undertaken, at which point the provinces, territories and other stakeholders were given opportunities to provide their views. Specifically:

• On November 1, 2001, a formal offer to consult with provinces and territories was issued via the CEPA 1999 National Advisory Committee (CEPA NAC). Environment Canada received no formal response to this offer.
• The Minister of the Environment announced in a press release on November 29, 2001 that the general direction of the revisions would be that emission limits would be much more stringent than those contained in the 1993 Guidelines and would be based on BAT. The draft Guidelines and a discussion document detailing the rationale for revisions was issued to all stakeholders on January 23, 2002.
• A workshop was held by Environment Canada on March 22, 2002 to increase stakeholder understanding of the proposed revisions, facilitate the sharing of perspectives among stakeholders and enhance Environment Canada's understanding of the views of stakeholders.
• The comment period ended April 19, 2002, 86 days after the release of the draft revisions. At any point during the comment period, stakeholders could contact Environment Canada officials for clarification or to provide input.

The proposed changes to emission limits are based on a wealth of data and precedent from the U.S. and other countries. Based on comments received, further research and analysis has been conducted resulting in the final emission limits presented in the revised Guidelines to be gazetted in 2002. None of the comments received identified specific issues that had the potential to be resolved through further consultations. In light of the above, Environment Canada believes that the consultation process was extensive and complete and that there is no need for a second round of consultations.

2.2 Link to other Federal/Provincial Processes

Summary of Comments

• There were few, or no, linkages made between the proposed Guidelines and other federal processes that are currently under way. Examples cited included: Multi-Pollutant Emission Reduction Strategies (MERS) process, Canada-wide Standards, and addressing Canada's climate change commitments.
• Linking with other processes may involve the addition of other pollutants (see Section 4.5: Other Pollutants).

Response

The processes noted in the comments are national processes which involve a partnership among the federal government, the provinces and the territories. Their common goal is emissions reduction but with a primary focus on reductions from existing facilities. The revised Guidelines are aimed at minimizing emissions from new facilities. As such, the Guidelines are a cross-cutting and complementary measure that will also assist in meeting the goals of the national processes.

Specifically, the revisions to the Guidelines support the commitment made by CCME, as part of the Canada-wide Standards for PM and Ozone, to keep clean areas clean by "ensuring that new facilities and activities incorporate best available economically feasible technologies to reduce PM and ozone levels". By revising the emission limits in the Guidelines to be consistent with the performance of best available technologies that are economically feasible, Environment Canada is setting out its expectations for practical baseline performance standards for new thermal power plants. It is expected that this will assist other partners in developing effective responses to the CCME commitment to keeping clean areas clean. The revisions include a statement of intention to continuously update the Guidelines, and this may involve the addition of provisions for other pollutants.

Summary of Comments

• The Guidelines should be harmonized with provincial processes which are developing environmental standards or policies, such as the Clean Air Strategic Alliance (CASA) process in Alberta.
• The revision of the Guidelines may constrain the ability of the CASA process to consider a much wider range of options for air quality management in the Province of Alberta.
• The timing for implementation of the Guidelines should be reconsidered to align with the CASA process so that the federal process does not prejudice the outcome of the provincial process. This would signal that Environment Canada is supportive of such provincial initiatives and is interested in working collaboratively with all stakeholders to achieve environmental goals.
• The Guidelines should have a provision to exempt facilities in provinces that have their own Electricity Emissions Management Programs such as the one the CASA is developing.
• Revisions to the Guidelines are not necessary as the provinces are responsible for regulating emissions from the electricity industry. For example, on June 15, 2001, Alberta announced new emission standards for any new coal-fired unit in the Province of Alberta.

Response

The Guidelines are one part of a collaborative approach which recognizes that jurisdictions implement regulatory requirements for electric power plants. They present Environment Canada's expectations for appropriate performance standards at the national level for emissions from new plants, and the federal Minister of the Environment recommends that jurisdictional air pollution control agencies adopt them as practical baseline standards for their regulatory programs. It is recognized in the Guidelines that local conditions may necessitate the adoption of more stringent standards.

Therefore, Environment Canada believes that there is a sufficient degree of harmonization between the provincial processes for developing environmental standards for air emissions and the CEPA 1999 Guidelines review process.

Environment Canada does not share the view that the Guidelines would constrain the ability of a provincial process to consider a wide range of options for air quality management. In fact, the emission limits in the Guidelines will assist jurisdictions in developing effective responses for keeping clean areas clean. Proponents of new power plants will retain access to the full set of technology and fuel options available for new electric power projects, and building new sources clean is a fundamental principle which is consistent with a wide range of options for air quality management. In this context, exemption of facilities in certain jurisdictions is not considered to be appropriate.

2.3 Regulation versus Guidelines

Summary of Comments

• Regulation should be required, or set as an ultimate goal, for controlling and reducing emissions from the electric power industry.

Response

Environment Canada recognizes that jurisdictions implement regulatory requirements for electric power plants. The federal Minister of the Environment recommends that jurisdictional air pollution control agencies adopt the Guidelines as practical baseline standards for their regulatory programs.

2.4Harmonization with U.S. Limits

Summary of Comments

• Fossil-fueled power from Canada that is exported to the U.S. should be required to meet standards comparable to those in the U.S., to prevent Canada from becoming a pollution haven for the U.S.
• The Guidelines should advocate harmonization of Canadian and U.S. goals and programs to improve air quality where problems and solutions cross jurisdictional borders.

Response

Harmonization with U.S. emission performance requirements for similar facilities is one of the goals of the proposed revisions. The proposed emission limits are based mainly on U.S. requirements and experience; however, because of the different constitutional and legal framework in Canada, harmonization with U.S. programs is judged to be inappropriate.