GLBTS Links

Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy

Stakeholders Forum

May 17, 2001
Draft Executive Summary Minutes

Welcome

Jim Smith, the Regional Director of Environment Canada, opened the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (BTS) Stakeholder Forum at 8:30AM on May 17, 2001 by welcoming all participants to the sixth meeting of the BTS Stakeholder Forum. Mr. Smith gave an overview of the morning’s speakers, and stated that a goal of the session was to generate new and innovative ways to move the Strategy forward. Mr. Smith introduced Danny Epstein, the new Regional Director of the Environment Protection Branch of Environment Canada. He also introduced Rita Cestaric and Alan Waffle and recognized their hard work in the Strategy. Gary Gulezian, Director of the USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office, also welcomed all participants to the stakeholder meeting. Mr. Gulezian described that the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy is at a critical stage and is seeking actions to promote further reductions. Mr. Gulezian encouraged and urged all to participate in discussions during the day. Next, Mr. Gulezian introduced James McKenzie of McKenzieParis as the facilitator of the meeting. James McKenzie reviewed the agenda for the meeting.

Key Note Address

Following opening remarks, Jane Barton, Manager of International Smog Programs at Environment Canada, presented “The Canada-U.S. Ozone Annex: from air issue to bilateral agreements”. Ms. Barton described the transboundary movement of air and the emissions and reductions in the Great Lakes basin, and the various political instruments available to achieve transboundary reductions. The main focus the discussion was the Ozone Annex Agreement, which has monitoring and assessment capabilities, including tools to assess what needs to be done, and a check-up loop to measure accomplishments. The agreement permits the sharing of data, and the sharing of the network monitoring, emission trading cooperation, public engagement, and outreach activities. The Ozone Annex embeds a domestic program, which forms the basis of the program, and is necessary in order to check that progress is being made. The presentation also included a review of the commitments made between Federal and Provincial governments in Canada. Ms. Barton also provided a description of the future air quality and emission reporting commitments of both Canada and the US, and future reassessment opportunities in regard to negotiating future reductions. A description was also provided of reduction results that have been achieved to date by Canada and the US, and highlights of the emission origins of substances that were of interest to the GLBTS, including Mercury, PCB’s, Dioxins, B(a)P, HCB and OCS, were presented. Finally, future steps required to reduce Particulate Matter (including SO2, NOx, VOC, NH4) were described.

Steel Industry Activities

David Ailor, of the American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute, presented “The US Coke Industry’s efforts to reduce releases of PBTS into the Great Lakes Basin.” He provided an overview of the U.S. Coke industry including:

a description of the coke production process
a description of the differences between “by-product recovery” processes and “non-recovery” processes
a description of the type and location of operating US coke plants
a description of the financial status of the US coke production industry, and the number of closings and declarations of bankruptcy in relation to the international import of coke.
an overview of the major and minor components of raw coke oven gases, and emissions of gases of concern to the GLBTS during coke production including B(a)P and PAHs.
an overview of what US coke producing companies are doing to reduce emissions and releases.

Mr. Ailor described coke production in China. He described that the quantities of Chinese coke being imported into the US. are increasing. Mr. Ailor expressed interest in more strict international environmental regulation of this industry. He explained that USEPA is in the process of creating a guideline for wastewater substances of concern being discharged by the coke producing industry. Mr. Ailor raised concern over the range of competing emission estimates from coke plants, highlighting that comments from the Coke Oven Environmental Task Force (COETF) released on November 7th, 2000 explained that the GLBTS July 13th, 2000 draft report entitled Benzo(a) Pyrene and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Sources, Regulations and Programs for the Ontario Great Lakes Basin overestimated emissions of B(a)P and PAH from coke production based on recent testing conducted. He expressed his concern about “heavy regulation” of the US coke industry. Mr. Ailor concluded his presentation by expressing the continued commitment of US Coke producers, via the COETF, to the GLBTS.

Following Mr. Ailor’s presentation, Tim Huxley, of North American Steel, gave a presentation entitled “BNTS Toxics of Interest in the Steel Sector.” Mr. Huxley expressed his concern about the “poor future” of North American Steel Production. He presented an overview of substances of concern to the GLBTS in the steel sector. Mr Huxley described releases to air, land and water from the perspective of the steel industry. He also commented on existing reporting mechanisms (from both the US and Canada) and existing barriers to the reduction of:

Mercury from coal, equipment, scrap, and taconite processing
Dioxins and furans from electric arc furnaces
HBC from iron sintering
B(a)P from coke making
PCB’s from equipment

Mr. Huxley described the steel sector’s ongoing participation with the following examples:

work to identify sources of mercury entering steel plants; including work through the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI). (Tim referred the ISRI website at http://www.isri.org/am/Template.cfm?Section=Home1 ), and with Pollution Probe
voluntary reporting of mercury recycling and waste to the ARET program
voluntary NPRI report 2000 emission reporting
with Dofasco and Stelco work on mercury emissions with Environment Canada
through steel sector strategic options process (SOP) and SCA
with the CCME-sponsored CWS multi-stakeholder advisory groups (MAG) process
through information sharing with interlocking association membership
USA TRI report beginning in 2000 of dioxin and furan compounds and HCB
studies of taconite processing mercury emissions (in Minnesota) and the potential broadening of this study approach
Engaged in dioxin and furan emission studies in electric arc furnaces
Working on an Industry B(a)P Environmental Best Practices Manual.
CWS sector standards targeted for Spring 2001
through environmental best practices (EBOM) for coke making
Removal of PCB equipment by 2010

Mr. Huxley concluded his presentation by emphasizing that the steel sector will continue to engage in activities to minimize toxics releases.

Global Information Pollution Prevention Network

Next, Marianne Lines, of the Canadian Centre for Pollution Prevention, gave a presentation on the Global CP Information Network. Ms. Lines described the launch of the International Pollution Prevention Network at the summit held in Canada in October of 2000. She noted that the launch of the Network links and supports the experiences of many well-established partners associated with the network. She highlighted the progressive achievements of those involved in moving pollution prevention ahead and suggested that the web-based information could be very useful to the GLBTS. Ms. Lines described the network as providing:

a “roadmap” of information and services
international service to all sizes of communities
building on existing information, and providing information at local levels

Ms. Lines also described a few types of support available through the network including industry-specific information, on-line dialogues, and databases on key topics. She also described that target audiences of the network include communities, new partners, and leaders in energy, finance, sustainable consumption and production. Ms. Lines described the network as functioning through a North American host with international regional contributions. The site’s URL is http://www.c2p2online.com . Ms. Lines concluded by encouraging participates to visit the network.

Research and Development Report

Dr. Keith Puckett of Environment Canada gave a presentation entitled “R&D in support of BNS Challenge 7.” He began with a review of the 7th GLBTS Challenge to “assess atmospheric inputs of Strategy substances to the Great Lakes”. Dr. Puckett described many of the international agreements in place to monitor and reduce substances of concern to the Strategy including persistent organic pollutants (POP’s), heavy metals and mercury. He also reminded participants about the Stockholm Convention, stressing that the Convention is an agreement to ultimately eliminate the use of POP’s, resulting in global emission changes that will affect the Great Lakes. Dr. Puckett described the international movement of HCB and the effects of concentrations found in the Great Lakes Basin. He presented data showing a general decline in the level of HCB, but encouraged continued monitoring of the Great Lakes, and international monitoring of HCB. He also called for a greater integration of networks, data management and reporting. Dr. Puckett used computer modeling to demonstrate the international movement of OC pesticides, which have been banned in Canada and the US but are still found in air and precipitation. He also used computer modeling to demonstrate the movement of the domestic pesticide lindane from Canada’s Prairie region to the Great Lakes region. Dr. Puckett described current research into the modeling of long-range transport (LRT) of mercury, and ongoing research into mercury cycling in the Great Lakes basin. Dr. Puckett concluded his presentation by describing that a global perspective is required in the BTS, but that emissions from Great Lakes’ sources cannot be ignored.

Substance-specific Workgroups Reports

PCBs
Tony Martig, of USEPA, began his report of the PCB Workgroup by informing participants that the PCB progress report was now available. He reminded participants that the PCB challenge goals:

in Canada, to seek a 90% reduction of high-level of PCBs by 2000
in the U.S., to seek by 2006 a 90% reduction of nationally high-level PCB in electrical equipment.

Mr. Martig reported that Canada has had limited disposal options, but that they are increasing. He also reported that to date Canada has made approximately 80% reductions in high-level PCBs, and that the United States has made an apparent 90% reduction in the number of PCB transformers. Mr. Martig also noted that the US number is based on the transformer registration database, and that there may have been unregistered transformers. Mr. Martig further noted that both the Canadian and US challenges have targeted electrical equipment, but recognize that there are other sources of PCBs. The Workgroup is interested in seeking voluntary reductions that go beyond regulation, and focusing on education and regulations. The Workgroup has continued to create PCB reduction letters to send out to companies and associations. The Workgroup has also targeted the steel, automotive, and utilities industries and their trade associations. The group has developed a generic education presentation, and case studies to be used by companies. The Workgroup is also updating its web site. The PCB Step 1, 2, and 3 reports are already posted on the site. Future plans for the Workgroup include:

a continued focus on commitment letters
continued tracking of progress
outreach and sharing of information
follow-up on creating incentives for facilities to reduce PCB’s

In conclusion, the Workgroup feels that both countries are well along on their challenges. The Workgroup is also urging further stakeholder commitments to achieve more reductions. The Workgroup would like to address sectors as opposed to individual companies

Dioxins and Furans
Next, Anita Wong, of the Dioxin and Furan Workgroup, reported on the group’s progress. She began by reminding the Stakeholder Forum of the Dioxin and Furan challenge goals:

in Canada, to achieve a 90% reduction of all releases of dioxins and furans in the Great Lakes basin by the year 2000
in the US, to achieve a 75% reduction of aggregate air releases nation wide and water releases in the Great Lakes basin by 2006

Ms. Wong reported that in the US there has been a 75% reduction of dioxins and furans, and in Canada an average 79% reduction of dioxins and furans from air waste and soil. She also reported that the inventory has shown an increase in dioxins due to data collection improvement and due to the backyard trash-burning sector. The Workgroup is now looking at backyard burning as being a major emission source. Ms. Wong also described the Burn Barrel subgroup’s development of a strategy and generic implementation plan to approach backyard trash burning that includes education, infrastructure improvement, and the enforcement of regulations. She described that Canada Wide Standards are now being proposed for waste incineration, sewage sludge, iron sintering and steel manufacturing, and wood combustion. She also described a Canadian voluntary stack-testing program. The Workgroup’s high priorities are backyard trash-burning and residential wood combustion, and its medium priorities are medical waste incineration (Canada) and pentachlorophenol-treated wood (U.S.). The Workgroup has also placed a priority on the collection of information from steel manufacturing, landfill fires, and incinerator ash management.

B(a)P and HCB
Tom Tseng, of Environment Canada, provided a B(a)P and HCB Workgroup update. He began by reminding the Stakeholder Forum of the B(a)P and HCB challenges:

in Canada, to seek by 2000 a 90% reduction of B(a)P and HCB from sources resulting from human activity consistent with the Canada Ontario Agreement
in the US, to seek by 2006 reductions in releases that are within or have the potential to enter the Great Lakes basin resulting from human activities

Mr. Tseng estimated that in Canada reductions of approximately 60-90% of HCB and approximately 30-40% of B(a)P have been achieved. In the US there have been (nationally) approximately 90% reductions of HCB and (in the Great Lakes) approximately 65% reduction of B(a)P. The Workgroup has identified several sectors which it feels are critical to achieving further reductions. He reported that the Workgroup is in need of better data in order to make progress in other sectors. Recent Canadian activities of the group include the implementation of SOP’s with steel mills and wood preservers, and an EMA signed with Algoma Steel as well as the Wood Stove Change-Out program in Georgian Bay. Mr. Tseng also informed the group that HCB and B(a)P (PAH’s) release inventories would be required under NPRI reporting requirements in 2001. He described new Canada Wide Standards that are being considered, through which B(a)P and HCB releases are expected to drop in the next 5-10 years. Recent US activities of the group included the completion of the Wood Stove Change-Out program in 12 States, discussion with the scrap tire sector to reduce fires, and the completion and posting of Step 1, 2, and 3 reports on the web site. Mr. Tsang concluded by stating that common sectors have to present reduction efficiencies and that we can do better if we have specific projects on sectors, which include data collection, monitoring, etc.

Mercury
Next, Alexis Cain, of USEPA, gave a report of the Mercury Working Group. He reminded Stakeholder Forum participants of the Canadian and US mercury reduction challenges. The Canadian challenge is to achieve by 2000 a 90% reduction in the release of mercury, or where warranted the use of mercury, in the Great Lakes basin. To date, Canada has achieved an 81% reduction against a 1988 baseline. Mr. Cain reported that Canada’s ambitious target is not on schedule, but that a 90% reduction target is still being actively pursued. The U.S. challenge is to achieve by 2006 a 50% reduction in the use of mercury nationwide; a 50% reduction in aggregate of mercury emissions nationwide and releases to water in the Great Lakes basin. He also reported that more data is needed in order to be able to declare any successes on the US challenge. Mr. Cain further reported that the US release reductions achieved through 1996 (including reductions anticipated through incinerator regulations) are close to 50%, and that the US is on target for 2006. Other activities reported upon by the Workgroup included:

the signing of the chlor-alkali industry’s voluntary agreement to reduce mercury use by 50% below 1990 levels by 2005
the Canadian Centre for Pollution Production training sessions in hospitals
the National Wildlife Federation’s signing of pledges with 651 hospitals in the Mercury-free hospitals campaign.

Mr. Cain described that the Ontario Dental Association and the State Dental Associations are both promoting Best Practices for Managing Dental Waste. He reported that the Workgroup intends to focus on the auto sector and scrap metal, and on mercury education over the next few years. The Workgroup web site has been updated and improved, and can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/region5/mercury/index.html.

The plenary meeting was adjourned. Attendees were invited to participate in Substance-specific Workgroup meetings scheduled for the afternoon.

Attendees

David Ailor, American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute
Rose Abate, Ontario Dental Association
Dan Adsit, Ford
Jim Bailey, ECO Superior
Bob Bailey, GGLI
Jane Barton, Environment Canada
Michael Bland, US EPA Region 5
Helga Blackman, CEA
Marty Bratzel, International Joint Commission
Rebecca Bowman, Environment Canada
Natalie Bulera, Center for Great Lakes Environment Education
Peter Bziuk, City of Windsor
José Castro, National Institute of Ecology
Alexis Cain, US EPA
Dale Cameron, Environment Canada
Tracey Campbell, ESG
Morag Carter, Toronto Public Health
Rita Cestaric, US EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Molly Chidsey, National Wildlife Federation
Mary-Anne Ciampini, CVMA
John Clarke, Environment Canada
Thomas Corbet, NYSDEC
David Clunas, Region of York
John Crouch, Hearth Products Association
Brad Cumming, Environment Canada
Patrick Curran, Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association
Tom Dann, Environment Canada
Bennie Deaton, Westlake Cato
Ken De, Environment Canada
Tony DeFalco, National Wildlife Federation
Alice Dove, Environment Canada
Lorrie Draper, Environment Canada
Art Dungan, Chlorine Institute
John Eichner, SIAC
Danny Epstein, Environment Canada
Ric Erdheim, National Electrical Manufactures Association
Herbert Estiecher, Covington & Burling
Greg Filyk, Environment Canada
Murali Ganapathy, SENES Consultants Limited
Jeff Gearhart, Ecology Center
John Gilkeson, Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance
Bruce Gilles, Environment Canada
Gordon Godin, Sensor Environmental Services
Nan Gowda, US EPA
Douglas Green, PMRW
Gary Gulezian, US EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
John Hall, Ontario Power Generation
Martin Hassenbach, Contech
Yves Hennekesus, YIFC
Jon Heinrich, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Darryl Hogg, Environment Canada
Dan Hopkins, US EPA
Tim Huxley, North American Steel
Cynthia Hyland, ??
John Jackson, Great Lakes United
Mark D. Johnson, Weyerhaeuser Company
John Johnson, PCI Chemicals Canada Inc.
Robert E. Jones, Defence National Stockpile Center
Steve Kratzer, Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality
Alfred Krause, US EPA Region 5
Rajib Khettry, Eco-Sense Advisory
Lorinda Lamb, COMED
Krystal Larocque, MOE
Jack Lewis, SUNPRO
Raymond Lewis, SUNPRO
Angela Li-Muller, Toronto Public Health
Marianne Lines, Centre for Pollution Prevention
Dennis M. Lynch, Defense National Stockpile
Terry Mah, Region
Tony Martig, US EPA Region 5
Tracey Mattson, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries
Ellie McCann, US EPA
Dawn McDonald, Environment Canada
James McKenzie, McKenzieParis
Octavio Melo
Susan Nameth, Environment Canada
Laura Nazef, US EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Scott Painter, Environment Canada
Ton Parrott, Vulcan Chemicals
Dale Phenicie, CGLI
E. Marie Phillips, US EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Darrell Piekarz, Environment Canada
Lou Pocalujka, Consumers Energy
Keith Puckett, Environment Canada
Steven Radcliff, Ontario Ministry of the Environment
William C. Rankin, Olin Corporation
John Reid, Resource Futures International
Elizabeth Rezek, Environment Canada
Steve Risotto, HSIA
Jim Roewer, NRECA
Steve Rosenthal, US EPA Region 5
Linda Samek, Ontario Dental Association
Greg San Martin, PG&E
Eric Sanderson, McGill University
Sam K. Sasnett, US EPA
Ron Shimizu, Contractor for Environment Canada
Vic Shantora, CEC Montreal
Jim Smith, Environment Canada
Paula Smith, Office of Planning and Management
Joe Stearns, CCC
Brent Steele, Dofasco Inc.
Joseph Stepun, Western Lake Superior Sanity District
Evelyn Strader, CGLI
Laura Summers, MOE
Greg Susanke, Agency
Larry Talbot, Talbot and Associates
Joy Taylor-Morgan, MDEQ
Jose Tenorlo, CEC
Vicki Thomas, US EPA, Great Lakes National Program Office
Luke Trip, Environment Canada
Tom Tseng, Environment Canada
Alan Waffle, Environment Canada
Al Wakeun, Sensor Environmental Services
Rich Whate, Toronto Environmental Alliance
Lance Wilcox, SUNPRO
Dale Wilhelm, ?????
Dwaine Winters, US EPA
Anita Wong, Environment Canada
Marianne Woods, Environment Canada
Margaret Wooster, Great Lakes United
Maureen Wooten, Battelle
Noel Wylie, Hydro One Networks, Inc.
Karen Yang, Environment Canada