Ready Mix Concrete Sector: Fisheries Act Compliance

Environmental Stewardship Branch

Rodger AlbrightFeb 17, 2007

www.ec.gc.ca

Attention Please!

$95,000 + change

Fine Savings

Why?

Federal Fisheries Act Section 36 (3) (3) Subject to subsection (4), no person shall

deposit or permit the deposit of a deleterious substance of any type in water frequented by fish or in any place under any conditions where the deleterious substance or any other deleterious substance that results from the deposit of the deleterious substance may enter any such water.

Case Study: Doing it Wrong!

British Columbia, 2001 Polluting a Creek

Depositing a deleterious substance in a place where it may enter fish bearing waters Washing chutes at a construction site

Failed to comply with inspectors directions Had pH levels >9.0

considered harmful to aquatic life no observed fish kill

$95,000+ fine

Environment Canada: Fisheries Act National Inspection Plan

Includes Ready Mix Concrete Industry Fall 2007, or Spring 2008

To be preceded by Compliance Promotion initiative : Sets the stage for enforcement Raise compliance with non-regulatory instruments

Recommended Guideline for Environmental Management Practices for Ready Mix Concrete Operations 2004

Allow you to evaluate site: Ensure the good systems are working Fix risky systems Install appropriate new systems

Objective is compliance –not fines!

Fisheries Act Inspection Plan

Inspect companies with history of compliance issues

Random selection of others

Compliance promotion /inspection initiative does not alter a normal enforcement response to a complaint

Fisheries Act Pass: Fail:

Warning Inspectors direction Prosecution

What are desirable effluent characteristics pH >6 and <9 Non acutely lethal

(e.g. 96 hour LC 50 with rainbow trout) Undiluted effluent: 50%+ die = fail

Suspended solids often parallel provincial /municipal values reference CCME guidelines (+10% over background)

Other factors can affect the acceptability of the effluent

Fisheries Act: Due Diligence

what a reasonable person would have done

reason a lot of background information is requested at time of inspection

consideration in follow-up and sentencing

Lets see!

Background Information: onsite Written company environmental policy

Operations/accidents/offsite conditions

Obvious connections to receiving waters Site plans

Volumes; Product throughput Process and storm water: recycling/released

Conditions around site: operations/storage

Precautions to prevent deposit Best practices: conservation/operations/chemicals Recycling/Treatment: settling basins Sampling/reporting

Background Information: off-site

Cleaning chutes is main issue Policy for off-site truck cleaning: Designated safe location on job site

work with developer to assign such locations/equipment To be rehabilitated later Metal washout boxes/storage tanks

Rinse/collect washwater/return to site

No discharge zones! (not limited to those below) Any area leading to watercourse

Ditches/brooks etc. Storm sewers

Provincial Requirements

Often have permits Water (surface, groundwater) Air Noise Solid waste Spills

Municipal By-Laws

Halifax (W 101) pH >5.5 and < 9.5 Total suspended solids: <300 mg/l Others: metals/oil and grease etc.

Compliance Promotion plan Worked with them already Very direct and focused

“If it goes in the storm sewer – charge them”

Canadian Environmental Protection ACT (CEPA)

Air pollutants such as PM and sulphur dioxide have been declared toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999

Designated toxic substances PM (particulate matter)

Dust and fugitive emissions from roads, storage piles, cement mixing PM 10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or less)

Combustion emissions from on-site boilers, heaters, and vehicles (e.g. sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and fine particulate matter (PM2.5))

PM 2.5 (particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less) is linked to human health concerns such as cardio-respiratory disease,

lung cancer, and premature death also forms smog, which in addition to causing health issues, also

reduces visibility

May require National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) reporting

Size comparison of PM

Particulate matter is divided into fractions based on its size in microns (µm) Total Suspended

Particulate (TSP): less than 100 microns in diameter e.g. road dust, soil

PM10: less than 10 microns in diameter e.g. cement dust

PM2.5: less than 2.5 microns in diameter e.g. engine and vehicle combustion

Larger fraction is more noticeable and may be a nuisance to nearby neighbours

Finer fraction can travel farther and has greater potential health effects

Canadian Environmental Protection ACT (CEPA)

NPRI reporting; If you exceed 20,000 kg of PM 500 kg of PM 10* 300 kg of PM 2.5

Using emission factors: Mineral Products Industry (Table 11.12-3 Plant Wide Emission Factors per yard of Truck Mix Concrete)

Lower value indicated for reporting* (estimates by author)

~980 cy /day or 2000 tons /day uncontrolled 1940 cy /day or 4400 tons /day designated controlled

Next Steps: March, April, May 2007

Atlantic Provinces Ready Mix Concrete Association Effective compliance promotion outreach to members and non-

members

Provinces and Municipalities Identify and coordinate efforts

Discuss results with Environment Canada Enforcement

www.ec.gc.ca

Smog in Halifax

Increased smog levels can impact the visibility of scenic vistas

Above: Halifax Harbour looking from Citadel Hill on August 10, 2001 (left) and August 11, 2001 (right). Both pictures were taken on sunny/mostly cloudless days. Fine particulate (PM2.5) readings on August 10 were 50µg/m3 and on Aug. 11 were 3µg/m3.