Government announces that NPRI program will include substances contained in mine tailings and waste rock

Environment Canada has made a major adjustment to its National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) requirements for the 2009 reporting year.

According to a notice published in the Canada Gazette Part I, December 5, 2009, facilities must now consider the quantity of NPRI-listed substances contained in tailings or waste rock to determine whether releases fall within the mass reporting thresholds of the program. There are also new reporting provisions related to the tailings and/or waste rock stored or managed on-site, as well as those transported off-site for recycling or disposal.

Prescribed facilities are those that generate or dispose of tailings or waste rock as a result of “the extraction or recovery of bitumen, coal, diamonds, metals or potash, or the extraction or beneficiation of metallic ore or ore concentrate” and that meet the other criteria set out in the NPRI schedule.

The notice follows the release on April 23, 2009 of a Federal Court of Canada decision that ordered the government to begin publicly reporting mining pollution data from 2006 onward (see CERCN May 2009 edition).

The court’s decision was made in response to a successful application for judicial review of the federal Minister of the Environment’s alleged failure under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) to require reporting by mining facilities of releases or transfers of pollutants to waste rock and tailing disposal areas, that was filed in 2007 by Ecojustice on behalf of Great Lakes United and MiningWatch Canada.

Notice with respect to tailings and waste rock reporting under the National Pollutant Release Inventory for 2006 to 2008, pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, was published in the December 5, 2009 edition of Canada Gazette Part I. The notice announces that any person who owns or operates a facility described in Schedule 3 to the notice, and who has access to information described in Schedule 4, must report that information to the government no later than June 1, 2010. The notice applies to the calendar years 2006, 2007, and 2008.

For more information, contact: National Pollutant Release Inventory, Environment Canada, Fontaine Building, 9th Floor, 200 Sacré-Cœur Boulevard, Gatineau, Quebec, K1A 0H3, Telephone: 1-877-877-8375, Fax: 819-953-0461, Email: NPRI@ec.gc.ca Access the December 05 edition of Canada Gazette Part I at: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2009/2009-12-05/html/notic... Access the decision (109 pages) at: http://www.miningwatch.ca/updir/decision_NPRI_apr2009.pdf

Ontario’s Toxics Reduction Act now in effect

Requirements for manufacturing and mineral processing sectors

Under the Act, facilities in the designated manufacturing and mineral processing sectors must:

Toxic substance reduction plans must be updated at least every five years (and more often in the event of a significant process change at a facility). They must also be certified by both the facility manager and an accredited toxics reduction planner.

Affected sectors concerned about compliance costs

The Ministry received a total of 831 comments on the draft version of the regulation after it was posted in September 2009. The affected sectors were concerned about excessive compliance costs and the potential release of confidential business information. At the same time, environmental groups pushed for lower reporting thresholds, wider application of the Act and faster implementation. However, following the consultation period, only relatively minor revisions were made to the final regulation.

• The requirement to conduct uncertainty analysis on tracking and quantification methods was removed.
• The first report to be submitted need not include information related to plan implementation.
• The toxic substance reduction plan review requirements were streamlined into one section.
• Employees must be advised of the plan on the same day it is made available to the public.
• End-use products intended for human or animal consumption are not prescribed as toxic substances.
• A plan must include the anticipated date when the proposed reductions would be achieved.
• Facilities should provide the rationale for selecting the option(s) that they will implement.
• There is no requirement to estimate reductions for acetone or substances listed in Parts 4 and 5 of NPRI.

Additional regs to cover certification of toxics reduction planners

The Ministry says that it will continue to develop additional regulations to cover the certification of toxics reduction planners, additional reporting requirements for “substances of concern” and administrative penalties.Substances of concern are potentially toxic materials not currently tracked through NPRI, and facilities using these substances would be subject to a one-time reporting requirement. Future regulations may also prescribe or remove toxic substances from the program.

Compliance deadlines

The reporting requirements are being implemented in two stages, beginning with the 47 priority substances listed in Table A of the regulation.
The first draft toxic substance reduction plans must be submitted by June 1, 2011 (covering the calendar year 2010), and the final toxics reduction plans are due by December 31, 2011.
The second phase covers the remaining substances listed in the NPRI. Facilities will have until June 1, 2013, to provide their first report to the Ministry (covering the calendar year 2012). Facilities would then complete their plans and provide a summary plan to the public and the Ministry by December 31, 2013.

The Ministry is preparing information guides and is planning a series of workshops in the new year to help facilities meet the reporting requirements.

New Ontario regulation limits greenhouse gas reporting requirements to major emitters

Ontario filed its final Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting Regulation (O. Reg. 452/09) under the Environmental Protection Act, on December 1, 2009.

Requirements for large emitters

The regulation will ensure that an estimated 200 to 300 large emitters of prescribed greenhouse gases (GHGs) will provide regulators with the kind of credible and detailed GHG emissions data needed to support a multijurisdictional cap-and-trade system. The new regulation, which comes into force on January 1, 2010, covers who has to report, how the data is to be collected, analyzed and verified, and when the annual submissions are due. The final regulation closely resembles the draft posted for public comment on October 7, 2009 and described in CERCN’s November and December editions. There have been some minor revisions relating to third party verification, the protection of confidential business information and various technical clarifications. These changes are summarized in the Environmental Registry posting (under EBR # 010-7889) of December 1, 2009.

Who does the regulation apply to? What, and how, will they have to report?

The regulation applies to refineries, pulp and paper companies, energy generation facilities, chemical producers and metallurgical companies, as classified in 26 sectors. All prescribed facilities will be required to quantify their annual GHG emissions using standardized methods set out in the new Guideline for GHG Emissions Reporting. For the 2010 reporting year, facilities will be permitted to use alternative methods as described in the Guideline or approved by the Ministry of the Environment. The standardized quantification methods, which have been tailored for each of the 26 sectors, are based on procedures developed by the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) and the US Environmental Protection Agency. All prescribed facilities must collect emissions data but only those that emit 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) or more per year are subject to the annual reporting requirements.

What are the compliance deadlines?

The first emissions report, covering the 2010 calendar year, is due by June 1, 2011.
Beginning with the 2011 reporting year, the emissions data must be verified by an accredited third party and a verification report submitted by September 1 of the calendar year following the reporting period.
All documentation and data must be retained for at least seven years.
The Director can require any prescribed facility that does not file an annual emission report to submit proof that its emissions did not exceed the 25,000 tonne threshold during the relevant reporting period.

For more information, contact: Paul Manning, Willms & Shier Environmental Lawyers LLP, Partner and Certified Specialist in Environmental Law at 416-862-4843. website: http://willmsshier.com

Ontario government releases long-awaited revisions to province’s brownfields regime

The decision has been made to amend provisions in Ontario Regulation 153/04, under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), related to brownfields. The following summarizes an EBR notice on the changes published January 6, 2010.

Background: Through the Brownfields Statute Law Amendment Act, 2001, legislative amendments were made to a number of Acts, including the EPA, and implemented through O. Reg. 153/04. In the 2007 Budget, the government announced a comprehensive reform package that would address barriers to brownfield redevelopment. A reform package received Royal Assent on May 17, 2007 as part of the Budget Measures and Interim Appropriation Act, 2007. On October 1, 2009, an amendment related to Qualified Persons (QPs) in O. Reg. 153/04 came into effect. The amendment defines qualified persons who can conduct or supervise an environmental site assessment for the purpose of filing a Record of Site Condition (RSC).These amendments to O. Reg. 153/04 implement the balance of the legislative reforms passed in 2007.

What do the amendments address? Amendments address the following areas:

1. Enhanced Record of Site Condition (RSC) Integrity
2. Streamlined Risk Assessment
3. Strengthened Standards
4. Other Technical Improvements
5. Implementation and Transition

1. Enhanced Record of Site Condition (RSC) Integrity:
The following will be implemented:

• A transparent RSC submission and filing process
o All completed RSCs will be checked by the Ministry of the Environment within 30 business days.
o Selected RSCs will go through a desktop technical review (and a subset of these will go through a Field Review)

• Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Requirements set clear rules on minimum requirements for Phase One and Phase Two ESAs:
o The regulation prescribes requirements consistent with various jurisdictions including those set by Geoscience and Engineering best practices in Ontario, Canadian Standards Association, and international bodies.
o Key aspects of a Phase One ESA include: records review, interviews, site reconnaissance, review, evaluation and report preparation.
• Clear provisions for QPs and conflict of interest.

2. Streamlined Risk Assessment: A new modified generic risk assessment (also referred to as Tier 2) will provide an alternative to meeting generic standards and the traditional risk assessment process where appropriate. According to the Ministry, this streamlined approach “will provide a timelier and more costeffective option for proponents in the province.”

3. Strengthened Standards: The Ministry of the Environment updated standards for approximately 120 chemicals to reflect advances in science and be consistent with those of other leading jurisdictions. A “flexible approach” to standards has been encouraged by providing several generic tables for use in various land use scenarios and physical settings. These also offer the risk-based alternative of developing property-specific standards through risk assessment.

4. Other Improvements to O. Reg. 153/04: Other necessary technical amendments supporting implementation of the new legislation, including setting clear standards for quality of soil brought to brownfield properties.

5. Implementation and Transition: The amendments will come into force on July 1, 2011 (approximately 18 months) after the regulation is filed. For those who qualify under the transition provisions, an additional 18 months will be provided. Grandfathering will only apply to soil, ground water and sediment standards (not for the new ESA requirements).

EBR Registry Number: 010-4642 Title: Proposal for Amending Ontario Regulation 153/04, Brownfields Records of Site Condition Ministry: Ministry of the Environment Date Decision loaded to the Registry: January 06, 2010. For more information: Atif Durrani, Senior Policy Advisor, Ministry of the Environment, Integrated Environmental Policy, Division, Land and Water Policy Branch, 135 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 6, Toronto, Ontario, M4V 1P5, Phone: (416) 314-4708

The documents linked below are provided by the Ministry for information purposes only

• Ontario Regulation made under the Environmental Protection Act, Amending O. Reg. 153/04 (Records of Site Condition V Part XV.1 of the Act
  http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2009/ela...
• Implementation and Transition Fact Sheet
  http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2009/ela...
• Overview Fact Sheet
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Enhanced Record of Site Condition Integrity Fact Sheet
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Risk Assessment Fact Sheet
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Standards Fact Sheet
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Soil, Groundwater and Sediment Standards
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Protocol for Analytical Methods
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/0...
• Modified Generic Risk Assessment Model
  http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/land/decomm/condition.htm

Ontario proposes new or amended air pollution standards to reduce emissions of nine contaminants

Two novel situations arise. For some contaminants, the new URT (upper risk threshold) is lower than the current standard. The metals, except Cr II-III, will have different standards for PM10 and TSP.

The proposals include new standards for benzene, 1,3-butadiene, chromium and uranium and significant reductions for four others. Only the revised standard for acrolein is less stringent than the one currently on the books. The standards (except for the acrolein standard) would take effect five years after they are adopted, although companies would have to comply with the proposed URTs in the interim.

The proposed AAQOs are to be the same as the regulatory standards, with the addition of average annual concentrations for some contaminants.

The Ministry has compiled detailed rationale documents for each of the proposed standards. These were posted to the Environmental Registry on July 31, 2009, together with a consolidated document that contains the draft URT standards.

Background: This is the penultimate set of revised air standards generated by the Ministry as part of a 13-year updating process; it covers seven of the outstanding 16 contaminants, plus uranium (which was not on the 1999 list) and acrolein (which was already revised once before, in 2005). The Ministry has already introduced new or updated standards for 54 of the 70 high priority air contaminants identified in Setting Environmental Quality Standards in Ontario, first released in 1996 and revised in 1999.

What's ahead: In addition to the above, new regional air quality standards and objectives for sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are being developed through a federal/provincial process under the CCME. The Ministry is currently working to develop new standards for the seven remaining air contaminants: arsenic, copper & Cu compounds, ethylene, mercury & Hg compounds, toluene, vanadium & V compounds, and zinc & Zn compounds.

For more information: Access a discussion of the implications of these changes together with a table comparing the current standards in O. Reg. 419/05 with the proposed additions and amendments, as well as listing the new AAQOs on page 9 the September 2009 sample issue of... attached at the bottom of this posting.

Ministry releases updated registration guidance manual for liquid industrial and hazardous waste

Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment posted on the Environmental Registry December 24, 2009, Registration Guidance Manual for Generators of Liquid Industrial and Hazardous Waste - an April 1995 document that was amended and finalized in December 2009 to provide information and guidance for waste generators, processors, and receivers regarding the regulatory requirements for hazardous wastes - including land disposal restriction (LDR) requirements. New content includes, in part:

• a discussion on how to determine appropriate waste classes for waste streams;
• updated schedules of hazardous wastes; and
• information on new requirements that improve the management of subject wastes, including mixing, blending, bulking, and on-site storage and processing requirements.

The ministry also released a new Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Handbook - dated December 2009 - that provides step-by-step guidance to the LDR program.

For more information contact: Ministry of the Environment, Frank Coschi (416) 314-4191; website: http://www.ene.gov.on.ca Access the registration guidance manual (118 pages): http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/er/documents/2009/L... Access the registry posting (#PA07E0002): http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/displaynoticeconten...

Oakville by-law writes new chapter in NIMBY legislation

On February 1, 2010 - spurred by local opposition to a proposed new TransCanada Energy gas-fired electric power plant in the town of Oakville, Ontario, the town council introduced its Health Protection Air Quality By-law 2010-035. Claiming the inadequacy of both existing federal and provincial regulatory controls to control emissions of particulate matter, the by-law effectively made the proposed plant, and other existing facilities, subject to a facility-specific, municipal environmental approvals process. On March 9, 2010 the town’s committee of adjustment used the by-law to deny the energy company’s application. It is now expected that the company will have to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board in order to continue construction.

What is the purpose of the by-law?

The stated purposes of the by-law are:

• to take measures, including collecting information, implementing regulatory controls and monitoring, to protect human health from fine particulate matter;
• to designate specified sources of major emissions of health-risk air pollutants as public nuisances;
• to encourage public participation in Council decision-making on major emissions of health-risk air pollutants; and
• to reduce over time the levels of fine particulate matter in the ambient air of the Town.

Who will the by-law apply to?

The by-law applies to “any person who owns or operates a facility located in the Town that may emit at least one health-risk air pollutant into the air.” In particular, the by-law is concerned with facilities that are responsible for “major emissions.” A "major emission" is defined as an air emission from a facility of a health-risk air pollutant that exceeds at least one of the following thresholds:

1. (a) for directly emitted fine particulate matter, more than 300 kilograms per year;
2. (b) for volatile organic compounds, more than 10,000 kilograms per year;
3. (c) for nitrogen oxides (as NO2 equivalent), more than 20,000 kilograms per year;
4. (d) for sulphur dioxide, more than 20,000 kilograms per year; or,
5. (e) for ammonia, more than 10,000 kilograms per year.

Who must report?

A proposed or existing facility emitting at least one health-risk air pollutant into the air must advise the Town in writing “forthwith” of the emission source or sources, and provide the average and worst-case rates of daily and annual emissions of any emitted health-risk air pollutant facility-wide. Where a person proposes a change to a facility or its operation, and such change may change the emissions of any health-risk air pollutant, its owner or operator shall advise the Town of the change in writing forthwith.

Approval rules for proposed facilities

Under the by-law, the proposed power plant and all future major emitters must apply for facility-specific approval of their proposed air emissions, regardless of whether or not they hold provincial certificates of approval for their air emissions. The application must include payment of the prescribed fee (of $25,000 payable to the Corporation of the Town of Oakville) and submission of the following information:

1. (a) facility description;
2. (b) an evaluation, using a Town-approved atmospheric dispersion model, of the air concentrations across the affected airshed resulting from average and worst-case annual emissions of the predicted levels of fine particulate matter emitted by the proposed facility;
3. (c) mapping that illustrates the extent of the affected airshed, etc;
4. (d) an assessment of the public health effects; and
5. (e) an appraisal of any measures available to the facility that would reduce risks to public health, including the costs and other implications of implementing such measures.

Approval rules for existing facilities

Existing facilities in the Town that cause major emissions to the air must also obtain facility-specific municipal approval of their air emissions. Existing emitters who have MOE CofA’s (air) will be required to report to the Town on “major emissions” within six months; those that do not require a CofA will have one year to submit a report. Existing facilities will be subject to similar reporting requirements as those outlined for proposed facilities. As with proposed facility applications, a fee of $25,000 shall apply. A database of all facilities that report, along with their emissions data will be posted on the Town website.

Applications to be 'peer reviewed'

Upon receipt of an application for approval and the prescribed fees, the Town shall identify a person with appropriate expertise to peer review the submitted application using a two-phase process. Peer reviews are to be completed within 120 days.

Emissions monitoring, annual reporting

According to the by-law:

(15) Each owner or operator of a facility receiving approval under this by-law must prepare and submit to the Town, annually during the first three years following approval, and thereafter for such period as the Town determines appropriate, a report that provides average and worst-case rates of daily and annual health-risk air pollutant emissions from the facility, and such further information as Council may require.

Proposed penalties

Penalties of up to $100,000 may be imposed for facilities that fail to report or obtain a town-issued approval.

Legal authority

The preamble to the by-law cites section 11(2) of the province’s Municipal Act, 2001, as amended which permits municipalities to pass by-laws respecting the health, safety and well-being of persons.” In addition, it notes that s. 128 of the Act permits municipalities to prohibit and regulate with respect to public nuisances, including matters that, in the opinion of council, are or could become or cause public nuisances.

Perhaps anticipating a likely challenge to the Town’s authority, the wording of the by-law states that if “any section of this by-law, or parts thereof, are found by any court of law to be illegal or beyond the power of Council to enact, such section, sections, part or parts shall be deemed to be severable, and all other sections or parts shall be deemed to be separate and independent therefrom and to be enacted as such.”

Background: Power plant too close for comfort, some residents claim

TransCanada Energy is building a 900-megawatt, gas-fired power station in the Town of Oakville, a suburb just 30 mins. west of Toronto. Plans call for the facility to be located next to the town's Ford car plant, and approximately 350 metres from the nearest homes. The plant, which is to replace the coal-fired Lakeview Generating Station, is to provide the area with a cleaner source of electricity in keeping with the government’s green energy strategy.

At a Feb. 24 rally at Queen’s Park, protesters voiced objections the proposal, arguing that it’s emissions will pose health and safety risks and that it will be located too close to homes and schools. The protesters, organized under a group calling itself “Citizens for Clean Air”, attracted further attention to their case by referencing a recent tragedy in Connecticut, where an explosion at a power plant - which was reportedly felt as far as 30 kilometres away - left five people dead and injured another two dozen.

However, concerns about the safety of the plant were challenged by TransCanada. Chris Breen, a spokesman for the company, told The Globe & Mail that replacing coal with cleaner natural gas is a positive step for the community. He also noted that the company has operated plants for 20 years with no safety incidents. The explosion in Connecticut, he attested, happened when a contractor used high-pressure natural gas to clean a pipeline. "That is just something we don't do," he said. "It's unsafe."

Premier criticizes NIMBY approach

In spite of the recent decision by the town to deny the company’s application, it is expected that the development will proceed. Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty warned last year that he wouldn't tolerate the NIMBY ( "not-in-my-backyard") attitude of those who oppose green-energy projects. Faced with this town councillors can only voice their frustration, complaining that governments have been unable or unwilling to apply existing provincial or federal environmental regulations to address the issue.

The preamble to the current by-law states that, while both the province and the federal government have gathered research and prepared reports on fine particulate matter and its harm to human health, “neither have passed air regulations that focus on fine particulate matter, evaluate together ambient conditions and new emissions, assess the human and public health impacts of such conditions, or limit cumulative concentrations.”

In December, Oakville reportedly asked the federal ministers of Health and the Environment to issue an interim order under Part V of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) to regulate particulate matter (PM10) and respirable particulate matter (PM2.5). Although these two types of fine dust are designated as toxic substances under CEPA, the town notes that the federal government has yet to adopt regulations to control them. (This may be, in part, because much of the fine particular matter in our air comes from sources that are difficult to regulate, such as chemical reactions in the atmosphere, motor vehicles, and home fireplaces and woodstoves. An estimated fifty per cent of PM emissions originate from sources in the U.S.).

The Town has also asked the Ontario Ministry of the Environment to conduct a full individual environmental assessment of the proposed power plant; a request that most observers agree will be unlikely to succeed.

Access A by-law to assess and control the health effects of major emissions of fine particulate matter in the Town of Oakville at:
http://www.town.oakville.on.ca/Media_Files/By-law2010-0...
Access the Town’s by-law website at: http://www.town.oakville.on.ca/bylaws.htm

Alberta Storage Tank System Management Regulation amended to delegate powers to Petroleum Tank Management Association

Alberta Regulation 343/2009 Storage Tank System Management Amendment Regulation, pursuant to the Government Organization Act, was approved December 16, 2009, and comes into force January 1, 2010. The regulation amends the Storage Tank System Management Regulation (AR 254/2000) to, in part: delegate the powers, duties and functions of “the authority having jurisdiction” with respect to storage tank systems to the Petroleum Tank Management Association of Alberta for the following:

• acceptance of longer intervals between inspections and tests;
• issuance of permits or approvals and the examination of plans, drawings and specifications;
• assignment of site sensitivity classifications;
• receipt of notification for leaks and spills;
• receipt of notification where underground storage tanks are being taken out of service for a period exceeding 180 days;
• receipt of notification for the removal of underground storage tanks that have no further use or that have been out of service for more than two years;
• receipt of notification that soil is contaminated where underground tanks have been removed, reports showing the extent of the soil contamination, and acceptance of the manner of removing, treating, or replacing the soil;
• granting of permission to abandon a storage tank; and
• receipt of notification of the reactivation of aboveground storage tanks.

In the above cases, “the authority having jurisdiction” refers to local authority, administrator, or safety codes officer as defined in the Safety Codes Act or the authority having jurisdiction as defined in the Alberta Fire Code. Access the amending regulation: http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/orders/orders_in_council/2... Access AR 254/2000: http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/regu/alta-reg-254-2000/lates...

Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Regulation now in effect in BC

British Columbia’s Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources announced in December 2009, a new Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements Regulation, pursuant to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements) Act (Bill 16).

Background: The 2008 Renewable Fuel Requirements Regulation established a five per cent provincial annual average renewable fuel requirement for 2010. The 2009 Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements Regulation amends the 2008 regulation to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels by 10 per cent by 2020.

The low-carbon fuel requirement is a market-based approach to achieving emission reductions; uses life-cycle analysis to determine the overall carbon intensity of fuels used for transportation; and includes all factors associated with the production and consumption of each fuel (i.e. exploration and production of fossil fuels, production of crops for biofuels, and the refining, transport, and end use of the fuel).

Compliance options include changing the fuel mix, improving refining efficiency, or improving agricultural practices for growing biofuel crops.

The low-carbon fuel requirement will be phased in starting with reporting only in 2010, a modest reduction of 0.25 per cent in 2011, and increasing annual carbon intensity improvements to reach a total reduction of ten per cent in 2020. The five per cent renewable fuel requirement for diesel set for January 1, 2010, is also being amended. The diesel requirement will now be phased in with a three per cent target for 2010, four per cent for 2011, and five per cent by 2012.

The five per cent renewable requirement for gasoline in 2010 remains unchanged.

Access the regulation here Access related FAQ: http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/RET/T... Access the act: http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th4th/3rd_read/gov16-3.htm For more information contact: Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (250) 952-0628; website: http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca

Quebec bill amends Mining Act

Quebec’s Minister for Natural Resources and Wildlife, Serge Simard, tabled December 2, 2009, Bill 79 An Act to amend the Mining Act. The bill amends the existing Mining Act to, in part:

• increase the scope of the financial guarantee that must accompany a rehabilitation and restoration plan;
• provide the minister with the authority to exclude certain zones from mining activities and to refuse to grant certain types of mining rights;
• require claim holders to report to the minister on all exploration work performed and for which an allowance was granted under the Mining Duties Act;
• update the penalty system; and
• require public consultation before a mining lease or a peat lease is issued.

Access the bill (24 pages): http://www.assnat.qc.ca/eng/39legislature1/Projets-loi/Public...

New CSA Propane storage and handling code: January 2010

CSA Standards will release in January 2010, B149.2-10 Propane storage and handling code. The code applies to the storage, handling, and transfer of propane; the installation of appliances, equipment, components, accessories, and containers on highway vehicles, recreational vehicles, mobile housing, outdoor food service units, and wash-mobiles when propane is used for fuel purposes; propane used as an engine fuel in other than highway vehicles; and the installation of containers and equipment to be used for propane in distribution locations and filling plants.

The code does not apply to: marine or pipeline terminals; gas where used as a feedstock in petroleum refineries or chemical plants; utility pipeline distribution and transmission pipelines; refrigerated storage or underground reservoirs for propane; propane used on boats; propane used as a propellant in aerosol containers; butane fuel cylinders of 5.3 oz (150 g) capacity or less; and the installation of appliances, equipment, components, accessories, and containers other than those on highway vehicles, recreational vehicles, mobile housing, outdoor food service units, and wash-mobiles when propane is to be used for fuel purposes.

For more information contact: CSA Standards (416) 747-4044; toll-free: 1 (800) 463-6727; website: http://www.shopcsa.ca

Attachments:

CERCN 2006 archive	[View a year's worth of searchable back issues containing over 1200 links to valuable verbatim sources and environmental management resources. ]	1578 Kb
Canadian Environmental Regulation and Compliance News - September 2009 edition	[ ]	177 Kb