Ontario refinery wanted coal tar oil,
but regulations forced its incineration
Tanya Collier MacDonald
Cape Breton Post
Friday, Oct. 24, 2003
Coal tar oil housed in a tank at
the coke ovens site was requested
by an Ontario steel refinery
for use but instead it was incinerated
in a Quebec community
despite residents' protests.
Environment Canada designated
the material a hazardous
waste, forcing its incineration.
The Montreal Gazette
reported that steelmaking giant
Stelco Inc. was prepared to
accept the material for use at its
steel refinery in Nanticoke,
Ont., but was unable to because
of the federal regulators' designation.
Instead, it was sent to an
incinerator in Mercier, Quebec.
Residents there spent about
$20,000 fighting the incineration
in their community as well as
testing the material for PCBs.
None were found.
Walter van Veen, project
management consultant for
work at the Sydney coke ovens
and tar ponds, said a preliminary
deal was reached between
the Ontario refinery and Clean
Harbours Inc., the environmental
and waste management company
contracted to dispose of
1,000 tonnes of coal tar oil from
the Domtar tank located on the
coke ovens site.
"However, the regulators at
Environment Canada designated
it a hazardous waste destined
for recycling under the Inter-
provincial Transportation of
Dangerous Goods regulations,"
It was designated hazardous
because it was sitting in the
tanks since the 1950s, not
because of its character, he
added.
"Somethnnes regulations cannot
always address every conceivable
permutation of the
world," said van Veen.
Although the steel refinery
accepts coal tar oil for use on a
regular basis and has a certificate
of approval to do so, it
would have taken time - likely
months- to sort out the red tape
surrounding the Sydney material.
"We didn't have any time left
to petition the people at the
Ontario Ministry of Environment
to ensure there wouldn't
be any trouble," said van Veen.
When the federal designation
was handed down, the decision
was appealed by the project
management consulting firm
Conestoga Rovers & Associates,
where van Veen is a consultant.
"We had not expected it
would get that designation early
on in the project," he said.
Burning the material as
opposed to using it didn't cost
taxpayers more for the contract
- valued at $3.6 million - with
Clean Harbours because the
company's proposal was to simply
dispose of it in a legal manner,
said van Veen.
There is a lot of similar coal
tar remaining at the coke ovens
site and the tar ponds but that
doesn't mean it could be used in
the steel industry as opposed to
being disposed of, he added.
However, there will be more
time to deal with that if government
determines it an option,
said van Veen.
Appropriate Environment
Canada officials could not be
reached for comment.
tcmacdonald@cbpost.com
|