DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT. Modifications Document

Transcription

1 December 2016 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT Modifications Document Submitted to: Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Director, Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch 135 St. Clair Ave. W, 1st Flr. Toronto, ON M4V 1P5 REPORT Report Number: Distribution: 3 copies - Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change 1 copy - Toronto Solid Waste Management Services 1 copy - Golder Associates Ltd.

2 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION CONTACT INFORMATION SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECT CHANGES RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED CHANGES SUMMARY OF NEW POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS EFFECTS ON RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL APPLICATION REPORTS NEW DOCUMENTS REQUIRED SITE PLAN CONCLUSIONS... 8 TABLES Table 1: Proposed Scenarios for Biogas Consumption... 3 Table 2: Summary of Amendments to Renewable Energy Approval Application Reports and Studies... 5 Table 3: Amendments to Renewable Energy Approval Application Reports and Studies... 6 FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location APPENDICES APPENDIX A Revised Air Emission Tables (ESDM Report Tables I, 4 and 5 and Design & Report Table 3) December 2016 Report No i

3 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Modifications Document has been prepared by Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder), on behalf of the City of Toronto (the City) in support of a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) application for the proposed Disco Road Biogas Utilization Project (the Project). The Project is located at 150 Disco Road in Toronto, Ontario, adjacent to the Disco Road Waste Management Facility (DRWMF), which is located at 120 Disco Road, as shown on Figure 1. The draft REA for the Project was issued by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) on March 29, Upon review of the draft approval, it was identified that approval for three additional operating scenarios (contingency scenarios) for the consumption of is required to provide operational flexibility to meet heating demands of the Disco Road Organics Processing Facility (DROPF) at 120 Disco Road under extreme cold weather conditions and to allow for all foreseeable temporary operating scenarios that could arise. The MOECC has classified this amendment as a Technical Change. The purpose of this Modifications Document is to outline the Technical Change by describing the proposed contingency scenarios, assessing the environmental effects of these changes, and summarizing how these additional scenarios affect reports previously submitted as part of the REA application. December 2016 Report No

4 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT 2.0 CONTACT INFORMATION Applicant The Proponent for the City of Toronto and the contact for the Project is as follows: Silvio Abate, Project Manager Toronto Solid Waste Management Services Infrastructure Development and Asset Management Capital Delivery 35 Vanley Crescent Building 275 Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 2B7 Phone: (416) [email protected] Project website: Consultant The Proponent has retained Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) to prepare the Modifications Document for the REA Application under O. Reg. 359/09. Contact information for the Golder REA Manager is as follows: James Francis, REA Manager Golder Associates Ltd. 141 Adelaide Street West Suite #910 Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5H 3L5 Phone: (416) x [email protected] December 2016 Report No

5 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT 3.0 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECT CHANGES Three contingency scenarios are proposed to be added to the REA. These scenarios are in addition to the two scenarios already included in the REA. These three contingency scenarios are required to provide operational flexibility to meet heating demands of the DROPF at 120 Disco Road under extreme cold weather conditions and to allow for all foreseeable temporary operating scenarios that could arise. The proposed operating scenarios for consumption are identified in Table 1. Table 1: Proposed Scenarios for Biogas Consumption Source Description Biogas Generators DRWMF Biogas Flare DRWMF Biogas Boilers Included in Draft REA Scenario A Two generators at maximum of 1064 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 418 m³/hour Not Scenario B One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour Not Proposed Contingency Scenarios to be Added to the REA Scenario C One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 418 m³/hour on 497 m³/hour Scenario D One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour on 248 m³/hour Scenario E Two generators at maximum of 1064 m³/hour Not on 66 m³/hour Scenario A (normal operations) and Scenario B (maintenance operations) both represent the primary operations for the Project, while Scenarios C through E will be temporary operational conditions. Each of the Scenarios account for consumption of at least the maximum amount of that can be produced by the digesters (1,130 m³/hour). Note that the operating conditions encompassing (1) no generators, one boiler and flare and (2) no generators, two boilers and no flare have been previously approved under the Amended Environmental Compliance Approval EHPAN, issued February 12, December 2016 Report No

6 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT 4.0 RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED CHANGES The additional scenarios are required to meet heating demands of the DROPF at 120 Disco Road under extreme cold weather conditions and to cover all foreseeable temporary operating scenarios that could arise. 5.0 SUMMARY OF NEW POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS No new environmental effects are anticipated to result from the proposed changes to the Project. The proposed changes could result in minor increases in the magnitude of predicted contaminant concentrations previously assessed in the REA Application. These changes are as follows: maximum nitrogen oxide emissions in any modelled operating scenario increase from 46.9% of the MOECC Point of Impingement (POI) limit under Scenario A to 47.8% of the limit under Scenario E; and maximum sulphur dioxide emissions in any modelled operating scenario increase from 96.8% of the MOECC POI limit under Scenario A to 98.7% of the limit under Scenario E. Given that the predicted emissions remain within MOECC POI limits, no additional mitigation is required. Details of the updated air quality modelling are provided in Table 3 with updated results for all scenarios included in Appendix A. December 2016 Report No

7 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT 6.0 EFFECTS ON RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL APPLICATION REPORTS Table 2 provides a summary of the amendments/updates to each REA application report as a result of the three additional operating scenarios (contingency scenarios). Table 2: Summary of Amendments to Renewable Energy Approval Application Reports and Studies Report Description of Amendment/Update Explanation of whether the report is impacted by the change Project Description Report No amendments required No impacts to report Construction Plan Report No amendments required No impacts to report Design and Report Amendment to describe the three additional operating scenarios and provide air emissions summary tables for the additional scenarios Updates to the description of operation Decommissioning Plan Report No amendments required No impacts to report Cultural Heritage Report No amendments required No impacts to report Natural Heritage Report No amendments required No impacts to report Water Assessment Report No amendments required No impacts to report Emission Summary and Dispersion Modelling (ESDM) Report Amendment requiring modelling of the additional operating scenarios. The ESDM amendments include updating the Emission Summary Table (Table I and Table 5), adding additional Dispersion Modelling Source Summary tables for the three additional operating scenarios, updating the text throughout to mention the additional scenarios, and including the modelling files for the additional scenarios No impact to the conclusions of the report. The assessment demonstrates that the Project can operate in compliance with section 20 of O. Reg. 419/05 under each assessed Scenario. Noise Study Report No amendments required No impacts to report Odour Study Report No amendments required No impacts to report Consultation Report No amendments required No impacts to report Table 3 outlines the amendments/updates required to each REA application report as a result of the three additional operating scenarios (contingency scenarios). December 2016 Report No

8 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT Table 3: Amendments to Renewable Energy Approval Application Reports and Studies Report Design and Report Description of Amendment Addition of information on operating scenarios C through E Section # and Page # Affected Section Page 12 Original Text It is not feasible for all equipment to operate at maximum concurrently; therefore, two maximum operating scenarios have been defined: the normal operations scenario and the maintenance operations scenario. Revised Text or Location of Revised Text It is not feasible for all equipment to operate at maximum concurrently; therefore, five maximum operating scenarios for consumption have been defined as follows: Source Description Biogas Generators Scenario A Two generators at maximum of 1064 m³/hour Scenario B One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour Scenario C One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour Scenario D One generator at maximum of 532 m³/hour Scenario E Two generators at maximum of 1064 m³/hour DRWMF Biogas Flare at a consumption rate of 418 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 418 m³/hour at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour Not Section Page 12 A summary of the modelling results is provided in Table 3 for the normal operations scenario and Table 4 for the maintenance operations scenario. DRWMF Biogas Boilers Not Not on 497 m³/hour on 248 m³/hour on 66 m³/hour Scenario A is considered normal operations, while the remaining four operations provide flexibility for various heating demands as well as maintenance of the system. A summary of the modelling results is provided in Table 3 for all scenarios. Revised table 3 is provided in Appendix A (Emissions Summary Table.). Addition of reference to additional tables Section Page 22 These include emission of the contaminants listed in Tables 3 and 4 (see Section 4.4.3). These include emission of the contaminants listed in Table 3 (see Section 4.4.3). ESDM Report Revision of text regarding additional operating scenarios Executive Summary Page i The assessment has been completed for two scenarios, normal operations and maintenance operations. The assessment has been completed for five scenarios of consumption: normal operations, maintenance operations, and three contingency operation scenarios. Revision of header title Revision of header title Section Page 2 Section Page Normal Conditions Scenario A (Normal Conditions) Maintenance Scenario B (Maintenance Conditions) Addition of sections describing Page Scenario C December 2016 Report No

9 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT Report Description of Amendment Section # and Page # Affected Original Text Revised Text or Location of Revised Text operating scenarios C through E If required during off-peak hours due to heating demands of 120 Disco Road, the two dual fuel boilers may be operated on. If this is required, sufficient would be available to run one of the generators at maximum. Remaining not consumed by the two boilers and single generator would be directed to the flare Scenario D If required during off-peak hours due to heating demands of 120 Disco Road, one of the two dual fuel boilers may be operated on. If this is required, sufficient would be available to run one of the generators at maximum. Remaining not consumed by the single boiler and single generator would be directed to the flare Scenario E If required during on-peak hours due to heating demands of 120 Disco Road, the two generators would be operating to provide power and heat to the Joint Facility. Remaining not consumed by the two generators would be consumed by one of the dual fuel boilers. No would be directed to the flare. Addition of information on operating scenarios C through E Section 4.1 Page 7 Table A: Scenarios Source Description Maximum Capacity Normal Maintenance Table A: Scenarios Source Description Maximum Capacity Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Scenario E Biogas Generators Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Dust Collector DRWMF 1,426 kw each (24 hours per day, 7 days per week) 16 hours per day, 5 days per week 24 hours per day, 7 days per week Described in Appendix A Two generators at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum Maximum One generator at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum Maximum Biogas Generators Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Dust Collector DRWMF Flare DRWMF Biogas Boilers (H4) All other DRWMF Sources 1,426 kw each (24 hours per day, 7 days per week) 16 hours per day, 5 days per week Two generators at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 One generator at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour 24 hours per day, 7 days per week Maximum 24 hours per day, 7 at a days per week consumption rate of 418 m³/hour 24 hours per day, 7 days per week Not Not Described in Appendix A Maximum Maximum One generator at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum at a consumption rate of 418 m³/hour on at 497 m³/hour Maximum One generator at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum at a consumption rate of 656 m³/hour on at 248 m³/hour Maximum Two generators at maximum All units operating at maximum except boiler H4 Maximum Not on at 66 m³/hour Maximum December 2016 Report No

10 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT In the ESDM, the Emissions Summary Table (Table I and Table 5) also requires revision to reflect updated results based on the modelling completed for the additional operating scenarios. The revised table can be found in Appendix A of this document, along with a revised Table 4 (Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table) which reflects the emission rates and modelling parameters of all five operating scenarios. Additionally, the dispersion modelling files for Conditions A through E have been provided to MOECC. 7.0 NEW DOCUMENTS REQUIRED No new documents are expected to be required with respect to the proposed amendment. 8.0 SITE PLAN No changes to the site plan are required with respect to the proposed amendment. The Project Location, as shown in Figure 1, is unchanged. 9.0 CONCLUSIONS The proposed amendment does not affect the conclusions of the REA application reports. Revisions to the text in the Design and Report have been provided in this Modifications Document to describe the additional three operating scenarios. Modelling of the additional three operating scenarios was completed to update the ESDM Report. Revisions to the text in the ESDM Report reflecting the additional three operating scenarios have been provided in this Modifications Document. The conclusions of the ESDM Report remain unchanged. The proposed amendment does not result in an increase in Project Location size, does not result in a change to the overall impact at receptors, does not require additional lands, does not require an archaeological assessment, and has no impact on cultural heritage or natural heritage features. December 2016 Report No

11 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT Report Signature Page GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD. James Francis, M.Sc., B.Eng.Soc. REA Manager Mark Greenhill, P.Eng. Project Manager AVW/KSA/JF/MG/ng Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation. n:\active\2013\1155\ city of toronto-landfill& util.study\ rea application\19 draft rea approval\technical change\version 3\ rpt dec 2016 disco rd util mod doc.docx December 2016 Report No

12 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT FIGURES December 2016 Report No

13 HIGHWAY LEGEND ³ Railways Watercourse Waterbody Wetland North Mimico Valley Park Municipal Boundary Underground Biogas Pipes 150 Disco Road Property 120 Disco Road Property Disco Road Waste Management Facility Toronto West Detention Centre Project Location 1 Biogas Facility Footprint (Included in the Project Location) CITY OF TORONTO NOTE: 1. The Project Location includes the Biogas Facility Footprint. ATTWELL DRIVE Boiler Room New SSO Processing Facility ^_ Mississauga!. Whitby!. Toronto!. Lake Ontario Cambridge!. Hamilton!. INDEX MAP G:\Projects\2013\ \GIS\MXDs\Reporting\ProjectLocationMap.mxd CITY OF MISSISSAUGA NORTHWEST DRIVE Approximately 1.6 km To Pearson Airport? DISCO ROAD Mimico Creek HIGHWAY 409 CARLINGVIEW DRIVE REFERENCE Base Data - MNR LIO, obtained 2009 Produced by Golder Associates Ltd under licence from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Queens Printer 2012 Imagery - ESRI World Imagery WMS, 2014 Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 83 Coordinate System: UTM Zone 17 PROJECT TITLE SCALE 1:8,000 METRES CITY OF TORONTO DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT NO SCALE AS SHOWN DESIGN ME 14 Mar GIS ME 14 Mar CHECK IC 14 Mar Mississauga, Ontario REVIEW IC 14 Mar REV. FIGURE: 1

14 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT APPENDIX A Revised Air Emission Tables (ESDM Report Tables I, 4 and 5 and Design & Report Table 3) December 2016 Report No

15 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT ESDM Report Table I, 4 and 5 December 2016 Report No

16 December (5000) Source Information Previously Approved Significant Modelled Rationale if Not Significant or Not Source Description Expected Contaminants Source ID General Location Under Existing ECA (Yes or No)? (Yes or No)? Modelled or Title 150_S1 Generator 1 Main Building No Products of combustion Yes Yes N/A 150_S2 Generator 2 Main Building No Products of combustion Yes Yes N/A 150_BA Building A (103) Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Building A (103) No Products of combustion Yes Yes 150_BB 150_BC Building B (101) Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Building C (102) Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Building B (101) No Products of combustion Yes Yes Building C (102) No Products of combustion Yes Yes 150_BD Building D (100) Natural Gas Combustion Equipment Building D (100) No Products of combustion Yes Yes 150_DC Dust Collector Building B No Particulate matter Yes Yes N/A MW Maintenance Welding Building B No Particulate matter No No Negligible source as per Table B-3 of FT Fuel Tanks Building B No 120_S-1 Biofilter 120 Disco Road Yes Volatile compounds from diesel fuel VOCs, odour, total reduced sulphur compounds No No No No the ESDM Procedure Document. Negligible source as per Table B-3 of the ESDM Procedure Document. No contaminants in common with the Project. Odour is not expected to be emitted from the Project. An analysis of odour emissions from 120 Disco Road is documented in the Odour Study Report, submitted under separate cover in support of the REA application. 120_S-2 Biogas Flare 120 Disco Road Yes Products of combustion Yes Yes N/A 120_S-4 Natural Gas Fired Heating Equipment Transfer Station and SSO Facility Sources H1-H6 Table 1 Sources and Contaminants Identification Table Yes Products of combustion Yes Yes 120_S-5 4 Dust Collectors S5a-S5d Yes Particulate matter and odour Yes Yes 120_FP Fire Pump 120 Disco Road Yes Products of combustion Yes Yes Only NOx has been assessed as per section of the ESDM Guidance Document. Only NOx has been assessed as per section of the ESDM Guidance Document. SO2 has been assessed at the request of the MOECC. Only particulate matter has been assessed. Odour is not expected to be emitted from the Project. An analysis of odour emissions from 120 Disco Road is documented in the Odour Study Report, submitted under separate cover in support of the REA application. Only NOx has been assessed as per section of the ESDM Guidance Document. SO2 has been assessed at \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 1 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: EKL Checked by: KSA

17 December (5000) Table 1 Sources and Contaminants Identification Table Source ID Source Information Source Description or Title General Location Previously Approved Under Existing ECA Expected Contaminants Significant (Yes or No)? Modelled (Yes or No)? Rationale if Not Significant or Not Modelled 120_S-6a-e Transfer Station General Exhausts Transfer Station Yes Odour No No 120_S-7 LFG Collection System Exhaust 120 Disco Road Yes Odour No No 120_S-8 Leaf and Yard Waste 120 Disco Road Yes Odour No No 120_N/A Roads, Parking Lot 120 Disco Road Yes Dust No No Odour is not expected to be emitted from the Project. An analysis of odour emissions from 120 Disco Road is documented in the Odour Study Report, submitted under separate cover in support of the REA application. Not listed in Table 7-2 or 7-3 of Section 7.4 of the ESDM Procedure Document (although waste disposal Facility, is not a landfill) \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 2 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: EKL Checked by: KSA

18 December (5000) Source Identifier Source Description Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Exit Gas Temperature [ C] Stack Inner Diameter Source Parameters Stack Height Stack Height Above Grade Above Roof X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Table 2 Source Summary Table Normal (Operation A) 150_S1 Generator N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-01 1,24 EF Average 40% 65% 59% 62% 39% Vinyl Chloride E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Methylene Chloride E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Hexane E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% cis-1,2-dichloroethene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Benzene E E E E E-04 24, annual EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Trichloroethylene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Toluene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Tetrachloroethylene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Ethylbenzene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Xylenes E E E E E min, 24 EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% 1,1-Dichloroethane E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Cyclohexane E E E E E EC Average 50% 100% 100% 100% 50% Particulate matter N/A 5.25E E E E E EF Average 16% 20% 18% 19% 16% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E EC Average 44% 72% 67% 66% 44% Carbon monoxide E E E E E EF Average 28% 39% 38% 38% 28% 150_S2 Generator N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-01 1,24 EF Average 40% <1% <1% <1% 39% Vinyl Chloride E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Methylene Chloride E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Hexane E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% cis-1,2-dichloroethene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Benzene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Trichloroethylene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Toluene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Tetrachloroethylene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Ethylbenzene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Xylenes E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% 1,1-Dichloroethane E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Cyclohexane E E E E E EC Average 50% <1% <1% <1% 50% Particulate matter N/A 5.25E E E E E EF Average 16% <1% <1% <1% 16% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E EC Average 44% <1% <1% <1% 44% Carbon monoxide E E E E E EF Average 28% <1% <1% <1% 28% 150_BA Building A (103) Natural Gas Combustion N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Equipment 150_BB Building B (101) Natural Gas Combustion N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-02 1,24 EF Above average 3% 5% 4% 5% 3% Equipment 150_BC Building C (102) Natural Gas Combustion N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-02 1,24 EF Above average 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% Equipment 150_BD Building D (100) Natural Gas Combustion N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-02 1,24 EF Above average 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% Equipment 150_DC Dust Collector N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Particulate matter N/A 1.00E E E E E-01 1 EF Average 31% 38% 35% 36% 31% H1 Transfer Station Boiler Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-05 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% H2 Transfer Station Roof Top Unit Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-06 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% H3 Hot Water Heater Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-04 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-06 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% H4 SSO Facility Boiler Nitrogen Oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% 10% 5% <1% Carbon Monoxide E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Particulate matter N/A 0.00E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% 6% 3% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-02 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% 16% 8% 1% Maintenance (Operation B) Emission Rate One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Emission Data Averaging Period [hours] Emission Estimating Technique Emissions Data Quality Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) Percentage of Overall Emissions [%] One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 3 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: EKL Checked by: KSA

19 December (5000) Source Identifier Source Description Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Exit Gas Temperature [ C] Stack Inner Diameter Source Parameters Stack Height Stack Height Above Grade Above Roof X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Table 2 Source Summary Table Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) Emission Rate One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Emission Data Averaging Period [hours] Emission Estimating Technique Emissions Data Quality Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) Percentage of Overall Emissions [%] H5 Hot Water Heater Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-05 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% H6 Hot Water Heater Nitrogen oxides E E E E E-03 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-05 1,24 EF Above average <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% S2 Biogas Flare NA Nitrogen Oxides E E E E E-01 1,24 EF Average 14% 23% 20% 21% 14% Carbon Monoxide E E E E E+00 1 EF Average 44% 61% 61% 61% 44% Particulate matter N/A 6.29E E E E E EF Marginal 20% 24% 22% 23% 20% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E-01 1,24 EF Above-Average 11% 28% 17% 26% 11% S5a Transfer Station Dust 3.2 above roof x Collector (tier 1) Particulate matter N/A 1.51E E E E E EC Average 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% S5b Transfer Station Dust 3.2 above roof x Collector (tier 1) Particulate matter N/A 1.01E E E E E EC Average 3% 4% 4% 4% 3% S5c Transfer Station Dust 3.2 above roof x Collector (tier 1) Particulate matter N/A 1.01E E E E E EC Average 3% 4% 4% 4% 3% S5d Transfer Station Dust Collector x above roof (tier 1) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Particulate matter N/A 1.51E E E E E EC Average 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Notes: "V-ST" - Validated Source Test, "ST" - Source Test, "EF" - Emission Factor, "MB" Mass Balance, "EC" - Engineering Calculation Data Quality Categories: "Highest"; "Above-Average"; "Average"; and "Marginal" \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 4 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: EKL Checked by: KSA

20 December (5000) Relevant Section of the Regulation Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section Title Negligible Sources of Contaminants Same Structure Contamination Conditions Source of Contaminant Emission Rates Combined Effect of Assumptions for Conditions and Emission Rates Meteorological Conditions Area of Modelling Coverage (receptor locations) Stack Height for Certain New Sources of Contaminant Terrain Data Averaging Periods Table 3 Dispersion Modelling Input Summary Table Summary of How the Approved Dispersion Model Was Used Sources and contaminants that were considered negligible were explicitly identified, and therefore were not modelled in accordance with s.8 of O.Reg.419/05. Not applicable as the Facility is the only tenant occupying the building, and does not have a child care facility, health care facility, senior's residence, long-term care facility or an education facility located at the on-site. All equipment was assumed to be operating at the maximum production rates, simultaneously. The emission rate for each significant contaminant emitted from a significant source was estimated. The methodology for the calculation is documented in Table 2 - Source Summary Table. The Conditions were estimated in accordance with s.10(1) 1 and s.11(1) 1 of O.Reg.419/05 and are therefore considered to result in the highest POI concentration that the Facility is capable of for each contaminant emitted. The MOECC Regional Urban Dataset for Toronto Region was used. Modelling coverage based on s.14 of O. Reg. 419/05. Not applicable as s.15 of O.Reg.419/05 does not apply to the Facility. Terrain data obtained from the MOECC website was assessed for sources and receptors at the Facility using AERMAP. The appropriate averaging periods, as defined by the regulatory limits outlined in Schedule 3, were used. Location of Supporting Documentation in ESDM Report Section 3.0, Table 1 N/A Section 4.0, Table 4 Section 4.0, Table 2 Section 4.0 Section 6.3 Section 6.0, Figure 6 N/A Section 6.0, Figure 5 Section 6.7 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 5 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: EKL Checked by: KSA

21 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Table 4a Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Normal (Operation A) Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_S1 150_S1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S1 Vinyl Chloride E _S1 Methylene Chloride E _S1 Hexane E _S1 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S1 Benzene E-04 24, annual 150_S1 Trichloroethylene E _S1 Toluene E _S1 Tetrachloroethylene E _S1 Ethylbenzene E _S1 Xylenes E min, _S1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S1 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S1 Cyclohexane E _S1 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S1 Sulphur dioxide E _S1 Carbon monoxide E _S2 150_S2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S2 Vinyl Chloride E _S2 Methylene Chloride E _S2 Hexane E _S2 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S2 Benzene E _S2 Trichloroethylene E _S2 Toluene E _S2 Tetrachloroethylene E _S2 Ethylbenzene E _S2 Xylenes E _S2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S2 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S2 Cyclohexane E _S2 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S2 Sulphur dioxide E _S2 Carbon monoxide E H1 H1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H1 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H2 H2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H2 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H3 H3 Point Nitrogen oxides E-04 1,24 H3 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H5 H5 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H5 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 6 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

22 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Table 4a Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Normal (Operation A) Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] H6 H6 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H6 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 S2 S2 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-01 1,24 S2 Carbon Monoxide E+00 1 S2 Particulate matter N/A 6.29E S2 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 S5a S5a Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E S5b S5b Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5c S5c Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5d S5d Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E Averaging Period [hours] Source ID Source ID(s) Source Type Building Area Building Height Release Height Initial Lateral Dimension Initial Vertical Dimension X-coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_BA 150_BA Volume Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 150_BB 150_BB Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BB 150_DC Particulate matter N/A 1.00E-01 1,24 150_BC 150_BC Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BD 150_BD Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 7 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

23 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Table 4b Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Maintenance (Operation B) Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] 150_S2 150_S2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S2 Vinyl Chloride E _S2 Methylene Chloride E _S2 Hexane E _S2 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S2 Benzene E _S2 Trichloroethylene E _S2 Toluene E _S2 Tetrachloroethylene E _S2 Ethylbenzene E _S2 Xylenes E _S2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S2 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S2 Cyclohexane E _S2 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S2 Sulphur dioxide E _S2 Carbon monoxide E H1 H1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H1 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H2 H2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H2 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H3 H3 Point Nitrogen oxides E-04 1,24 H3 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H5 H5 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H5 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H6 H6 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H6 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 S2 S2 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-01 1,24 S2 Carbon Monoxide E+00 1 S2 Particulate matter N/A 6.29E S2 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 S5a S5a Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E S5b S5b Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5c S5c Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5d S5d Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E Averaging Period [hours] Source ID Source ID(s) Source Type Building Area Building Height Release Height Initial Lateral Dimension Initial Vertical Dimension X-coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_BA 150_BA Volume Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 150_BB 150_BB Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BB 150_DC Particulate matter N/A 1.00E-01 1,24 150_BC 150_BC Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BD 150_BD Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 8 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

24 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4c Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_S1 150_S1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S1 Vinyl Chloride E _S1 Methylene Chloride E _S1 Hexane E _S1 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S1 Benzene E-04 24, annual 150_S1 Trichloroethylene E _S1 Toluene E _S1 Tetrachloroethylene E _S1 Ethylbenzene E _S1 Xylenes E min, _S1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S1 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S1 Cyclohexane E _S1 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S1 Sulphur dioxide E _S1 Carbon monoxide E H1 H1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H1 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H2 H2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H2 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H3 H3 Point Nitrogen oxides E-04 1,24 H3 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H4 H4 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-02 1,24 H4 Carbon Monoxide E-02 1,24 H4 Particulate matter N/A 1.84E-02 1,24 H4 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 H5 H5 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H5 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 9 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

25 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4c Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] H6 H6 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H6 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 S2 S2 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-01 1,24 S2 Carbon Monoxide E+00 1 S2 Particulate matter N/A 6.29E S2 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 S5a S5a Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E S5b S5b Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5c S5c Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5d S5d Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E Averaging Period [hours] Source ID Source ID(s) Source Type Building Area Building Height Release Height Initial Lateral Dimension Initial Vertical Dimension X-coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_BA 150_BA Volume Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 150_BB 150_BB Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BB 150_DC Particulate matter N/A 1.00E-01 1,24 150_BC 150_BC Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BD 150_BD Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 10 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

26 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4d Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] 150_S2 150_S2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S2 Vinyl Chloride E _S2 Methylene Chloride E _S2 Hexane E _S2 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S2 Benzene E _S2 Trichloroethylene E _S2 Toluene E _S2 Tetrachloroethylene E _S2 Ethylbenzene E _S2 Xylenes E _S2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S2 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S2 Cyclohexane E _S2 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S2 Sulphur dioxide E _S2 Carbon monoxide E H1 H1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H1 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H2 H2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H2 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H3 H3 Point Nitrogen oxides E-04 1,24 H3 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H4 H4 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-02 1,24 H4 Carbon Monoxide E-03 1 H4 Particulate matter N/A 9.18E H4 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 H5 H5 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H5 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H6 H6 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H6 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 S2 S2 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-01 1,24 S2 Carbon Monoxide E+00 1 S2 Particulate matter N/A 6.29E S2 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 S5a S5a Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E S5b S5b Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5c S5c Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5d S5d Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E Averaging Period [hours] \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 11 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

27 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4d Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] Source ID Source ID(s) Source Type Building Area Building Height Release Height Initial Lateral Dimension Initial Vertical Dimension X-coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_BA 150_BA Volume Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 150_BB 150_BB Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BB 150_DC Particulate matter N/A 1.00E-01 1,24 150_BC 150_BC Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BD 150_BD Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 12 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

28 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4e Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of Two Engines and One Boiler (at reduced ) (Operation E) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_S1 150_S1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S1 Vinyl Chloride E _S1 Methylene Chloride E _S1 Hexane E _S1 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S1 Benzene E-04 24, annual 150_S1 Trichloroethylene E _S1 Toluene E _S1 Tetrachloroethylene E _S1 Ethylbenzene E _S1 Xylenes E min, _S1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S1 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S1 Cyclohexane E _S1 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S1 Sulphur dioxide E _S1 Carbon monoxide E _S2 150_S2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-01 1,24 150_S2 Vinyl Chloride E _S2 Methylene Chloride E _S2 Hexane E _S2 cis-1,2-dichloroethene E _S2 Benzene E _S2 Trichloroethylene E _S2 Toluene E _S2 Tetrachloroethylene E _S2 Ethylbenzene E _S2 Xylenes E _S2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E _S2 1,1-Dichloroethane E _S2 Cyclohexane E _S2 Particulate matter N/A 5.25E _S2 Sulphur dioxide E _S2 Carbon monoxide E H1 H1 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H1 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H2 H2 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H2 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H3 H3 Point Nitrogen oxides E-04 1,24 H3 Sulphur dioxide E-06 1,24 H4 H4 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-03 1,24 H4 Carbon Monoxide E-03 1,24 H4 Particulate matter N/A 2.44E-03 1,24 H4 Sulphur dioxide E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 13 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

29 December (5000) Modelling ID Source(s) Included for Modelling Source Type Table 4e Dispersion Modelling Source Summary Table - Operation of Two Engines and One Boiler (at reduced ) (Operation E) Stack Volumetric Flow Rate [Am³/s] Stack Height Above Grade Stack Exit Gas Temperature [K] Modelling Source Data Stack Exit Velocity [m/s] Stack Inner Diameter X-Coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Emissions Data Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] H5 H5 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H5 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 H6 H6 Point Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 H6 Sulphur dioxide E-05 1,24 S2 S2 Point Nitrogen Oxides E-01 1,24 S2 Carbon Monoxide E+00 1 S2 Particulate matter N/A 6.29E S2 Sulphur dioxide E-01 1,24 S5a S5a Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E S5b S5b Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5c S5c Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.01E S5d S5d Horizontal Point x Particulate matter N/A 1.51E Averaging Period [hours] Source ID Source ID(s) Source Type Building Area Building Height Release Height Initial Lateral Dimension Initial Vertical Dimension X-coordinate Y-Coordinate Contaminant CAS No. Maximum Emission Rate [g/s] Averaging Period [hours] 150_BA 150_BA Volume Nitrogen oxides E-03 1,24 150_BB 150_BB Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BB 150_DC Particulate matter N/A 1.00E-01 1,24 150_BC 150_BC Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 150_BD 150_BD Volume Nitrogen oxides E-02 1,24 \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 14 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

30 December (5000) Table 5 Emission Summary Table Total Facility Emission Rate [g/s] Maximum POI Concentration [µg/m³] Percentage of MOECC Limit [%] Contaminant CAS No. Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Air Dispersion Model Used Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Averaging Period [hours] MOECC POI Limit [µg/m³] Limiting Effect Regulation Schedule No. Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Nitrogen oxides E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health Schedule % 25.8% 27.3% 26.7% 47.8% Nitrogen oxides E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health Schedule % 14.7% 16.0% 15.3% 27.0% Vinyl Chloride E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule % 9.7% 4.7% 4.7% 9.4% Methylene Chloride E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Hexane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% cis-1,2-dichloroethene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Benzene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Upper Risk Threshold Schedule 6 Below URT Below URT Below URT Below URT Below URT Benzene* E E E E E-03 AERMOD Annual 0.45 Health Schedule 3 6% 2% 1.1% <1% <1% Trichloroethylene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Toluene E E E E E-02 AERMOD Odour Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Tetrachloroethylene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Ethylbenzene E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Xylenes E E E E E-02 AERMOD min 3000 Odour Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Xylenes E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1,1-Dichloroethane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Cyclohexane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Particulate matter N/A 3.18E E E E E-01 AERMOD Visibility Schedule % 44.9% 44.9% 44.9% 45.0% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health & Vegetation Schedule % 51.9% 57.8% 56.0% 98.7% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health & Vegetation Schedule % 38.4% 42.6% 40.7% 70.7% Carbon monoxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD ½ 6000 Health Schedule % 11.7% 11.5% 11.5% 14.6% Notes: * All average annual modelled concentrations multiplied by 140% to obtain maximum annual concentrations \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 15 of 15 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

31 DISCO ROAD BIOGAS UTILIZATION PROJECT - MODIFICATIONS DOCUMENT Design and Report Table 3 December 2016 Report No

32 December (5000) Table 3 Air Emission Summary Table Total Facility Emission Rate [g/s] Maximum POI Concentration [µg/m³] Percentage of MOECC Limit [%] Contaminant CAS No. Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Air Dispersion Model Used Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Averaging Period [hours] MOECC POI Limit [µg/m³] Limiting Effect Regulation Schedule No. Normal (Operation A) Maintenance (Operation B) One Engine, Two Boilers and Flare (Operation C) One Engine, One Boiler and Flare (Operation D) Two Engines plus One Boiler (reduced ) (Operation E) Nitrogen oxides E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health Schedule % 25.8% 27.3% 26.7% 47.8% Nitrogen oxides E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health Schedule % 14.7% 16.0% 15.3% 27.0% Vinyl Chloride E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule % 9.7% 4.7% 4.7% 9.4% Methylene Chloride E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Hexane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% cis-1,2-dichloroethene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Benzene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Upper Risk Threshold Schedule 6 Below URT Below URT Below URT Below URT Below URT Benzene* E E E E E-03 AERMOD Annual 0.45 Health Schedule 3 6% 2% 1.1% <1% <1% Trichloroethylene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Toluene E E E E E-02 AERMOD Odour Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Tetrachloroethylene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Ethylbenzene E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Xylenes E E E E E-02 AERMOD min 3000 Odour Guideline <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Xylenes E E E E E-02 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1,1-Dichloroethane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Cyclohexane E E E E E-03 AERMOD Health Schedule 3 <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% Particulate matter N/A 3.18E E E E E-01 AERMOD Visibility Schedule % 44.9% 44.9% 44.9% 45.0% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health & Vegetation Schedule % 51.9% 57.8% 56.0% 98.7% Sulphur dioxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD Health & Vegetation Schedule % 38.4% 42.6% 40.7% 70.7% Carbon monoxide E E E E E+00 AERMOD ½ 6000 Health Schedule % 11.7% 11.5% 11.5% 14.6% Notes: * All average annual modelled concentrations multiplied by 140% to obtain maximum annual concentrations \\golder.gds\gal\mississauga\active\2013\1155\ City of Toronto-landfill& util.study\ Response to MOECC Questions\01 Air\To MOECC September 2016\Updated Tables 4 and 5.xlsm Page 1 of 1 Golder Associates Made by: KSA Checked by: BSC

33 Golder Associates Ltd Century Avenue, Suite #100 Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 7K2 Canada T: +1 (905)