Sudbury Soils Study

Public Advisory Committee – Meeting #31

March 27, 2007 – 7:00 p.m.

Room C10, Tom Davies Square

 

 

Attendees:            Ersin Abdullah           John Hogenbirk         Gary Hrytsak          Aino Laamanen        
                                 
Carol Zippel               Dick Cowan               Bob Somek  

 
Regrets:                Nicole Breau             Franco Mariott

                                 Darrell Alston             Whitefish Lake First Nations Representative

 
TC Members:       Brian Cameron          Glen Watson          Marc Butler

                                 Stephen Monet

 

SARA Group            Regrets

 

Chair:                     John Hogenbirk

 

Recorder:               Carol Zippel

 

Communications Subcommittee           Lynn Demers             Cory McPhee

 

Public (5)     

______________________________________________________________________

 

JOHN HOGENBIRK PRESIDING

 

1.0       CALL TO ORDER

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. following dinner.

 

2.0       INTRODUCTIONS

 

Members of the PAC, TC and Communications Subcommittee introduced themselves to the public in attendance.

 

3.0       DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

None

 

4.0       OPEN FORUM (30 min.)

 

There were no questions raised from the audience.

 

5.0       ADDITIONS TO/APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

 

The introduction and welcome of two new members of the PAC was added as item 5.1.

5.1             Introduction of New PAC Members

 

Paula Takats and Adam Cecchetto were introduced and welcomed as new members of the Public Advisory Committee.

 

07-2007         Moved by Somek - Laamanen: That Paula Takats and Adam Cecchetto be added as Members to the PAC.                                             CARRIED.

 

6.0       REPORT ON QUESTIONS/ISSUES RAISED AT LAST PAC MEETING

 

There were no items that needed to be addressed.

 

7.0       PRESENTATION

 

7.1             Role and Policies of MOE in Relation to the SSS.

 

Brian Cameron, District Manager Sudbury Office gave a presentation regarding the role of the MOE which is to review and approve the final draft of the HHRA and ERA. The MOE will also review and approve remediation measures, if needed. This will be done by reviewing the conclusions of the risk assessment and making sure they are based on sound science and follow guidelines or policy and best practices.

 

If the risk management concentration level of a substance is found to exceed safe levels, then mitigation measures must be appropriate for reducing risk such as soil remediation or changes in technology/industrial process to reduce emissions. The MOE will also monitor risk management methods and if it cannot accept the methods provided it will work with the company to revise these methods.

 

Other roles of the MOE include guidance in how to provide risk assessment. The Ministry expects community based risk assessments be guided by risk assessment outlines in the “Procedure Use of Risk Assessment”.

 

Q: “What is the process to reject the risk assessment?” 

A: It is premature to discuss whether the report will be accepted or rejected until the final report is completed.  If, however, the report is in danger of being rejected, then the MOE would go back to the proponents and ask them to change the document. If this doesn’t work, then the MOE will pursue legal options.

 

Q: “What does the MOE do if there is a disconnect between policy and science?”

A: Policy comes first but that is weighed against the available science and placed in the context of the SSS.

 

Q:  “When the project is complete is there something that needs to occur for its acceptance?” 

A: The MOE Standard Development Branch will review the HHRA and ERA.  Advice can be sought from outside the MOE. The MOE would review with the study’s intent in mind and not necessarily stick to the letter of the regulations as the regulations have changed during the course of the study.

7.2       Role and Policies of FNIHB in Relation to the SSS

           

To date there has been no response to the request from the PAC for FNIHB to describe its roles and responsibilities with respect to the SSS.  The PAC will continue to follow-up on this request.   There was a suggestion that if there continues to be no response from FNIHB, then this lack of response should be noted in the final copy of the report.

 

WG mentioned that the MOE invited the FNIHB to the study. WG has asked FNIHB to clarify their role but has received no response. FNIHB have received all documentation to date but no comment has been received.

 

There was some discussion regarding the fear that FNIHB might reject the study.  It was noted that the Independent Expert Review panels have commended the SSS stakeholders for the thoroughness, Sudbury-specific data and scientific integrity of both the HHRA and ERA. Therefore, if the FNIHB chooses to reject the findings of the risk assessment at this late stage, then the onus will be on the FNIHB to explain how their opinion differs from that of independent experts and why they have not responded earlier.

Action: WG to talk with FNIHB about the necessity of explaining their
role in this study and report back to the PAC at the next meeting.

 

7.3       Updated Communications Plan

 

Cory McPhee, Public Relations CVRD-Inco, CSC representative indicated there would be three community information sessions: Day 1 – Sudbury (likely at Science North) and Day 2 – Falconbridge and Copper Cliff.  Prior to the first public session the city, politicians, unions, etc would be briefed. There would also be a media briefing complete with a media package.

 

Q:, “How long would the PAC have to review material before it went public?”

A: Eight weeks.

 

Q: “Is there a strategy to release information to the media?”  Reiteration of an ongoing PAC suggestion to key in on environmental reporters such as Bill Bradley or David Pearson. 

A: A complete hard copy of the final reports would be available at the McKenzie Street Public Library and a DVD version at the other branches. The plain language summary would also be available for people to take home.

 

PAC re-iterated a suggestion to involve school children.

 

CSC mentioned that all public comments would be attached to the final version of the report.

 

The PAC were concerned that the public sees delays as a major issue.

 

Q: “Can the need for delays be addressed in the reader-friendly summary?”

A: CSC acknowledges that this has been an ongoing communications issue and some thought will be given how to address this issue during the public release.

Q: “Will there be a French version?”

A: media kit and plain language summary will be translated into French. 

 

There was an additional recommendation that knowledgeable bilingual laypersons be asked to review the French language versions, much in the same way that the PAC will review the English-language versions.

Action: Cory McPhee to take ideas back to Communications Subcommittee. He will ask Trevor Smith-Diggins to send out the updated Communications Subcommittee plan to the PAC.  The PAC has agreed that this document, as well as any other reports or documents that are received in advance of public release,

will be kept confidential.

 

7.4       Sun-Setting Issues

 

Glen Watson indicated that once the ERA and HHRA are released to the public all committees will be dissolved and the study will revert back to the default organization/agency mandate. This ensures a clean end to the risk assessment and a new beginning for risk management. CVRD Inco and Xstrata are responsible for developing a risk management plan and strategy in consultation with the Sudbury & District Health Unit, the Ministry of the Environment and the City of Greater Sudbury.

 

8.0       APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

8.1       Minutes of Meeting #30 – January 17, 2007

 

08-2007         Moved by Cowan - Somek: That the minutes of the meeting #30 dated January 17, 2007 be approved.             CARRIED

 

9.0       BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES

 

None

           

10.0         NEW BUSINESS

 

None

 

11.0    TC MEETINGS

 

            12.1    Technical Committee Meeting #54

                        Key Progress & Decision Summary for Meeting of December 14, 2006

 

            This document was tabled for information. 

 

12.0    ADDENDUM

 

There were no items for the addendum.

 

 

13.0    NEXT PAC MEETING

 

May 15, 2007 Room C-10, Tom Davies Square

 

14.0    FOLLOW UP TO PUBLIC SESSION

 

Q: What is being done with the fine tailing ponds? If there was a large amount of rainfall it may result in a risk to the water table.  Dr. Amaratunga’s research is well known in Sudbury but how come it isn’t being used?

A: Cory McPhee mentioned that CVRD Inco has a huge tailings area. It reports on its management practices every year.  Glen Watson mentioned that CVRD Inco brings in seasonal workers each April to lay down a straw mulch to reduce dust in the Lively area. Acid mine drainage is collected and treated. The threat of dam failure exists but routine and third party inspections are carried out.  Dams are designed to withstand a probable maximum flood and earthquake event.

Action: It was noted that this is not a question about the SSS per se.  Therefore it is up to the companies to respond to these questions as they see fit.  Cory McPhee will take these concerns to the individuals involved in tailings management and arrange for a formal written response.

 

 

15.0    ADJOURNMENT

 

The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m.

 

 

 

 

            _________________________                ________________________

            Chair, John Hogenbirk                                 Recorder, Carol Zippel

 

Viagra acheter viagra acheter viagra Viagra acheter viagra Propecia online Super Kamagra Cialis Daily online Viagra Voor Vrouwen Cialis online Priligy online Levitra Professional online Kamagra Gold online Viagra Gold online Cialis Professional online Kamagra Jelly online Levitra Soft online Viagra kopen online in nederland hvor kjøpe generisk cialis på nett i Norge
adidas schuhe adidas superstar adidas superstar damen adidas sneaker adidas superstar adidas superstar australia adidas nmd adidas nmd australia adidas superstar femme adidas stan smith adidas superstar adidas stan smith femme adidas schoenen dames adidas superstar dames adidas superstar adidas schoenen in nederland hvor kjøpe generisk cialis på nett i Norge