Sudbury Soils Study

Public Advisory Committee – Meeting #34

July 15, 2008 – 7:00 p.m.

Room C11, Tom Davies Square

 

 

Attendees:                Dick Cowan              John Hogenbirk       Aino Laamanen      

Paula Takats                        Carol Zippel                         

 

Regrets:                    Ersin Abdullah         Darrell Alston           Nicole Breau                       

Adam Cecchetto      Gary Hrytsak             Bob Somek

                                    Whitefish Lake First Nations Representative

                                   

TC Working Group: Marc Butler                Brian Cameron        Stephen Monet        

            Angie Robson

           

Independent Process Observer:            Franco Mariotti

 

Chair:                         John Hogenbirk

 

Recorder:                 Julie Sabourin

 

Public (3)

Media

______________________________________________________________________

 

JOHN HOGENBIRK PRESIDING

 

1.0      CALL TO ORDER

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. following dinner.  Because quorum was not achieved, it was agreed the meeting would continue for information purposes only and documents requiring approval would need to be brought forward again at the next meeting.

 

2.0      INTRODUCTIONS

 

Members of the PAC and TC Working Group introduced themselves to the public in attendance.

 

3.0      DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

None.

 

4.0      OPEN FORUM (30 min.)

 

Homer Sequin, in his address to the committee, stated that he thought the members of the SSS and the TC are important people but he had some strong recommendations to make and felt he had a right and a duty to do so.  He indicated his comments were not intended to be offensive to Vale Inco or Xstrata Nickel and his recommendations are as follows which he submitted in a letter to the SSS committee:

 

Homer Seguin

3 Laurier Street West, P.O. Box 461

Azi1lda, Ontario POM 1BO

Tel: (705) 983-1208 Fax: (105) 983-0027

 

 

June 25, 2008

 

Sudbury Soils Study -HHRA Public Comments

c/o Gartner Lee Limited

512 Woolwich Street, Suite 2

Guelph, Ontario

N1 H 3X7

 

Dear Sudbury Soils Study Group:

 

The following are my comments and recommendations relative to the Human Health Risk Assessment part of your recently-released report.

 

Please consider them additional to my verbal comments made at one of your public meetings.

 

1.         I recommend, strongly, that the Study be continued or a new urgent one be undertaken which utilizes a new improved model incorporating the principal listed below.

 

2.         The new study should utilize the dozens of prior studies of S0₂ [JCH1] and heavy metal fallout in the Sudbury area, along with the current study in order to determine the true health risks to the current Sudbury-area population. It must evaluate past exposures, as well as future exposures.

 

3.         The study should also examine the highest risk group of residents which is the current and past living employees of Vale Inco (including prior names), as well as Xstrata (including prior names) plus frequent on-site contractor employees. The study should determine whether this group's on-site exposures coupled with off-site exposures puts them at health risk.

 

4.         The extended or new study should function without Vale Inco or Xstrata representatives being on the decision-making technical committee, since they are in a serious conflict-of-interest position to be, in effect, investigating themselves.

 

5.         The business of the extended or new study should be conducted in open sessions with media and public spectators welcome on a first-come basis.

 

6.         The proposed study should be conducted on the basis of majority decision making, which is truly the democratic way.

 

7.         I also strongly recommend that the extended or new study seriously and fairly evaluate the true heavy metals risk to Sudbury-area residents by recognizing that exposures to more than one heavy metal requires evaluation and recognition that the true risks are increased in such circumstances requiring a lowering of the amount of exposure to each heavy metal.

 

8.         I also recommend a much more comprehensive evaluation of lead exposures.

 

a)          To this end, I recommend the lead criteria to be used as a safe level be the same as the Ontario government's guidelines of 200 ppm.

 

b)          In addition, detailed lead soil sampling must be undertaken in Copper Cliff, Coniston, Falconbridge, and Sudbury Centre, particularly in the west end in order to ascertain the true picture of lead contamination in the study area.

9.         I also strongly recommend that human hair and blood sampling be conducted on willing residents of the hot spots referred to in 8 b) above and in any other areas of concern. These tests will determine, without guessing, the true uptake into the body of the various elements of concern; thereby, giving us a true picture of the real human health risks.

 

10.       In conclusion, I recommend, in the strongest voice possible, that the study recommend a professional clean-up paid for by Vale Inco and Xstrata of all areas of concern, starting with school yards and playgrounds.

 

Respectfully submitted by,

Homer Seguin

 

Mr. Seguin then concluded by asking this committee and the TC to give fair evaluation and consideration to his submission and to urge the TC to view this submission with an open mind.

He also indicated that he was obtaining an independent evaluation regarding the science of the study by a qualified individual.

 

Mr. Seguin responded to questions/comments voiced by the committee as follows:

 

Q:        Are you submitting these comments formally as an inclusion with the study?

A:         Yes, I am doing so now via this meeting.

 

Q:        If a further study is undertaken, who would you think should pay for it?

A:         The mining companies as they caused the issue.

 

Q:        Who would you envision conducting the next study?

A:        The TC as it is now except without the mining companies. They should be standing by and cooperating but not be part of the decision-making process.

 

Q:        It was noted that the study had been reviewed by an independent panel of experts from Canada and the United Sates of America.

A:        We need to do another review for the people of Sudbury.  I am not at liberty to say who will finance this other review.

 

A member of the PAC asked Brian Cameron, MOE, if the study had answered the questions raised by the MOE and if the MOE was satisfied with the study.  The response from Mr. Cameron was, in the view of the MOE, that the study had indeed met its objectives and that the MOE was satisfied with the risk assessment.  He noted that the risk assessment was always envisioned as a necessary step to determine the need for any additional study or any follow-up activity.

 

5.0      ADDITIONS TO/APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

 

The following items were added to add to the agenda:

 

            1.         Feedback on Community Information Session

            2.         PAC Terms of Reference Review

 

 

 

6.0      REPORT ON QUESTIONS/ISSUES RAISED AT LAST PAC MEETING

 

There were none tabled.

 

7.0      APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

7.1       Minutes of Meeting #33 – September 25, 2007

 

This approval is deferred to the next meeting.

 

8.0      BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES

 

There was no business arising.

           

9.0      NEW BUSINESS

 

9.1      Membership Renewals

9.2      Election of Chair and Vice Chair

9.3      PAC Annual Report

9.4      PAC Terms of Reference Review

           

As the above items required approval of a quorum of the committee these were deferred to the next meeting of the PAC.  Revised versions of the Annual Report and Terms of Reference would be circulated to PAC members via email and approval would be sought from a quorum of members via email.  These documents would be sent to the SARA Group for posting on the website after approval was received.  It was noted that previous PAC annual reports have not been posted, despite earlier requests.  The Chair of the PAC will follow-up with the TC Working Group and the SARA Group to ensure that all annual reports are posted and that the Terms of Reference are updated.

 

10.0    TC MEETINGS

10.1    Meeting #56 Key Progress & Decision Summary August 16, 2007

10.2    Meeting #57 Key Progress & Decision Summary October 18, 2007

10.3    Meeting #58 Key Progress & Decision Summary November 16, 2007

10.4    Meeting #59 Key Progress & Decision Summary February 14, 2008

 

The above documents were tabled for information.

 

11.0    PRESENTATION

 

11.1    SARA Group Update on the SSS

 

Dr. Glenn Ferguson provided the update on behalf of the Sara Group.  He informed the PAC that the HHRA was released in May and can now be found at the local libraries and on the website.  He also informed the group that the French version of the Executive Summary report is being finalized and should be out shortly.  He stated that the comment period has been extended to November 1, 2008 because of the delay in the release of the French version.

 

He also stated that the ERA has been submitted to the TC for their review and it is expected that this will be released in December of 2008 pending the responses from the committee members.

 

12.0    ADDENDUM

 

12.1    Feedback on the Community Information Session   

 

Overall the PAC felt that the presentations were well done and the public had plenty of opportunity to approach members of the committees and study team.  They were surprised that not more people had attended the information sessions in Copper Cliff and Falconbridge.

 

Dr. Ferguson provided an explanation In response to a question regarding the reasoning behind the study group using the 200 ppm vs. the 400 ppm for lead and indicated that this was an evolving knowledge base area.  He suggested that those residents who have concerns should contact the Sudbury and District Health Unit or consult their family physician.

 

13.0    NEXT PAC MEETING

 

The next meeting will be scheduled for September 16, 2008.  It was requested that Dr. Monet reserve Room C11 for this meeting.  An update regarding the ERA will be provided by the SARA Group.  The Chair of the PAC will follow-up with the TC Working Group and the SARA Group to ensure that the correct date and location of the meeting are posted on the website.

 

14.0    FOLLOW UP TO PUBLIC SESSION

 

There was no additional comment or question from the public.

 

15.0    ADJOURNMENT

 

The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

 

 

            _________________________              ________________________

            Chair, John Hogenbirk                               Recorder, Julie Sabourin