______________________________________________________________________

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 SARA 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.

5.0 ADDITIONS TO/APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

The agenda was approved as tabled.

6.0 REPORT ON QUESTIONS/ISSUES RAISED AT LAST PAC MEETING

6.1 Letter to Homer Seguin

The issue of making public the letter sent by Chris Wren of the SARA Group to Mr. Seguin responding to questions he raised at a previous meeting was clarified. As the letter was addressed specifically to Mr. Seguin and he had not had an opportunity to review it, there was a concern as to releasing confidential information as a matter of courtesy. Mr. Seguin responded that he was more than happy to share the information contained in this letter.

This initiated discussion regarding how questions raised by the public should be addressed. It was noted that if there were personal identifiers or medical information this would have to be held in strictest confidence, but if it was of a public or general nature it could be responded to publicly.

This discussion was left that each question would be dealt with on an ad hoc basis and that members of the PAC would discuss amongst themselves if a protocol would be required. If so, a formal policy would be developed for the January meeting.

Action: PAC to resolve discussion.

7.0 PRESENTATION

7.1 Ecological Risk Assessment for the City of Greater Sudbury

Chris Wren provided a presentation on the Ecological Risk Assessment prepared for the study. He reviewed what an ecological risk assessment is, what it was they were looking for, where did they conduct the study and what are the next steps.

Following his presentation there were several questions raised to define some of the terminology. Dr. Wren went on to indicate that to date, nothing is showing to be of any significance – some results are as expected, and many others have yet to be defined.

It was asked if there is recovery continuing of the local environment to a healthy state and will the report address this question? Dr. Wren responded by indicating that different areas are recovering but at different rates – more often determined by the intervention of reclamation.

Further to this presentation, the PAC requested a copy via e-mail. It was requested that if the PAC identified any areas of confusion or concern, that they note these and forward to the Chair for review by the WG and SARA.

Action: Chris Wren will email his presentation to the PAC.

8.0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES

8.1 Minutes of Meeting #23 – September 20, 2005

14-2005 Moved by Somek – Breau: That the minutes of meeting #23 dated September 20, 2005 be approved. CARRIED

9.0 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES

There was no other business arising from the minutes.

10.0 NEW BUSINESS

10.1 Sudbury Soils Study Report Schedule (Tentative)

These dates were reviewed and Glen Watson stated that it was preferred by the WG to refer to completion dates as seasons so as not to provide the public with inaccurate timelines as dates are often altered due to extenuating circumstances. He also stated that the TC works with actual dates, but this is to ensure timely turnaround for the review of documents. Following is the tentative schedule at this time:

Review of Volume 1 – Draft 1 by TC: completed Fall 2005

Review of Volume 2 – Draft 1 by TC: Winter, 2006

Review of Volume 3 – Draft 1 by TC: Spring 2006

Completion of Review of First Drafts by Technical Committee: Spring, 2006

Incorporation of TC comments by SARA and production of Draft 2: Summer 2006

Final Report sent to TERA: Summer, 2006

Incorporation of TERA comments by SARA and production of Draft 3: Fall 2006

Draft 3 report printed and issued for public review: Fall 2006

Incorporation of public and final comments by SARA and production of final Sudbury Soils Study report Fall 2006.

It was noted that this schedule is regarded by the TC as tentative since a variety of factors may delay the completion of reports. At this point no one can anticipate the response of the TERA Group which may or may not delay the final report.

It was also noted that as a result of this discussion, incorrect information is contained in the current draft of the next issue of the Independent Process Observer’s Report. It was requested that this be updated as appropriate prior to public distribution.

Action: Julie, Franco and Shawna to correct information as

appropriate prior to publication.

11.0 TC MEETINGS

11.1 Next TC Meetings (Pending Approval of the TC)

It was noted that the meetings listed below will be held at 9:30 a.m. at Tom Davies Square, Provincial Tower, Boardrooms C and D. Some of these meetings may be deferred or cancelled, pending recommendation from the Working Group to the Technical Committee.

· December 8, 2005

· January 12, 2006 (cancelled)

· February 9, 2006

· March 9, 2006

· April 13, 2006

· May 11, 2006

It was requested that as soon as it has been identified that if a meeting is cancelled, that this be posted on the website immediately. Mr. Watson indicated the only reason for canceling a TC meeting would be because of review schedules and workload.

12.0 MOTION TO EXTEND MEETING

15-2005 Moved by Zippel – Somek: That this meeting be extended past the hour of 9:30 p.m. CARRIED

13.0 ADDENDUM

There were no addendum items at this time.

14.0 NEXT PAC MEETINGS

This is the schedule for the next few PAC meetings. It was requested that the March meeting date be moved forward or back one week as the present date falls within March break.

January 17, 2006

March 21, 2006

May 16, 2006

Action: Chair to canvass members for alternative dates.

15.0 FOLLOW UP TO PUBLIC SSESSION

15.1 Microphones

It was requested that microphones be used by committee members during the meetings as it was very difficult for the public to hear all discussions.

15.2 ERA Presentation

Dr. Wren was complimented on his presentation as being very well done and extremely informative.

15.3 Scientific Advisors

It was suggested that the PAC might like to have discussion with the Scientific Advisors to provide feedback on the quality of the study prior to the study report being sent to TERA or even at some further point.

Action: WG to take request under consideration.

16.0 ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m.

_________________________ ________________________

Chair, John Hogenbirk Recorder, Julie Sabourin