Boundary Air Quality Committee Meeting
DRAFT MINUTES
11:30 am JULY 10, 2007
RDKB Board Room
Present: Karin Kilpatrick (Chair), Ingo Frankfurt (vice-chair), Michele Caskey, Peter Regenberg (left at 2:00 PM), Mike Reiner, Rob Chornenki, David Simm (left at 1:50 PM),
Mike Van Ek, Cher Wyers, Joy Davies (Coordinator),
Regrets: Lyle Olsen, Chris Moslin, Bob Grieve, Gary Smith, Joe Mottishaw
1. Call to order; 11:40 AM
2. Agenda: Motion: TO adopt the agenda as amended. Add under new business item
regarding motion to invite Alex Atamanenko, MP.
Moved by R.Chornenki., 2nd by I.Frankfurt. Carried
3. Minutes: Motion: TO adopt minutes of the June 5, 2007 meeting.
Moved by M.Caskey. 2nd I. Frankfurt
4. Business arising from Minutes
(i) “Motion 6 from the June 5,2007 minutes: That the BAQC immediately advise Mayor
Krog & the Grand Forks City Council to urgently contact the Minster of the
Environment, the Hon. Barry Penner, with a view to allowing the city access to
the real time monitoring & reporting data that is being collected from the TEOM machine on Grand Forks city hall. Moved R. Chornenki 2nd by D. Simm. Discussion. Amended.
Carried.”
– Has there been any action? Coordinator stated that she thought Mr. Moslin was to speak with council. The coordinator has not be given any information as to the status.
MOTION 1: THAT the coordinator contact our MP, Alex Atamanenko & our MLA, Katrine Conroy before the next meeting of the BAQC requesting information on how they would like to be informed as to the proceedings of the BAQC. Moved by R. Chornenki, 2nd I. Frankfurt. Carried.
ACTION 1: Coordinator will email our MLA & MP and ask the question.
(i) Bring forth to next meeting of the BAQC the PROTOCOL LETTER.
5. CORRESPONDANCE: n/a
6. FINANCIAL REPORT/DR. Karin Kilpatrick:
MOTION 2: That all incoming chairs sit with the City Treasurer before taking their seat to better
understand the financial categories of the Financial Report.
Moved by Dr. Kilpatrick, 2nd by R. Chornenki. Carried.
7. REPORTS:
A. MADT REPORT/Rob Chornenki:
(i) Emissions Inventory:
a) Decision on consultants to contract: SENES has been awarded the tender. The process of selection was explained.
MOTION 3: THAT the BAQC contract with SENES Consulting to perform the Grand Forks
Emissions Inventory according to the Terms of Reference subject to a legal opinion clearing
any relevant conflict of interest issues regarding their work with Roxul Inc., Rockwool International and its affiliates. Moved by R. Chornencki, 2nd by P. Regenberg. Discussion. Carried. Opposed by D. Simm
b) Call for volunteers to work with successful bidder. No discussion
(ii) TEOM update:
a) The provincial government has invested over $400,000 in software so
that Grand Forks should have real time reading by the end of the 2007.
b) The city will be installing the new weather station on the roof of
city Hall shortly.
c) Mobile unit will be coming to GF soon.
(iii) Referred motion on the health standard: The MADT committee wants to work with
it’s own health standard. The MADT would like the BAQC to consider working
with the health standard reference. Tabled until next meeting of the BAQC.
(iv) Interim chair: Chris Moslin has volunteered to stand in while Rob Chornenki is
away July 11, 2007 – the end of August,2007.
(v) Minutes: Mr. Chornenki addressed the issue of minutes of the MADT & BAQC
stating that he felt they need to be more comprehensive. He stated that the minutes
of the last meeting of the MADT ( May 18,2007) have not been brought to the
BAQC yet because they have not been approved by the MADT. Discussion.
A recommendation was made that a proper tape recorder be purchased by the
BAQC that can be used at all meetings. Peter Regenberg offered to meet with
the coordinator to demonstrate his tape recorder as he can highly recommend it for
our purposes. The cost is approximately $300.00
MOTION 4: THAT the coordinator get clarification from V. Kumar, City Administrator about
the procedures of recording minutes. Moved by R. Chornenki, 2nd by Dr. Kilpatrick.
Carried.
ACTION 2: Coordinator to follow up with Victor Kumar and to resend his February 1, 2007
email about the recording of minutes.
B. MOE REPORT/Mike Reiner:
(i) Letters to the Editor regarding Health Reference Level: The MoE has concerns about the misinformation in letters to the editor regarding the objectives and information relating to A/Q in June’2007 issue titled “Worst Fears Confirmed” by Rob Chornenki” and “Ministry has failed” by David Simm.
MOTION 5: That the BAQC write a letter to the editor clarifying the misinformation of letters
to the editor of June ,2007. Moved by M. Reiner, 2nd by M. Caskey. Discussion.
Carried. Opposed by David Simm.
ACTION 6: Dr. Kilpatrick will write a short response consulting with David Simm &
Rob Chornenki to correct the ambiguous & incorrect information in the
articles regarding the above motion and send as a letter to the editor.
Timeline: 2 weeks.
C. CET REPORT/ Michele Caskey:
(i) There was no meeting in June due to Commuter Challenge activities.
(ii) Commuter Challenge: Wrap up Details:
a) thank you letters & tax receipts have been sent to the donators.
(iii) Burn it Smart plans: information to be presented at the Grand Forks Fall Fair
(iv) Anti-idling bylaw status: City Council passed a motion to accept our recommendation to draft and anti-idling bylaw.
D. IHA REPORT/Ingo Frankfurt:
(i) Discussed the memo of June 29, 2007 from Dr. Paul Hassleback: (Appendix I):
-the committee is pleased to hear from Interior Health Association (IHA).
- advised the committee that Don Corrigal of the IHA be invited as a guest
to one of the BAQC meetings.
- stated that IHA will ensure proper information gets to the public about Air Quality.
Also, he shared that, as with the standards set - for example of water quality- have been
lowered to more suitable levels this attitude of improvement of health standards for
air quality is changing as well.
(ii) World Health Organization: uses the value of 25 for a 24 hour average.
(iii) Table the need to approve the formation of a health committee for the BAQC until
the next meeting.
(iv) Public Health will be taking a leading role in communicating with the public about
air quality.
(v) IHA response to the Roxul Permit: Letter dated July 27, 2007 (Appendix II)
E. COORDINATOR’S Report/Joy Davies (see Appendix III):
(i) Report on BC Lung Association’s Conference Call of July 2, 2007
(ii) Recommended motion: that the MADT begin the preliminary work in preparing an airshed Management Plan for our airshed.
MOTION 6: That an airshed management plan be developed for Grand Forks by the BAQC.
Moved by Dr. Kilpatrick, 2nd by I. Frankfurt. TABLED.
(iii) Coordinator’s review - who does this? (A group takes the contract and the schedule of duties and reviews performance. This review is written and then gone over with the coordinator and then with Victor Kumar, City Administrator.)
MOTION 7: That the hiring committee and the Committee of Chairs review the coordinator’s
current contract. DISCUSSION: It is apparent that the coordinator is regularly
working in excess of 12 hours per week. It is appropriate to have the hours
increased formally. At the same time it is appropriate that the coordinator be
given a performance review. Moved by C. Wyers, 2nd Dr. Kilpatrick. Carried.
ACTION 3: C. Wyers will organize the review with the assistance of the coordinator.
F. CHAIR’S REPORT/Dr. Karin Kilpatrick: (see Appendix IV)
- Dr. Kilpatrick shares her appreciation of working with the committee as chair.
– introduced Ingo Frankfurt as the incoming chair.
MOTION 8: THAT the BAQC committee of the whole recess until September 18, 2007.
Moved by Dr. Kilpatrick, 2nd by I. Frankfurt. Carried.
8. NEW BUSINESS:
i) Invite Alex Atamanenko, MP to a BAQC meeting. Meeting adjourned
prior to this discussion.
9. Next meeting date: September 18, 2007. 11:30 AM
Adjourn: 2:15 PM
APPENDIX I
PUBLIC HEALTH
Paul Hasselback, MD MSc FRCPC
1340 Ellis Street Medical Health Officer, Okanagan Central/North
Kelowna BC V1Y 9N1
Telephone: (250) 868-7818
Fax: (250) 868-7826
Web: interiorhealth.ca
E-Mail:
MEMORANDUM
To: Ingo Frankfurt Public Health Inspector, KBHSA From: Dr. Paul Hasselback Medical Health Officer, Okanagan Central/North Date: June 29, 2007 Re: Air Quality I have been following the debates regarding Grand Forks Air Quality and in particular, the Roxul permit discussion, with interest. With considerable trepidation I would like to offer a few comments to clarify some misconceptions and contribute to the quality of the decision making process. Of particular note in the correspondence that I have received are the following issues.
1. Canada Wide Standards
2. “Health Reference Level”
3. Use of 24 hour monitoring data versus one hour measures.
4. Cigarette smoking and equivalency of exposure
5. Socioeconomic considerations relative to industrial emission reductions.
I was privileged to have been actively involved in the Canada Wide Standards (CWS) process for particulate matter in the late 1990’s. Prior to the establishment of the CWS for PM, there was minimal knowledge about the potential health effects of fine particles. A great deal of scientific study has been undertaken over the past decade and the knowledge base has grown substantially.
One of the key issues we need to consider is that there does not appear to be a lower exposure point below which no health effects will be seen (often referred to as the NOEL). Built into the CWS process, and something that should be integral to airshed management planning and the objective of committees, is to continuously improve the quality of the air in the community.
The current process for revising the operating permit for Roxul has become a community focal point for improving air quality in the Grand Forks area. Such dialogue can be very constructive for a community, but can also be divisive. Unresolved conflicts can contribute to negative community wellbeing, and we have a role in facilitating an acceptable community solution.
While the CWS process established an air quality monitoring objective, such an objective was set as a reasonable and achievable step in improving air quality. The objectives and progress were scheduled to be revisited in 2009 and some work is already beginning on the evaluation of the objective. Just as importantly, many jurisdictions are reporting reductions in mean particulate matter measures and fewer days above the CWS. I would be interested in reviewing what information exists in Grand Forks.
Page 1 or 2
Memo to Ingo Frankfurt re Air Quality June 29, 2007
There are some very key points related to the CWS levels. While they are a reasonable objective to ensure levels are being met, they should not be interpreted as health protective. The work done in preparation for reviewing the Roxul permit and the proposed upgrades reflects the positive impact on the ambient air quality monitoring in the community. The target of using 4 ug/m3 in the approportion modeling is a conservative target given the previous measured attributions in the community. Albeit that IH has raised concerns about the use of the appropriation modeling as a decision tool, the approach used in the Roxul permit discussions is actually consistent with continuous air quality improvement and should achieve about 2 ug/m3.
Within the CWS process, but not normally considered accepted in the health community, is a terminology of a “reference level”. Reference levels are set as a level above which impacts on health and the environment would be expected (but does not preclude impacts below such levels). The reference level can be established for a variety of reasons, including various measures of health, vegetation impacts, other materials or visibility. The reference level for particulate matter is based on a health outcome, but would be incorrectly referred to as a “Health Reference Level”. The reference levels for air quality objectives were set and are used as cutpoint criteria for the old air quality index (AQI). It is notable that no province in Canada uses either of the particulate matter reference levels in the formulation of their air quality index and some have used the CWS levels for their criteria.
The Canada Wide Standards are based on 24 hour monitoring, since this was the technology available when the CWS were set and mirrored other air quality measures. Given diurnal variations it is not appropriate to equate one hour measurements with the CWS, although I realize this is frequently the trend. Over the past few years there have been a variety of recommended factors for attempting to convert shorter monitoring periods to a 24 hour monitoring value.
Reference is made in a letter to the editor about 30 ug/m3 of PM2.5 being the equivalent of smoking a pack of cigarettes per day. This statement is not correct and is taken out of context. The guidelines refer to that the average indoor air PM2.5 concentration where a pack of cigarettes a day is smoked. This is a very different concept from what is referred to in the letter to the editor. Both poorer air quality and smoking cause health problems. The issue of indoor versus outdoor air exposure is important but not relevant in the population based studies of health impacts (where outdoor ambient air quality measurements are used).
Finally, and what I view as the most challenging of the issues. The best measure of the health of the population of a community is its economic vitality. While it should be expected that reasonable efforts are made to improve air quality, these must be balanced with sustainable economic endeavours. The balance between technology investment and community environmental quality is something that requires constructive and informed local community debate. We are challenged to sustain existing industrial operators that have the potential to contribute to poorer air quality, while working with these industries to reduce their impacts and remain viable businesses. Ethical business practices and environmental stewardship should be acknowledged and commended where this occurs.
I hope these comments are of value to you in fostering a constructive discussion that leads to an improvement of the health of the population of Grand Forks through ensuring better air quality and ensuring a robust economy.