THUNDER BAY REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN (RAP) Public Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting June 1, 2016 – 7 p.m. Richardson International Grain Terminal 303 Shipyard Road, Thunder Bay ON ATTENDANCE Jim Bailey – Lakehead University (LU) Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Office Britt Bailey – LU student Frank Edgson – Thunder Bay Public Advisory Committee (PAC), Co-chair Jean Hall-Armstrong – Thunder Bay PAC, Co-chair Sara Cockhill – LU student Claudia Dias – ECCC Gerry Heinrichs – Richardson International Grain Elevator Dave Lang – Thunder Bay Field Naturalists Mark McMaster – Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) John Parks – Damsa Integrative Resources Inc. Samuel Pegg – LU RAP Office Bruce Pritchard – Thunder Bay PAC Lak Rappon – Public Manit Rappon – Lakehead University, Chemistry Department Pamela Rubenick – Thunder Bay Field Naturalists Steve Rubenick – Thunder Bay Field Naturalists Kathy Sakamoto – Thunder Bay PAC Kirsti Salmi – LU RAP Office Dave Schnell – Public Jan Schnell – Public Mark Serediak – Thunder Bay PAC Brent Straughan – LU student Carl Taylor – ERCO Worldwide Michelle Willows – EcoDivers, Thunder Bay PAC Nathan Wilson – LU student 1 INTRODUCTIONS F. Edgson called the meeting to order and thanked G. Heinrichs for allowing PAC use of the boardroom at Richardson International Grain Elevator. F. Edgson called for introductions from meeting attendees. REVIEW OF MINUTES OF MARCH 23, 2016 Meeting minutes of the March 23rd PAC meeting were reviewed. No errors or omissions were noted. PRESENTATION ON LIVER TUMOUR INCIDENCE IN WHITE SUCKERS FROM THE THUNDER BAY AOC – DR. MARK MCMASTER, ECCC. M. McMaster presented his findings on the status of the RAP beneficial use impairment (BUI) for fish tumours and other deformities in the Thunder Bay Area of Concern (AOC). He explained the rationale for using white suckers for the research: they are bottom-feeding fish which ingest some sediment, potentially contaminated with effluent. He went over the protocols involved in the research, the history of research done for this BUI in Thunder Bay, and what the most recent findings were from his study in August 2013. M. McMaster stated that 1 white sucker in 100 studied from the Thunder Bay AOC had a tumour or deformity. He contrasted this finding for context: the average AOC shows 9 in 100 fish have a tumour or deformity. Dr. Gary Marty concluded that chronic toxin exposure is not significantly affecting liver morphology of fish populations in the Thunder Bay AOC. M. McMaster’s presentation can be accessed here. M. McMaster opened asked for questions and comments. G. Heinrichs referred to the three sets of testing done in the AOC and asked if there would be another round in future. M. McMaster said that the Thunder Bay RAP Team decides on further testing vs. redesignating the BUI as “not impaired” – he is not involved in the decision-making. F. Edgson asked about the percentage of contaminated fish found in the previous study, and asked if it was compared with other AOCS. M. McMaster reiterated that 1 fish out of 100 was found to have a liver tumour or deficiency in the 2013 study. B. Schnell asked if there had been improvements in effluent quality. M. McMaster stated tumour rates haven’t changed, so even if effluent quality has changed (and acknowledged that this might be the case), it hasn’t affected fish tumour rates. M. McMaster stated some percentages of tumour rates from other AOCs for comparison. St. Marys AOC has fish tumour and deformity rates at 12%, Hamilton Harbour 8%. In the United States he cited 20-30% tumour rates. These rates went 2 down because sediment was covered, spiked when dredging was done, and then eventually settled again. A participant asked if M. McMaster could explain what a BUI is. M. McMaster explained that BUI referred to impaired use of a specific item or area, for example a beach where contamination prevents swimming or an activity or use like fishing hampered by contamination, precluding eating of the catch or reducing the number of meals of fish consumed A participant asked if any specific chemicals were potential cause for tumours. M. McMaster listed PAHs (polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons), PCBS, and pH levels. J. Bailey asked if M. McMaster would make a recommendation about BUI redesignation based on his findings. M. McMaster said he would make no recommendation. He said he is going to publish his findings and make revisions comparing the Thunder Bay and St Mary’s River AOCs. M. McMaster said he was comfortable stating that 2% is not a high incidence rate for tumours compared to some other AOCs at 12%. A participant asked if any white sucker samples were taken from the North Harbour site. M. McMaster said no. Discussion turned to concerns about mobility of fish and the fact that they might not reside for long periods of time in one location, like North Harbour, even noting that white sucker don’t usually move more than about 3 miles. M. McMaster said that pulp and paper production is a big problem for fish exposed to effluent when they are eating and developing adult tissue. He said that it wasn’t possible to say if suckers were located specifically in North Harbour over the longterm. ACTION ITEM #1 OF JUNE 1ST/16: M. McMaster to check if livers from his reproductive study have been retained and whether they could be studied for the effects of mercury. M. McMaster to inform J. Bailey if such study can proceed. A participant asked if it might be possible to avoid killing fish while carrying out research and whether blood, urine or other sampling could be carried out rather than killing fish. M. McMaster replied that work in the St. Marys River Area of Concern by John Bauman of Lake Superior State University in Sault St. Marie, Michigan had turned in this direction and included blood and genetic testing. F. Edgson said that a decision as to whether to support redesignation of this BUI to “not impaired” would be made after receipt of M. McMaster’s written report on fish tumours and other deformities. F. Edson thanked M. McMaster for his presentation. 10’ BREAK 3 STATUS OF BENEFICIAL USE IMPAIRMENTS (BUI) AND REDESIGNATION F. Edgson called the meeting back to order and asked J. Bailey to provide an update on Thunder Bay AOC BUIs. J. Bailey provided information about the status of 5 BUIs pending redesignation. • Aesthetics (slicks, scums, odors on harbour waters.) – LU is currently undertaking work to better quantify aesthetic conditions across the harbour and in the lower Kam River. A report on this work will be made to the PAC in the fall. The PAC has already formalized support for redesignating this BUI to “not impaired.” • Phytoplankton – Tara George of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) presented information to the PAC on current status at their January 20, 2016 meeting. The PAC supported redesignation to “not impaired” and RAP government agencies are moving this BUI through the process of redesignation. • Bird and animal deformities – Doug Crump of ECCC presented information to the PAC on current status at their March 23rd, 2016 meeting. The PAC will make a decision on redesignation after receiving the written report from ECCC. • Fish tumours – M. McMaster of ECCC presented information to the PAC on current status at the present meeting (June 1, 2016). The PAC will make a decision on redesignation after receiving the written report from ECCC. • Fish populations – A presentation by a representative of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources is planned for a fall meeting of the PAC. The PAC can recommend redesignation to “not impaired”, or otherwise, upon receipt of this information. NEXT STEPS FOR NORTH HARBOUR F. Edgson asked if there were responses to the PAC letter to the federal and provincial ministries of the environment, the federal Minister of Transport and the Thunder Bay Port Authority. J. Bailey replied that there had been responses from all but the Thunder Bay Port Authority. He said these responses had been distributed to PAC members and were also available on the infosuperior website. J. Hall-Armstrong said committee members were frustrated by the lack of action. She said various options had been selected for North Harbour cleanup but that well over a year had passed with no indication whatsoever as to what option had been chosen, if any. Discussion turned to lack of response from the Port Authority. J. Hall-Armstrong pointed to a line in the letter received on May 17th from Catherine McKenna, the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change, which states that, “the 4 contaminated sediments are located on federally owned bodies of water administered by the Thunder Bay Port Authority.” J. Bailey reported that he had received a call from the Port Authority asking that he inform the PAC that the Port Authority is only an observer on the North Harbour steering committee and that a response to the PAC letter would be forthcoming from the Port Authority after their June board meeting. Frank Edgson pointed out that North Harbour was not on the federal list of contaminated sites and that research on this matter indicated that the Port Authority was required to ensure North Harbour was added to the list, thereby making it eligible for federal cleanup funding. C. Dias informed PAC members that representatives of ECCC and Transport Canada would be meeting to discuss North Harbour. G. Heinrich told PAC members he would be having breakfast with a member of the board of the Thunder Bay Port Authority. He said he would discuss the matter of North Harbour with this individual and report back to the PAC. ACTION ITEM #2 OF JUNE 1ST/2016: G. Heinrich to speak with Port Authority board member about North Harbour and report back to the PAC. F. Edgson called for a PAC letter to clarify responsibility for North Harbour among the Port Authority and government agencies. ACTION ITEM #3 OF JUNE 1ST/2016: A letter to be sent to the federal Environment and Tranport ministers, as well as the Port Authority, copying MP Patti Hajdu, asking for clarification as to which agency, agencies and/or authority is responsible for North Harbour cleanup. J. Hall Armstrong said she would like C. Dias to ask senior ECCC management for a timeline for North Harbour cleanup. She said the following response was not acceptable, ‘no timeline because the issue is too complex’. ACTION ITEM #4 OF JUNE 1ST/2016: C. Dias to ask senior ECCC management for a timeline for North Harbour cleanup and to provide this information to the PAC. M. McMaster said Randle Reef in Hamilton Harbour provided a measure of comparison to North Harbour. He said the project was well underway but had taken many years before being started. He said cooperation between various government agencies, industry and the Port Authority had been critical for this major project. He suggested the PAC be provided with information about the Hamilton Harbour project, as such information could be very useful in the North Harbour situation as well. 5 ACTION ITEM #5 OF JUNE 1ST/2016: Contact the Hamilton Harbour RAP and request a presentation to the Thunder Bay PAC about the Randle Reef project, seeking information about cleanup method, challenges, cooperation and direction forward. J. Hall-Armstrong asked for an overview of the outcomes of the meeting between ECCC and Transport Canada, once the meeting has taken place. ACTION ITEM #6 OF JUNE 1ST/2016: C. Dias to request an overview of the outcomes of the meeting between ECCC and Transport Canada, once this meeting has taken place. ELECTION J. Bailey asked if anyone would like to volunteer for the position of PAC chair or shared co-chair. Frank Edgson and Jean Hall-Armstrong said they welcomed other PAC members to take on these positions. No PAC members came forward to take on the position of chair or co-chair. J. Bailey asked if there was support for F. Edgson and J. Hall-Armstrong to continue as chairs. Support for F. Edgson and J. HallArmstrong to continue as co-chairs was unanimous and they agreed to continue in these positions. PAC MEDIA REPRESENTATIVE C. Taylor agreed to become the PAC media representative, that is to provide PAC perspective to the media about RAP matters, when such input is sought. OUTREACH K Salmi provided an overview of recent RAP outreach activities, the www.infosuperior.com website and associated social media activity. RICHARDSON INTERNATIONAL INC. G. Heinrich provided a brief overview of Richardson’s International Inc. and operation of the grain elevator in which the present meeting was taking place. ADOURNMENT F. Edgson adjourned the meeting at 9:08pm. Next meeting scheduled for October 12th, 2016. 6