From: John W. Morgan Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:49 PM To: Dan Fraser Cc: All Council; DIRECTORS; Janet Gnatiuk Subject: JAG Recommendations Dan I appreciate the work put in by the volunteers at the JAG over the last number of years leading to the Recommendations for cleanup which have been recently approved by the Round Table and provided to government. You may be aware of some significant issues which have arisen recently in the media and elsewhere with respect to the recommendations. In particular, there is some dispute about: a) whether incineration at the SERL incinerator is included or excluded as an option by the JAG recommendation. b) whether incineration at the Point Aconi power plant is included or excluded as an option by the JAG recommendation. c) whether encapsulation is included or excluded as an acceptable option (although not preferred) by the JAG recommendation. I do not want to prejudge what JAG's position may be on these important issues; however, it is important that government have an unequivocal understanding of the JAG's position on these issues. Can you please ensure that JAG reviews and clarifies these issues as soon as possible. Mayor John Morgan From: Dan Fraser Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:09 AM To: John W. Morgan Cc: All Council; DIRECTORS; Janet Gnatiuk; Barry McCallum; Germaine LeMoine; 'Francis Sirois'; 'Glenn Hanam' Subject: RE: JAG Recommendations Janet: In keeping with Mayor Morgan's request to forward his e-mail to all members of JAG, I ask that you forward this response to our membership please. Thank you. Your Worship: Thank you for the questions posed at your e-mail of Tuesday June 17, 2003. I regret that I have been unable to respond until now but the demands of preparing for the AGM, the Point Aconi engagements and other activities have taken up most of my time. In your e-mail of June 17th., you refer to disputes in the media and elsewhere about the JAG recommendation to our government partners concerning cleanup options. The JAG recommendation, you will recall is as follows: BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Joint Action Group recommends to its government partners that removal and destruction technologies be employed to clean up the Tar Ponds and Coke Ovens site. As a result, full and thorough consideration must be given to implementing the chain of feasible technologies embodied in Tar Ponds Cleanup Options 3 and 4, and Coke Ovens Cleanup Options 3 and 4 as presented in the workbooks and more fully detailed in the Remedial Action Evaluation Report. Options 3 and 4 make no mention of Incineration, so Incineration is not one of the recommended options. In response to your third issue, there is no mention of encapsulation in the JAG recommendation, so encapsulation is not a recommended option either. The second issue is more complex. Options 3 and 4 both include co-burning as part of the treatment train. To describe co-burning as incineration would be inaccurate. Incineration has been made a hot-button word by those who would prefer the clean-up drag on indefinitely. By equating co-burning with incineration, they hope to create a public outcry. These people have no interest in seeing the Tar Ponds cleaned up, and do not care how much damage they do to the social and economic fabric of CBRM in order to aggrandize themselves. As it happens, all of the acceptable options include co-burning in some form. This includes mixing a small percentage of the fuel manufactured from the sediments with a large quantity of conventional fuel. The additional release of contaminants to the environment using this method is usually below the level of detection by the most sensitive instruments we have today. Further, the JAG motion makes no mention of Point Aconi, or any other facility. Co-burning is done routinely in Europe and the U.S.A. If local industry cannot take advantage of this opportunity, itm is expected by JAG that it will go elsewhere. In relation to further discussions at JAG, I regret that we are unable to accommodate your suggestion. We have precious little time remaining to deal with the issues at Point Aconi, prepare to close down our office and wrap up our activities. In fact, I will have to call an extraordinary Roundtable meeting to deal with the dissolution of JAG if that is what the membership deems to be appropriate. In all fairness to JAG and CBRM, you have two senior members of staff who are on the Executive Committee of the Cost Share Agreement. At this time, the Executive Committee is very much involved with all of these issues. In that regard, Mr. Ryan and Mr. MacDonald should be carrying your message to the Executive Committee. In addition, I am sure as all of the various activities associated with our motion, the upcoming conversion of the motion into a project and the Canadian Environmental Assessment that will take place, will be of interest to the new community organization that will be put in place as our current partnership and MOU winds down. If there is anything I can do to assist in any way, I will be pleased to do my utmost to help. However, at the June 9th. Meeting with our government partners, it was made very clear, "get on with the business of closing down" since the MOU will terminate September 18th. Do not take on any new taskings with the exception of your community involvement commitments that have been made leading up to June 9th. I certainly hope that you understand my position and that of the other members who have sent you e-mail directly. All of the volunteers and staff of JAG have done yeomen's work on behalf of our community. Government at all levels wish to change direction and we accept that reality. I hope all the fantastic work and accomplishments of JAG will not be lost as the major cleanup must be carried out, and a strong community involvement with an equal partnership and strong voice is certainly required. Cheers, Dan From: John W. Morgan Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 9:22 AM To: Dan Fraser Cc: All Council; DIRECTORS; Janet Gnatiuk; Barry McCallum; Germaine LeMoine; 'Francis Sirois'; 'Glenn Hanam' Subject: RE: JAG Recommendations Dan I want to be clear that my request was directed to JAG not just yourself. My request was "Can you please ensure that JAG reviews and clarifies these issues as soon as possible." I am again requesting that the issues stated in my e-mail be clarified. JAG does have more than two months remaining in its mandate and the questions posed are the heart of what JAG was asked to do six years ago. It is important that the community and government understand for example whether JAG has concluded that the SERL facility or encapsulation are not acceptable remediation options (I am not prejudging the conclusion but I believe it is an important question to be answered before government makes its decision). It has been clear from public comments made by government representatives that they do not draw the inference that because JAG has "recommended co-burning" that therefore JAG has deemed encapsulation and the use of the SERL facility unacceptable. Stating something is "not recommended" is not the same as answering a much more relevant question of whether it is "acceptable". Mayor John Morgan From: Dan Fraser Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 10:01 AM To: John W. Morgan Cc: All Council; DIRECTORS; Janet Gnatiuk; Barry McCallum; Germaine LeMoine; 'Francis Sirois'; 'Glenn Hanam'; Bev MacDonald Subject: RE: JAG Recommendations Bev: Please forward to all members of JAG as soon as possible. I will be away on vacation for next two weeks and all responses I receive will be taken care of when I return. Your Worship: Your earlier e-mail and my response has been sent to all members of JAG. You did receive two separate responses, one from Francis Sirois and another from Frank Larade. This e-mail will also go out to all members. Your observation that your earlier request was directed to JAG and not myself is appreciated. However, I am authorized to respond on behalf of all members between meetings of Roundtable. In this case, your e-mail was out to all members and all had an opportunity to send me some information but, the only two that responded were Francis and Frank prior to my e-mail to you. I would also like to note that in this case, I am clear on what the majority of JAG members think about the situation and the motion we put forth to our three government partners. In fact, Vince Hall tried to satisfy some of your observations when he introduced a possible amendment to the JAG motion at the May 28 Roundtable meeting. His suggested amendment was: to add- "that we call upon the Government Partners to abide by the CCME Guidelines". He could not get a seconder for that "friendly amendment". The members of JAG are very aware of their mandate to determine what cleanup options are acceptable to our community. This has been carried out and the motion is now in the hands of three levels of government. Your government has two representatives on the Executive Committee that must deal with the motion. They now have and in fact always had more authority than JAG since they are a decision making body and we are an advisory committee. This committee determines where the money will be spent and in what priority. This e-mail will go to all JAG members. When we have our extraordinary meeting, your issue will be raised. In addition, when the members see your additional request and my response, they will certainly know that if they have comments, they will send them to me and I will include them in any other response. I regret that I cannot provide you with a different response at this time but, as you indicate in your e-mail, government will be making a decision. All three levels of government will make that decision. The citizens have spoken, JAG has sent government the motion, government now has some major decisions to make. What kind of a project will come out of the JAG motion, what cost, when does CEAA start the process and when will the major cleanup start. These are big items that require a great deal of knowledge, tenacity, overseeing and influence. I am sure the community organization that moves forward will take up that challenge with the same determination as the members of JAG have demonstrated thus far. Cheers, Dan |