PSSG: Session Round 1

Location:

Edson

Date:

June 26, 2000

Committee Reps:

Gerry Desorcy
Paul Jackson
Tim Lambert
Frank George
Judith Bugg
Brian Winter
Cindy Miller Reade
David Spink
Ron Wolsey

Number of Participants:

44*

Other Locations:

June 8 Millarville
June 8 Vulcan
June 9 Pincher Creek
June 19 Red Deer
June 20 Drayton Valley
June 21 Rocky Mtn. House
June 22 Sundre
June 24 Grande Prairie
June 26 Edson
June 27 Hinton
June 28 Leduc
June 29 Calgary

Summary Aboriginal

Summary Response Forms

Summary Written Forms

Session Overview:

The daylong session in Edson was extremely successful, with more members of the public participating in the Discussion Sessions than in any other location. Key and consistent issues that were presented involved: (1) issues surrounding the EUB's approach and effectiveness related to regulations, monitoring and enforcement (2) concerns about the negative impact of sour gas emissions on human, animal and environmental health, and (3) communication challenges between the public and industry.

Prevention, Policy and Jurisdiction

Some of the Edson participants believe that the EUB is not effective and does not adequately represent the interests of the public because of it's affiliation with industry and government. A few individuals suggested that because of the EUB's relationship with industry and government, economic matters are given more consideration than human, animal and environmental health.

The need for improved communication between the public and the EUB was mentioned by a few individuals in Edson. A few participants indicated that the EUB is understaffed and as such, they cannot regulate effectively and response time is slow.

A few people at the discussion session expressed concerns about the degree of sour gas facility development in populated area or recreation use areas, suggesting that development priority should be given to unpopulated areas.

A few participants indicated that bigger companies have a better record related to meeting regulations and communication with the public than smaller companies. One individual suggested that companies with a poor record should not receive licences. Another suggested that difficult companies should be audited (without warning) more regularly.

Several individuals in Edson suggested that the EUB should implement stricter regulations (especially related to air and water quality), should conduct more monitoring, should fulfil a 'policing' function and more rigorously enforce regulations. Specific references were made regarding more effective monitoring of night flaring, monitoring during a variety of climatic conditions and more monitoring of abandoned and older sites and pipelines. Self-regulation was identified as ineffective by a few participants.

Some participants mentioned concerns related to flaring and suggested that alternatives to flaring (primarily incineration) should be implemented. One individual suggested that incinerators should be mandatory for all new development.

Event Consequence Management

Several of the participants in the Edson session mentioned the need for more testing and monitoring of the health effects related to sour gas emissions. A few individuals indicated that all policies should make safety and environmental friendliness the first priority. One individual suggested that there should be zero tolerance for pollution.

Several participants expressed concerns about the relationship between human and animal health and long term exposure to emission. Individuals offered accounts of personal health issues that they attribute to sour gas emissions. Examples of these include: nose bleeds, auto immune deficiencies, premature births, asthma and allergies. In addition, a few participants provided examples of negative health impacts on livestock. One individual indicated that there has been a decrease in wildlife and fish stocks in the area that correlates with the increase in sour gas activity.

Some of the participants in Edson indicated that the stress and mental anguish associated with long-standing worry about the negative impacts of sour gas is an issue.

One participant suggested that there has not been sufficient risk and hazard assessment related to flaring and the potential for forest fires. Another indicated that risk and hazard assessment is not valid because it does not include long term health effects.

Several of the Edson participants had issues with setback distances, indicated that setback distances are not big enough. It was suggested that rather than an arbitrary radius, setback distances should also consider topography and climate. A few individuals suggested, in an effort to not lose land with setbacks, that corridors be established in populated areas.

There was a range of concerns related to ERPs. Some participants indicated that the ERPs are inadequate because they do not consider animals. A few identified concerns about the effectiveness of the ERPs because they do not detail evacuation of children from schools and because of an inability to notify and evacuate individuals working in the fields. One individual expressed concern about the hospital's ability to handle several knock down victims at one time. Solutions offered included: better communication with the companies and more participation by the public in the development of the ERPs.

A few Edson participants stated that more research related to long term health effects and flare emissions is required.

Communication and Compensation

Several of the participants identified challenging communications with industry as an issue. Some suggested that company employees had treated them poorly, with disrespect, others indicated that companies had not kept promises or had not provided accurate or timely information. A few of the participants stated that this has resulted in a climate of mistrust between industry and the public.

A few people in Edson said that industry was too large to fight and intimidated the public. A few others said that the public had blind faith in the industry and are not aware of the dangers or issues surrounding sour gas.

A few individuals in Edson indicated that two-way communications with the EUB is not satisfactory and that the EUB is sometimes vague and unresponsive. It was suggested that this has diminished trust in the EUB.

A few participants relayed positive experiences with companies and indicated that they are satisfied with the level of communication.

The lack of public knowledge and awareness about sour gas issues was identified as a concern by a few Edson participants. A few suggested that the public does not know where to go to receive fair and accurate information and that the lack of information is frustrating. A few others indicated that the public does not understand how they can have input into the decision making process.

Some participants expressed dissatisfaction with compensation, providing a variety of personal accounts where compensation from the companies has been difficult to receive and/or inadequate.

* Several participants indicated that they were acting as representatives for larger groups and/or organizations.

	Location:	Edson
	Date:	June 26, 2000
	Committee Reps:	Gerry Desorcy Paul Jackson Tim Lambert Frank George Judith Bugg Brian Winter Cindy Miller Reade David Spink Ron Wolsey
	Number of Participants:	44*

Other Locations: June 8 Millarville June 8 Vulcan June 9 Pincher Creek June 19 Red Deer June 20 Drayton Valley June 21 Rocky Mtn. House June 22 Sundre June 24 Grande Prairie June 26 Edson June 27 Hinton June 28 Leduc June 29 Calgary Summary Aboriginal Summary Response Forms Summary Written Forms	Session Overview: The daylong session in Edson was extremely successful, with more members of the public participating in the Discussion Sessions than in any other location. Key and consistent issues that were presented involved: (1) issues surrounding the EUB's approach and effectiveness related to regulations, monitoring and enforcement (2) concerns about the negative impact of sour gas emissions on human, animal and environmental health, and (3) communication challenges between the public and industry. Prevention, Policy and Jurisdiction Some of the Edson participants believe that the EUB is not effective and does not adequately represent the interests of the public because of it's affiliation with industry and government. A few individuals suggested that because of the EUB's relationship with industry and government, economic matters are given more consideration than human, animal and environmental health. The need for improved communication between the public and the EUB was mentioned by a few individuals in Edson. A few participants indicated that the EUB is understaffed and as such, they cannot regulate effectively and response time is slow. A few people at the discussion session expressed concerns about the degree of sour gas facility development in populated area or recreation use areas, suggesting that development priority should be given to unpopulated areas. A few participants indicated that bigger companies have a better record related to meeting regulations and communication with the public than smaller companies. One individual suggested that companies with a poor record should not receive licences. Another suggested that difficult companies should be audited (without warning) more regularly. Several individuals in Edson suggested that the EUB should implement stricter regulations (especially related to air and water quality), should conduct more monitoring, should fulfil a 'policing' function and more rigorously enforce regulations. Specific references were made regarding more effective monitoring of night flaring, monitoring during a variety of climatic conditions and more monitoring of abandoned and older sites and pipelines. Self-regulation was identified as ineffective by a few participants. Some participants mentioned concerns related to flaring and suggested that alternatives to flaring (primarily incineration) should be implemented. One individual suggested that incinerators should be mandatory for all new development. Event Consequence Management Several of the participants in the Edson session mentioned the need for more testing and monitoring of the health effects related to sour gas emissions. A few individuals indicated that all policies should make safety and environmental friendliness the first priority. One individual suggested that there should be zero tolerance for pollution. Several participants expressed concerns about the relationship between human and animal health and long term exposure to emission. Individuals offered accounts of personal health issues that they attribute to sour gas emissions. Examples of these include: nose bleeds, auto immune deficiencies, premature births, asthma and allergies. In addition, a few participants provided examples of negative health impacts on livestock. One individual indicated that there has been a decrease in wildlife and fish stocks in the area that correlates with the increase in sour gas activity. Some of the participants in Edson indicated that the stress and mental anguish associated with long-standing worry about the negative impacts of sour gas is an issue. One participant suggested that there has not been sufficient risk and hazard assessment related to flaring and the potential for forest fires. Another indicated that risk and hazard assessment is not valid because it does not include long term health effects. Several of the Edson participants had issues with setback distances, indicated that setback distances are not big enough. It was suggested that rather than an arbitrary radius, setback distances should also consider topography and climate. A few individuals suggested, in an effort to not lose land with setbacks, that corridors be established in populated areas. There was a range of concerns related to ERPs. Some participants indicated that the ERPs are inadequate because they do not consider animals. A few identified concerns about the effectiveness of the ERPs because they do not detail evacuation of children from schools and because of an inability to notify and evacuate individuals working in the fields. One individual expressed concern about the hospital's ability to handle several knock down victims at one time. Solutions offered included: better communication with the companies and more participation by the public in the development of the ERPs. A few Edson participants stated that more research related to long term health effects and flare emissions is required. Communication and Compensation Several of the participants identified challenging communications with industry as an issue. Some suggested that company employees had treated them poorly, with disrespect, others indicated that companies had not kept promises or had not provided accurate or timely information. A few of the participants stated that this has resulted in a climate of mistrust between industry and the public. A few people in Edson said that industry was too large to fight and intimidated the public. A few others said that the public had blind faith in the industry and are not aware of the dangers or issues surrounding sour gas. A few individuals in Edson indicated that two-way communications with the EUB is not satisfactory and that the EUB is sometimes vague and unresponsive. It was suggested that this has diminished trust in the EUB. A few participants relayed positive experiences with companies and indicated that they are satisfied with the level of communication. The lack of public knowledge and awareness about sour gas issues was identified as a concern by a few Edson participants. A few suggested that the public does not know where to go to receive fair and accurate information and that the lack of information is frustrating. A few others indicated that the public does not understand how they can have input into the decision making process. Some participants expressed dissatisfaction with compensation, providing a variety of personal accounts where compensation from the companies has been difficult to receive and/or inadequate. * Several participants indicated that they were acting as representatives for larger groups and/or organizations.