Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image
PARC meeting minutes March 15, 2006
Attendance
Board members present
Chris Kirby – PARC Board Administrator
Dale Mitchell – ODA Co-Chair
Michael Heumann – DHS Co-Chair
Chris Kuenzi – OSFM
Brad Knotts – ODF
Gene Foster – DEQ
Garnet Cooke – OR/OSHA
Sandy Giffin – OHSU/Poison Control

Board members absent
Richard Kepler – ODF&W
Consultants present
Dr. Dan Sudakin - OSU
Dr. Jeff Jenkins - OSU
Kaci Agle – ODA, PARC
Dr. Fred Berman – CROET
Joan Rothlein – CROET
Lauren Slusser - OSPH

Introductions
  1. All present were introduced. Called to order: 9:05 am. Lauren Slusser provided an expanded introduction, noting that she was recently hired as the Pesticide Program Coordinator within the EOE  office of Oregon State Public Health.
  2. Minutes from the January 18, 2006 meeting were made available during the meeting.
  3. Heumann suggested that Agle develop a list of the regular attendees so that they can simply check a box when they are in attendance, rather than repeat their contact information each time. Agle agreed to develop the “check-list.”

Old Business
  1. Update on securing a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with PARC Member Agencies: Chris Kirby provided this update, saying that all member agencies have either completed the process, or they have a version of the MOA in their possession with his signature, ready for theirs.
  2. TOSC / Dallas Community Workgroup Michael Heumann said that he spoke with Michael Fernandez, of TOSC (Technical Outreach Services for Communities)) recently. He said that a key community member cancelled the meeting she had scheduled with TOSC staff, partly because of bad weather (she was concerned that older community members would not come out in the winter) and partly in protest of the decision not to perform a community-wide health-related survey.
  3. Publications
    1. Resource list for support staff with contacts for PARC Member Agencies – Agle reminded PARC Board members about this resource and asked how it is being used. Members were not aware of its use. Agle encouraged members to modify the document as needed for their agency, and put it to use by providing it to support staff.
    2. Pesticide Issues… who should you call? – Agle presented this poster-type publication to replace the old “Pesticide Resources” poster, which incorporated comments from the January PARC Board meeting. Agle discussed her research regarding Tyvek paper, saying that the actual document would cost about $0.25 each. Due to the cost, PARC administration had chosen to print on card-stock (closer to $0.10 each) instead. OERS staff approved the final version of the poster, noting their contact information at the bottom. Michael Heumann suggested that each PARC Board representative visit the PARC website, print the poster and ask around their offices in order to determine how many could be distributed. When determined, copies are available from Kaci Agle upon request! Heumann asked about translating the poster into Spanish, and offered to review the spanish version when it becomes available. Garnet Cooke said that OR-OSHA would also be happy to review the Spanish version.
  4. Referral Criteria Agle provided an update, saying that only one agency had yet to provide input, ODF&W. Agle said she hoped to finalize the document before the next PARC Board meeting; expect to see it in your email box!
  5. PARC Case Classification System The Board reviewed the procedural questions that had been under review at the end of the last PARC Board meeting (see page 5 of 1/18/06 minutes).
    1. If a case is referred to OSPH by PARC, then OSPH may provide details to PARC, even without permission from the reporter. This is according to a new determination from the Assistant Attorney General, Shannon O’Fallon.
    2. Heumann said that Lauren Slusser has been working on a form that she will use to transfer case-related data to PARC (Agle) with a standardized set of data points, and standardized look.
    3. Mitchell said that tracking incident reports would be important in order to identify trends.
    4. On the matter of grouping affected entities the group discussed adding this bold text to the first page of the PARC Case Classification Criteria: “When multiple entities inside one of those categories (human, animal and environmental) are impacted in a single PARC case (i.e. group of humans, school of fish, multiple waterways), groups of similarly affected and similarly exposed parties will be classified separately.”
    5. Heumann and Rothlein said they felt it was important to design the PARC database so that it could capture data regarding each individual, in addition to characterizing groups. Individual data, especially regarding humans, should be considered very important.
    6. Jeff Jenkins suggested adding a narrative field to explain grouping decisions.
    7. Gene Foster suggested that we classify all humans individually.
    8. Garnet Cooke asked, what if people performed different decontamination procedures and suffered similar effects?
    9. Agle argued that there would likely be a low number of group incidents.
    10. Heumann said we should try it this way, and work with it over time. Moving on, the group looked at page 2 of the PARC Case Classification criteria, and made suggestions.
    11. Heumann suggested that “active ingredient” be replaced with “pesticide formulation.” Agle said that finding information about the toxicology of formulations, including the contents of formulations, can be difficult compared to the active ingredient. Jenkins said that formulations are evaluated in terms of toxicity, in order to determine the signal word. Agle said it would be difficult to determine whether symptoms were consistent with a signal word (Caution, Warning, Danger). Garnet Cooke asked if we should consider the diluted product, such as Vapam, which behaves differently when diluted. The group agreed to replace “active ingredient” with “pesticide formulation” in the document.
    12. Dr. Sudakin addressed the footnote to “Probable” criteria. He said that the opinion of a qualified health care provider should not serve as a substitute for an “obvious and clearly documented exposure pathway”, but it could be considered in addition to that basic criteria. The group agreed, and Agle agreed to make the change.
    13. Moving on, the group looked at page 4 of the PARC Case Classification criteria, and made suggestions.
    14. Jenkins referred to the Decision criteria for groundwater, surface water and drinking water detections. He said that maximum contaminant levels are not based on health, and USGS would be publishing health-based levels next month! Agle said these criteria were drawn from the Code of Federal Regulations (%) CFR Ch. 1 159.184, and they’re not perfect. The group agreed to revisit these criteria when health-based numbers are available.
    15. Jenkins asked, “What about cancer?” Agle discussed the policy for chronic effects to be tracked through the incident report process. See the PARC Case definition.
  6. Old PARC cases – updates
    1. The Florence Case: Dale Mitchell said that ODA and EPA are working to evaluate the legal ramifications of the case. PARC has finished its review and classification of the case. A press release regarding PARC’s determination is planned for next Tuesday, March 21. Watch for a copy in your email box.
    2. The Irrigon Case: The case was classified according to the PARC Case classification criteria- using the “Groundwater, surface water and drinking water detections” portion. Agle discussed classifying the tree damage (when that portion of ODA’s investigation is complete) according to the criteria “For wildlife, other non-target organisms.” Gene Foster recommended adding the word “plants” to that list. Agle asked if every drift case would then be considered a PARC case? Would it be a beneficial use of state resources to try to determine the cause of plant damage, every time plant damage is reported to ODA? Agle asked for guidance from the Board. Agle suggested that the nature of the claim should be the deciding factor. For example, if “environmental damage” is claimed, that would be a PARC case. If “property damage” is claimed, that would not be a PARC Case.
    3. AZM & Packing Houses (Azinphos-methyl): Gene Foster said that data is back from the lab, and they have shared it with the fruit packing houses. They are finding AZM in effluents from the packing houses (15-18 µg/L) and in streams. The LC50 for AZM in fish (what kind?) is 1-2 µg/L. Jeff Jenkins said there was not much dilution going on in small streams. Dick Nicols has been talking about trying to find dollars to help packing houses re-tool to reduce effluent discharge. Anyone with funding ideas should contact him! Dr. Kim Anderson and Dr. Jeff Jenkins conducting monthly monitoring through the fall at 20 locations, and found levels of AZM around 20 ppb, which is above the drinking water advisory level. A meeting is planned between DEQ and industry (packing house) representatives on March 29. Apparently, word is spreading. Medford packing plants have started to discharge effluent through sewage treatment plants. Garnet Cooke said she was interested in worker exposure issues in the packing plants, but Jenkins said it would be wise to do a preliminary assessment of exposure potential before instigating a large project. Kevin Masterson is new at DEQ, and he’s wondering about ways to “keep it on the farm,” perhaps by washing the fruit on-site.
    4. Pudding River watershed program: Gene Foster said that the collection event for old pesticides went very well, and others around the state (Milton-Freewater, etc.) are interested in conducting similar events. Apparently OAN (Oregon Association of Nurseries) has joined the discussion, and may provide funding for future event(s)?

New business
  1. ODA-PD: 2 cases, 3 incident reports. Agle provided a hand-out with a brief paragraph describing each situation. The group reviewed each scenario. Dale Mitchell said that plans are in place to treat Diamond Lake with rotenone this fall to eradicate an invasive chub. ODA will be there to perform an observation, and ODA staff are working with the applicators now in order to get the appropriate licensing. Fourteen boats will be on the lake, and about 40 individuals will become licensed.
  2. OSPH: 11 incident reports. One report was referred to OSPH by PARC. Michael Heumann provided an update about a large application planned by ODA near The Dalles; approximately 900 acres will be treated in order to eradicate a wood-boring beetle. Dave Stone (toxicologist with OSPH) will be there. Margo Barnett was asked to create some educational materials to communicate the risk. The active ingredient in the product is apparently a probable human carcinogen.
  3. ODF: Brad Knotts said that Jan Wroncy had recently complained about small fertilizer bits in a fish-bearing stream (not pesticide-related). In addition, he mentioned a reporter from the Eugene Weekly who had been making inquiries about forest practices. Michael Heumann said that he had also spoken with her, for over an hour, and Chris Kirby said he had also spoken with her. Watch for an article from Kera Abraham in the Eugene Weekly (note: see “Pitchfork Rebellion” on next month’s agenda.) Michael Heumann indicated that we should be providing a consistent message- “If you plan to drink surface water, have it tested often!”
  4. Florence Case Recommendations: Discussion tabled until next time. Mitchell said he thought it would be beneficial to wait on this item, as things may change as events unfold over the next month.