The fate of Chemtura’s Responsible Care designation has become a flashpoint for tensions between the chemical company and the citizens’ group that watches over it.
The chair of Chemtura Public Advisory Committee (CPAC) says the company has failed to win renewal of its designation. Chemtura says there’s been no final decision, and accuses Dan Holt of breaching confidentiality in talking about the process.
Holt, who made the comments as part of a presentation last week to Woolwich council, was in council chambers Tuesday night to hear the company respond to his remarks.
Dwight Este, regional environment, health, safety and security manager, said he was dismayed Holt had not respected the confidentiality of the process, arguing Chemtura is still awaiting a decision on the designation from the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada.
When a decision is reached, he added, the company would release the information.
“It’s our right and our responsibility to do so – not anyone else’s.”
Este also called for some changes to CPAC to “bring a sense of decorum” to its meetings.
The current process, allowing public input in the form of delegations at the start and comments at the end of the meetings often leads to a negative atmosphere, he said, noting the general public’s view of the company and its groundwater remediation efforts is nowhere near as pessimistic as that of CPAC members.
His comments about the decorum at meetings found some resonance with Coun. Mark Bauman, council’s representative on CPAC.
“At times it degrades to a level I’m not comfortable with,” he said of the level of discourse, stressing participants need to respect one another despite the differences of opinion.
Holt, however, was none too pleased with Este’s comments, emphatically denying any breach of confidentiality in a discussion after the meeting.
“There was no breach of confidence because there was/is no confidentiality agreement,” he said in a later email. “In July, 2011 when the Responsible Care team first met at Chemtura we were given a confidentiality agreement to sign, but we, the team members, objected to signing it and never did. I, as the chair of CPAC, represent CPAC, Woolwich council, and the residents of Elmira and I owe them truthful information regarding the process of cleaning up their aquifer, not something that has a spin to it. I have not nor do I intend to disclose any proprietary information.”
As part of the verification team, he said he stands by his statement the company did not pass muster.
“I am a member of the team that met with Chemtura for a week in July, 2011 and again this month. … My statements are based on firsthand knowledge. The decision at the conclusion of the meeting was final, as far as I was led to believe. If that decision is reversed in the future it will be in spite of my negative vote.”
Holt also took issue with some of the other points raised by Este, particularly comments about the negative atmosphere, noting that it’s simply a reflection of the public’s concerns about a lack of progress with efforts to clean Elmira’s contaminated groundwater.
