PAT McLEAN & SUSAN BRYANT HAVE WITHHELD CRUCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE PUBLIC

For three years plus I've been struggling with this issue. During that time I have repeatedly raised the question at public CPAC meetings asking for comments or feedback from Pat McLean, Chair of CPAC, to the public in regards to a crucial meeting held at the University of Waterloo. All during this time PRIVATE technical meetings were going on discussing these issues (DNAPL). I have also commented here in the Advocate over the last several months. Today I am posting an e-mail that I sent yesterday to five current CPAC members and to the media.

Dear "Tim": Background: The 1991 M.O.E. Control Order orders "removal of DNAPL as a contaminant source." The Control Order also specifically names the locations of this DNAPL (RPW 5, 6, 7, 8). RPW means retention ponds west. DNAPL is dense non aqueous phase liquid. Dense means it has a density greater than water (1.0) and thus sinks. Non aqueous phase means although it's a liquid it doesn't immediately or readily dissolve in water (groundwater). CPAC, unanimously passed a Motion approving the following document written by myself, Susan Bryant and Henry Regier: "Request for Action July 2003". This document requested/demanded source removal of contaminants most particularily DNAPL including the same locations as the M.O.E. Control Order had both named and ordered. Since 2003 however , without any credible conflicting or contrary evidence being presented, I detected a wavering on the part of Susan and Pat. In December 2006, Susan advised me of a meeting with Dr. John Cherry and Dr. Beth Parker at the University of Waterloo to discuss DNAPL. These two are literally world renowned researchers and leading edge authors on the subject, as is the University of Waterloo Groundwater Research Institute. I was invited, as for years I had authored numerous critiques of CRA's DNAPL technical drivel & babble . I did this on behalf of APT, CPAC's Soil & Water sub-committee and the Elmira EH-Team (Rich Clausi, Henry Regier, Esther Thur). The meeting was for January ? 2007. Myself, Susan , Pat McLean and "independent" hydrogeologist, Wilf Ruland were invited. Wilf was a former student of Dr. Cherry and on numerous occasions Wilf had advised against removal, excavation or treatment of DNAPL which coincidentally has been Uniroyal's/CRA's position for years. I suspected ahead of time that I was being invited along in order to soften my position (and ostensibly CPAC's) on removal or destruction of DNAPL. Prior to the meeting Wilf made it clear that the professional opinion of Dr. Cherry and others years ago had been to let subsurface DNAPL lie, that attempted removal could be counter productive. WELL! Both Drs. Cherry and Parker made it absolutely clear that that position had been reversed through their efforts and research and that where at all possible, DNAPL should and must be removed from the subsurface. The Doctors provided us with numerous scholarly articles and reviews that they had authored in the last few years on the subject. Susan , Pat and Wilf all gave me these articles at the meeting as Wilf was too busy, Pat admitted then and now that she is technically incapable and Susan conceded my expertise. After the meeting on the way home (we drove together) those three were absolutely stunned by this reversal and I was ecstatic. I read all the articles and gave Susan regular updates as well as offerring them back to her for her perusal. She refused. OTHER THAN MYSELF, NOT A DAMNED WORD PUBLICLY TO CPAC OR ANYONE ELSE ABOUT THIS MEETING. Instead 8 months later Pat & Susan are demanding my resignation over my Appeal of an Ammonia Treatment Certificate of Approval. In hindsight that was a red herring . I was kicked off CPAC (with major help from Bill Strauss) AND kicked off the DNAPL technical committee and publicly at CPAC refused admittance to any meetings of the DNAPL technical committee. It is my belief that privately Pat, & Susan may have falsely advised CPAC members about this meeting at the U. of W. but publicly they won't say anything for fear I will publicly call them liars if they do so.
OD: The significance of this in regards to the overall cleanup of the Elmira Aquifer is incredible. There is subsurface DNAPL both on and off the Chemtura site and as long as it is unaddressed , we will never have drinking water from the Elmira Aquifer. The M.O.E.'s refusal to enforce their own Control Order is prima facie evidence of a "deal" and a coverup involving themselves and Chemtura.