Saturday, November 2, 2013

SURPRISES (NOT) DURING CHEMTURA'S GP1 & 2 "CLEANUP"



Last Thursday's Elmira Independent also carried this story "Remediation program complete on former waste pits". This story described extra contamination that was found in the south-east corner of Chemtura as they went about their "scraping" of surface contamination. Chemtura had advised CPAC that they were only going to remove the top .3 (1 foot) metre of contamination but this story indicates that they noticed several "stringers" of markedly darker soil one metre below ground surface. These "stringers" according to Gail Martin's story suggested "...threads of contamination that went deeper into the ground.". These "stringers" sound similar to terminology I've read describing NAPLS (non aqueous phase liquids) as "disconnected blobs or ganglia"). Therefore based on the decades these "stringers" have had to dissolve via infiltrating rainwater as well as by the very high water table in this area; the fact that they are still present decades later strongly indicates that they are very slow dissolving NAPLS whether LNAPL or DNAPL. One can almost bet money that Chemtura/CRA either didn't test them to discover their chemical makeup or in the alternative will simply advise CPAC that they didn't test them. While the removal of these "stringers" is a good thing the missed opportunity to determine if they are NAPLS and or if they contain DDT/Dioxins is unconscionable.

George Karlos, assistant director with the West Central Region of the M.O.E. also discussed further testing both upstream and downstream of Chemtura, in the Canagagigue Creek in regards to DDT. The even deadlier Dioxins seem to have fallen off the M.O.E.'s radar. While to date the sketchy and inadequate testing have found higher exceedances of DDT than Dioxins; nevertheless ignoring Dioxins is at everyone's peril. Is the plan to rediscover their importance after the next round of DDT testing and then go back yet another year later looking for them? Is it possible to drag this program out even longer and if so for what purpose? These questions and comments are what truly upset the M.O.E. and their partners in pollution, Chemtura; not my choice of words in so doing. People who focus on specific wording only are desperately trying to avoid the big picture ie. the message the author is sending regarding honesty, credibility, right and wrong.

2 comments:

  1. I just read the Elmira Independent article Remediation program complete on former waste pits. It has the intriguing sentence:

    The samples, tested in September, showed non-detectable readings of all forms of DDT, as well as dioxins and furans, with the exception of Octa-CDD, which was detected in small amounts.

    If the sample showed readings of the contaminants they are not "non-detectable", unless Chemtura and CRA are using a definition of "non-detectable" with which I am not familiar.

    Alan, do you know if this was an error by the Independent in reporting this story, or does this kind of language appear in the Chemtura and CRA reports regularly?

    --Bob.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob: Sorry I just spotted your comment now. CRA reports are routinely poorly written, unfactual and full of optimistic spoutings which they later qualify. I would like to review these so called samples and testing because Chemtura do NOT spend $3 Million to excavate non-detectable chemical contamination.

    ReplyDelete