MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2015 public TAG MEETING

O.K., O.K. so I can't resist criticizing the very first Statement titled "Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest". Firstly at least two TAG members have pecuniary interests and secondly the text after the title states: "All disclosures made by TAG members indicated that they had no pecuniary interests to declare and therefore that no conflicts of interest exist.". Really? So now pecuniary interests are the only possible conflicts of interest? Therefore why not make the direct declaration that each member does not have any conflicts of interest?

page 3-4: Dick Jackson clarified that the M.O.E. messed up in their presentation by having labelled some of their slides as floodplain samples. He has confirmed that all samples were from the sediments in the bottom of the Canagagigue Creek. He also stated that we can not assume that the contamination seen in 1995-96 is the same contamination that we are seeing now at Station 21 (New Jerusalem Rd.). This is due to the M.O.E. and Chemtura failing to measure suspended sediment hence we have no idea of the level of sediment transport. Once again the allegedly responsible parties have been measuring the wrong thing by measuring dissolved contaminants in water versus contaminants in the suspended sediments in the water.

page 4: Dr. Jackson advised that "The difference in numbers reflects the huge variability in organic matter in the sediments throughout the creek.". Dick also stated that "There are five or six samples at the location, but they were not taken on a vigorous grid pattern which is the way the protocol is written by CCME (Cnd. Council of Ministers) and other organizations.". Finally Dick states that the samples were taken from the wrong location namely on the outside bank of the creek versus the inside bank where the sediments would mostly have been deposited. WOW!

Dr. Dick Jackson on page 4 also stated as I indicated a few weeks ago that the creek should be both posted with signs and fenced off. He does not know why the M.O.E. included two other contaminated sites with allegedly higher concentrations of Dioxins. Dick stated that they are both poor comparisons when one compares the ratio of the surface area of sediment to the volume of water available in the creek. Lastly Dick noted how high the organic carbon is at 9% which he referred to as the glue that holds hydrophobic compounds such as DDT, Dioxins and Furans.

Dr. Jackson has made it very clear that despite testing being done both twenty years ago and over the last few years we do not have remotely enough data to know where we need to remediate.

page 6: Dr. Jackson has indicated that the huge variabilty in creek flow is the cause of erosion of creekbanks and sediment transport. Again in referencing a report on clams and leeches Dr. Jackson is at a loss as to why CRA has not conducted suspended sediment sampling. I am beginning to wonder if Dr. Jackson's repeated comments that he does not know why the various authorities have not done what they should have is a euphemism for something harsher.

page 7: Susan Bryant indicated that the argument with how CRA has conducted their sampling has gone on for years. She referenced their procedure of spinning the sample in order to remove suspended sediments. I also recall them referring to a "field filtering" process in order NOT to include suspended sediments in their samples. A skeptic might begin to think that Chemtura/CRA/M.O.E. are a bunch of crooks and liars. Of course Dr. Jackson would never use such language no matter how accurate it was.

Overall these Minutes are of very acceptable quality. Perhaps the TAG secretary is again receiving assistance on the side to do her job as she did with the CPAC Minutes.