LANXESS SHAREHOLDERS REJOICE: EXCAVATING A FEW CREEKBANKS IS MUCH CHEAPER THAN REMOVING TOXIC SEDIMENTS THE LENGTH OF THE CANAGAGIGUE CREEK

Hunh? Why is this? Well sediments are the soil if you will on the bottom of the creek. Sediments started as suspended sediments in the flowing water and can be deposited either on the bottom of the creek where they do build up to a certain amount and or they can be deposited in ...wait for it... depositiional zones along the creek as creekbank soils. These are likely on inside, curved slower moving areas of the creek (i.e. inside bends). Of course heavy rains and floods can certainly remobilize these sediments as well as creekbank soils and put them back into the water column where they move yet further downstream. Simple mechanics of excavating drier soils above the water line make them much easier to remove then dredging the bottom of a small creek and avoiding ripping up the creekbanks in the process. Also environmental controls to attempt to minimize gross amounts of suspended sediments killing fish etc. would be much greater while excavating sediments than creekbank soils. ................................................................................................................................ A week ago I posted here about the ridiculously high Method Detection Limits (MDL) in the "2020 Canagagigue Creek Sediment and Soil Investigation" and how they grossly minimized both detections as well as exceedances of criteria by toxic compounds. Sediment results are by far much more subject to these high MDLs than Creekbank soils. Why? I think my first paragraph answers that question. Secondly it is the DDT compounds (DDD, DDE, DDT) that are subject to these high MDLs, not dioxins/furans. Why is this? I'm not sure but it is strange that the dioxin TEQs (Toxic Equivalents) are measured in picograms per gram (pg/g) which are the same as parts per trillion (ppt) wheras DDT concentrations are generally measured in either parts per billion (ppb) or parts per million (ppm). The ppt are 1,000 times smaller than ppb which are 1,000 times smaller than ppm and yet the labs seem to have no difficulties in accurately measuring the dioxins which are at least a thousand times lower concentrations than the DDT compounds. Seems just a tad self-serving to me. ............................................................................................................................................ Since last Monday when I mentioned that Stantec had not included the data from the "2020 Canagagigue Creek...Investigation", I have explored further. It is clear that Stantec did include some data from the 2020 Investigation such as the Stroh Drain very high sediment results provided by GHD as well as the Pacific Rim lab reports provided by myself. Including the Pacific Rim results in the Risk Assessment (RA) was very odd as zero provenance or background information was provided along with the lab report. In other words how many witnesses were present during the sampling, where exactly in the area of the Stroh Drain were the samples taken, at what depth, via what protocols etc. Also the Pacific Rim lab results were NOT as Stantec stated, a combination of soils and sediments together. That is incorrect. One of the soil samples was a composite of two different soil samples and the other soil sample was just that: a soil sample taken quite close to the Stroh Drain. ........................................................................................................................ My further explorations mentioned in the previous paragraph are in regards to 2020 data NOT being included in the RA. I have looked carefully for creekbank soils, flodplain soils and sediment results from the 2020 Investigation and I can not find them in Stantec's Risk Assessment. I still also have inquiries out on this matter but I am concluding that possibly Stantec have decided that the ridiculously high MDLs rule out the validity or accuracy of the aforementioned soil and sediment sample results. Too bad that Stantec didn't also feel that way about the data from the "2017 Canagagigue Creek Sediment and Floodplain Soil Investigation" as well. GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out.