UNIROYAL/LANXESS DEVIATION FROM CONTROL ORDERS

DNAPL removal, full hydraulic containment (Nov. 1991 Control Order); 2028 full remediation of groundwater (2000 Control Order).

Further MECP & Lanxess failures:  Canagagigue Creek cleanup not mandated according to Lanxess.

DNAPL and LNAPL remain on the former Uniroyal Chemical site both as residual and as free phase DNAPL and LNAPL. Locations are known and mostly shallow.

Full hydraulic containment in all aquifers never occurred. Three quarters of Upper Aquifer, namely north-west, north-east and south-east are not contained for egregious and or false reasons. Municipal Lower is not hydraulically contained nor is the Bedrock Aquifer. Municipal Upper routinely fails to achieve its' Target pumping rates.

 2028 full remediation of groundwater is admitted by all parties to be unattainable. This is due to the polluter being in full charge of the cleanup and the least expensive, least effective methodologies have been used despite excellent recommendations from various citizens plus UPAC and CPAC.

Only recently have we the public been advised that the cleanup of the Creek is voluntary. Good God!  The Creek soils, sediments and fish are full of DDT, dioxins/furans, PAHs, mercury and PCBs plus more most well above the provincial or federal health criteria. Human beings living along the Creek are also exposed. Lanxess claims that their bought and paid for Risk Assessment says that there are no unacceptable risks downstream. That is a lie produced for money by professional, self-serving manipulators. 

SETTLING FOR CRUMBS

 Will Lanxess play the same game that Todd Cowan tried with me back in 2010.  Todd and I had sat down on two or three occasions and discussed the status of the Elmira cleanup. He already was unimpressed from various other professional sources that he had talked to. I was the cherry on the cake and promised to continue my work keeping up to date but as a member of Woolwich Council appointed CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Committee).  Then lo and behold as he advised me that I was being put onto CPAC, he and Dave Brenneman added a condition. I either had to give up my Blog (Elmira Advocate) or else promise not to discuss any Chemtura/Elmira/ CPAC issues in it. I was stunned and angry. I basically advised Todd and David in no uncertain terms that I had agreed to do volunteer work on behalf of the public interest and if they thought that I should somehow have to "pay" for the privilege then they were out of their minds  I was appointed without conditions.

Right now Lanxess (Ramin A.) are telling TAG (Technical Advisory Group) that they are in favour of doing something extra for the community in regards to the Canagagigue Creek. They emphasize that their whole Risk Assessment and or any extra are all voluntary. I do not know how they managed to wiggle out of both financial and legal liability for the devastation they caused in the Creek but the Ministry of Environment are not disagreeing with Lanxess's position. 

So will Lanxess go to their proven lousy poker player whom they've bluffed and bafflegabbed for thirty years and ask her for some form of ringing endorsement of them if they agree to say cleaning up two hotspot areas? Will Lanxess advise Woolwich Township that good press quoting Woolwich Township praising them is desirable  prior to them spending their money on any hotspot cleanups. Maybe if Lanxess have enough brass (they do) they might even sell their cleanup costs for good press from the Min. of Environment. Again if you will this is Lanxess's desired outcome. Do the absolute minimum (moral, ethical-legal?) AND get praised for doing it. 

It is without a doubt a fine time to be a dirty polluter.

JUSTICE JAMES RAMSAY IS NO ROBERT RILEY

 Thank goodness! Or am I just caught up in the euphoria of the moment? Did I see this judicial victory described in both yesterday's K-W Record and today's ahead of time? I did not. There was of course absolutely no doubt that the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) and their stooges are complete bullies and idiots. That was not ever in contention with myself. I've been on the receiving end of that former pack of gutless wonders nearly thirty years ago.

Robert Williams and Luisa D'Amato in today's Record lay bare what Justice James Ramsay had to say about former Chair Scot Piatkowski as well as about the Board's behaviour. When I say the Board I usually am referring to the senior administration however right now I'm referring to them as well as to the Trustees as a group. They are a contemptible pack of biased and woefully ignorant citizens not working in the public interest but in the School Board's interest. That is the proof of their ignorance (as a group) as they have through their public stupidity exposed  themselves and the entire WRDSB to the public contempt and derision to which they've long deserved. To be clear there are at least a couple of trustees who do not deserve my contempt and that would be Mike Ramsay and Cindy Watson. I suspect that one or two more may have voted against the majority of trustees in agreeing with the then Chair Scot Piatkowski to remove Caroline Burjoski from the public meeting she was speaking at way back in January 2022.

 Am I being too ecstatic in my praise of Justice James Ramsay? Maybe because I don't believe that I know him at all. Am I being too harsh in my condemnation of Justice Robert Reilly? Not at all. I know that as+hole only too well. He is a biased coward and bully who uses his judicial pulpit not in the public interest. Frankly he disgusts me. Getting back to Justice James Ramsay I would very much like to believe that his decision hammering the Trustees, Scot Piatkowski and presumably the senior WRDSB administration is the real deal. 

That's the rub. I've seen asinine decisions out of judges at the Ontario Superior Court in Kitchener in the past. Also at local lower courts nearby. I've also seen a far too cosy relationship between senior police admin and the WRDSB in the past. So is this decision from Justice James Ramsay the proper decision based upon the facts and based upon the law or is it just one more set up by a group of professional liars and manipulators?  This recent decision shouldn't even have been entertained by the courts in the first place. The WRDSB filed a Motion to dismiss Caroline Burjoski's Defamation lawsuit against Trustee Chair Scot Piatkowski. This Defamation lawsuit was directly mentioned by Judge Ramsay as he indicated his opinion that it was a very worthy/credible ? lawsuit based upon the facts and evidence before him. 

Time will tell but it is typical for the inward looking, intellectually incestuous idiots at the Board to file a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) Motion against Caroline Burjowski after she was publicly defamed by the Trustee Chair.  Oh and just for the record up until the Burjoski incident I was a fan of Scot Piatkowski. Boy has that changed. 

A PUBLIC MEETING WILL BE ANNOUNCED SOON

 It was not my idea. I am not in charge of this upcoming meeting. Its' purpose will be to update Elmira and Woolwich citizens regarding the status of the alleged remediation of the Uniroyal Chemical toxic dynasty. This so called remediation has been underway since January 1992. In fits and starts. In stop and starts. What has been constant is the propaganda and puffery coming from Uniroyal Chemical initially and their three corporate successors since (Crompton,  Chemtura,  Lanxess Canada). 

Uniroyal's toxic dynasty includes gross soil contamination, gross ground and surface water contamination, gross air contamination and gross downstream creekbank soil and creek sediments contamination. Plus throw in some floodplain soils contamination as well. Now of course it goes without saying that gross truth pollution has also occurred by those responsible for the environmental pollution as well as their fellow travellors.

Fellow travellors have included most of our political and semi political authorities to their everlasting shame. Of course lying to the public is all in a day's work for professional politicians whose motivation is their own self-interest versus the public interest. Seriously is it possible for any but the newest Canadian residents to still think that our governments are here for our benefit?  Think provincially with Doug Ford and the Conservatives blatant lying and corruption over the Greenbelt. Think about Justin Trudeau and the Liberals cheerfully bringing in many hundreds of thousands per year new immigrants without having first upgraded our housing stocks, our transportation routes, our sewage treatment plants, our water supply and on and on. Did they do this on humanitarian grounds or did they do this to massively increase the supply of labour, decrease wages and weaken unions? It may be true that Canada needs a certain number of working immigrants per year but why are so many underemployed in relation to their skills? Why with the Covid pandemic are restrictions on both foreign nurses and doctors practicing in Canada still maintained? Why are highly educated Canadian applicants to medical schools being routinely denied admission?

We are a country of self-serving producers and professionals all looking out for number one who are also smart enough to be politically active. Professional lobby groups both pressure and financially reward our governing parties to do their bidding. This obviously includes input into legislation whether to weaken government attempts to control collateral damage to the public or to further strengthen individual groups stranglehold on their part of the economy.

Our municipal, regional, provincial and even federal governments have not acted in the interests of Elmira and Woolwich residents. They have permitted the downstream discharge and leakage of Uniroyal Chemical's toxic wastes from 1942 up to the present. Along with that they permitted decades of toxic air emissions and groundwater contamination. Our governments have taken the measure of local citizens and opposition and decided back in November 1989 to continue their support of a very dirty polluter. This has been done both with subtlety  at times and blatantly at others. Citizens have paid the price through shortened lives and increased health issues.         

It is my hope that citizens will leave this public meeting knowing that they must step up and demand government action. The pressure must be renewed for any appropriate cleanup to take place. 

TAG GET YOUR THUMBS OUT OF YOUR BUTTS & START DEMANDING MORE FROM LANXESS AND THE MECP

 TAG members are not stupid. Unfortunately. If they were unable to understand what is good for them personally then they might focus more on what is in the public interest. There is a plethora of new members with science backgrounds, education and experience who are going along for the Lanxess/MECP ride .  Or maybe they'd rather be known as incompetent and inexperienced rather than self-serving and willingly blind. You pick which it is.

The entire HHERA (Risk Assessment) as predicted years back by both TAG and Dr. Richard Jackson, their Chair, has proven to be pathetic. A crock if you will. While acknowledging the numbers of soil and sediment samples in the Creek which exceed either provincial or federal criteria for DDT and dioxins/furans despite locational sampling biases, faulty and self-serving Method Detection Limits (MDL) and amateur hour sediment sampling using shovels versus proper core samplers; Lanxess and the MECP have continuously supported, propped up and even bragged about the "science" behind their Risk Assessment. 

Their "science" is the science of professional liars whose only goal is to get the hell out of Dodge with the minimal amount of cost to themselves. They don't give a rat's butkiss about you, me, downstream citizens or the public at large. What they are trying to achieve is to convince generally the dumbest half of our citizens that all their degrees, credentials and environmental work experience makes them honest, decent folks who strictly out of the goodness of their hearts, with no self-interest involved, want to do what's right. They want to protect us all. They want to, solely based upon scientific principles mind you, ensure that their conclusions of "no unacceptable risks"  in the downstream Canagagigue Creek are believed by us. 

Their consultants have been routinely "client driven". The Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks (MECP) have been trying to resurrect their reputation for decades. It's been tattered by Uniroyal Chemical, Varnicolor Chemical, Northstar Aerospace  and mercury poisoning in the English-Wabigoon river system (Grassy Narrows). 

There are health based criteria for DDT, dioxins/furans, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, mercury, PCBs, solvents etc. There are air criteria. There are drinking water criteria. There are eating criteria namely fish tissue concentrations.  FOR INDIVIDUAL CONTAMINANTS ! In other words the drinking water criteria for NDMA is 9 parts per trillion of NDMA in pure water. The drinking water criteria for dioxins is 15 parts per quadrillion in pure water. What is the criteria for both NDMA and dioxins in otherwise pure water? Nobody knows because there isn't one. Then add in all the other toxic compounds in the water, soils and Creek sediments. Nobody can honestly say what the health effects are for two separate tocic compounds much less for twenty-two or more.

Nobody can say what the health criteria for one individual compound (such as dioxin) in air is if the resident receptor both breathes contaminated air AND eats contaminated fish, much less drinks contaminated milk and eats beef from his farm. What is the health criteria for that same resident (Old Order Mennonite) along the downstream Canagagigue Creek who also burns his own wood at his house?           

Then assume this very same resident is also exposed to the well in excess of criteria DDT in the Creek sediments, creekbank soils and air etc. Again multiple routes of exposure for two toxic compounds. Now throw in every single industrial chemical in the air, ground and surface water, creekbank soils, Creek sediments, fish and what have you got as a health criteria? You have absolutely nothing whether or not every single industrial poison is from Uniroyal Chemical. Which pleases professional liars, whether corporate or government to no end. None of us can prove that Uniroyal Chemical and corporate successors have intentionally poisoned anyone. At the same time honest brokers can not claim that there are "no unacceptable risks" in the downstream Canagagigue Creek. 

That however is no problem for the Ontario MECP and Lanxess Canada to do. 

TOXIC CHEMICALS EFFECT ON BABIES IN UTERO

 Biologist, scientist, author and environmental activist Dr. Henry Regier has shared recent results of studies done on following generations of victims of the 1984 Bhopal, India industrial disaster (Union Carbide).  These studies indicate that this particular accident not only injured and killed thousands of men, women and children but also seriously affected babies still in the womb at the time of the accident. The toxic chemical released was methyl isocyanate (MIC) and now with the passage of time, scientists, doctors and researchers can see its' full, multi generational effects. 

These include higher risks of cancer, lower education accomplishment, higher rates of disabilities, high blood pressure, diabetes, miscarriages and other reproductive problems including birth defects. The other huge issue discovered is the radius of impact of the release of  MIC. It is not a mere five kilometres but closer to one hundred kilometres (62 miles). 

In India, citizens, governments and health authorities are beginning to ask the question "What is owed to victims who weren't born yet at the time of the accident?"

KUDOS TO THREE WOOLWICH COUNCILLORS

 Now the groundwater tutorial ran from 4:15 pm. until 6 pm. and I believe that all who attended both benefited and enjoyed the experience. I was particularly pleased with the questions asked by the councillors (Schwindt, Grant and Cadeau) as they were clearly engaged and interested. Both Drs. Dan Holt and Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach of CPAC (Citizens Public Advisory Committee) also attended and contributed.

All attendees were given a large package which included colour maps of the Lanxess site, the town of Elmira, location of wells etc. Much of the package, which also included text from the K-W Record (May 15, 1991) and a letter from a professional hydrogeologist, may like a fine wine require time to be fully appreciated. Further text which I provided listed the pumping well systems such as the Upper Aquifer Containment System (UACS), the On-Site Containment System (PW4 & 5) and the Off-Site Containment & Treatments System consisting of wells W5A, W5B, W8, W9, W6A, W6B, W3R and E7/E9. 

The Diagram showing the sub-surface cross-section of the various geological strata was particularly helpful as councillors could quickly see the interaction, location and connections between the various Aquifers (water saturated pore spaces) and Aquitards (tighter pore spaces and much less water flow). I offered future assistance as they had the time to examine some of the maps, diagrams and documents more carefully down the road.     

YOUNG CHILDREN MOST AT RISK FROM UNIROYAL/LANXESS DIOXIN

 Young children above in the title particularly includes children in the womb followed by breast fed babies. Good Lord imagine mothers being on call for babies feeding times believing that their efforts are giving their children the very best possible start in life only to learn later that they may have poisoned their own children. Such is the insidious nature of both dioxins and the profit/share price motivated industrial polluters among us.  In the case of Elmira, Ontario we are referring to Uniroyal Chemical and their corporate successors namely Crompton, Chemtura and now Lanxess Canada. 

Can you believe that today more than thirty years after we learned that dioxins were unintentionally produced here in Elmira and then distributed throughout the site in the north-east corner of Elmira plus released into the air, groundwater and surface water (Canagagigue Creek); to date there has been barely minimal attempts to remove them from soils as well as sediments on at least the downstream five miles of Creek prior to its' discharge into the Grand River. 

Today the world are expressing their horror and disgust relative to children being injured and killed both in the Ukraine as well as in Gaza. The hypocrisy is not lost on me that we can be outraged by harm to innocent children overseas yet blind to the harm that has been caused right here in Elmira, Ontario. Dioxins are the worst of the worst including NDMA which was described by one scientist as the most carcinogenic compound known to mankind. Dioxins do so much more harm than just causing cancer. They can cause birth defects minor and major, developmental problems physical, mental and emotional, contribute to diabetes, reproductive problems and the list goes on and on. These health and mortality effects have occurred here in Elmira including along the downstream five miles of Canagagigue Creek. Our authorities have been very careful to refuse health studies either thirty plus years ago or now. They have been very careful to keep health data of both adults and children quiet.  

TOMORROW IS GROUNDWATER TUTORIAL DAY FOR THREE WOOLWICH COUNCILLORS

 Oddly two councillors did not respond at all to the invite. The third, mayor Sandy Shantz also did not, but that was less of a surprise to me. I am curious regarding Bonnie Bryant and Evan Burgess's reason(s) for not responding.

The three attendees are councillors Grant (Kayla), Schwindt (Eric) and Cadeau (Nathan). All three seem keen and eager and that's all that is necessary to spark perhaps a long term interest in groundwater in general and Elmira's groundwater in particular. I will be providing multiple relevant photos, maps and drawings to each of the three councillors both for use tomorrow and for them to keep as references down the road. My goal is to get them started to be able to ask intelligent and indeed probing questions of Lanxess, MECP, and consultants such as GHD and Stantec.

Although my focus is a better understanding for councillors of the groundwater literally beneath their feet I will also be attempting to show a number of inconsistencies within some of the maps/drawings and claims of various consultants. This is not necessarily to try and prove subterfuge or dishonesty but to indicate that much of the science of hydrogeology can be interpreted subjectively. I feel that hydrogeology is both an art and a science. Hence some of these inconsistencies are the results of new data and more time having passed leading to somewhat different conclusions.

I admit that I may have judged a couple of councillors too harshly early on when they sent me e-mail answers to my complaints about the shallow aquifer (UA) pumping system failures. Their written answers frankly were poor and I thought that those poor answers were intentional. I have since come to understand that whatever strengths and experience they have, hydrogeology was not part of it. Hence my offer of a groundwater tutorial and their agreement to it. Tomorrow should be a win-win.    

FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THE LIKELY INTERCEPTOR TRENCH DIVERTING UNIROYAL CHEMICAL'S TOXIC GROUNDWATER OVER TO THE STROH PROPERTY

 This trench visible from both aerial photographs and satellite images of the Uniroyal/Lanxess site in Elmira, Ontario was the subject of dispute way back in 2014. Yours truly had discovered the Stroh Drain approximately in May 2014 and some time after that began carefully examining satellite images and aerial photographs. The images are very clear that a manmade excavation from the surface had occurred over a large distance on the east side of the Uniroyal Chemical site. I coined the term Interceptor Trench to describe what seemed to be pretty clearly was an attempt to divert contaminated groundwater away from it's natural flow westwards towards the Canagagigue Creek on site.

The Trench is located on the west side of the east side toxic waste pits known as IR-2, RPE-1, RPE-2, RPE-3, RPE-4, RPE-5, BAE-1 and RB-1 and RB-2. It appears to run from north to south initially while then turning towards the south-east. This corresponds to the slope of the surface of the ground hence gravity flow would take liquid contents (groundwater) from the Uniroyal property over to the Stroh property. There is a sub-surface corrugated steel pipe facing north-south that discharges directly into the north end of the Stroh Drain. It is my opinion that likely the buried Trench joins the corrugated steel pipe and discharges into the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB) where it then continues southwards through the Martin property, both past and into their dug swimming pond. This pond was used by generations of children and if I am correct then this bypass was an abomination.

Firstly there were drawings submitted to the Environmental Appeal Board showing an Interceptor Trench proposed to remove the need to excavate the two Consolidation Pits known as RPE4 & 5. Uniroyal was adamant about not agreeing to excavate and truck the toxic contents off-site whereas the Ministry of Environment, under intense public pressure wanted it done. Also recent examination of the photos also indicates the peculiar route this alleged Interceptor Trench has taken. It neatly encompasses toxic groundwater from the five major east side pits and from RB-1 & 2 and BAE-1 as well as skirts TPE-2 (a temporary pit) . This path as shown in the various photos etc. is both difficult and deliberate. 

The fact that the Min. of Environment refused to demand a clear explanation as well as some exploratory minor digging to prove or disprove the likelihood of some kind of potentially illegal diversion onto one neighbour's property (Stroh), likely with consent, and onto the second neighbour's property (Martin), likely without consent, is shocking and heinous. This citizens is government corruption and I suggest it makes the recent Doug Ford Greenbelt scandal look like small potatoes in comparison.      

 

A BRIEF DIOXIN REVIEW

Bob Burtt of the K-W Record wrote a story about dioxins at the Uniroyal site back on May 15, 1991. They had been found as high as 19 parts per billion in soils on the site. The Ontario Ministry of Environment apparently did not have any criteria or standard for soils at industrial sites but they did have a limit of 1 part per billion (ppb) on residential properties at the time. Currently there are provincial soil standards (Table 8) which refer to soils within either 10 or 30 metres of surface water (rivers, lakes etc.). That limit or criteria is 7 parts per TRILLION (ppt). To say that Uniroyal/Lanxess exceed that criteria routinely the length of the downstream Creek to the Grand River is an understatement.  When it comes to the even much lower criteria for dioxins in creek sediments then I believe the exceedances of the federal criteria (.85 ppt) are even more egregious. 

The May 15, 1991 article gives further damning information about dioxins and their toxicity to wildlife and human beings. How is it possible today based upon even greater knowledge of the damage that dioxins have done and are doing to human beings, fish and wildlife that Lanxess and their fellow travellors continue to sell their bought and paid for, self-serving Risk Assessment of the Canagagigue Creek to the unsuspecting public as well as the non-confrontational, non-aggressive, tame TAG committee? The fact that the Ontario Ministry of Environment are supporting Lanxess efforts is an indication of exactly how corrupt our so called environmental regulator is.

LAST NIGHT"S TAG MEETING A BUST

 O.K. am I prepared to say that I wasted my time in attending it in person? No I'm not. Unlike two citizen liars who barely each attended one third of the CPAC meetings between 2011 and 2015 I will only speak about TAG from regular first person attendance. Oh and I will also inquire as to why half of TAG are not showing up in person but are "attending" from home virtually.  Covid has introduced a slippery slope here and I fully expect Lanxess and fellow travellors to exploit this lack of in person attendance when it suits their needs at the expense of the public interest.

Firstly as promised but undelivered, the Min. of Environment (MECP) failed to complete their Comments on the Revised Draft Risk Assessment (HHERA) on time for last night's meeting. Hence there was nothing to read, understand and discuss for Item 4.2 . Last night's meeting should have been cancelled or postponed or at least other important items put on the Agenda. It did not happen. TAG were re-promised those Comments by the end of November with the next TAG meeting scheduled for February 1, 2024.

Then we were treated to Agenda Item 4.3 in which Ramin Ansari (Lanxess) played the good guy working diligently to assist the poor,  intellectually deficient Elmira citizens who want at least a token/pretend cleanup of the Canagagigue Creek. Susan Bryant has spent decades manipulating, scheming and back stabbing colleagues, friends, APTE members etc. in order to solidify her position as the citizen saviour of the Creek. This has included decades of private meetings and unauthorized by UPAC and CPAC deals with the devil (Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura/lanxess). She trusted professional liars and scumbags to deliver on their promises. In exchange for unrestricted access to talk and negotiate allegedly on behalf of local citizens she has made a plethora of environmental concessions harmful to the public interest. Her long term goal was her own enhancement and status with all levels of government as well as with the public combined with a significant cleanup of the downstream five miles of Canagagigue Creek.     

Instead she is now prepared to settle for crumbs. I have no doubts that she will jump on the bandwagon and claim victory if and when Lanxess "voluntarily" do a token cleanup of one, two or three "hotspots" in the Creek. Lanxess's fake but well credentialed Risk Assessment allegedly has claimed that all downstream chemical and environmental risks are "acceptable". That is utter and complete self-serving and self-manipulated bullcrap. Wildlife are suffering and the scientific evidence in fish tissues of dioxins/furans, DDT, mercury and PCBs is overwhelming. Furthermore much of the sampling and lab work was not up to par and manipulating Non Detects in sediment samples is child's play when you are in charge of the entire process.  

I am hoping in the near future to hear what the MECP's rationale is for pretending that Uniroyal Chemical and successors are not obligated and legally liable for the cleanup of the Canagagigue Creek which they devastated. How dare they sit on their fat ass** and pretend everything is O.K. with both wildlife and humans having been victimized by the company. 

 

 

 

TONITE'S TAG MEETING WON"T BE GOOD

 There are two apparently significant Items on the Agenda namely 4.3 an Update on Hotspot Removal and 4.2 The MECP Comments on the Risk Assessment (HHERA). Both are irrelevant in that the decisions were made a long time ago and these discussions are simply to continue the facade of public consultation. These discussions along with public TAG meetings are the price our authorities pay in order to do their anti social, anti public interest work behind the scenes. The results of this Risk Assessment (HHERA) were decided years ago (maybe decades) and RAC and TAG are simply the way to both stifle real public consultation and likely opposition. RAC and TAG are simply controlled opposition, controlled by Lanxess, MECP and Woolwich Township, with or without the knowledge of most of the current, new councillors.

Pages 1 and 2 discuss what was said about the RAC and TAG Terms of Reference Review. Sebastian was the only TAG member whether honest enough or brave enough or both to speak truth to power. Unfortunately the Minutes inaccurately reflect that  in particular as they do not attribute either his criticism to him nor TAG members responses to themselves. This is unfortunate and deceptive in my opinion. This is a long term experienced TAG member telling his colleagues to get their act together and all he got back in response was excuses and drivel from three TAG members as I previously reported here last Friday (Nov. 10) as well as in late October immediately after the TAG meeting.                       .         

HAVE OUR MEDIA FORSAKEN US?

 I have long complained that our only remaining truly local media (Woolwich Observer) have abandoned us to the deluge of bull, lies and propaganda coming from Lanxess Canada, the Ont. Min. of Environment and Woolwich Township regarding the alleged "cleanup" here in Elmira, Ont.. Now of course almost as soon as I do that the Observer publish something relevant whether "balanced", slightly tilted in favour of the guilty parties or God Bless Them honest, accurate and strong. I will make a generalization as follows. Whether coincidence or not I feel that the addition of reporter Leah Gerber has improved both the quantity and quality of their "Elmira Crisis" reporting. 

That said here is my "balanced" reporting. What perks or benefits is the Observer receiving in exchange for refusing to interview or quote the single most informed, by a country mile, citizen/resident of Elmira?  It has been obvious to me for many years now that a deal has been struck. If the Observer are staying in business via Ad revenue or other dollar inputs provided they obey certain rules then frankly I am less offended. On the other hand if it is simply a corporate (or political) minor quid pro quo that they are not to interview or quote me then I am seriously offended. For example would a mayor threaten to remove municipal ads and Notices from the only local newspaper if they quote my opinion/position on the Canagagigue Creek Risk Assessment? Come on Observer dig your heels in and at least get well paid for following the local power structure's rules.

I checked on-line for stories or articles about the East Palestine, Ohio train derailment from last February. Wow there is almost nothing! There has also been nothing in the Waterloo Region Record since then.  What the hell is going on? Is this a government (state/Feds) news blackout i.e. a coverup? The little I have seen on-line actually supports the posting I made yesterday regarding the likelihood of dioxins being formed under the conditions of carbon based materials burning in addition to chlorine based items such as vinyl chloride. Dioxins while being produced unintentionally via chemical companies as well as pulp and paper mills can be produced naturally via forest fires. Dioxins are also produced with improper municipal and hospital incineration of wastes. 

Here in Elmira we have been blessed by Uniroyal Chemical's production of 2,4-D,  2,4,5-T, Agent Orange and more. The manufacture of pesticides and herbicides is a great way to produce and distribute dioxins/furans into the air, soils, creek sediments, local wildlife and human beings. We've got them all up here despite the silence on the matter from both the K-W Record and the Observer. This reluctance to publish fearlessly will eventually bite all our media. Yes you have responsibilities towards your staff, employees, families which I understand. But you have chosen to work in a field where the public interest is supposed to be paramount. Please put it first.   

EAST PALESTINE, OHIO TRAIN WRECK LAST SPRING

 I was recently sent a video from a local friend and colleague that I found fascinating. My understanding is that an activist from New York City by the name of Eric Coppolino was being interviewed by a fellow named Alec who has a regular Vlog? (The Way Forward") either on the radio or perhaps more likely on-line. Now Mr. Coppolino has longtime credentials as an activist in at least a couple of different areas but it was his knowledge of dioxins/furans that were the subject of this on-line video.

I certainly recognized much of his facts and claims regarding the toxicity and prevalence of dioxins in the form of body burden in human beings around the world. It is very alarming. He (Eric) essentially was saying that the derailment and spillage of large quantities of benzene, motor oils, vinyl chloride etc. and the resulting fire was a catastrophe and a disaster that was exacerbated by poor decision making afterwards. He suggests that there was improper influence brought to bear possibly by Northfolk Southern Railroad immediately after the accident. I hope that I've got the correct name of the railroad company involved. 

Regardless Mr. Coppolino makes a strong case that the plastics as well as the chlorinated compounds involved in the fire would certainly have produced dioxins. Again his statements of fact generally correspond with research I did years ago regarding dioxin production and toxicity. What is of great concern however is the response by governments at all levels as well as by the media.  It's all about denial and minimization of the risks and threats to both human beings and to wildlife. It includes basically ignoring the probable presence of large amounts of dioxin under the conditions stated.

Here in Elmira, Ontario we know all about "experts", suits, Qualified P++++++ exaggerating, lying, minimizing and making  self-serving claims for the benefit of their polluting clients.

EFFECTIVE VERSUS LAB SOLUBILITY

 Via experiments in the lab the solubility of most solvents in water has been determined. They range from almost insoluble (MBT) to chlorobenzene at 495,000 parts per billion. Other examples of lab solubilities would be benzene at 1,800,000 parts per billion. Toluene is close to that of benzene.

By lab solubilities I mean an exact amount of organic solvent in a pure litre of water. Real life and contaminated sites are nothing like that. In the real world polluters leak, drip, spill and dump all kinds of solvents into the ground and surface water. Hence determining the solubility of benzene for example in contaminated groundwater depends upon the different solvents present and their individual concentrations. What we do know is that the solubility in water of all solvents decreases as the number and concentration of other solvents increases.

These are known as Effective Solubilities and can be determined via testing the variety and concentration of all other solvents in the groundwater. These Effective Solubilities are usually a tiny fraction of the Lab Solubility of the compound on it's own in a litre of pure lab water. It's almost as if there are a pre-determined number of spaces available for organic compounds in water and hence there is competition to decide which compound ends up in the available spaces .

The significance of multiple compounds in groundwater simultaneously is as follows. Usually we think of groundwater contamination based upon the various concentrations in groundwater of these contaminants (organic pollutants). Hence the higher the number of contaminants the lower the concentration numbers but the greater the contamination. 

HALF OF COUNCIL READY TO LEARN MORE ABOUT GROUNDWATER

 Well it seems to be three out of six which while not ideal is still well worthwhile to do. Maybe between the presentation, questions asked and answered, combined with the notes, maps and diagrams given to the three councillors; the other three might change their minds or at least take a long, hard look at the literature handed out. 

In a two hour or less tutorial nobody is suddenly going to become an expert. However, especially if they already have an interest, the tutorial could spring curiosity and interest into more serious study.  If there had been more citizens really keen on learning about hydrogeology thirty years ago then I am confident that the guilty parties would have had a much more difficult path to doing the very least possible while expecting gratitude and congratulations.

I have long suggested that hydrogeology is not rocket science. This of course does not please the credentialed practitioners of that art & science.  What I have learned over the past three decades is that any fact, data, theory or theorem can be intentionally misinterpreted, bent or deflected to suit the self-serving interests of others. This even includes sampling whether sediments, groundwater or soils. I suspect that there may be many disciplines in which dishonest adherents are able to manipulate results and conclusions to serve their agenda's and most certainly not the public interest.

OCTOBER TAG MEETING WRITTEN UP IN WOOLWICH OBSERVER

 At least part of it was written up. That would be the part that discussed how TAG has been functioning. The reporter did a good job although a couple of quotes from member Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach were missed such as his accurately describing TAG as "tame". My comment here in the Advocate was that what was needed was a watchdog and instead TAG were a "lapdog". Sad but true. Nobody on TAG wants to offend the powers that be. 

Sebastian however was quoted as saying "The reality is that (TAG) lacks the teeth and the knowledge to be able to do a credible job. And the reality is that when confronted by specialists in the field, we find ourselves on this committee at a disadvantage." Further he added "And consequently, there's a tendency for this committee to be bulldozed because of that professional accreditation that is presented to us. And the reality is that some of that professionalism isn't ironclad." 

A couple of members agreed with Sebastian that more peer reviews by independent experts could be helpful and as well there was agreement that TAG needed to better communicate with the public. Other TAG members did not agree to either. Overall Sebastian 's comments about TAG's weaknesses were not supported by Susan Bryant and Wilson Lau both with agendas I view as not being in the public interest.

Sebastian spoke truth to power and was not supported by those in favour of the status quo including the MECP, Lanxess, GHD, likely Stantec and TAG in general.

ANOTHER TAG MEETING NEXT THURSDAY (Nov. 16) IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 6:30 PM.

 There are two significant items on the Agenda namely Item 4.2 and 4.3 which are MECP Comments on the Revised Draft Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment (HHERA) for the Canagagigue Creek and Creek Hotspot Removal Update (Lanxess). 

With the first Item 4.2 the Min. of Environment may or may not have substantive comments or criticisms on the HHERA. In reality their comments are essentially irrelevant as the poor data, mistakes, omissions, bad assumptions, and falsehoods of the HHERA are all long in the rearview mirror. Whatever stuff the MECP produces in their latest comments won't even nudge the forward progress of the HHERA, not even a little bit. It's been a done deal for years with Lanxess/Stantec/GHD and the MECP simply going through the motions which was essentially predicted by Dr. Jackson and aven other TAG members years ago. Oh and by the way these MECP comments aren't even completed yet for distribution hence aren't included in the Agenda package sent out today.

Item 4.3 is Creek Hotspot Removal Update by Lanxess. When exactly did Polluter Pays get replaced with Polluter Controls? Now we are advised that this HHERA is voluntary and that the Ont. Min. of Environment, in their infinite incompetence and impotence, can't even order cleanup of a Creek devastated by decades of unethical, immoral and ILLEGAL pollution from Uniroyal Chemical and successors. When exactly did Ontario citizens give up their rights to a clean environment? When exactly did large corporations rewrite both the laws and their enforcement to suit themselves? Lanxess will haughtily advise that out of the goodness of their hearts that they will voluntarily spend at least a tiny fraction of the amount required to undue the damage, which liability they bought along with the property and business. Unless of course all our local political authorities as well as the province gave them a free pass, a legal release if you will from the liability attached to the Elmira property. If this was done apparently all our authorities/politicians etc. "forgot" to tell us citizens about it. That folks would be corruption especially if certain hands got greased along the way.      

POSITIVE VERSUS NEGATIVE (CRITICAL) : A NICE CHANGE OF PACE

 When dealing with decades long, entrenched corruption of the corporate polluter and Ministry of Environment style it becomes easy to be disillusioned and skeptical. When one joins an environmental group it does elevate one's hopes and aspirations for environmental improvement. It also reinforces the fact that most people are good at heart despite the appearance that so many politicians are not. I think what has been most shocking to my system is the extremely bad behaviour, thank goodness of only a few citizens who surreptitiously have advanced their own position at the cost of both their friends and colleagues as well as that of the public interest. That such perfidy existed I originally did not know. 

Currently I am attempting to arrange a groundwater tutorial with the mostly new Woolwich Council. Within a mere 48 hours I have had positive responses from half (3) of them so far. I view that as an excellent start and certainly hope for more. I expect that this time we will be able to come up with a time that suits more folks.

I will admit that I am looking forward to assisting these new councillors to get a better handle on proposals or ideas brought to them through their Council duties. It has long been my opinion that there has been a one sided voice speaking to municipal councillors regarding the Elmira Water Crisis and all the ensuing plans whether for groundwater cleanup or downstream Creek cleanup. I believe that if councillors can get a better handle on the basics of groundwater, contamination, remediation etc. that they eventually will make better decisions in the public interest. This could be through better knowledge and understanding or even simply greater skepticism as they ask more and harder questions when Lanxess, GHD and the MECP plans are presented to them.

A POSITIVE START TO MY OFFER TO WOOLWICH COUNCIL

 Well I must say that I am pleasantly surprised as to how quickly I've actually gotten a couple of responses from two Woolwich councillors. The one was an absolute yes that they are definitely interested in a groundwater tutorial and the other was a more general yes the idea sounds good can I have a little more info to which I've already responded.

As far as I'm concerned the tutorial will strictly be about groundwater: where it comes from, where it goes ...specific to the immediate Elmira area and to the former Uniroyal Chemical. I will be using a few maps and diagrams as we all know that a picture is worth a thousand words. I will also be encouraging questions from councillors. Now if there is a question that is either a little off topic or perhaps even a little advanced for a beginning Hydro G tutorial, I will do my best to keep it simple and explain it. 

As of this morning I am gathering a few extra colour diagrams etc which I believe will be particularly helpful and getting them reproduced to distribute to councillors. Likely most of these will be for followup questions or discussion whether by e-mail or in person. Followup interest may be a  function of how well and how much councillors have learned in the pure groundwater tutorial hence that is an incentive to me to do a good job for them.   

OFFER OF A FREE TUTURIAL WENT OFF THIS MORNING

 I revised my initial draft letter more along the lines of Dr. Dan Holt's suggestions and sent all six councillors as well as Drs. Dan and Sebastian copies. I do have a tendency to "editorialize" and both wisely suggested that a short, to the point offer (without too many comments) was best. This I have done. The offer was to any or all six councillors (including mayor) if they are so inclined.

As with any subject there tends to be lots of acronyms and in-house language if you will. I will attempt during this groundwater tutorial to both answer any relevant questions as well as to clearly explain the basics of hydrogeology. For example simply saying that groundwater like surface water generally flows downhill is accurate however there are many nuances involved. Also there are huge issues regarding contaminant hydrogeology and the subject can get somewhat complicated although my favourite saying is that hydrogeology is not rocket science despite some practitioners pretending that it is.  

ANOTHER POTENTIAL INITIATIVE WITH WOOLWICH COUNCIL

 Well I've sent an idea to CPAC and to date have received considerable  feedback from them. The idea actually was first briefly mentioned during e-mail conversations with councillor Nathan Cadeau many weeks ago.  Basically I had offered to give Woolwich councillors a groundwater tutorial. At this point in time I'm waiting for CPAC's final position on a second Draft I've sent them making my proposal to Woolwich Council.

I see the offer as a win-win. New councillors in particular have an onerous learning curve and obviously in most cases hydrogeology isn' t part of that. This however is Elmira, Ontario and in fact it is needed. I would expect Council to have a few questions plus if they're in agreement we still have to pick a day and time.   

FAKE SCIENCE, JUNK SCIENCE, PSUEDO SCIENCE BY WHATEVER NAME IS EMPLOYED BY ELMIRA"S POLLUTERS

 Terms that have been used frequently to describe RAC and TAG include lapdogs, tame, bureaucrats, suits, professional liars (some only), originally Sandy's curling buddies, cringe-worthy and worse. None of this seems likely to deter the hardliners on Council. Some are ideologically hardliners and others are simply non-thinking, lazy hardliners. These are the ones who surround themselves with like thinkers and fellow travellors. It's not only misery that loves company but cowardice thrives with company as well. 

Junk science includes sampling in areas where you are least likely to obtain accurate samples. An example is sampling for sediments in the bottom of the Canagagigue Creek where there are cobbles, heavy stones and other "armouring" on the bottom. As DDT and dioxins/furans adhere to tiny soils particles and fine sediments you can reduce detections of these toxic compounds with selective sampling.

Taking soil samples in the middle of aquifers is a great way to miss where both the subsurface LNAPLS and DNAPLS are. The LNAPLS float on top of the water table (i.e. just above the top of the aquifers whereas DNAPLS sink through aquifers (soils saturated with water) and mostly reside in depressions on the surface of aquitards  (much less permeable clays and silt).  

Intentionally using inappropriate monitoring wells to "prove" hydraulic containment. Wells that are carefully screened in one aquifer or another generally provide very accurate groundwater elevations whether for the Upper Aquifer, Surficial Aquifer, Municipal Upper Aquifer, Municipal Lower Aquifer etc. The problem arises when dishonest brokers (i.e. professional liars) choose wells whose screens intersect two different aquifers. This happens far too often and was used to falsely claim hydraulic containment on the west side (off-site) of Uniroyal Chemical during "optimization" studies (early 2004?) when a well screened in both the UA and MU was used. The UA reading falsely elevated the alleged MU groundwater reading making it appear that off-site MU readings were higher than on-site thus hydraulic containment was supposedly good when it wasn't. This dishonest process was also used with well CH97 just south of Uniroyal during the building of the  Ammonia Treatment System around 2007 and 2008. Again Ch97 was improperly used to "prove" hydraulic containment on the Uniroyal/Chemtura site. The Environmental Review Tribunal eventually did give me a tiny pat on the back for finding that whereas CPAC, Woolwich Council, Pat & Susan had me kicked off CPAC for being right (again). 

Very little ever changes in the land of the blind, incompetent, and intentionally obtuse.

THREE OF THE BIGGEST LIES SOLD BY UNIROYAL/LANXESS WITH CRA/GHD & MOE/MECP SUPPORT

 1) LNAPLS and DNAPLS are are not a serious issue on the former Uniroyal Chemical site in Elmira.

2) The Stroh farm is not highly contaminated with Uniroyal toxins and was not deliberately used as an east side by-pass to transport these toxins into the Canagagigue Creek.

3) Risk levels from Uniroyal toxins are "acceptable" downstream of the site all the way to the Grand River..

Each and every time the professional liars were allowed to move on unscathed to the next distortion and manipulation they knew that their ultimate victory was assured.  Each and every time Woolwich Township did not issue a Press Release condemning Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura/ Lanxess it solidified their status and position. Each and every time the Ministry of Environment produced a report criticizing the company's efforts but then eventually relented it gave the polluter the green light.

Our media knew to be careful and were likely even given a couple of individual's names not to quote. They were also told that yes it was O.K. to publish Letters To The Editor from Pat and Susan as they were allegedly more responsible and professional. To their shame the media generally followed directions. It save them any further defamation lawsuits.

Their ace in the hole was one former resident who has slowly come out from under her camouflage. She has become increasingly emboldened and especially as most of her past colleagues have fallen to the side seems to be almost willing to be considered part of the establishment, to both their shame. She has been an active participant in all three lies.

 

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RESIDENTS OF TOXIC NEIGHBOURHOODS VERSUS DOWNSTREAM RESIDENTS OF THE CANAGAGIGUE CREEK

 First of all is location. Most people move a number of times in their lives whether for work, retirement, to get closer to their kids (or further away) etc. This is quite normal also as neighbourhoods "mature" from young families to older folks over the decades. Now take a look at the 22 Old Order Mennonite families living and farming downstream from Uniroyal Chemical (Lanxess Canada). These are generational family farms. Exactly how many residents of urban neighbourhoods have their children or grandchildren also living as adults in the same home as their parents? Very, very few. Therefore the exposure times for the downstream residents can easily be from in the womb until into the ground.

The generational aspect also permits bioaccumulative  Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) to negatively affect the development of babies in the womb. Hence the exposure of the mother may well be passed onto the fetus especially when we are talking DDT, dioxins/furans/PCBs/PAH, mercury etc . These health effects can range from minor to fatal.

Living and working on the farm full time can also increase exposure compared to a dual working parents being away from the house eight to eleven hours a day. There are a multitude of exposure paths including drinking water, children playing in the Creek, livestock wading in and drinking from the Creek, and soils, sands being used as either garden amendments or for use in children's sandboxes. There are also constant air emissions with Uniroyal/Lanxess toxic air emissions primarily being blown eastwards from the chemical plant towards the downstream neighbours. 

Lastly as the Creek flows through these farms either children or adults can fish in the Creek. Only for the last five years or so have their been warning signs posted along the Creek advising fishermen not to EAT their catch. Even those signs were posted against the vehement wishes of the totally corrupt Ontario Ministry of Environment. These fish are indeed contaminated well above the Ontario fish tissue residue guidelines. See the previous sentence about the "totally corrupt" MECP.