ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THE BULK OF THE UNDISSOLVED CHLOROBENZENE (DNAPL) IS GOING TO BE WITH US FOR A VERY LONG TIME

 

Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a simple plug in formula to determine how many decades, centuries or millennia before all the free phase and residual DNAPL are finally, fully dissolved. Keep in mind the term DNAPL can also be referred to as "free phase" DNAPL when it has pooled on some sort of low permeability surface such as clay or even a silt aquitard. The term "residual" DNAPL refers more to long strings of DNAPL or even simply separated areas of pore spaces with the water in the pore spaces replaced with tiny chlorobenzene droplets. This residual DNAPL is also a long term source area of eventually dissolved chlorobenzene. 

While concentrations of chlorobenzene in the groundwater can be low such as 100, 200 or even a thousand parts per billion (ppb.) nevertheless they are all greater than the Ontario Drinking Water Standard (ODWS) for  chlorobenzene of 80 ppb.. Nearer to the DNAPL source areas concentrations however can exceed 1% of the Solubility of chlorobenzene in water which could be as high as 4,300 ppb in either pure lab water or less in already contaminated groundwater. 

I expect that some sort of mathematical calculations showing the total number of kilograms of  chlorobenzene dissolved within the aquifer is possible. That quantity could then be compared to the thousands upon thousands of gallons of chlorobenzene discharged by Uniroyal into the natural environment. Of course please don't waste my time with any calculations whatsoever done by Lanxess or GHD personnel. "You can't fool all the people all the time.".

DECADES OF MISDIRECTION, DECEPTION & MANIPULATION i.e. LYING

 

I think that I recently mentioned the also deceptive comment from a GHD operative (consultant) that CHLOROBENZENE DOES NOT EQUAL DNAPL. Boy is there some semantics and word twisting going on there. I do believe that the chlorobenzene plume under part of Elmira is not DNAPL.  It is the totally expected slow dissolution or dissolving of chlorobenzene DNAPL that was spilled or dumped by Uniroyal Chemical decades ago. Therefore all chlorobenzene in and around Elmira started as DNAPL but the DNAPL now located in saturated soil is very slowly dissolving into groundwater and those dissolved portions have changed from Non Aqueous Phase to an Aqueous (i.e. water) Phase as they migrate with the groundwater.  

A few quotes may also help to clarify. " The dissolved portion of chlorobenzene moves with the groundwater, while the larger, undissolved liquid portion will sink and can persist in the subsurface." As well there is the following:  "The adsorbed chlorobenzene in the vadose (unsaturated) and saturated zone will take a long time to disappear, liberating contamination in either the gaseous or dissolved state. The resulting plumes (gaseous or dissolved) will be relatively small in size." Finally "Chlorinated solvents have low solubility in water and are denser than water, causing them to sink and accumulate in the subsurface as DNAPLs.".   

For me these quotes from professional and academic sources published on line put things in perspective. Firstly it is clear that pump & treat remediation is plainly the cheapest and least effective  method of remediating chlorinated solvents under Elmira. This was a quote from Dave Belanger of CH2MHILL way back in the 1990s on behalf of the Region of Waterloo. Secondly we were deceived and lied to regarding chlorobenzene leaving the Uniroyal site PRIOR to dissolving in the groundwater. Serious evidence of free phase DNAPL has been found in two locations off the Uniroyal site over the years namely by the Howard St. Water Tower (OW57-32R) as well as on the Nutrite property. Since June 19/25 Jesse Wright of Arcadis has stated that there are another approximate half dozen locations of chlorobenzene DNAPL south-west of the Uniroyal site near First St, Union St. and Howard Ave.

This chlorobenzene DNAPL carried Dioxins and DDT plus more with it and is to this day slowly dissolving into the Elmira Aquifers. This will continue for at least decades more maybe even centuries if you examine the Montrose, California subsurface chlorobenzene and DDT mixture.  

Our authorities have been dishonest and complicit. None of them can be in charge of any new cleanups!

TWO POINTS: BOTH DIOXINS & DDT DISSOLVE IN CHLOROBENZENE AND MIGRATE WITH IT BOTH WITH THE SLOWLY DISSOLVING CHLOROBENZENE PLUME AS WELL AS WITH THE BULK OF THE REMAINING DNAPL

 

So chlorobenzene is hardly the pesky, younger brother hanging around with the older, faster moving more toxic sibling (NDMA). This is partly how chlorobenzene has been falsely portrayed by Elmira polluters and their fellow travellors.  Other important points include the often repeated phrase "slowly" dissolving chlorobenzene or DNAPL.  Contrary to the inferences by Allan Deal (GHD) chlorobenzene basically does equal DNAPL even though the dissolved in groundwater chlorobenzene plume is no longer DNAPL. However every single droplet of the chlorobenzene contaminant plume came from the original chlorobenzene DNAPL discharged into the natural environment by incompetent, negligent or uncaring corporations. Furthermore the bulk of discharged DNAPL remains as DNAPL in the subsurface while only a tiny part of it over decades to centuries actually slowly dissolves into the groundwater.  This dissolution can also be slowed even more by the extent of other contaminants already dissolved in the groundwater.  Hence the term Effective Solubility refers to the actual solubility of a compound such as chlorobenzene in a mixture of groundwater plus all the other contaminants discharged by Uniroyal Chemical. This Effective Solubility is usually very much smaller than the Lab Solubility of the compound in pure water.

DDT and Dioxins are not insoluble in water. Yes they have a very low solubility but particularly in the case of Dioxins their Ontario Drinking Water Standard is more than a thousand times lower than their solubility in water. 

The issue is both the remaining subsurface DNAPLs both on and off the former Uniroyal site including chlorobenzene and others which are and will continue to slow the remediation of the aquifers as well as the accompanying Dioxin, DDT and other contaminants all mixed in.

MOST RESPONSES TO DIOXINS IN OUR DRINKING WATER AQUIFERS HAVE BEEN "NOT SURPRISED" OR "OF COURSE THEY ARE"

 

I'm surprised because I know how carefully and forcefully Uniroyal and successor corporations have repeatedly stated that dioxins and DDT are "hydrophobic" and "insoluble". The first may be true but the second is not. Dioxins have a solubility in water close to 20 ng/l  which means 20 parts per trillion. Yes that is a very low solubility but the terminology of "very low solubility" is more accurate than "insoluble".  DDT on the other hand has a low solubility which varying sources suggest is between 5 and 25 ug/l which means 5-25 parts per billion . This solubility of DDT is approximately 1,000 times greater than the solubility in water of dioxin. Of course as per yesterday's posting however, dioxin is much more toxic than both NDMA and DDT.

The reason people give for actually expecting dioxins in our drinking water aquifers is one of common sense. Everyone knows that Uniroyal Chemical produced Agent Orange for the U.S. military and that dioxins were an unintended by-product of them. Also everyone knows that Uniroyal Chemical dumped or buried hundreds of tonnes  of toxic wastes in, on and under their property in Elmira.  Obviously these same folks either don't believe the lies of the polluter that dioxins and DDT couldn't get into our drinking water aquifers or they don't care or know what the claims are. For them if you have a huge buried mess right there then of course between wind, rain and groundwater toxic things will migrate. 

It gets worse of course in regards to mobility of these truly nasty compounds. There are many more mechanisms available some of which will be shared in upcoming days. Those mechanisms are why human beings around the globe are carrying a body burden of dioxins and more. Some humans are more susceptible to damage from them than others. The list of heath effects are absolutely horrendous. Thank you very much Uniroyal for providing jobs to this community. You made large amounts of money in exchange plus you left your poisons behind.  Next time take the poisons with you and choke on them.

YES WE DO HAVE DIOXINS IN ELMIRA'S DRINKING WATER AQUIFERS

 

Maybe the thought is that the still living old timers here in Elmira have developed an immunity to toxic chemicals ? Maybe after decades of various exposures Mr. Charles Darwin (Survival of the Fittest) has already weeded out those most likely to succumb to chemical onslaughts.  Sure let's fire up the old laboratory and cook us a few more batches of polluted water for our enjoyment. Our authorities are already hinting about uses for the polluted Elmira Aquifers. What a way to solve the housing crisis and the always rising costs of food. Enough quick deaths would also reduce hospital waiting times and free up beds for the younger folk.  Lanxess, MECP and Woolwich Township likely see this as a win-win-win.

Fortunately our authorities in charge of the Elmira groundwater remediation know the first rule of both cleanups and public relations. Never, ever sample or test for parameters (chemicals) that you absolutely do not want to find. Can you imagine the panic and anger levels if Uniroyal Chemical and the Ontario Ministry of Environment had announced during the height of the Elmira water crisis that there was a more toxic chemical in our aquifers than  NDMA?  

The drinking water standard for NDMA is 9 parts per trillion (9 ppt.). That is indeed tiny because it is highly toxic. 

The drinking water standard for dioxins is 15 parts per quadrillion (15 ppq.) .  That is approximately 1,000 times more toxic than NDMA.

So Sandy and Nathan and any other Lanxess apologists on Council do your thing. Announce a public meeting and have ALL the guilty parties present to deny, deny, and deny. The MECP and Region of Waterloo would be a start.  Lanxess and all their consultants can help. 

WHAT COULD IT BE? HAS SANDY RESIGNED? HAVE LANXESS RUN BACK TO EUROPE? WHAT IS GOING ON?

 

Do they have any ethics or morals at all? Did they get written permission from either the companies or the residents along Union St. N. to permit contamination to flow off the former Uniroyal site allegedly to "optimize" the cleanup? This was done starting about twenty years ago. Actually intentionally increasing the sub surface toxic load including in the drinking water aquifers. 

How much of the off-site Dnapls (chlorobenzene & others) have actually been discovered to date? How many are Lanxess and GHD prepared to properly clean up? Originally I was aware of the dnapls at OW57-32R as well as at Nutrite with the extraordinary groundwater concentrations of substances such as Benzothiazole, Mercaptobenzothiazole, Carboxin and Aniline. Now courtesy of common sense and Arcadis (Jessie Wright) we are aware of many more just south-west of the former Uniroyal site. 

Part of the problem of course is how long it will take for the dnapls to dissolve into the groundwater. Until they are either removed or fully dissolved in decades or centuries they will remain as a long term contaminant source to the Elmira Aquifers which they are in. While local contaminants such as NDMA and chlorobenzene to date really aren't that close to drinking water standards after 27 2/3 years of remediation (pump & treat), there are others undoubtedly that are even further from their Ontario Drinking Water Standards. 

Of course we can not count on any honest information from the company, their consultants, the Ministry of Environment, Woolwich Township or the Region of Waterloo. Control Orders are for Putzes would be a good protest sign. Any new claims of miraculous cleanups via a new Control Order is likely wishful thinking.  Any denials by the guilty parties of recently discovered data and facts are most likely shameless and self-serving lying to save money and jobs.

 Remember no lie is too small and no lie is too large not to be embraced and entrained by corporate polluters.

HOW COULD DNAPL BE THE LIMITING FACTOR TO CLEAN UP THE ELMIRA AQUIFERS?

 

Since the June 19/25 TRAC meeting disclosed DNAPL located off-site just south of the company as well as on First St. and Howard St. it has become obvious that we have been lied to for decades. These only just recently disclosed DNAPL locations match the highest concentrations of chlorobenzene in the Municipal Lower Aquifer in this area. 

The other problem is the numerous chlorobenzene/DNAPL sources throughout the area around the former Varnicolor Chemical. Not just around but on both sides (east & west) as well as possibly right on site. These groundwater concentrations should have been picked up on the Varnicolor Chemical site in the shallow aquifer monitoring but allegedly were not. WHY NOT? The map shown by Mr. Wright (Arcadis) is incredible as it shows perhaps as many as nine off-site sources of chlorobenzene/DNAPL. 

Do we at last have the smoking gun proving corruption by the Ontario Ministry of Environment? The lack of chlorobenzene detections on site taken by the M.O.E. was never properly explained. The refusal and indeed reneging on the promise to citizens to sample the deeper aquifer was also never appropriately explained. 

All this off-site DNAPL needs to be properly removed or taken care of. Absolutely zero of the parties involved in the cleanup now should be involved in the future removal of DNAPL as they simply are too dishonest and untrustworthy.

THIRTY-SIX YEARS OF DNAPL EMBARASSMENT & FACE SAVING

 

It sure looks that way. Way back when Joe Ricker on behalf of Lanxess was shilling his plume configuration creds and extrapolating them to encompass some theory of diminishing returns (asymptotic behaviour) when treating contaminated aquifers; I was struck by some very strange concentration numbers. Here was good old Joe, man or suit splaining  why NDMA concentrations could never be reduced to zero as if that ever was anybody's goal which it never was. The goal was and is nine parts per trillion (ppt.) and we are nowhere close. 

But here's what's weird. Barely a word about chlorobenzene whose average concentration in the Municipal Lower Aquifer is 163 parts per billion (ppb.) with a drinking water standard of 80 ppb. Chlorobenzene in the Municipal Upper Aquifer is around 91 parts per billion (ppb). So chlorobenzene after decades of pump & treat also has NOT achieved drinking water standards in Either drinking aquifer. Isn't that just a grand success now if you listen to the heavy duty bull*hit peddled by various credentialed "talking heads" shoved into our faces by the polluter and his corporate successors. Oh and note that chlorobenzene concentrations are literally thousands of times greater than NDMA concentrations ( ppb. versus ppt.) 

Is this indeed why Uniroyal, the M.O.E., Woolwich and the Region of Waterloo, in the understatement of the century, have never been keen on seriously investigating much less remediating either residual or free phase DNAPLS on and off the Uniroyal Chemical site? Is the DNAPL presence the single limiting factor to a cost effective (i.e. cheap) remediation to drinking water standards but nobody in authority (i.e. politicians) back in the early 1990s or since have had the courage or honesty to admit it?

Except of course for myself and a very few close colleagues. Wow! So now all those dishonest dickheads are just too damn embarrassed to ever admit that a layperson with a strong interest and even stronger stubbornness has been right all along while they and all the guilty parties have been lying like dogs.

   

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT IT IS CHLOROBENZENE NOT NDMA THAT IS THE LIMITING FACTOR IN THE ELMIRA CLEANUP?

 

To answer my own question the answer is yes, it is possible. What if the quantities of sub-surface free phase DNAPL are far greater than we've ever been told? What if all the pump & treat in the world will not dissolve all the chlorobenzene fast enough? Say even within fifty years. Maybe that is part of the reason for the long term DNAPL coverup. Our polluters (multiple) and authorities (politicians especially) have known since the beginning that the cleanup simply couldn't be done even in a generation or two due to the DNAPLS which by the way consist of far more than just chlorobenzene.

Even the recent public (June 19/25)  outing of several off-site locations of chlorobenzene may not be fully accurate. How are we to have confidence in a pack of corrupt, lying individuals as well as groups (councillors, Min. of Environment etc.)  who have made a specialty of misleading and deceiving us on so much in regards to the Elmira cleanup?

Why you ask? Simple! If DNAPL precluded any kind of timely cleanup without massive expenditures then why not blame NDMA with it's extraordinarily low drinking water standard ( 9 parts per trillion or .009 parts per billion) . Lay persons plus others could easily fall for that misdirection with enough credentialed suits backing it up whether private suits or public suits. 

All I've ever wanted is the truth. All I and the public have ever gotten is packaged bull*hit .

WHERE IS THE POLITICIAN WITH THE GUTS TO PASS A LAW MAKING BLATANT LYING TO THE PUBLIC ILLEGAL?

 

Well if the lying was based upon number of lies told I believe that Donald Trump would be in jail for multiple life terms.  At least as long as the penalty was at least a month in jail per lie. I also suggest that Premier Doug Ford could keep him company for at least a couple of years or so. Locally I think that mayor Sandy Shantz might also expand her political horizons if she had to share prison with Doug and Donald.. This is despite them all being right wing Conservatives of one brand/name or another. Whatever Ms. Shantz's sins of deception and manipulation regarding Uniroyal/Lanxess and the non cleanup of Elmira I wonder if comparing her to Dougie and Donald is a bit harsh. Eh I don't think so.

Just imagine the lying that would go on during debate around such a draconian law. Draconian at least for the likes of say local wonder Todd Cowan. That dipshit had to struggle to finish a paragraph without somewhere throwing in a lie or two. In his case I believe that it was some sort of psychological crutch or affliction as in it was out of his control.

Honest mistakes or unintentional errors of fact  could be handled less rigorously although a blunt clarification and accurate statement of fact afterward would be required.  Any politician who surpassed a certain number of these "honest mistakes" would soon become suspect. Should a law of this nature be extended say to Chief Administrative Officers (CAO) or other senior executives whether corporate or political? Should it extend to the heads of various government agencies serving the public? I'm thinking of WISB, Boards of Education, Hospitals, Judges etc.? Hmm maybe one step at a time. Tackling public lying by politicians may indeed inundate any process or procedures set up to enforce the no lying to the public law. Let's start with them and see if our governance does improve after application of the new law takes effect. 

TRAC UPDATE AT WOOLWICH COUNCIL ONE WEEK FROM TODAY

 

TRAC or Technical Remediation and Advisory Committee has been generally environmentally useless during its' short tenure. This is understandable, intentional and apparently perfectly acceptable to Woolwich Twn., Region of Waterloo, Lanxess, GHD, GRCA  MECP. and TRAC as well   Think about that for a while and see what unfortunate and unsavoury conclusions you may come to. TRAC's purpose is not to assist the clean up of our aquifers, our Creeks or even the contaminated former Uniroyal Chemical site itself. It is simply to delude and distract as many citizens as possible from the reality of the non cleanup.

We were advised weeks ago that TRAC would be presenting a regular update and status of their efforts and successes next Tuesday August 26/25 at the regular Woolwich Council Meeting. Usually these are feel good moments in which bought and paid for individuals tell the Council and public what a great job that TRAC have done and are doing. It used to be Tiffany Svensson on behalf of TAG (& RAC?) spreading the good news at an annual Council meeting or so. Whether TRAC Chair Nathan Cadeau will do so next Tuesday could be hilarious. First of all there is absolutely no remote chance of "arms length", unbiased reporting and secondly he doesn't know what he is talking about. Being a politician he feels that a brief course or discussion will bring him up to speed.  Simply put he doesn't know what he doesn't know. 

Fans and  friends alike will see the art of lily gilding practiced at the highest levels.         

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE LONG TERM ELMIRA ENVIRONMENTAL UNRESOLVED ISSUES?

Our municipal drinking water aquifers are not remotely potable (drinkable) yet and won't be for decades more. The Canagagigue Creek cleanup hasn't even started! Literally it's all been about sampling and monitoring and trying to scope (reduce) the amount of cleanup required.  Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLS) have been mishandled and intentionally misunderstood both on and off the former Uniroyal site including a failure to clean up even the shallower easier to get at DNAPLS. The Stroh and Martin farms have been improperly and maybe illegally ignored and pollution from Uniroyal Chemical covered up by all parties. The history and facts around the sources and causes of the destruction of our aquifers has been minimized and untruthful particularly the corporate misbehaviours. What passes for public consultation here in Elmira/Woolwich has been contemptible since the start in January 1992. To get away with these coverups, obfuscations and intentional deceptions has required complicity between all parties whether corporate or political. That conspiracy, collusion and corruption needs to be exposed.

 

Hmm PERHAPS SOME DISHARMONY ON CAMBRIDGE COUNCIL?

 

Truth be told I don't know what to think of the article I read in today's K-W Record regarding a possible disagreement between Mayor Jan Liggett and two of her councillors trying to put an item on the Agenda. At the very least I can say that it sure seems like a complicated and difficult process with all the third party (legal) input allegedly required. Overall I'm clear as mud as to who is doing what to whom process wise.

That said based upon Woolwich politics I can tell you that our local keepers of the status quo have little or no respect for fair play or democracy at least not so long as there is a back door or backhanded way for them to get their way. It's all about stick handling through and around things like ethics. morality, right and wrong.

Don't mistake my concerns about disharmony on a council. It's more of an observation actually than any kind of serious concern. I actually am more afraid of a council who always vote nearly the same  on most issues. It gives me the heebe jeebies to think that the buggars are doing all their debating and serious discussions in private. What exactly is so dangerous or frightening that the public should be shielded from the facts and the truth? It actually makes me think that maybe, just maybe something out and out illegal is going on. Years ago our Woolwich Council got their knuckles wrapped for their gamesmanship in hiding stuff via improper and inappropriate "in camera" claims. Have they really learned their lessons?

WELL HERE WE ARE! PATHETIC ON & OFF SITE HYDRAULIC CONTAINMENT

 

Do not be alarmed however. These are professionals fooling around with your groundwater and possibly somewhere down the road your drinking water again. Maybe. If we are lucky. To date they've had thirty-six years to show us what they can do and it's been pathetic. They have made claims as to how many kilograms of chlorobenzene and NDMA they have removed from our former drinking water aquifers which sound impressive. The problem of course is that they are still nowhere near where they have to be for the water to be safe to drink. That is so even by the inadequate standards and lack of parameters tested by the Region of Waterloo and the province of Ontario. 

On-site groundwater pumping has been slipping for the past two or three years. Off-site has been all over the place albeit NEVER even close to the November 2012 promises by CRA and Chemtura (Jeff Merriman) to TRIPLE the volume of pumping. Later they mentioned doubling their pumping but even that has never even come close to being achieved. Isn't it swell when the polluter is in charge of everything and the regulator meekly asks if all is well? 

So the July Progress Report is out and on-site total pumping from wells PW4 and PW6 is a total of 3.2 litres per second. The long term Target is 4.7 litres/second but they haven't hit that since January 2022. That's ONCE IN NEARLY THE LAST FOUR YEARS.  Off-site pumping is even worse. The following off-site wells all have the exact same volume of groundwater pumping last month namely W3R, W5A, W5B, W6A, W6B, W8 andW9. That volume is ZERO !

Bit do not fret. GHD and Lanxess with the usual protection from the MECP say it's O.K.  Let me repeat that: They all say that zero off-site pumping from seven of the eight off-site pumping wells is O.K. Well I don't know about you but when decades of corporate falsehoods and nonsense add up to failure to properly clean both the groundwater and the Canagagigue Creek I remain skeptical.  

WHEN PUBLIC CONSULTATION BECOMES MERE CHEERLEADING & SELF AGRANDIZEMENT

 

At least for a few short years in the early 1990s both Uniroyal Chemical and the Ontario Ministry of Environment kept their egos and arrogance in check. When they didn't they were apt to get their ass** handed to them verbally by any number of citizens including myself, Susan B., Sylvia, Henry Regier, Shannon and others. I recall a few occasions when Shannon let loose and really put Dr. David Ash in his place.  Citizens were rightfully angry and the guilty parties (Uniroyal/M.O.E.) had to mind their manners with a mixture of lies (sorry we didn't know) and guilt (we'll do better). 

Slowly things began to change as the media as well as locals lost interest. Truthful promises of clean (?) water from Waterloo combined with false promises of remediation calmed people down. Even in those days I knew that most citizens attending were not doing the work necessary to keep informed. Likely the plethora of reports, investigations, monthly meetings and Minutes was intentionally difficult for lay persons to stay on top of so most didn't. This was certainly demonstrated in January 1994 when the APT coordinators ignoring both the known DNAPL facts as well as a DNAPL report written by Sylvia, Glenys and I went along with Sylvia's verbal claims that all was well with DNAPLS, completely contrary to reality.  

In hindsight putting councillors Quentin Martin and Grace Sudden on the UPAC committee was simple reassurance that Uniroyal's interests would be protected and they wouldn't be overburdened by citizen demands. Similarly having Greg Pimento of Sulco as the Chair of UPAC was for control purposes as was later on possibly having councillor Ruby Weber as Chair of UPAC. 

Then I began to notice some oddities. New faces would show up at UPAC meetings simply on the recommendation of one UPAC member. I objected and wanted to know why we weren't all consulted regarding a potential new member. Nobody else really seemed to care. I also noticed that Susan B. was getting friends and neighbours onto the committee again without any formal or informal consultation with the rest of the current members. I also noticed that Rich Clausi and other working citizens including APTE members could never attend the daytime meetings that Uniroyal/Crompton/Susan B. and later Pat McLean so favoured.  Those day time meetings excluded almost everybody and I had to lose a half days pay in order to attend.  That was bullshit and thank you very much Susan and Pat.

Nowadays there are credentialed folks on TRAC who literally don't have a clue as to what went on for the first twenty or twenty-five years of UPAC and CPAC. They are left with asking Lanxess for God's sake as to past history. What a farce! The polluter fully captured the public consultation process long ago albeit with the full support of the M.O.E. and Woolwich Township to their utter shame. The removal of CPAC members in September 2015 at the behest of Chemtura and the M.O.E. to Woolwich Township was the icing on the cake. They now have a tame committee who wouldn't say sh*t if their mouths were full of it which they often are.

LEAH GERBER (K-W RECORD) WROTE AN EXCELLENT ARTICLE ABOUT THE STROH PROPERTY 5 YEARS AGO.

 

Mere tokenism. And of course Susan Bryant had to put her two uninformed cents in by suggesting "...that the work of identifying the contamination on this site (Stroh) remains unfinished until the ditch is tested." Great so that's exactly and all that Lanxess did. They did not take either groundwater samples throughout the Stroh farm nor did they take a serious number of soil or sediment samples. Of the two sediment samples taken in a ditch a quarter of a mile long one of them had a concentration of 2,3,7,8 TCDD (dioxin) thirty times higher than the federal criteria of .85 pg/g. The Stroh property is large. A couple of groundwater samples, a few shallow soil samples with several chemical criteria exceedances within 30 feet of the site boundary with Uniroyal/Lanxess and a couple of sediment samples. I repeat mere tokenism.

And Susan Bryant as she has done for three decades gave it her and the long defunct APTE's blessing. This folks is the very definition of a coopted citizen pretending to speak for the public while defending the indefensible. The Record article indicates that I made a presentation to the planning and works committee in June. I'm not sure if Ms. Gerber is referring to the Woolwich or the Regional works committee. Regardless the fix has been in for a very long time which is how and why mayor Sandy Shantz got rid of me and the Chemtura Public Advisory Committee (CPAC) back in September 2015. She knew that honest and informed citizens would never let the Min. of Environment, Lanxess and the Township get away with this abomination. The title of the Record article is "Watchdogs say not enough contaminant testing near new urban zone in east Elmira" dated July 4, 2020. 

ALL PROGRESS CAN & WILL BE WIPED OUT BY BAD GOVERNANCE - THE FUTURE IS BLEAK

 

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record had an excellent article by reporter Terry Pender titled "The rules change every day".  The sub-title of the article is "Retired urban planner Kevin Eby watches his work get "wiped out" across Waterloo Region. Mr. Eby "...oversaw smart-growth plans for the Region of Waterloo that led to high density development along the light-rail corridor."  My somewhat basic understanding of planning principles during that time frame was to reduce urban sprawl into the rural areas outside the settlement areas (K-W, Cambridge, Elmira, Breslau, Wellesley, Ayr etc.). This was to protect trees, forests, farmland, waterways and other natural areas while practicing "infill" within our towns and cities.  Actual development whether new homes or even industrial/commercial projects as much as possible should be built inside the current town and city borders albeit in the appropriately zoned areas. 

That was then and now we have a Progressive Conservative idiot and former drug dealer as our Premier whom I would suggest is less stupid, arrogant and dogmatic then President Donald Trump. There that is my ringing endorsement of Mr. Ford. He has tried to sell parts of our Greenbelt to his developer friends. He has gutted environmental protections by removing many new projects from environmental oversight. He ordered our Regional Council to sign Non Disclosure Agreements regarding an attempted surreptitious land assembly of 770 acres of prime farmland in Wilmot Township. He has extended settlement boundaries here in Waterloo Region "...that rewarded developers and speculators who long supported the Conservative government". These extended settlement boundaries conveniently included the contaminated Stroh and Martin farms located east and south of the former Uniroyal Chemical in Elmira which has been leaking and leaching parathion, lindane, NDMA, dioxin/furans, DDT, PAH etc. for about  the last eighty years.

Fortunately mental geniuses calling themselves politicians, without any formal environmental training or degrees, who have absolutely zero informal training as well say otherwise. Asking polluters and their fellow travellors their opinions on the Elmira "clean up" gives them confidence in supporting both the pathetic non cleanup and the necessary political coverup required to support it. This is the bottom line. Politics trumps everything including proven facts, principles and the lessons of history.  Good planning means nothing when Sandy Shantz says so along with Karen Redman and along with Doug Ford.  Common sense, care and respect for our natural environment mean nothing when our self-serving politicians say so. Human health being decimated by cancer, climate change, air, water and soil pollution  mean nothing when politicians do what they do best which is to lie about these issues. 

Our politicians will be the most likely end of the human race here on earth.

.  

   

OF COURSE ALL THE GUILTY PARTIES PRETEND THAT MY E-MAIL INPUTS TO THEM HAVE NO VALUE OR INSIGHTS

 

Which is interesting when the only person with as much time (?) albeit much less technical understanding has only recently decided to be dressed for the public meetings versus a bathrobe in bed from the comfort of her home. Even when she lived in Elmira versus K-W she had started skipping meetings in person enjoying the convenience of Zoom . As far as time considerations while I've spent time researching both past and current technical data and reports she has spent her time networking, socializing and building political support for the status quo here in Elmira, Ontario. Many, many years ago I thought that that combination of our skills could bring us a successful cleanup. Susan's deviousness, back stabbing, manipulation and penchant for self-promotion destroyed that.

There is no active TRAC (Technical Remediation Advisory Committee) member quite frankly who has a clue what has gone on over the decades. Don't get me wrong. There are a number of very smart and educated TRAC members but they are at a huge disadvantage when being manipulated and obfuscated to by Lanxess's staff and consultants. Many of the lies and deceptions are decades old and many of the issues even precede Sebastian (2011) who is the best of a bad lot.

I will be sending all the guilty parties copies today of my previous two Blog postings (Aug. 8 & 9/25) titled " East Side DNAPLS As Well" and " Almost By Definition We Have DNAPLS On The Stroh Farm".  Please note carefully that these titles are referring to two different locations. The first posting referring to East Side DNAPLS is referring to DNAPLS on the east side of the former Uniroyal Chemical and current Lanxess property.  The second posting of course refers to the Stroh property which is a farm further east of the entire Uniroyal/Lanxess property.

"Guilty Parties" by the way refers to the usual suspects namely Woolwich Township, MECP, GHD, Lanxess, Region of Waterloo, TRAC unfortunately (too compliant, deferential and overwhelmed).

I THINK ALMOST BY DEFINITION WE HAVE DNAPLS ON THE STROH FARM

 

After all despite the horror and anguish displayed by Jeff Merriman years ago when I first suggested that DDT and Dioxin/Furans were DNAPL chemicals; I have seen nothing since to persuade me otherwise.  We do know that Dioxins are on the Stroh farm based upon a very few samples that have been taken including soil samples that I and Se******* took years ago. Also Lanxess have taken a couple of sediment samples in the bottom of the Stroh Drain and hit paydirt with one result of 24.4 pg/g. The criteria for 2,3,7,8 TCDD (dioxin) in sediment is a mere .85 pg/g.

Also of course we have the huge chlorobenzene plume shown underneath the east side pits (RPE 2-5) shown at the June 19/25 TRAC meeting by Arcadis on behalf of Lanxess. That takes a significant quantity of either free phase or residual DNAPL (chlorobenzene) in order to produce that size of a dissolved plume of chlorobenzene in groundwater. The chlorobenzene was initially released mixed in with wastewaters and  pumped into the east side pits where it could readily overflow the open topped pits and gravity flow both westwards and eastwards onto the Stroh property. That fact has been proven by serious concentrations of both DDT and Dioxins found on the Stroh property near Uniroyal's east side pits. Seriously what kind of ass**les locate their toxic waste pits either on the property line of their neighbours or literally within spitting distance of it?

Chlorinated solvents are DNAPLS (dense non aqueous phase liquids). Again DDT is Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane  i.e. lots of chlorine present.   Dioxins (2,3,7,8 TCDD refers to Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin also with lots of chlorine present. These two chemicals also have a density greater than 1 (they are "sinkers") and they have a very low solubility in water. Chlorobenzene is also known as Monochlorobenzene or benzene (C6H6) with one chlorine atom attached i.e. C6H5Cl. Dichlorobenzene has two chlorines attached to a benzene molecule. Trichlorobenzene has three chlorine atoms attached.

Never fear the idio** at Woolwich Township feel that burying this crap on the Stroh farm under roads and commercial buildings somehow will magically make it go away. Well Uniroyal has already tried it and look at the mess they made and continue to pretend to clean up.

EAST SIDE DNAPLS AS WELL

 

Well of course there were/are DNAPLS on the east side of the Uniroyal/Lanxess property. How could there not be? Over the course of the sloppiest dumping, spilling and wishful thinking toxic waste disposal possible various waste streams were switched back and forth and rerouted many times. Eventually pretty well everything ended up everywhere. At the last TRAC meeting (June 19/25) there was a map/figure put up on the screen by the Arcadis rep showing chlorobenzene sources. The largest plume encompassed most of the RPE 2,3,4, & 5 pits along Uniroyal Chemical's eastern property line with the Stroh farm. There were of course both the off-site sources just south of Uniroyal (& a little bit west) as well as the west side of the Creek sources from the RPW lagoons.

Speaking now of just the large chlorobenzene plume on the east side of the site I wonder how many local citizens remember one of a number of Mickey Mouse "investigations" that allegedly occurred near there? Three nearby monitoring wells on the west side of RPE 4 & 5  displayed very high chlorobenzene concentrations repeatedly. Now of course these monitoring wells were between these two pits and the Canagagigue Creek without any known containment of any kind. Well OW-40 was at the top (northern) edge of RPE-4 and OW-41  was at the bottom (southern) edge of RPE-4. The third well was OW-42 and was located at the northern edge of RPE-5, all three of course on the west side of those two toxic waste pits. 

My records show three test pits in and around OW-42 named TP (test pit) #14, TP #15 and TP #16. There is also a nearby Borehole named BH # 8. Funny to me how quietly the data (soil samples) from those test pits was kept quiet. Clearly there are DNAPLS beneath those two pits that were not excavated and removed when the pits were emptied and put into the Envirodome/Mausoleum in 1993. After all the Envirodome had already accomodated much more toxic waste than originally envisioned. How were they also supposed to dig deeper and remove the DNAPLS? 

Then there is also the possibility of a surreptitious Interceptor Trench over on the east side. It kind of makes sense when the Ontario Ministry of Environment bailed out on the hydraulic containment of all aquifers by ignoring the shallow aquifer (UA 1, 2, 3) on the east side.  Almost as if they knew what Uniroyal had done surreptitiously in order to save themselves greater costs by having to pump and treat the east side Upper Aquifers.. 

The DNAPLS intentionally left on the former Uniroyal Chemical site will ensure many more decades (centuries?) of slow leakage affecting both the Elmira Aquifers and the downstream Canagagigue Creek lifeforms. Perhaps unknown to us Lanxess or the MECP are researching methods of speeding up the slow leakage on site in order to restore the property to a more developable state sooner. Of course this will further damage all the downstream and downgradient receptors from benthic lifeforms, fish, wildlife and human beings but these may be viewed as merely collateral damage by sociopaths and psychopaths. 

STILL MORE MECP VIOLATIONS - HAVE THEY NO SHAME?

 

In the June Progress Report we are advised that Item 7. "Remediation of Former Operating Pond Area" is a Control Order reporting requirement. This item actually refers to the DNAPLS found in, through and under these former operating ponds namely RPW 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8. Dnapls were mostly determined to be at shallower depths making them quite accessible for removal if there was the will. There was not. While relatively shallow as in six to twelve metres below the surface they were still often below the bottom of these ponds hence cleaning out the ponds and pretending nothing went through the bottom of them was the game. 

What I find a little brazen is the claim in the June Progress Report that while this project i.e. 7. Operating Ponds/DNAPLS is a Control Order reporting requirement there will be no further details provided in future Progress Reports. The Control Order is supposed to be legally in effect until 2028 yet our illustriously corrupt Ministry of Environment are publicly stating that they are going to ignore it for the next two and a half years. Wow!

Apparently the MECP must feel that they are home free and nobody is looking anymore. Certainly TRAC aren't and certainly our local political bodies aren't. Maybe it is a clear runway to avoiding a public tsunami of contempt and disgust and maybe it isn't.

WHAT DOES WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP HAVE IN COMMON WITH THE REGION OF WATERLOO?

 

That's actually pretty easy. Bad governance is the answer. One can look at how the Region appear to be violating a recent Court Decision ordering them not to dismantle the tent city sitting on Victoria St. near Weber. One can also look at the Region's mishandling of both the Victoria Park encampment and the Charles St. tents they bulldozed a few years back. Or heaven forbid simply look at where their so called control of groundwater has gotten us. Within a decade they will be pushing a Lake Erie pipeline down our throats.

None of these issues however were mentioned by Mike Farwell in his Opinion piece in todays' Waterloo Region Record. Mike was criticizing how our municipalities, school boards and Region of Waterloo have been denying us our democratic right to vote far too often. He lists numerous examples of Guelph, Kitchener, WRDSB and the Region of Waterloo filling vacancies caused by death or retirement by appointment versus by a democratic election.

Here's the thing. Mr. Farwell missed Woolwich Township which did the very same thing in 2021 only significantly worse. Now I'm also remiss here in that I assumed the naughty school board was the WRDSB when in fact it could have been the Separate  (Catholic) School Board. I'm really not sure which (or both?) Mr. Farwell was figuratively throwing stones at. Finally Mr. Farwell does applaud the City of Cambridge for holding a proper byelection in 2023.

Back to Woolwich. They not only held their own citizens in contempt by refusing them a byelection but they also rigged the appointment process.  Yes I said "rigged". I did not say "appeared to rig". I did not say "were alleged to have rigged". I said "rigged". Yes in this day and age especially with what passes for justice here in Waterloo Region I am taking a risk. Also I might add that while there was a time when I didn't have much use for the pre-arranged "winner" of the appointments process; that has changed. Since losing the following real election I have learned a number of positive things about Julie Ann Herteis from a couple of people I respect. I repeat ever since the rigged appointment process quite frankly I have only heard positive, good things about her character and intelligence. Yes I was surprised but I'm not too old to admit when I'm wrong. 

Hence if there is any fallout from this Blog posting I hope it falls solely on the Mayor and Council at the time for their incredibly petty, ignorant and who knows possibly illegal behaviour. Julie Ann may have been the recipient of Council's self-serving largesse but I don't have any knowledge that she was part of the conspiracy. 

JUNE 2025 MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT

Progress my butt! Everything we were told for years and years now apparently is out the window. So was Uniroyal/Chemtura lying to us then or is Lanxess lying to us now? I have a rule of thumb. When in doubt about bizarre or outrageous claims by polluters the odds are 95-97% that you are being lied to as usual. In this particular case I believe that we were lied to by Uniroyal/Chemtura as well as by Lanxess Canada although the lies may very well be on different matters.  

In past decades we were advised that there was a strong relationship between the volume of on-site pumping and the volume of off-site pumping. In fact way back when, rather grudgingly it was admitted that the much higher pumping rates off the Uniroyal/Chemtura site could actually "pull" or draw groundwater contaminants off site. Think about it: if the normal Target pumping rate for on-site wells (whether PW4 & 5 or further back PW1, PW3 and PW4) was 4.7 litres per second and the normal total of all off-site pumping wells was 53 litres per second then everything was good. Keep in mind that the on-site wells pumping to maintain hydraulic containment are right there in the heavily contaminated areas on site and the off-site pumping wells are hundreds of metres and more DOWNGRADIENT i.e. further away such that while their pumping has an influence on-site presumably the pumping wells right there on site are pumping adequately to prevent on-site groundwater from flowing off site.

This relationship has now been clearly abandoned without any public explanation. On-site pumping is a ridiculously low 3.12 - 3.7 litres per second versus the standard for many years of 4.7 l/sec. Meanwhile off-site pumping over the last few years has been higher than the original 53 l/sec sometimes actually hitting 70 l/sec. Currently of course with the also  new and poorly explained slowing of off-site pumping to allegedly mimic some sort of "steady state" aquifer conditions for testing of contaminant concentrations, we can expect much lower off-site pumping. That said June 2025 off-site pumping still averaged 62.8 l/sec with greatly reduced on-site pumping just beginning on June 27/25. 

It just seems so obvious to me that what they are doing is lessening Lanxess's toxic load on their property here in Elmira by allowing it to be drawn off-site and downgradient by their greatly reduced on-site pumping over the last couple of years and more. Don't expect any TRAC members to demand a better or clearer explanation of what's going on. That would be viewed as rude or disrespectful and if this "cleanup" is about anything it's about always being nice. Sandy says that is important.   

POLLUTER'S BIBLE: HOW TO OVERCOME CITIZEN RESISTANCE, ORGANIZED OPPOSITION & EVEN THE MOST REASONABLE PUBLIC CRITICISM

 

First off appoint a committee. That's the first way to destroy mass public opposition. Put a few popular figureheads on the committee and immediately public interest will wane as they believe that those figureheads will do all the heavy lifting. Schedule the public meetings during business hours. Yes this is for the convenience of the polluter, government personnel etc. and will weed out the hourly, wage paid riff raff who actually pay the vast majority of councillors and Min. of Environment's salaries. I should have picked up on this in 2000 when Pat McLean and Susan Bryant refused evening CPAC meetings forcing me to take paid time off work to attend.

Make certain right from the start that the Chair is one of yours. It can be obvious or not but later key decisions will be made by the Chair, usually unilaterally and quietly, that will make a huge difference. Certainly go through the motions such as following Robert's Rules at the meetings. That will give the minority, honest and straightforward members confidence that the committee is for real. Of course it isn't but you don't want the honest citizens dropping off the committee prematurely. 

Make certain that even your friends and fellow travellors on the committee speak glowingly about the environment, the beauty of nature and the responsibility of everyone to be going in the same direction despite you and your  supporters utter contempt for anything other than profits and the bottom line. Keep your biases and right wing, pro business at all costs attitudes to yourselves until finally the committee totally reflects your attitudes. This easily could take years but patience and time are on your side. Remember for most people just talking about a problem and pretending to solve it is absolutely huge. They believe that the very act of a public meeting is a validation of their legitimate environmental concerns. The polluter however knows that talk is cheap, cleanup is not.

Sometimes push may come to shove. When necessary have your supporters wave a red herring in front of a recalcitrant member so as to provoke a reaction. Then have the majority jump on this member and question his loyalty to the group and to their fellow members. Provoke him if necessary with bull**it and weak logic so that he either quits the committee or they decide to remove him for obstructing the flavour of the day issue (eg. such as Ammonia Treatment). Yes it's obvious later and petty but it also begins to cement the wrong idea that the committee must always agree and be unanimous in their decisions. It also scares those who have invested much time and effort and feel that they are a part of the group and hence of the eventual solution.

There is a lot of psychology and manipulation involved in all of this. However when all the liars and biased pro polluters know the game and the other early members do not, it can and will work. The key for the polluters is also to have made private deals with all the other "stakeholders" before the committee starts. Having both local government on side via legal bribes if necessary as well as the provincial Min. of Environment pretty much guarantees long term success no matter how disgusting the private deals are. It is a myth that our authorities only work on behalf of the public interest.  They are always looking out for Number One not for you and I.

Thirty-three years of bogus public consultation here in Elmira and of course nothing promised has been accomplished. That requires money, resources and will. The first two are available but the last never has been by all our guilty parties. 

DNAPLS: THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING

 

January 2007 : I've forgotten the exact date but have no doubt about the year and month. I was invited along with Susan Bryant, Pat McLean and Wilf Ruland to a chat with Drs. John Cherry and Beth Parker at their offices at the University of Waterloo to discuss DNAPLS which was their specialty to say the least.  In hindsight especially it is amazing how little the groundwater contamination expertise at the University was called upon by anybody whether polluter or citizens such as Susan with close ties to the University.

We all travelled in the same car and of course the talk was all about DNAPLS and how the current thinking  favoured leaving them in place at contaminated sites despite their known long term negative effects on groundwater quality. Various reasons were given to me by all three of my colleagues as to why little or nothing could or should be done about them at Uniroyal/Chemtura.

Besides discussions we were given a number of copies of Bulletins that the two Doctors had published in recent years. Surprisingly when they were all passed to me and I tried to distribute them equally to the four of us, the other three all declined. The suggestion was that I could read them all first and then pass them along to whomever wanted them. That turned out to be nobody, never. I have them to this day and reference them occasionally still.

The two Doctors who were world class experts in the field had made amazing progress in their knowledge and understanding of these highly toxic and dangerous compounds in recent years. Concerns about further spreading them through the subsurface accidentally while in the process of removing or containing them were apparently overstated. Yes care was required when excavating or drilling in search of them but it was quite achievable. I was so engrossed in what I was hearing that it wasn't until the return trip in the car with the other three that I realized how quiet and possibly sullen they were. What the heck I said why so glum. This is all good news.

Seriously you would have thought that somebody died. It was only then or a little later that I figured out what was going on. I was the only one at CPAC still pushing hard for DNAPL (Free phase & residual) removal from the Uniroyal site in Elmira. It seemed to me that everybody else had somehow signed off on actually doing anything about them. Over the years the denials of their presence had waxed and waned by the parties always with the attitude it's best to leave them alone. Well that plan sure got shot out of the water by Drs. Cherry & Parker. Or at least so I thought. I had been brought along to this meeting for the express purpose of having my mind and position to remove DNAPLS reversed by the two Doctors which clearly did not happen. They were not part of the plan nor was I.

Back at CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Committee) NOTHING happened. I asked when the meeting with the two experts would be put on the Agenda. Delay after delay and excuse after excuse it did not happen. I was finally beginning to sniff out the fact that I had a lot fewer friends and supporters at CPAC than I thought. Then of course the two pieces of crap backstabbed me over a non issue that would and did eventually work itself out namely the Ammonia Treatment System. Despite it's flaws that I pointed out it's construction proceeded without any delay remotely due to my criticisms (later proven accurate by the ERT) of some of the conditions  surrounding it.

The DNAPL meeting at the University of Waterloo has NEVER been referenced or put on the Agenda by Susan Bryant or Pat McLean since. They covered it up in order to help Chemtura and to continue APTE's shameful dereliction of duty way back in 1994. I say APTE's dereliction of duty when in fact while they were uninformed, it was Sylvia who led that charge.