MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT (M.O.E.) CORRUPTION IN ELMIRA, ONTARIO

For the moment we will forget (Ha!) Jim Dochstader and Glen McDonald, two former M.O.E. officers who were fired and faced criminal charges for their actions. Now Mr. McDonald among other things tipped off Severin Argenton about the upcoming May 17 ? 1990 raid on his business at 62 Union St. in Elmira (i.e. Varnicolor Chemical). Mr. Dochstader, I have been advised, may have used his M.O.E. position inappropriately and been involved in some paperwork shenanigans to improperly assist a client (polluter?) . Now what I always found interesting was that prior to working in the Sarnia area Mr. Dochstader was involved here in Elmira with the Uniroyal Chemical file. 

After the M.O.E. excavated the buried tanker behind Varnicolor's office building that I informed them about, they immediately cut it up with a torch. This was after promising myself, Rich Clausi and APTE that they would carefully examine it first looking for intentional drainage holes or other anomalies.  They blatantly and intentionally destroyed evidence that could have made a huge difference in understanding the extent and volume of dumped toxic liquid wastes on that site.  It also probably reduced the jail sentence that Mr. Argenton received  as the Judge did not know the extent of damage he had done to the Elmira drinking aquifers. 

On top of that they virtually ignored the buried septic tank that was also hooked up to the floor drain in the (orange) office building. This buried septic tank had likely been converted to a toxic liquid waste disposal system after Elmira was hooked up to the Elmira Sewage Treatment Plant in 1965. All in all a sophisticated and cunning method of disposing of inconvenient toxic wastes without having to pay for proper disposal.

The Ontario Ministry of Environment knew all this yet never raised it at trial or anywhere else. They always wanted to minimize evidence and facts of other polluters than Uniroyal Chemical in Elmira. Why?  Probably because it would damage the false narrative that the M.O.E. and Uniroyal agreed on as part of the settlement package for both their illegal and inappropriate environmental behaviours over the decades. 

VARNICOLOR CHEMICAL WAS NOT A WATER PISTOL IN A THUNDERSTORM - LANXESS & GHD SAY SO

 

Here's the rub. The compromised beyond all repair, Ont. Min. of Environment (MECP), hasn't even commented publicly if you can believe that. It was their lawyer/prosecuter Stan Berger who made that  comment about Varnicolor at the Environmental Appeal Board Hearings back in the early 1990s. The then M.O.E. wanted all pressure and leverage they could get against Uniroyal Chemical so they actively lied and covered up Varnicolor's guilt. It was yours truly along with Rich Clausi, Ted Oldfield and Susan RUPERT (not Bryant)  who dragged Varnicolor out of the shadow of Uniroyal and exposed their intentional dumping among other sins.

Lanxess and GHD have recently listed four or five different chlorinated solvents that they now admit migrated from Varnicolor into the Municipal Upper Aquifer under Elmira. This is one of the two drinking water aquifers that have been contaminated for decades. Early on in the 1990s there was a hydrogeological report known as the Golder Report which described the horrid state of Varnicolor's shallow aquifer. It included evidence of both LNAPLs and DNAPLs yet at the time we the public as well as APTE and after 1994 the Elmira Environmental Hazards Team (EH-Team) knew very little about how insidious both could be.  

Around 1994 it was suggested to us that a decade of shallow aquifer pump & treat at Varnicolor would clean up the site. Elmira Pump bought the property approximately in the early 2000s and have been trying to obtain a Record of Site Condition from the MECP at least since 2016 unsuccessfully. By the way the M.O.E. (Min. of Environment) promised to install deep monitoring wells way back in the early 1990s and then immediately reneged on that promise when Phillips Environmental showed an interest in buying the site.  To the best of my knowledge (due to MECP secrecy /shame?) the Varnicolor/Elmira Pump site still requires some environmental work. 

Regarding political corruption it is of some interest to note that former Woolwich CAO Bill Kowalchuk after leaving Woolwich Twn. immediately was hired by Varnicolor to help increase the variety of waste class licenses they held.  This required conversations and lobbying with the M.O.E. and with the Ontario government which did allow a serious expansion of their solvent inventory and further mismanagement. 

Thank you to all levels of government oversight for your ongoing protection of polluters and systemic suppression of honest citizens trying to improve our environment. 

FURTHER CRITICISMS OF TIFFANY SVENSSON'S PRESENTATION TO WOOLWICH COUNCIL LAST TUESDAY

 

I had mentioned other fabrications. Today however I may focus more on deceptions than fabrications. By the way her fabrication regarding the Stroh farm contamination issues not only has not been RESOLVED but I have had complaints and concerns from citizens other than myself about it. They too do not appreciate their legitimate strong concerns and evidence being swept under the carpet by either professional or amateur liars. This has been the case with this "cleanup" from day one whereby the guilty parties ignore citizen concerns as mere opinions while elevating their hired consultants opinions as edicts handed down by God him/her self.

Tiffany needs to give councillors a more rounded and complete understanding of the extent of the contamination. There are not merely two plumes, one being chlorobenzene and the other NDMA. Despite phony claims that they have merely "scoped" all the chemical contaminants into two inclusive groups, that is not accurate. The breadth and variety of contaminants includes chlorinated solvents, unchlorinated solvents, BTEX compounds which are LNAPLs (floaters), pesticides/herbicides, fungicides, PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), Dioxins, PHCs (petroleum hydrocarbons) including fuels and so much more.

Then there is the actual concentrations of NDMA and chlorobenzene still in the Elmira Aquifers. Lanxess and GHD would like the public to believe that their pump & treat remediation has been so successful that they are almost finished! That is bullsh*t. NDMA in the Municipal Upper Aquifer has an average concentration NINE TIMES HIGHER than the ODWS (drinking water standard). NDMA in the Municipal Lower aquifer has an average concentration ONE HUNDRED and FIFTY TIMES HIGHER than the ODWS.

Then we have chlorobenzene . It's average concentration in the Municipal Upper Aquifer is more than 50% HIGHER than the ODWS and in the Municipal Lower Aquifer is more than TWICE as high as the ODWS.

That folks is not success, it is FAILURE 36 years after Elmira's wells were shut down in 1989.

 

MORE ON TUESDAY EVENING'S WOOLWICH COUNCIL MEETING

 

Following is a copy of my Delegation spoken to and e-mailed to Woolwich councillors afterwards:

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF MY REMARKS TO WOOLWICH COUNCIL ON SEPT. 23/25

The Montrose Chemical Co. is located in Los Angeles, California. They produced DDT which resulted in a plume of dissolved chlorobenzene, free phase chlorobenzene DNAPL and a benzene plume. DDT was also transported both by chlorobenzene DNAPL as well as by the dissolved in groundwater, chlorobenzene. Early attempts at a remediation plan of pump & treat resulted in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calculating cleanup times of between 3,100 years and 5,800 years. Here in Elmira our polluter and their political supporters have found a different solution. Basically despite all evidence you simply deny, deny and further deny the presence of both off-site DNAPL by the Howard St. Water Tower as well as on-site DNAPL . Recently according to the Minutes of the September 12/24 TRAC meeting the presence of DNAPL by the water tower and pumping well W4 was admitted, literally after decades of denial. Hints are beginning to emerge regarding DNAPL from Uniroyal also gravity flowing onto the Nutrite/Yara property.

Both DDT and dioxins entrained in DNAPL and dissolved in chlorobenzene have left the former Uniroyal site and spread through Elmira. One issue is that despite decades of denials that either DDT or Dioxins will dissolve in water, the fact is that they can dissolve at a very low concentration. What is very concerning with Dioxins is that because their drinking water standard is so much lower than even NDMA it is possible to have Dioxins in groundwater exceeding the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS).

Other issues abound. For example while we know the drinking water standard for NDMA as the sole contaminant in water, what is that standard when mixed with chlorobenzene in the water? What are both the standards for these toxic chemicals when mixed with another fifty or one hundred toxic chemicals? There are no such standards despite the obvious health implications. The drinking water standard for Dioxin is 15 parts per quadrillion ( 15 ppq) in clean water. Again what is the standard when Dioxin is mixed in with Uniroyal Chemical's other chemicals?

I have some advice for Woolwich Council. If you continue doing exactly what you've been doing and that is following the advice and lead of the corporation currently responsible for the badly damaged aquifers and for the ongoing damage to the Canagagigue Creek, you will be in the same position in another 36 years. This goes for their fellow travellor the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MECP) as well. Both bodies have turned a blind eye to the long term effects of DNAPLS as well as of DDT and Dioxins in and around both ground and surface water.

Alan Marshall

CPAC & Elmira EH-Team

Recent (between 3-12 months ago) admissions by Lanxess, Woolwich Twn. and the MECP after decades of brutal and blatant lying include:

DNAPLS were/are? present at former pumping well W4 beside the Howard St. Water Tower.

Dioxins and DDT are still eroding from on-site Uniroyal/Lanxess creekbanks .

Residual DNAPL still exists by on-site (SW corner) observation well OW88-19

Six to eight other locations/companies in Elmira (near First St., Union St., Howard Ave.) handled or still handle chlorobenzene on their properties

Varnicolor Chemical did help pollute the Elmira drinking water aquifers with chlorinated solvents.

Our political authorities at all levels have accepted and permitted this gross deception of the public and coverup of the truth. Does anyone honestly believe that care and control of further cleanup should remain in their hands? 

PUBLICLY LYING TO WOOLWICH COUNCIL IS NOT ONLY O.K. BUT WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING PERSONS TO DO SO

 

Tiffany Svensson, hydrogeologist, was Chair of TAG from 2017 until maybe a year and a half to two years ago when councillor Nathan Cadeau (5 minute man) took over.  At one point I did see that she had made $30,000 in one year from Woolwich Township for a very part time job. Yes it's an important job but why are Woolwich taxpayers paying her when in fact she is working on behalf of Lanxess Canada? 

Tiffany delivers TAG now TRAC updates to Woolwich Council twice a year. They are mostly lily gilding, bullsh*t. Now of course all good bullsh*t requires some facts to hang its' hat on. Tiffany does a pretty good job as a credentialed cheerleader and as well I see her as providing cover and protection from negligence or incompetence allegations against Council members. Afterall now councillors only have to say well we took advice from a credentialed hydrogeologist who certainly knows more than we do about these matters. Yes she does but she is no Dr. Richard Jackson who told it like it was during his stint as Chair of TAG from September 2015 - December 2016. . 

Tuesday night at Council among a few fabrications Tiffany gave a really good one. She stated that community concerns with the Stroh Drain were "Resolved".  Really? Well that's news to me and I'm the one who raised them in the first place in 2014.  All we've had since is delays, bullsh*t, more delays, a couple of sediment samples tested and lots more bullsh*t from professional liars mostly. 

The sediment samples tested had a result of 24.4 ppt. with a health criteria of .85 ppt. for 2,3,78 TCDD. That result is about thirty times higher than the health criteria.  One of the DDT breakdown compounds also exceeded the health criteria. Did any of these results cause a more comprehensive and extensive sampling program?  Of course not. This is Elmira/Woolwich where common sense has long been replaced with money, power, credentialism and you guessed it...more bullsh*t. 

Not all Woolwich councillors are naive, immature or stupid. Some of them know, especially the mayor, that they are being fed pablum when they are told that the cleanup is going well. I mean really there is no lack of brass on display when they tell the public that no the aquifers will not achieve drinking water standards by 2028 but we professionals are all over this and can assure you that everything possible is being done.  THAT WAS A LIE, IS A LIE AND WILL CONTINUE BEING A LIE  possibly for the next 36 years (1989-2025  &  2026-2062 ) or more. 

WOOLWICH COUNCIL MEETING LAST EVENING

 

Just another stinker although after decades of effort I can report that Woolwich Council are much better behaved than they used to be. Former councillor Mark Bauman was the first to realize that verbal sparring with someone (me) who has more direct knowledge of Uniroyal/Lanxess in his little finger than all the councillors and mayor combined was not going to work for them. Hence they did not interrupt my Delegation however they did indicate their lack of knowledge or perhaps biases by not asking a single question. 

I spoke for seven minutes as permitted and focused on Lanxess and the MECP's having turned a blind eye to the issues of DNAPLS as well as the issues of DDT and Dioxins migrating off-site of Lanxess onto both Nutrite/Yara and likely to the now admitted DNAPL found beside the Howard St. Water Tower and pumping well W4. By turning a blind eye I mostly mean lying like dogs about it for decades. Only recently (last June 19/25 ) was there allegedly an admission as per the Minutes released months later that there used to be DNAPLS at pumping well W4. Other tidbits about that include the fact that W4 by itself pumped more chlorobenzene out of the groundwater than all the other off-site pumping wells combined which is precisely because it had free phase chlorobenzene DNAPL immediately beside it.

Here's another tidbit without formal admissions or explanations yet. Off-site pumping well W3 pumped more NDMA out of the Elmira Aquifers than all the other pumping wells combined. Think carefully about that if you will. That well is located one or two hundred yards/metres due south of Sanyo and also pretty close to the former McKee Harvestor in the south end of town. 

Yes Dorothy we've been lied to on so many fronts by so many allegedly honest persons in authority here in Elmira.

I WATCHED LAST THURSDAY'S TRAC MEETING VIA THE TOWNSHIP'S WEBSITE

 

It was a stinker as usual without any socially redeeming value. It was an hour and a quarter of my life that I will never get back.  There was a long presentation from Jen Lindall (?) of Integral Inc. advising how they were going to be peer reviewing the HHERA otherwise known as both the Human Health & Ecological Risk Assessment but known by myself and more informed citizens as acute green washing. You simply hire a company, tell them in advance that you have no intentions of  spending money on a cleanup but need some paperwork backup to support that decision.

Apparently this process will add about eighteen months to the whole do nothing process which is money well spent versus dozens of millions of dollars removing DDT and Dioxins from the Creek sediments, soils and floodplain soils. We were advised that if warranted there could be some soil or sediment removal. YES! Wait a minute...warranted by whom? Sure as hell nobody currently involved has any interest in much more than talking, delaying and for variety stalling.

Brian Broomfield did sort of try to suggest that there had been loads of studies and he is correct. That went nowhere however. Long time member (TAG & TRAC) Dave Hofbauer has resigned due to family commitments. His presence unfortunately had been very sporadic the last couple of years as he is a smart cookie. Maybe why he's hitting the road as many before him have. 

The dumbest statement of the evening was that of Lou Almeida (GHD) who suggested that they had been pumping their wells "too aggressively" in the past. He wants to see less pumping going on as he claims it could be beneficial to do so. After decades of constant failing to pump to their own recommended rates and admittedly of not going to achieve drinking water standards by 2028 as mandated, his position is completely the opposite of what we the citizens were told for decades. Sebastian has suggested that he would like to see some evidence of this bizarre claim by Lou.  

WILL TOMORROW NIGHT BE NO MORE THAN THE GLASS HALF FULL VERSUS THE GLASS HALF EMPTY?

 

My understanding is that Agenda Item 4.3.2  at Woolwich Council meeting Tuesday evening will be Tiffany Svensson praising the heroic efforts over the years of Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura and now Lanxess to clean up the nasty pollution left behind because nobody knew any better. Then Agenda Item 4.3.3 will be yours truly suggesting that hey wait a minute, exactly how smart do you have to be to know better than to dump directly into the local Creek.  Of course as the saying goes the truth is sometimes found in the middle of two opposing views. 

Were there any serious waste disposal options for Uniroyal Chemical from 1944 until 1970 when the most blatant dumping finally ended? Were these options presented to Uniroyal by either the Ontario Water Resources Commission (OWRC) or later by the Ontario Ministry of Environment? Would the options presented have avoided the shutdown of Elmira's drinking water aquifers? Would they have avoided at one time our creek (Canagagigue) almost being devoid of life? Would hundreds to thousands of people been spared ill health and premature deaths?

Nobody can change the past only the present and the future. We need to be certain that our current actions are in the best interests of the public and the environment, not the best interests of either Lanxess Canada or the Ontario Min. of Environment (MECP).

MULTIPLE POTENTIAL CHLOROBENZENE SOURCES WITHIN ELMIRA - ONE MORE BAIT & SWITCH TACTIC?

 

When you are dealing with long term proven dishonest persons one becomes used to second guessing everything they say and do. Therefore even when it appears that information that should have been known and made public 36 years ago has now suddenly been made public; one tends to question it. Why was it finally released now? Who benefits? For me the answer as always is the corporate entity (Lanxess) currently on the hook to clean up the aquifers. What good does the release of information that should have been known in 1989-1990 courtesy of Minister of the Environment, Jim Bradley's five man team sent to Elmira to investigate other sources of NDMA and solvents within Elmira's groundwater. The answer is that these six to eight new potential sources of chlorobenzene provide cover for the also recently  admitted chlorobenzene DNAPL found in 1998 beside the Howard St. water tower in the bottom of observation well OW57-32R .  Pumping well W4 was then installed nearby in order to help pump out free phase DNAPL from the nearby area as well as the already dissolved chlorobenzene in the aquifers. It was Jesse Wright of Arcadis who announced these on site chlorobenzene sources last June at a TRAC meeting. 

It's all about managing the publics' knowledge of the Elmira water crisis. It sounded so much better 36 years ago to say that nobody had ever heard of much less tested for NDMA way back then and that the Min. of Environment only missed one bad apple, namely Uniroyal Chemical, versus say Nutrite/Yara, Varnicolor Chemical and however many more are finally publicly released. Similarly it's better to say that the problem is NDMA and chlorobenzene and not mention DDT and dioxins, not to mention the other hundred or so solvents and chemicals used by Uniroyal Chemical. 

 

BAIT & SWITCH TACTICS AT UNIROYAL/LANXESS HAVE ALWAYS WORKED

 

Last June's TRAC meeting had an interesting point in the Minutes (page 7) advising that DDT and Dioxins were likely still eroding from the creekbanks on the Lanxess site and moving downstream where they replenished creekbank soils, floodplain soils and sediments in the bottom of the Canagagigue Creek.  This would seem obvious when after many decades of spring floods plus others that the DDT and dioxins hadn't all been washed downstream as Uniroyal undoubtedly had hoped would occur after on-site dumping ended around 1970.  Hmm did Lanxess or any predecessors ever previously admit to still being the source of new downstream contamination? This suggestion of course also swings attention away from any contributions of DDT and Dioxins from the Stroh and Martin farms previously contaminated by Uniroyal Chemical. 

Is the sudden and decades belated interest in better groundwater cleanup technologies also a convenient bait and switch? By focusing now on alleged new technologies such as ISCO, thermal, encapsulation or whatever are we also conveniently forgetting the fact that Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura/Lanxess have never consistently achieved the Target pumping rates that their own consultants recommend? This goes for both on site and off site (Elmira Aquifers) pumping. 

Similarly the Ontario Min. of Environment are waving a new Control Order around as if it will be the saviour of all that ails the Elmira Aquifers. A 2028 MECP Control Order will be exactly as effective as the last Control Orders from 1984, 1991, 2000 etc. which were regularly amended to Uniroyal Chemical's advantage. So much for the earlier Orders demanding Full Hydraulic Containment in ALL Aquifers on site as well as Removal of DNAPLS as a Contaminant Source. 

Nothing but more hot air and useless words. The cleanup has failed and will continue to fail until the company  legally responsible (Lanxess) for the cleanup is removed from being in charge of said cleanup. While we are cleaning house the MECP also needs to be thrown out of Elmira never to darken our doorways again with their pro polluter bias at the expense of human health and the environment.

 

CAN I TAKE SOME CREDIT FOR LANXESS'S RECENT REVELATIONS?

 

Frankly that hadn't crossed my mind until today. Why are they doing this? Could it be they' re hoping that by divulging some secrets/lies they can avoid others being found?  Admitting that Varnicolor was bad enough to pollute our deeper drinking water aquifers is huge. Similarly is the admission that there used to be DNAPL at former pumping well W4. This basically condemns both Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE/MECP) as they denied it both verbally and in writing. 

Now I will say that it was done super low key. No big build up or announcement whatsoever. In fact it was done so quietly at TRAC that likely 99% missed the first time around . Now it's even likely that a very large percentage didn't pick up on it even weeks or months later when the Minutes were released. Most of TRAC know absolutely nothing about Varnicolor  hence hearing that some other company decades ago contributed to the groundwater contamination isn't a big deal for them. Similarly learning that free phase DNAPL did exist on the top of the Municipal Aquitard (i.e. the bottom of the Municipal Upper Aquifer) at well OW57-32 (beside pumping well W4)  doesn't upset them because they have zero knowledge of the history of disinformation and coverup of DNAPL both on and off the former Uniroyal site. 

Is it possible that Uniroyal/Lanxess at this late date want some kind of recognition that Uniroyal was not the only dirty polluter of solvents and chemicals in Elmira?  Nutrite/Yara did contribute Ammonia to our drinking water aquifers and now we know that Varnicolor followed in Uniroyal's footsteps. How beneficial would it be for Lanxess to be able to say that well their predecessor Uniroyal was only one of several local polluters? Adding another half dozen or so suspects is an interesting angle.

What about the decades late admission that so many other companies in town used chlorobenzene in their processing? With 2,000 kilograms of excess chlorobenzene already pumped out of our Municipal Aquifers we already knew that there had to be other sources. I figured that the DNAPL beside W4 was the main culprit but now the revelation of chlorobenzene use by First St., Union St. and Howard St. companies muddies those waters. Did the DNAPL flow all the way from Uniroyal or were one or more of the closer sources  responsible?

Could part of the decision to release (confirm) these two old facts i.e. Varnicolor guilt and DNAPL at W4/Howard St. water tower plus the new one about six to eight chlorobenzene sources in Elmira near Uniroyal/Lanxess be no more than pettiness as in geez we don't want him (me) making the announcement and getting any credit for his knowledge. In fact while they confirmed what I told them in 2006 about OW57-32R (water tower) the discovery of multiple nearby potential DNAPL sources might just be to a) get Uniroyal/Lanxess off the source of the DNAPL at W4 and b) make me look incorrect in thinking it came from Uniroyal or Varnicolor etc.

I'M BOOKED TO BE A DELEGATE AT COUNCIL FOR NEXT TUESDAY AT 7 pm. IN WOOLWICH COUNCIL CHAMBERS

 

I expect a warm welcome from the dumbest councillors (& mayor) who may have inadvertently repeatedly read this Blog over the last few months or even decades (i.e. since May 2010). It is fair to say that on occasion(s) I may have questioned some of  their credibility or adherence to facts when ridiculous fictional versions were more palatable to Uniroyal and successor polluters.  

I have been advised that TRAC will be presenting an update at this Council meeting. It is in response to that update that I have decided to give Council and the public a less lily gilded version than is likely from TRAC. Now don't get me wrong. Just because TAG and TRAC have jumped through lots of unnecessary and irrelevant hoops and loops does not mean that there are not both intelligent people on the committee as well as honest ones. Unfortunately they are in way over their heads with very little honest direction being given by the MECP or Lanxess/GHD.

I will simply be pointing out some of the reasons why the 2028 mandated cleanup has/will fail plus why it could take another thirty, sixty or longer years to get to drinking water standards. 

NO APOLOGIES: JUST QUIETLY REVERSE POSITIONS AND HOPE NO ONE NOTICES

 

I am of course referring to recent events in which Lanxess, via third parties of course, have reversed positions on both off-site DNAPLS and other sources to the Elmira Aquifers contamination.  It is now in writing that besides Uniroyal Chemical and Nutrite/Yara as polluters of the Elmira Municipal Aquifers; Varnicolor Chemical can now be added to the list of miscreants. Four or five different chlorinated solvents (DNAPLS initially) released at the ground surface through spills, sloppiness and sometimes intent made their way through aquitards and shallow aquifers downwards and into the Municipal Upper Aquifer. This is as per the Minutes of that idiot Allan Deal's (GHD)  public presentation last September and includes 1,1 dichloroethene, 1,2 dichloroethene, trichloroethene, vinyl chloride and dichloroethane. 

Then there is the decades old lies about DNAPL presence at observation well OW57-32R in which DNAPL was both inadvertently drawn to surface from 33 metres below ground where it sat on top of the Municipal Aquitard (MAT) and initially identified as DNAPL. That was walked back in following statements and reports as Uniroyal/Chemtura realized their error (strategic versus factual). This location was beside the Howard St. water tower and in fact pumping well W4 was also located right there for the express purpose of pumping high concentrations of dissolved chlorobenzene from the sub-surface. In fact W4 pumped more chlorobenzene from that one location than all the other off-site pumping wells together. This location likely did not have as much DNAPL as say near the on-site wells OW88 -8 &  -19 or pumping well PW4 hence it may be possible that decades of pumping at W4 significantly reduced the DNAPL presence.  Again ironically it was the idiot Allan Deal who showed us this with his chart and later Minutes of his presentation.. 

Well of course in the ensuing months and a very few TRAC meetings no TRAC members have brought up these astounding developments because they generally don't know crap about the history of the site they are allegedly observing/monitoring. Susan Bryant may not have forgotten but she sure as hell doesn't want to remind anyone of her decades long stance as a DNAPL DENIER along with the rest of the guilty parties. Off-site DNAPLS including chlorobenzene are now admitted (tentatively at least) by Jesse Wrighte (Arcadis)  near First St., Union St. and Howard Ave..  As well  Varnicolor Chemical had both DNAPLS and LNAPLS in their groundwater along with the DNAPLS at W4, OW57-32 and area (water tower). 

Multiple additional sources to the destruction of our drinking water aquifers plus off-site DNAPLS making a difficult job much harder, perhaps impossible. These belated revelations are because of the coverup and corruption of the polluters, the Ont. Min. of Environment and of local politicians (councillors). 

TRAC MTG. THIS THURSDAY AT 6 PM. I'LL WATCH IT IN A FEW DAYS ON THE TOWNSHIP'S WEBSITE

 

I find it difficult not to throw up at TRAC meetings based upon the almost reverence given to opinions of bought and paid for client driven fibbers. It is also difficult to sit there and listen to the bought and paid for "experts" who don't know crap about the history of the site or the history of the errors and misstatements constantly being both repeated and new ones formulated.

The bottom of page 7 in the June 19/25 Minutes is an admission that creek banks at Uniroyal/Lanxess are still eroding dioxins and DDT into the Creek. Gosh doesn't that make Lanxess dirty polluters as well? They've been on site and in control for what seven years now?

Supposedly the shutdown of off site pumping (other than E7)  is to determine the extent of "rebound" of contaminant concentrations after pumping ceases. So far the company are talking out of both sides of their mouths regarding secondary sources such as "back diffusion". First of all I'm tired of the dirty polluter being the one who defines any word whatsoever. Please truck off Lanxess. I suspect that Lanxess and the MECP simply want to reduce pumping even more and allow the former Uniroyal site to simply leak, ooze and dilute their toxic load by sharing it downstream, downgradient in the aquifers and finally into the atmosphere.

There will also be an alleged peer review of the Creek's Risk Assessment. Sure we were all born yesterday as this firm and consultant are colleagues/peers/co-conspirators? of Hadley Stamm (Lanxess) who is simply the female version of Nathan Cadeau.

Just a normal day at the office of disinformation and dysentery on behalf of Lanxess Canada.

RELEVANT COMPARISONS BETWEEN ELMIRA (UNIROYAL) & MONTROSE CHEMICAL IN LOS ANGELES, CA

 

DDT was manufactured in both companies/countries.  Chlorobenzene is a significant part of the process. There is also a benzene plume at Montrose Chemical similar to Uniroyal/Elmira. Both sites have identified chlorobenzene DNAPL also known as free phase DNAPL. Both sites have identified residual chlorobenzene DNAPL. Both sites apparently have client driven consultants with a firm grasp on both fantasy and the bottom line.

Differences include the stratigraphy. Montrose Chemical has between 235 and 250 feet of sand, silt, clay etc. in their aquitards and aquifers all above Bedrock. Uniroyal/Elmira has approximately only 100 feet of aquitards and aquifers with sand, silt, clay & gravel above their fractured Bedrock Aquifer. The Gage Aquifer beneath the Montrose Chemical site in California begins at 175 feet below ground surface and is sixty feet thick and is contaminated with both dissolved chlorobenzene AND free phase chlorobenzene DNAPL. Here in Elmira we are to magically believe that the free phase chlorobenzene DNAPL didn't go below the Municipal Aquifer at worst, a mere 45-65 feet below ground surface. Recently it sounds as if Lanxess are walking that back to no free phase DNAPL past the Upper Aquitard (UAT) which is ridiculous. 

DDT is poorly soluble in water (very low) in both locations however it is very soluble in chlorobenzene in both locations. DDT is likely in California (Montrose Chemical) to become a mobile contaminant in groundwater after it has dissolved in the chlorobenzene.  It should be the same in Elmira (Uniroyal) although here in Elmira we also have dioxins dissolving and moving in groundwater with chlorobenzene.

This Feasibility Study (Montrose Chemical) has varying time estimates for major cleanup. They are between 3,100 and 5,800 years. I suspect that we can do better here in Elmira (Uniroyal) albeit all guilty parties do appear to be doing their best to achieve those time frames.

REASSURANCES FROM DISHONEST PARTIES MEAN LESS THAN NOTHING

 

The Montrose Chemical Corporation 's site in Los Angeles, California sits on thirteen acres. I think that that is smaller than Uniroyal Chemical's site here in Elmira. They manufactured DDT which requires chlorobenzene as part of the process. They spilled or dumped chlorobenzene onto the ground and into the natural environment apparently with just about the same care, consideration and respect for their human neighbours and the natural environment as Uniroyal Chemical did. 

The extent of the environmental damages there are beyond horrific. The extent of chlorobenzene DNAPL present in the subsurface is both horrific and a major reason why their cleanup may go on for generations. Based upon my first hand experience here in Elmira with Uniroyal Chemical and corporate successors, it appears to me that our local home grown (i.e. U.S. multi national company)  polluter has a standard solution for their environmental problems. Politely it is called gilding the lily and or greenwashing or even minimizing all problems. Less diplomatically it's called obfuscation or lying like dogs.

Why do corporations think that switching spokespersons somehow nullifies their history of dishonesty and deception? Why do corporations think that changing ownership also somehow nullifies their past history of deceit with local citizens? Is it possible that corporations like Uniroyal/Lanxess believe that as long as they have the local councillors support then lying to their citizens is now somehow O.K.? 

None of it is O.K. Not one goddamn word from Lanxess is O.K. or ever will be. All bridges of trust, respect and confidence have been burned by Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura and Lanxess. Too many lies by too many people for too many years/decades has caused this. Shooting the messenger is but one of their tactics with much support from local politicians over the decades, to their shame. 

  

A DNAPL SITE IN CALIFORNIA WITH AN ESTIMATED CLEANUP TIME IN THE THOUSANDS OF YEARS

 

Frankly I was shocked! I've long read that DNAPLS effects routinely can take decades to centuries to dissolve, dissipate and or be removed. Milleniums seemed like overkill if not fantasy. Not so according to state authorities and others for the former DDT manufacturing facility in Montrose, California. There estimates for various remediation schemes suggest three to five thousand years to get rid of the subsurface DNAPL and negative effects on local groundwater.

 Now this contaminated site appears to be awful in its' environmental impacts. The plant is located in Los Angeles and another plant is mentioned as being in Torrance, California. This second plant was discharging into the ocean and involves the Palos Verde Shelf and sediments contaminated with DDT and PCBs. What also shocked me was the following information however.

"Montrose/Del Amo Dual-Site Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) - consists of the study and cleanup of a highly contaminated mass of chlorobenzene in the form of dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) located under the former Montrose plant property. Chlorobenzene is one of the main ingredients used to make DDT. Excess chlorobenzene from the historic DDT manufacturing process has slowly moved down through the soil and is now trapped in spaces between the soil particles in the form of DNAPL . The DNAPL chlorobenzene mass is a current "source" of the chlorobenzene groundwater contamination, meaning the DNAPL continues to slowly contaminate the groundwater every day. It takes only a small amount of dissolved chlorobenzene for the groundwater to be extremely toxic and unsafe for drinking. Removing the chlorobenzene DNAPL from the ground will make the groundwater cleanup successful and more efficient."

NDMA has an even lower drinking water criteria but at least it is not a DNAPL. We the citizens of Elmira and Woolwich have been lied to and misled about the extent of the chlorobenzene contamination and long term health and environmental damages. 

IS RESTORATION OF ELMIRA's AQUIFERS HOPELESS?

 

I wish I knew. Two major points however:  ignoring DNAPLS and refusing to properly address them for the last thirty-six years has only made the job more difficult. Secondly, for the love of God, do NOT let Lanxess, the Min. of Environment, Region of Waterloo, Woolwich Township or GHD be involved in any  attempt to address either residual or free phase DNAPLS whether on site (Uniroyal) or off site (Yara, Stroh, Martin, plus within the town of Elmira). They've had their chance and made an absolute mess of it. 

Hence a new process with new participants is desperately needed. Again do not let any of those dic*heads get within a mile of planning/plotting this new investigative and decision making body.  This is what dishonest, self-serving politicians are all about namely perverting in advance democratic methods and procedures. Pat McLean for example was a master at that as CPAC Chair and likely while on Council as well. 

This will not be an easy task and frankly I would suggest that success is absolutely not guaranteed. It may even be a situation where local efforts of volunteers will only be for the benefit of future generations . Leaving the proven failures and liars in charge however guarantees more failure as they have proven that their motives are all about saving money for the corporate entity on site as well as avoiding culpability for past decision making and failures.    

SO WHAT EXACTLY ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF CHLOROBENZENE DNAPL OFF-SITE AND IN THE ELMIRA AQUIFERS?

 Well firstly we don't know due to the ostrich like characteristics of Uniroyal/Lanxess and the gross incompetence/negligence of the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE/MECP).  Both parties decided that they didn't want to have to deal with the complicating factors involved in a DNAPL site so they simply lied like dogs, disregarded the obvious evidence of DNAPL presence both on and off the Uniroyal site and proceeded as if all was straightforward and simple. DNAPL sites are neither one. 

Frank Rovers, according to a participant at UPAC, stated that the Uniroyal site was full of DNAPLs. The hydrogeological evidence in reports going back to the late 1980s and early to mid 1990s supports that.  This is despite dishonest conclusions in some client driven reports intentionally misinterpreting the data to minimize the extent of both free phase and residual DNAPL on the site. It was only later that the public became aware of off-site DNAPL issues such as onto the Nutrite property as well as beside the Howard St. water tower (OW57-32R) and most recently six to eight more potential areas in and around First St., Union St. and Howard Ave.  Just as a little reminder to the guilty parties and their fellow travellors  I have not forgotten about the search in the 1980s for orange liquid discharges from the Howard St. storm sewers heading towards the Canagagigue Creek.

These pools of free phase chlorobenzene DNAPLS can exist in the subsurface for decades to centuries and even longer (see Montrose, California DDT plant) depending on their size. The leftover residual DNAPL, in the soil pore spaces versus in pools, can also take decades or longer to fully dissolve. That is the problem with chlorobenzene as well as other DNAPL chemicals. They have a low solubility in water hence they simply cannot dissolve quickly while at the same time they can and do exceed the appropriately lower health based drinking water standards.  

DNAPLS flow in the subsurface based upon gravity not groundwater flow direction. Therefore they can flow literally in any direction albeit it must be downhill. The problem arises when DNAPL flows through "windows" in the aquitards and then contaminates groundwater in lower aquifers. This can also occur and I believe has occurred through a window in the Lower Aquitard (LAT) west of the Uniroyal site which is between the Municipal Lower Aquifer and the Bedrock Aquifer. Yes allegedly according to the polluter and successors chlorobenzene has not been found in the Bedrock Aquifer.  However their credibility is miles past suspect based upon their past behaviour and false claims. Finally DNAPL can also flow through leaky aquitards without a window although it takes longer.

If chlorobenzene DNAPL or any other DNAPL has penetrated the fissures and cracks in the weathered Bedrock Aquifer then we are all in trouble as they are almost impossible to remove fully. That might be the final kiss of death for the once pristine Elmira Aquifers. 

  

I'M BOOKED AS A DELEGATE AT THE SEPTEMBER 23/25 WOOLWICH COUNCIL MEETING

 

My topic will be the status of the Elmira drinking water aquifers. At the same meeting I am told that TRAC (Technical Remediation Advisory Committee)  also known by yours truly as Totally Rotten And Corrupt will be presenting an Update to Council. My expectation is that this update will be a glowing report on the professionalism, dedication, credentials and good looks of this committee of council. Likely numbers will be bandied about indicating how much NDMA and chlorobenzene have been removed from the Elmira Aquifers. My Delegation may differ somewhat from theirs.

It would appear to me that somebody with a brain cell or two have decided its' time after 36 years to make a few admissions and concessions. They have begun to realize that although I may be past my Best Before Date  I'm not dead nor in any mood to be so in the near future.  That is terribly inconvenient to the professional liars who have misled and deceived Woolwich citizens and residents since 1989 with a plethora of ridiculous lies and claims all magically minimizing the extent of the contamination and the extent of culpability of both Uniroyal Chemical and the Ontario Ministry of Environment (M.O.E.) who held their hand and blessed each of their poisonous activities.

This is why they are now admitting that Varnicolor's pollution was not what Stan Berger of the M.O.E. claimed namely a "...water pistol in a thunderstorm." There are yet further truths still hidden from the public that will be revealed including more than five chlorinated solvents being discharged into Elmira's municipal aquifers. The other recent truth revealed is that yes chlorobenzene DNAPLS did exist within the Elmira Aquifers near the Howard St. water tower as I have claimed for the last twenty years. This comes from Jesse Wright (Arcadis) at a TRAC meeting earlier this summer. The particular well he was discussing was the pumping well W4 intentionally placed beside the known but lied about subsurface DNAPLS at OW57-32R  also beside the water tower.

All in all these are interesting times. Somebody intelligent may actually be seeing what's coming down the pipe if they don't quickly fess up of their own volition. At the same time don't expect any apologies or kudos from the guilty parties coming either my way or the public's way. 

HOLY CRAP! DNAPL ADMITTED TO BE AT W4 OFFSITE & VARNICOLOR PUBLICLY ALLEGED BY LANXESS'S CONSULTANTS TO HAVE POLLUTED ELMIRA'S DRINKING WATER AQUIFERS!

 

Sometimes it's hard to see the gold because of the extent of the dross (i.e. scum or as in mining the tailings or leftovers). So that swinehund  (possibly German for swine) Allan Deal absolutely denied the presence of DNAPLS anywhere off the Uniroyal Chemical site at a TRAC meeting a year ago.  He actually suggested that there weren't anything but residual DNAPLS under the former Uniroyal site which would be even more asinine. He also misstated the concentration of dissolved chlorobenzene necessary to indicate the presence of DNAPL nearby. Meanwhile a closer examination of the online Minutes of that meeting indicate that there used to be DNAPLS very close to W4 which is located beside the Howard St. water tower as well as beside the well (OW57-32) in which DNAPL was found by me and denied in 2006 and 2012 by Chemtura, CRA and the MOE. 

So let's be blunt here. Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment lied to me, CPAC and the public in 2006 and 2012 regarding chlorobenzene free phase DNAPL in the Elmira Aquifers and apparently released from Uniroyal Chemical. They also flexed their muscles in 2008 with their two friends on CPAC as well as with Woolwich Council to get me removed from CPAC. Of course the usual quantity of lying was required to get the dirty job done. 

At the same TRAC meeting GHD on behalf of Lanxess threw Varnicolor Chemical under the bus at long last. They fingered Varnicolor as having added at least five chlorinated solvents to Elmira's drinking water aquifers none of which includes chlorobenzene and which kind of beggars belief. Not bad in that it only took from 1989 until last year to publicly name Varnicolor Chemical as having polluted the Elmira Aquifers along with Uniroyal Chemical and Nutrite (ammonia). 

                                Can anybody say COVERUP   ?

IS THERE OTHER EVIDENCE OF CHLOROBENZENE DNAPLS OFF OF THE FORMER UNIROYAL CHEMICAL SITE?

 

Yes as a matter of fact there is. There is also evidence of what I view as gross incompetence by CRA and Uniroyal. Now keep in mind that CRA work for Uniroyal and are paid by them. Hence it's difficult to know what CRA may or may not have recommended to Uniroyal versus what Uniroyal's decision ($$$) on the matter may have been. 

I love the following terminology namely "the weight of the evidence" and "on the balance of probabilities". Yes that second one is also used by our judicial system in all their non perfection. Long story short it is the authors of investigations/reports who decide what the weight of the evidence is and or what the balance of probabilities is. Do you know what that means? It means that it is a totally subjective decision entirely based upon the integrity and the biases of the authors of the report. If that means either Uniroyal and successors plus CRA/GHD who are paid by Uniroyal etc. then the decision is guaranteed to be a self-serving one. Ditto for the M.O.E./MECP.  Wouldn't you just love to be the Judge or jury at your own trial?

Newer evidence has included the approximate "excess"  2,000 kilograms of chlorobenzene already pumped out of the off-site aquifers. This "excess" was found by Dr. Neil Thompson of the University of Waterloo and published in his 2017 Conceptual Site Model.  He claimed the source of 2,000 kilograms of chlorobenzene was unknown. Probably it was unknown to him but sure as hell Uniroyal/Chemtura  and CRA all knew that it was off-site free phase DNAPL either from Uniroyal or other nearby industry. 

Other new evidence includes the six to eight potential chlorobenzene off-site sources found and publicly stated by Jesse Wright (Arcadis Inc.) at the June public TRAC meeting.  Finally there are two letters from two of the co-conspirators namely the Ont. Ministry of Environment and CRA written in 2012 approximately six years after I went public to CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Committee)  about the DNAPL found at the bottom of observation well OW57-32. These letters were in response to pressure from CPAC for them to formally respond to the public advisory committee.  This is the kind of behaviour from CPAC that mayor Sandy Shantz and councillor Mark Bauman declared to be "dysfunctional" . Both co-conspirators (CRA & M.O.E.) did their best to ignore the very strong DNAPL evidence in favour of much weaker evidence (?)  to support their plausible DNAPL deniability goals. Oh and just for the record CRA themselves had in 1998 in writing declared that it was DNAPL that they had found. Only eight years later when confronted by me at CPAC with their 1998 statements did they decide to change their tune. 

This is but a taste of the obfuscation, excuses, delays and deflections that are part of the arsenal of the modern polluter. Do I believe that 100% of polluters exhibit this kind of serious lack of ethics or integrity? I do not and I hope not. Remember that the issue of off-site DNAPL, either free phase or residual, in the Elmira Aquifers will determine the length of time to properly remediate them. Thirty years of not properly treating/remediating DNAPLS both on and off site have been wasted. Plus keep in mind that all the corporate entities plus the M.O.E./MECP have proven themselves repeatedly incapable of being honest  parties willing to do the right thing for the public interest whether human health or overall environmental health. They do not deserve the privilege or duty of being involved any further in the cleanup. 

FURTHER REVIEW OF CHLOROBENZENE DNAPL EVIDENCE AS FAR BACK AS 1998

 

One of my favourite quotes(?) eh statements (I can find the quote if needed) is that the purpose of off-site pumping well W4 was to pump large amounts of dissolved chlorobenzene from the Elmira Aquifers. Early on (1998) this pumping well was screened in both the Municipal Upper (MU) and the Municipal Lower (ML)  Aquifers. Indeed this pumping well pumped a couple of thousands of kilograms worth of chlorobenzene from its' location beside the Howard St. water tower and observation well OW57-32(R). Oh and I might add it was pumping high strength chlorobenzene with early concentrations including 3000, 3300, 3400, 4400 and 5600 parts per billion (ppb.) These concentrations equal or exceed the 1% Solubility Rule which states that concentrations greater than 1% of the compound's (chlorobenzene) solubility in water means that most likely free phase DNAPL is nearby!

Which it was and was actually pumped up from where it was sitting on the aquitard 33 metres below ground surface during the replacement of observation well OW57-32 with OW57-32 (R) . "R" stands for replacement. This occurred around June 1998. As it took me some time to find this out I can only surmise that I was otherwise occupied with a $2,000,000 libel suit filed against me and my wife by an ignorant bitch with support from her schoolboard. She got zero ($) and sure as hell no apology.

Further chlorobenzene DNAPL evidence has emerged over the years which I have been posting about here particularly the last week or so. All the guilty parties have denied these DNAPLS and others since the early 1990s at least. Oh and what is even more ironic/hypocritical is Dr. Neil Thompson's Conceptual Site Model (2017) in which he stated that there was an excess 2,000 kilograms of chlorobenzene over expectations and calculations in the Elmira Aquifers. Allegedly nobody knew where it came from.

BULLS*IT it was free phase DNAPL that gravity flowed most likely from the south-west corner of the Uniroyal Chemical site and which recently has been identified by Jesse Wright (Arcadis Inc.) has a number of potential chlorobenzene sources near First St., Union St. and Howard Ave. in Elmira.

WHY DO THEY ADMIT THAT NDMA IS IN THE BEDROCK AQUIFER BUT DENY THAT CHLOROBENZENE IS?

 

Well let's see now. Could it be because chlorobenzene is a "sinker" i.e. it is a DNAPL chemical with a density greater than water (1.0) and it sinks downwards through aquifers and aquitards and because of that is even more likely than NDMA to pollute the Bedrock Aquifer beneath the two drinking water aquifers namely the Municipal Upper (MU) and Municipal Lower (ML)?  Or could it be because courtesy of  Arcadis (Jesse Wright) we have more evidence of chlorobenzene DNAPL having left the Uniroyal site, presumably a long time ago, and gravity flowing to the First St., Union St. and Howard Ave. area? Now Arcadis at the June 19/25 public TRAC meeting indicated potential multiple (6-8?) locations of chlorobenzene sources off the former Uniroyal site. I really don't expect them to name six to eight different additional dirty polluters and rightly or wrongly I guess that I'm assuming that this is chlorobenzene DNAPL that gravity flowed off the Uniroyal site decades ago.  

That makes no sense to be denying dissolved chlorobenzene in the Bedrock Aquifer for those reasons. Similarly to deny chlorobenzene's presence because we know that pumping well W4 closed off their well screen in the Municipal Upper Aquifer (MU) many years ago and focused solely on their lower well screen in the Municipal Lower Aquifer (ML) is ridiculous. Oh and by the way at this location near the Howard St. Water Tower the ML is in direct contact with the Bedrock Aquifer. No low permeability aquitard between the two. Finally way back in 2006 I discovered an interesting tidbit in a monthly Progress Report describing the discovery of free phase DNAPL at the bottom of well OW57-32 later known as OW57-32R. Now of course Chemtura at the time just like GHD and Lanxess today won't use the term "free phase" DNAPL. The written words in the Progress Report were clear whereas Conestoga Rovers (CRA) did their ever loving best to muddy and make unclear the situation. They absolutely did not want to admit that which seemed obvious and their excuses and reasoning were weak.

O.K. so if it's not for all the above reasons then why lie about dissolved chlorobenzene in the Bedrock Aquifer.? Is that aquifer not being pumped and treated like all the others? Well in fact it is as they need to clear the NDMA out of it as well as the other aquifers. Maybe the real problem for them is the fear and likelihood that the same chlorobenzene DNAPL found at OW57-32 also flowed through the nearby window between the ML and the Bedrock Aquifer (BR). If indeed that occurred then rest assured free phase DNAPL which is very bad in sand and gravel aquifers is a thousand times as bad lodged in the fissures and fractures of weathered Bedrock. DNAPL is always difficult and expensive to deal with properly. Uniroyal and fellow travellors, thanks to the joys of corrupt politicians making decisions for their benefit versus the public's, have not been ordered to clean up the DNAPLS either on their site or off their site. 

This is why the next Control Order and phony "mandated"  cleanup date has been forecast out another thirty to even fifty years. At that time likely our authorities will continue yet again lying to the public. I believe that chlorobenzene DNAPL is in the Bedrock Aquifer under Elmira but I am confident that Lanxess and fellow travellors will use all possible means NOT to find it. That is the tried and true method of polluters avoiding proper cleanups. 

THE FOLLOWING IS A PARTIAL LIST OF DNAPL CHEMICALS - ALL ARE AT THE FORMER UNIROYAL CHEMICAL IN ELMIRA

 

trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethene (PCE), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), carbon tetrachloride (CTC), methylene chloride (DCM), chloroform (TCM), 1,2-dichloroethane (EDC), 1,2-dichloropropane, vinyl chloride, 1,2-dichloropropene, coal tar, creosote, 1,4-dioxane, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), chlorobenzene (MCB)

Upon second look the coal tars and creosote are suspect. Yes PAHs are found within coal tar and creosote and yes the PAHs are throughout the downstream Canagagigue Creek.

THE SKIES ARE CLEARING AFTER DECADES OF UNIROYAL & FRIENDS DNAPL DENYING AND OBFUSCATION

 

DNAPLS are nasty buggers! Something like intellectual prostitutes in my mind. Since 1990 a conspiracy of polluters and politicians has been in operation in Elmira. Their goal was to keep the filthy polluter here in town, paying taxes, employing locals and shutting down legitimate opposition to the conditions under which Uniroyal and later successors operated. These conditions included serious polluter cover and protection via both the province (Min. of Environment) and from our local Woolwich councils. 

DNAPLS such as the absolutely common and iconic chlorobenzene releases do more than just contaminate groundwater with chlorobenzene. They greatly assist in mobilizing other chemicals and compounds which are much less likely to migrate on their own. This includes polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) as well as DDT/DDD/DDE and numerous dioxins including the most toxic 2,3,7,8 TCDD. All of these of course are found throughout Elmira, Ontario courtesy of Uniroyal Chemical with the able ongoing assistance of our Woolwich Councils, MOE/MECP , Region of Waterloo plus a myriad of consulting companies most notably CRA/GHD.

PAHs, Dioxins and DDT compounds are common in our downstream Canagagigue Creek soils, sediments and fish. They are less well known to be in our drinking water aquifers due to a plethora of deception, manipulation and obfuscation by all the parties mentioned previously. The first and earliest lies from Uniroyal and their then consultants was the alleged lack of DNAPLS in, on and under the Uniroyal Chemical site.  Yours truly started the opposition rolling by getting one consultant "consolidated" by Uniroyal after I caught him playing fast and loose with the truth by quoting hydrogeologist Stan Feenstra out of context. The lying however has never ended.

The chlorobenzene DNAPL likely with a myriad of other toxic chemicals mixed in, flowed off-site from Uniroyal's south-west corner. Careful examinations of the subsurface shows the general slope of the stratigraphic layers to be southwards with a tad of westward included. This corresponds to the many potential chlorobenzene source spots determined last June by Arcadis Inc. in and around First St, Union St. and Howard Ave.  

Current average concentrations after almost thirty years of pumping are 123 ppb. in the Municipal Upper Aquifer and 173 ppb. in the Municipal Lower Aquifer.  These concentrations as well as past concentrations have always represented a very tiny amount of the total chlorobenzene leaked, spilled and dumped into the natural environment. Pumping increasingly smaller concentrations of chlorobenzene will simply assure that pumping off-site will continue forever as it is planned to do on site. 

Intelligent people want to clean up both the onsite and offsite contamination. Greedy and stupid people merely want to make money from the site through development etc.