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.
because chlorobenzene negligence IF NOT COMPLETELY COVERED UP would bankrupt everyone involved including yes Lanxess and the industrial zoned land on their property and the Stroh Farm etc would be absolutely worthless for resale or future development!
ReplyDelete