ONE SIDED TRAC MEETINGS FOR DUMMIES, FELLOW TRAVELLORS, CO-OPTEES, AVERAGE JOES AND EVEN INTELLIGENT, HONEST FOLKS

 

TRAC is the result of a thirty year metamorphosis (1992-2022) of public consultation from a citizen run, citizen oriented, open to all interested parties and individuals to a polluter/politician totally controlled and membership vetted body whose real purpose is to restore credibility and trust to a grossly broken system. That system not only includes an underfunded MOE/MECP, a series of corporate successors to Uniroyal Chemical but also political aberrations of democracy from the municipal, regional, provincial and federal levels. Imagine what used to be a town council monopolized by Uniroyal Chemical employees who used to decide which local industries were approved for industrial disposal in old fashioned dumps without any  modern leachate controls or even normal restrictions on chemical and toxic wastes. Normal restrictions that is for landfills/dumps located appropriately away from residents much less located right here in town (i.e. M1, M2, First St. Landfill, Bolender Landfill etc.).

This metamorphosis has been partially successful simply due to the time involved.  Most citizens have jobs, families and homes as the major part of their responsibilities.  Hence having anyone still actively involved for nearly thirty-seven years is almost unheard of.  There is only one such who has not been the recipient of various forms of consideration including permanent guaranteed lifetime attendance at both private and public meetings and that is myself. Other forms of consideration include editing work from Conestoga Rovers (Uniroyal consultants) and or in the case of a former councillor, expense paid trips around North America to attend conferences for which she was and is totally unqualified for.   

I must add that there have been and still are local Canadian citizens residing here in Elmira and nearby who contributed greatly in years past. Some of them still contribute as they are able and thank goodness for that. Like myself, those who have paid attention, are appalled by what passes for public consultation today.  Woolwich Township are in total control of the process with the responsible polluter (Lanxess Canada) being their only source of information and data. Well to be correct Lanxess and their various client driven consultants such as GHD and WSP. All reports, all data, all speakers are at the choice of Woolwich Township. Yes this is the same political body who sat back for decades and said and did mostly nothing as Uniroyal Chemical turned our Creek into a sewer and poisoned their residents with grossly contaminated water all the time denying there was a problem. 

Can you imagine if I was allowed to speak to either Council or TRAC for even 5% of the time that is allotted to Lanxess, the MECP or GHD?  Can you imagine if other citizens not affiliated with TRAC or Woolwich were given even an hour or two to speak publicly to either body? Nor can I because currently we aren't even allowed to so much as ask a simple question at a public TRAC meeting. I live here and I pay taxes and I find your deference and one sided protection of the polluter from criticism to be dishonest, cowardly and contemptible. 

 

SPECIFICS ON LAST THURSDAY'S TRAC MEETING

 

TRAC does not stand for Totally Rotten and Corrupt. That would be unfair to almost all the citizen members on this Woolwich (with Lanxess approval) appointed committee. I expect that with perhaps only one or two exceptions they all joined hoping to contribute to a better and quicker cleanup. Now in regards to Lanxess and the MECP my acronym for TRAC is totally accurate. 

Yesterday I suggested that even Sebastian was giving the benefit of the doubt to Lanxess and their consultants far too often. I also advised readers that I had to that point only watched the on-line video (Woolwich website under Council & then Council Calendar) for the first hour and a quarter. Well I finished the rest of the video later in the day (just over two hours) and guess what? That buggar (said affectionately) Sebastian up and digs his heels in on two important points namely NAPLS/DNAPLS and the effluent criteria for NDMA at the south end of Elmira (i.e. well E7).  Lanxess and GHD pushed back hard but Sebastian, bless him, dug in his heels and insisted upon the information he had. Now the other two parties have decided that maybe they do need to check this out which is good. It could be a miscommunication by Lanxess in a report or it could be more insidious. We shall see.

Here are the results of Joe Ricker's analysis of four plumes mentioned yesterday. NDMA concentrations in the Municipal Upper (MU)  Aquifer has been greatly reduced to .086 ug/l (micrograms per litre) or parts per billion. The drinking water standard is .009 ug/l. Therefore going on thirty-seven years since the wells were shut down in 1989, NDMA is still nine and a half times greater than it's drinking water standard.

NDMA concentrations in the Municipal Lower (ML) Aquifer have also been greatly reduced to .81 ug/l. This  is NINETY times greater than the drinking water standard.

Chlorobenzene concentrations since 1989  (pumping didn't start in the Elmira Aquifers until 1998) in the Municipal Upper (MU) Aquifer have also been greatly reduced to 120 ug/l  (parts per billion). The drinking water standard for chlorobenzene is 80 ug/l therefore chlorobenzene, the allegedly easier compound to remediate, is still 50% higher than the drinking water standard.

Chlorobenzene concentrations since 1989 in the Municipal Lower (ML) Aquifer have also been greatly reduced to 144 ug/l.  This is 1.8 times higher than the drinking water standard of 80 parts per billion.

Hadley Stamm (Lanxess), bless her pointed little head,  reiterated a major revelation from approximately a year and a half ago when she stated that Lanxess believes that there is another source of chlorobenzene to the Elmira Aquifers. HALLELUJAH !  While Lanxess and friends including the MECP do not feel the public are worthy to know whom that is, my guess is still Borg Textiles or Varnicolor Chemical. If it is Varnicolor then jail time would be appropriate for MOE/MECP officials complicit in that coverup. Yours truly has been advising a second source of chlorobenzene since approximately 2004/2005 since discovering free phase DNAPL (now also recently admitted) in OW57-32R beside the Howard St. Water Tower.

All the guilty parties are heavily involved in drafting a communications strategy in order to explain away their remediation failures over the last nearly 37 years. Likely they will focus on groundwater and try to avoid the total non-cleanup of the downstream Canagagigue Creek.

Thanks to Sebastian we have a tacit admission from Lanxess that likely there are still free phase DNAPLS on their property. This is hardly a surprise to those of us who have followed the decades long  DNAPL coverup closely. Joe Ricker (WSP) and Lou Almeida (GHD) who both know where their bread is buttered, of course leapt in to minimize the possible harm to their client, which only clarifies their conflict of interest opinions.  

Geoff Moroz (Region of Waterloo) impressed me with his factual, no nonsense approach. He made it clear that even Uniroyal/Lanxess's treated groundwater effluent was high risk water and should not be used without extreme care and much better testing. He referenced emerging contaminants such as PFAS  (poly fluorinated whatever?) and as well made it clear that Lanxess's treated discharge effluent currently to the Creek is NOT being sampled for the full suite of possible contaminants. WOW! 

For those paying attention that reminds me of APT Environment's phrase from three and a half decades ago that the proposed cleanup of the aquifers should be called  PUMP & DUMP. They may have forgotten since.

TRAC MEETINGS ARE SO MUCH LIGHTER, BRIGHTER, FUNNY AND FRIVOLOUS

This of course is ideal for the responsible polluting company Lanxess Canada and as well for their alleged regulator the MECP (not the Ministry of Enhanced Corporate Pollution - not in name at least ). Now today I listened to approximately the first hour and a quarter of last Thursday's TRAC meeting with the very smooth snake oil salesman Joe Ricker (WSP) taking the lead. He supposedly does plume analytics which a skeptic (knowledgeable realist) like me views as part public relations and part comedy set. In this presentation he is partially assisted by Hadley Stamm of Lanxess who never saw a presenter that she didn't want to interrupt. 

Mr. Ricker analyzed four plumes in the Elmira Aquifers namely the MU  (Municipal Upper) NDMA plume, the ML (Municipal Lower) NDMA plume, the MU chlorobenzene plume and the ML chlorobenzene plume. Right off the bat this is leading us down the garden path as is fully intended by the guilty parties. Of course no mention of DDT or Dioxins in the Elmira Aquifers and certainly no mention of benzene, toluene, xylene, aniline, carboxin, benzothiazole, mercaptobenzothiazole, chlorophenols, polyaromatic hydrocarbons or a myriad of other solvents. I mean really all of these others contaminants absolutely affect the drinkability of the groundwater right along with NDMA and chlorobenzene. But really TRAC is more of a celebratory party rather than a dirge. No one is mourning the  wildlife that have suffered and died much less the human beings who have contracted various cancers from Uniroyal/Lanxess toxins in the air, soil, ground and surface water. That would be gauche don't you know.

Almost every second sentence is a brag about decreasing toxin concentrations of only TWO toxins. Nothing is mentioned about the status of all the other toxins. Nothing is mentioned about how very far away even the two are from drinking water standards, in both aquifers. These meetings are feel good, lets pat ourselves on the back not for any kind of successful resolution but for having deflected appropriate public approbation. Frankly I can't stomach either the company's behavior nor the MECPs. There is not one hard core citizen activist on the committee willing to rock the complacency on view. Perhaps Sebastian is the closest but he too is far too willing to always give the professional B/S artists the benefit of the doubt.

It is this complacency and glad handing that has allowed Lanxess and predecessors to change the channel and the story from a disgusting, polluting corporation killing local citizens to a supposedly successful  (it is not) environmental cleanup story.   

1982 LETTER FROM MOE TO UNIROYAL TELLS ALL

 

This above letter was written on May 5, 1982 and published in the Elmira Independent on February 19, 1991. It is the Ontario Ministry of Environment telling Uniroyal Chemical in Elmira that among other things both their Upper and Municipal aquifers on their site are heavily contaminated plus the municipal wells in the south end of Elmira (E7, E9) are in the same Municipal aquifer as is beneath the Uniroyal site. Furthermore there is a direct hydraulic connection between both locations. Uniroyal and the MOE had seven and a half years from this point to 1) tell the public the truth  2) take drastic steps to avoid the shutdown of Elmira's south wellfield (E7, E9) in November 1989.. 

A  LEFT CLICK ON THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE SHOULD MAGNIFY IT FOR YOU. OTHER METHODS MAY ALSO ASSIST.

NOW IT'S OPIOIDS AND ANTIDEPRESSANTS FOUND IN LOCAL FISH

 

The title of the story in today's K-W Record is "Researchers find traces of opioids in Ontario fish population". A few years back we were advised that birth control pills were the source of feminization of some fish in our local waters. Apparently even trace amounts of hormones getting through our wastewater treatment plants were adversely affecting fish species in the Grand River. Today it's more drugs both legal and illegal also damaging fish species. These include fentanyl, methadone and venlafaxine and as testing and research continue we will find more in the future. 

This is the big fraud, if you will, both with wastewater treatment and drinking water treatment. We don't know what we don't know. The numbers of untested chemicals in both treatment systems vastly outnumber those that are tested for. A prime example of this neglect was NDMA allegedly not being tested for in Elmira's drinking wells until 1989 despite a large chemical plant (Uniroyal Chemical) as well as Sulco, Varnicolor Chemical, Borg Textiles, Nutrite and more all in town. Both regional and provincial governments knew that NDMA was associated with rubber and rubber additives production as well as fertilizers, animal wastes (pig farms?) and chemical companies yet they conveniently let Elmira citizens unknowingly imbibe it for decades prior to sampling for it.

 Currently our authorities knowingly are allowing citizens to drink tap water with high sodium, nitrate and nitrite levels as well as low level TCE . Then there are all the toxic disinfection by-products such as THMs, HAAs, chloramines and chlorine. I wonder if locally either drinking water or wastewater is being tested for PFAs? Glyphosate concentrations, the active ingredient in Round Up herbicide are not fully known partly because of the highest Method Detection Limit in regional tap water of 25 parts per billion  

Current generations are the guinea pigs of modern day technologies and production. While the current crisis concerns water capacity we should also remember that constantly expanding populations also put enormous pressure on our surface waters which are used for their assimilative capacity (i.e. usually treated human sewage).  At the same time the more water we pull from our aquifers for expanding industry and populations the less is available for downgradient discharge into surface waters. 

Short term thinking (I.e. the growth mantra) is both unsustainable and eventually will lead to collapse. We are on that route now with limited time to reverse course. 

ONGOING, LONG TERM LIKELY NONSENSE CLAIMS BY LANXESS, MECP etc.

 

1) No chlorobenzene in the Bedrock Aquifer

2) No second source of NDMA

3) There is ongoing hydraulic containment on site

4) There is ongoing hydraulic containment off site

5)  Uniroyal is the only source of chlorobenzene in the aquifers

6) Varnicolor never handled chlorobenzene

7) There are no unacceptable health issues in the downstream Canagagigue Creek

8) DDT and Dioxins are hydrophobic hence none in the Elmira aquifers

9) DNAPLS don't need remediation. Leave them alone.

10) Achieving drinking water standards by 2028 is for certain

11) Honest unrigged, unmanipulated public consultation is beneficial

Late in the day admissions by Lanxess, MECP etc.

1)  A second source of chlorobenzene-tacit- other companies near south end of Uniroyal/Lanxess used chlorobenzene   Also an "excess" 1,900 kg. found in aquifers by Dr. Neil Thompson 

2) Yes there was off site DNAPL near W4 and Howard St. Water Tower-Jesse Wrighte

3) We can't achieve drinking water standards by 2028

4)  O.K. maybe pump & treat (hydraulic containment) on its' own won't restore the aquifers to drinking water standards

Lying to the public is both appropriate and necessary for polluters and their regulators. Based upon their behaviour they clearly believe that shareholder profits trump ethics, morality, decency and health concerns. 

      

THE GROSSLY DISHONOURABLE JUSTICE (Former?) ROBERT REILLY

 

 I was advised that in civil cases involving men versus women that he tended to side with the women's testimony. Whether accurate or not it was evident in my case in which allegations of defamation were made against myself. Now of course after reading up on libel law it seemed clear that the truth was the best defence against libel or defamation claims. That may be so but what I found was that the truth simply did not hold up against a biased or ignorant judge right from the start. Also keep in mind that the school board were involved as they backed the other party. Perhaps the dishonourable R. Reilly merely was biased in favour of the local power establishment.

I was manipulated by both the Judge and the Plaintiff's attorney out of my right to a jury trial. Without advising myself, an unrepresented defendant, the Judge agreed to a on the surface ridiculous pre-trial Motion stating that I could not attend the Plaintiff's property. I asked the Judge why this was necessary as I had not been alleged to have already done so and furthermore I had absolutely no idea or interest as to where she lived. Regardless he granted the Motion which I was later told then gave the Judge the right to remove my choice of a jury trial in favour of him (Judge) alone. What a scam!

During the trial the dishonourable judge asked me if I would appeal a verdict made against myself. While warning bells were going off  as this felt like a weird question mid trial nevertheless I answered no. I honestly didn't see how losing was possible with the numerous parent witnesses I had ready to give supporting testimony to my case. Turned out that answer likely emboldened a possibly corrupt (stupid?) judge.

Judge Reilly also refused to enter as documentary evidence written reports by the Council of Teachers. Now if I have that name incorrect the group I am referring to were the provincially mandated oversight committee who had made detailed notes of interviews they had done with a number of my witnesses. I had copies of those detailed notes and my multiple witnesses had done an excellent job in detailing odious behaviour by the Plaintiff. Judge Reilly flatly refused to enter them into the record claiming that my witnesses could speak for themselves on the stand as they did. My view was that the notes would help my defence as my witnesses testimony was reaffirmed by their earlier testimony. Then of course when Judge Reilly found against me without any legitimate contradictions or breakdown in testimony by my witnesses he flatly stated that they had all been enthralled by me and actually referred to me as the Pied Piper without a shred of any such evidence before him. He did this with confidence that if I didn't have the money for a defence lawyer at his trial, combined with my suggesting I wouldn't/couldn't appeal his decision ; then he could decide the case not based upon evidence but based upon his biases or worse.

How many other asshats sit as judges in Ontario? In Canada? Could what I view as bias  actually be corruption or maybe simple influence?  Did the dishonourable  judge have somebody important whisper in his ear that I was a *hit disturber causing trouble for the school board? Did they whisper that I was a *hit disturber causing trouble for Uniroyal Chemical in Elmira? Regardless the facts were clear. The Plaintiff had a long history of poor behaviour. Thirty years later the province (and the courts) have both commented and acted upon bad behaviour of the same board. How much damage and disrespect have all parties including the courts suffered because of this gross miscarriage of justice?