Saturday, April 6, 2013

CONTAMINATED SITES NEVER HAVE CLOSURE?



Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carrys a story about the closing of the A.O. Smith Corp. water heater manufacturing plant in Fergus. It was formerly known as GSW (General Steel Wares). The title of the story is "Fergus plant closure is dire news". While the focus of the story is both economic and the accompanying human hardship nevertheless the last two sentences of the story really stood out for me. They are "Atkinson said that after decades of industrial use, the land on which the plant stands is badly contaminated. Redeveloping it will be a major challenge.".

Most of us have slowly come to realize over the last decade that the majority of our past local manufacturers are also our local polluters. While we were busy working hard and paying taxes our provincial Ministry of the Environment were carefully looking the other way and letting each and every company do their own thing. My surprise in regards to the old GSW plant being a challenge to redevelopment is based on a newspaper clipping I have from eight years ago namely the K-W Record on April 5, 2005. This article advises us that Conestoga Rovers, consultants to Uniroyal/Chemtura were fined $25,000 after an investigation "...discovered on several occasions between January 2001 and May 2004, GSW discharged higher than the maximun limit of trichloroethylene , a solvent." This discharge was via storm sewers into the nearby Grand River. The reason CRA were charged and convicted was due to their being in charge of a groundwater pump and treat system on behalf of GSW.

Therefore this pump and treat system has been in full operation for more than twelve years now. Despite this there are concerns that the site is still heavily contaminated. Kind of reminds one of the Chemtura site here in Elmira, doesn't it? Just exactly how grossly contaminated is this site? Who will now be in charge of operating the pump and treat? When will the Ontario M.O.E. and other authorities give hydraulic containment (pump & treat) the discredit it deserves? Hydraulic containment was designed to contain the spread of groundwater contamination exactly as it's name implies. It was not designed to permanently remove subsurface contamination in anything even remotely resembling a reasonable length of time. It's cheaper and less expensive than real cleanup and that's the bottom line here folks.

No comments:

Post a Comment