JULY 2013 CHEMTURA MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT

I received the July 2013 Chemtura Progress Report in the mail yesterday. There are a few surprises and a few more "adjusting the science according to your needs" moments. Off-site wells W5A & W5B have been problematic for CRA/ Chemtura since they started pumping in 1999. Almost immediately on-site containment went into the crapper as the minimal on-site pumping was undermined by the much greater off-site pumping dragging contaminants off-site. Oh by the way before I forget, my apologies to Chemtura Waterbury, Conn. USA. You guys are visiting my site most days between Monday and Friday and today you were on checking things out at 8:35 am.. Usually I have my new post up by then but as you can see I'm running late today. Sorry!

Anyhow the "adjusting your science according to your needs" is in relation to the relationship between off-site pumping well W4 (behind/west of Varnicolor Chemical) and wells W5A/B. W5B in the Municipal Upper Aquifer (MU) has had high but generally slowly decreasing Chlorobenzene concentrations for many years. Both W5A/B are located just off-site south-west of Chemtura and due south of Sulco. W5A in the Municipal Lower Aquifer (ML) on the other hand has had very low Chlorobenzene concentrations in the past and they have been consistently rising.

At one time in the Monthly Progress Reports, CRA claimed that a well between W4 and W5A/B (CH70) was experiencing rising concentrations of Chlorobenzene in the ML due to chlorobenzene being dragged from W4 towards W5A/B due to their pumping action. This made very little sense to me and when I questioned CRA about it at public CPAC meetings they claimed that despite the much lesser pumping rates at W5, it was overpowering the influence of W4. Well that response has recently changed as CRA are now telling the M.O.E. that in fact CH70D is experiencing increases in chlorobenzene due to migration from the north-east. This allegedly would be from the Yara site. How exactly these increasing concentrations of dissolved chlorobenzene are due to either pumping from the west (W4) or the east (W5A/B) is a mystery. Keep in mind there are dissolved concentrations of chlorobenzene in the ML on the Yara (Nutrite) site but to date the plume is not connected as far south as CH70D which is on the old Varnicolor property line.

Further "adjustments" include reducing the pumping rates at W5A/B because of the dragging action of chlorobenzene from W4 being replaced by oh we don't want to drag contaminants off the Chemtura site by pumping too much at W5A/B. This stickhandling could either be based on bad intent or on ignorance. Either one is a possibility.

Long story short this month's on-site pumping is within a whisker of meeting their target rates but off-site pumping is not. Be happy and don't worry however as CRA assure us that they have dramatically reduced their pumping rate at W4 on purpose. It used to be 11.4 litres per second but now it is 3.5 litres per second. They managed only 3.0 litres per second at W4 during July. Again don't worry this was because they've "reconfigured" well W4 to only pump from the ML instead of both the MU and ML. Therefore while CRA/Chemtura are talking about tripling their off-site pumping as part of their plan to achieve drinking water by 2028; in fact they've just reduced it. Only in Alice in Wonderland you say. P.S. There was little or no discussion/announcement ahead of time to CPAC or the public about this major change.