IS MARK BAUMAN GOING TO REVERSE HIMSELF & SUPPORT CHEMTURA'S EAST SIDE "INVESTIGATION"

Why do I think that Councillor Mark Bauman is yet again going to be caught talking out of both sides of his mouth? Could it be his publicly stated position that an independent investigation of the Stroh property is required? To date Mark has not advised CPAC or SWAT as to what he thinks about Conestoga Rovers "East Side Surficial Soil and Groundwater Investigation Plan" dated January 2015. To date I have posted comments twice this month here describing errors and flaws in the report.

There are many ways to fudge technical reports and Conestoga Rovers being the professionals they are, know them all. The most blatant and yet difficult to catch would be the initial fudging of either soil or water samples at the source. Composite sampling seems to me to be one such way while pretending to be collecting more "representative" samples. While the analysis is carefully done by independent labs (allegedly) with strict chain of custody protocols, the taking of samples in the field, not so much. This is a glaring weakness in the already grossly strained credibility gap surrounding Conestoga Rovers and their client Chemtura, Canada.

Fudging of the Conclusions of technical reports is one of the easiest methods to better "adjust" any negative findings that an impartial analysis of the data would provide. CRA are masters of this and I have so stated for years in my critiques of their reports. Perhaps another easy way to predetermine that you don't have a problem is by the initial "Work Plan". If you can scope or limit exactly what you are looking at in order to minimize negative results then you are three quarters of the way home before you even write your final report stating that there is no problem.

CRA's "East Side Surficial Soil and Groundwater Investigation Plan" is a crock. Chemtura and the M.O.E. skipped the January 2015 public CPAC meeting even though I had partially presented the case at Woolwich Council indicating they had excavated in the wrong place for the alleged GP1 remediation. I advised that further details and documentation would be provided at the January 29/15 CPAC meeting. No show by the guilty parties. Again at the upcoming CPAC meeting (February 26/15) there will be discussion about CRA's proposed "Investigation Plan". I don't expect Councillor Bauman to be present but if he is I fully expect he will reverse himself and suddenly see wonderful things in this horribly inadequate and intentionally flawed plan.