THE JULY 31, 2018 GHD RESPONSES TO MOECC GROUNDWATER REVIEW

In this July 31 set of Responses, GHD reproduce the MOECC's (MOE, MECP, MOECP) ie. Ministry of Environment Review comments first and then they respond to them. I'm not sure why GHD references the MOE as MOECC other than perhaps they like others figure that a pile of dung by any other names smells just as bad. Hmm that comment just slipped out. I prefer to save my harsh comments for the MOE when they most deserve them. These current comments and criticisms by the MOE are actually pretty good.

Page two is a little surprising. GHD reference private residential wells north of Church. St. Say what? Back around 2014, Woolwich Council passed a by-law mandating that all residences and businesses musdt be hooked up to municipal water due to the NDMA and more groundwater contamination.That information is of course relevant to the nearby Bolender Park Landfill. Holy gosh I had no idea that homes in that area were drawing groundwater from near that old municipal/industrial landfill.

Page two also wrongly suggests that the nearest surface water discharge for contaminated shallow groundwater is to the Canagagigue Creek. What a pile of crap that is. The Stroh Drain folks is a surface water body with life in it and it does indeed draw shallow groundwater into itself.

Pages 3, 4, and 5 discuss flow direction in the Surficial Aquifer (SA) at the north-east corner of Lanxess. Finally after barely thirty years of B/S and horse manure, Lanxess and their consultants are admitting that there is off-site flow to the east of their property over to the Stroh farm. Small credit goes to the MOE and major credit goes to the Citizens Public Advisory Committee (CPAC) for getting this very obvious fact recognized. I personally have known that CRA's decades old flow direction arrows and verbal drivel about the SA was NOT upheld by the excruciatingly few data points (from wells) they had and based their self-serving conclusions on.

Page 6 discusses incorrect statements provided by GHD in an earlier report and upon which the MOE were criticizing their conclusions. The issue has to do with groundwater located in the Upper Aquitard (UAT). Good to know that even in areas of silt and clay that groundwater both exists and can migrate albeit not at great speeds or in great quantities. That said page 7 advises us that both 2,4,6 trichlorophenol and 2,4 dichlorophenol were found in off-site (Stroh) Upper Aquitard (UAT) wells above the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS). Oops that's not good.