JIGS HOLLOW GRAVEL PIT

The pit that just won't go away. Today's Woolwich Observer carries it as their front page story titled "Legal battle latest twist to gravel pit". The sub-title is "Winterbourne valley residents turn out to urge councillors to fight LPAT appeal by applicant". Besides Preston Sand & Gravel looking for permission to dig below the water table they also want to more than double the amount of aggregate extracted from the pit namely from 800,000 tonnes to 2.1 million tonnes. The timeline of the pit would also increase from six or seven years to fourteen plus years and rather than allegedly rehabilitating the site back to farmland, a large pond would remain on the site.

New studies have been produced by the proponents however as often seems the case these studies are problematic. They have errors within them including according to peer reviews done on behalf of Woolwich Township the noise, dust, and visual impact studies.All of this appears headed towards LPAT, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, which replaced the long discredited Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).

This is unfortunate however aggregate producers have had essentially a clear path to do what they want in Ontario for a very long time. One rare exception was the proposed Hunder Pit between Winterbourne and Conestogo a few years back. I attended that hearing and frankly was convinced that the proponent had a strong case (as did the local residents) and was going to walk away with OMB approval. He did not. Can lightning strike twice?
.

DETAILS BEING WITHHELD FROM THE PUBLIC RE: MILL CREEK FUEL SPILL

We are advised in yesterday's Waterloo Region Record in an article titled "Cambridge wells to be turned back on after fuel spill" that two wells near the Shade's Mills reservoir are going to be put back on active duty shortly. According to the Region's website under "Water and Wastewater" there are four wells in the Shade's Mills system namely G7, G8, G38 and G39. Of course in this article the Region are not telling us which or how many wells were shut down in the first place or which ones are being reactivated. We certainly don't want paying consumers of the Region's water to be overly informed on matters of health, life or death now do we.

The Region are waiting on test results from those wells prior to restarting them. My suspicion is that the simple act of closing the wells over the last four months has greatly assisted in reducing the likelihood of those four wells drawing jet fuel contaminants both into the deeper aquifers and towards these wells. Remember that the initial spill was on the surface and into Mill Creek. Certainly the bulk of the uncaptured and uncontained spill has been flushed well downstream into the Grand River long ago. Hopefully Mill Creek does not have locations where it is in close contact with deeper aquifers although that certainly does occur in Elmira where the Canagagigue Creek is in extremely close contact with our municipal aquifer.

Also of interest near the end of this article is the reality that jet fuels which we were told months ago do not dissolve in water, in fact do dissolve to a limited extent. The key is the word "dissolve". The proper terminology should have been that jet fuel does not FULLY dissolve in water. That is much more accurate. In other words similar to gasoline and oil the bulk of it floats on the surface of the water however there is a small quantity that does dissolve into the water. Quoting this newspaper article "Sample results show concentrations of parameters related to the jet-fuel spill are stable and below protective surface water guidelines". The amount that dissolves is referred to as the solubility in water and the maximum possible solubility of the various components of jet fuel most certainly exceed the Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Therefore it's all about when and where you sample the surface water. Sample it the day after the spill one hundred metres downstream and the results will be bad. Sample it four months after the spill a couple of kilomtres downstream and you will likely get much safer concentrations.

ANOTHER BAD IDEA RESURFACING: JIGS HOLLOW GRAVEL PIT

A past lame duck Woolwich Council approved this pit way back around 2010 after Todd Cowan and company had given the boot to most of the idjits on council. One of the lame duck Council's last acts was to give the go ahead to this pit located outside Winterbourne but immediately beside the Grand River. Then several years later we learn that councillor Mark Bauman has a wee undeclared conflict of interest over this issue. It turns out that Ray Kuntz, owner of the gravel pit, is both Mark's neighbour and had coached one of Mark's sons in hockey. From that point on Mark excused himself from debates and voting on the issue although the damage was already done.

Last evening three speakers addressed Woolwich Council yet again on the matter. They were Gordon Haywood, Jan Huisson and Laurie Breed. As both Winterbourne and Conestoga residents (Golf Course Road) rallied against the proposed Hunder Pit they are also trying to stop any below water table expansion of this pit. They opposed it in the first place when it was a proposed above water table pit due to noise, dust, truck traffic, visual impacts and cultural heritage impacts all of which affect their quality of life. The hydrogeological and hydrological impacts to the Grand River are greatly increased with this newer plan to excavate a huge pit below the water table and then allow it to fill with groundwater. I personally have referred to the multitude of gravel pits along the Grand River as being death by a thousand cuts to the river.

Gord Haywood referenced numerous errors and inaccuracies in the various reports supporting this expansion below the water table. Currently Woolwich Township have a holding provision prohibiting this expansion which the current proponents Preston Sand & Gravel would like lifted. Mr. Haywood advised council that the so called signing off by the Region of Waterloo was based upon a flawed older noise study. It did not include screening noises or proper gravel truck noises as the trucks that were modelled were located in Conestoga versus Peel St. (Winterbourne) or Jigs Hollow Rd. Mr. Haywood also indicated that a nearby residence has been improperly labelled as some kind of workshop and hence neither noise or visual impacts have been determined for this residence. Other errors include inaccurate elevation levels marked on various maps that affect berms etc. and will also impact noise levels and visual impacts.

Jan and Laurie Breed spoke to noise and to cultural heritage issues. Clearly the individual decibel levels will be well above the maximum permitted and they will be industrial noises versus natural rural sounds. The reports submitted by the proponent also clearly indicate that there will be negative impacts to numerous nearby designated cultural heritage locations. As was pointed out repeatedly negative impacts are not supposed to be allowed in order to accommodate gravel pits by the Township's own by-laws. This proposed expansion including drag line noise, truck noise and negative visual impacts contravenes the Township's written rules and hence the Township are in a strong position to continue to deny the proponent's wishes.

Interestingly Preston Sand & Gravel have earlier this month filed an appeal against the Township with LPAT (Local Planning Appeals Tribunal). As Mr. Haywood pointed out that was done all of one day after they filed new information with the Township which seems somewhat bizarre.

UPDATE ON STROH PRPOERTY REMEDIATION

As of last Friday, back filling of the minor excavations had begun on the Stroh farm to the immediate east of the Lanxess (Uniroyal Chemical) property. I took a look yesterday and with a bulldozer closer to the north end they were they were grading the presumably clean topsoil that had been dumped along the length of the few hundred meters long excavations. At the south end of the excavations, with the aid of binoculars, I could see a skid steer working, possibly moving buckets of top soil from the piles into the bottom of the excavations. The delay was twofold. First supplementary excavations were determined to be necessary after the initial excavations in late December 2018 and early January 2019 as either the sides or bottom of the very shallow excavations (15 centimeters - 5.9 inches) still had unacceptable concentrations of either dioxins/furans or of DDT compounds. Secondly the planned supplementary excavations were to be done in March however the weather was uncooperative. Both March and April were wet and cold and on a couple of occasions I did check then and saw no work being done.

To date Lanxess, GHD, and the Ontario MOE continue to do their best not to take appropriate action further south in and around the Stroh Ditch, Drain, and Berm (SDDB) located a mere ten meters from Lanxess's east side property boundary with the Stroh farm. They are of course doing this with unfortunate and inappropriate political support from our local Township politicians. This is very likely to bite said politicians in the butt. Maybe not today or tomorrow but down the line.

TOLD YOU SO...MILL CREEK RECOVERY AS YET UNKNOWN

Nine days ago I advised here that caution in and around Mill Creek and Shade's Mills was a good idea for some time to come. I did receive some minor criticism for that from a biased source as well as undoubtedly adding to the resentment and anger long held towards me by the Ontario Ministry of Environment. Their alleged professionalism has long suffered from political interference such that only those technical employees who are truly isolated from that interference, by simply doing the technical jobs they are asked to do, are able to maintain professional standards. It is hard to believe that the rest are not infected with the disease that starts at the top and works its way downwards into the organization. How is it possible for inherently decent human beings not to be negatively impacted on the job as they slowly learn that their careers and livelihoods are mostly to serve the facade that is the MOE (MECP)? The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) has always been at the mercy of the provincial Cabinet whose primary function is to make the government of the day look good.

The latest article in today's Waterloo Region Record is titled "Mill Creek recovery far from complete". Just like my posting of nine days ago it advises that to date there have been no fish tissue results. Basically there have been no results regarding how fish have been affected at all. It's merely conjecture and wishful thinking on both the MOE/MECP and Grand River Conservation Authority's (GRCA) part.Biologists are supposed to be studying the creek's fish populations and that work has not been started.

Interestingly the MOE have advised the volunteer group "the Friends of Mill Creek" not to send their crew of teenaged "rangers" this season into the creek to do their normal rehabilitation work. It could appear that the MOE are saying one thing privately while publicly advising that all is well. Furthermore the Friends of Mill Creek will not be doing their usual stocking of the creek with brown and brook trout this season because of the fuel spill last January.

Finally citizens on the scene shortly after the spill have reported confusion and disorganization on the part of the authorities doing the cleanup and remediation of the creek. Also there are concerns about a lack of followup testing of local drinking water wells. For me having followed the actions of the Ontario MOE for the last thirty years, none of this is any surprise.

GET ALONG TO GO ALONG & M1, ISCO (and more)

Sub-title: The Lying Frucks


I have for many years understood that the locations of the Elmira off-site pumping wells were directly related to areas of high concentrations of NDMA, chlorobenzene, ammonia and more. Hence pumping wells are located at W5 (A/B) right beside (west) the First St. Landfill, W4 between Varnicolor Chemical and Borg Textile (i.e. west of Varnicolor and north of Borg), W3 located beside Landfill Creek and between Sanyo Canada and the former McKee Harvestor, and E7 which was one of the former drinking wells in the south wellfield. Ecologic Inc. from Rockwood and others, early on, advised that the NDMA in the south wellfield (E7, E9) was likely from a nearby source as in closer than Uniroyal Chemical.

Then we have the so called "Elmira RAP Expansion" locations. RAP of course stands for remedial action plan. What a pile of pus. It is not and has not been any kind of "expansion" whatsoever. What it is is simply replacement wells in different locations attempting to continue to locate beside what are euphemistically referred to as "hot spots". The great likelihood is that these "hot spots" are simply off the Uniroyal site SOURCE AREAS! Source areas as in Uniroyal never were the sole source of the destruction of our drinking water aquifers despite Uniroyal admitting to it in their October 7, 1991 Settlement Agreement or in the MOE November 4, 1991 Control Order.

Expansion pumping well W6 is located on Oriole Parkway halfway between Varnicolor's Lot 91 and the Sanyo Plant and W3. It is located on Oriole Parkway on the former Borg Textile's side of the road. New pumping well W8 is located on the east side of Union St. on the former Nutrite (Yara) property (now SNC Lavallin). I have long believed that besides Nutrite's own contribution of ammonia and likely more to the municipal aquifers that Uniroyal had free phase DNAPL (dense non aqueous phase liquids) flow westwards onto the Nutrite property near to the location of W8. W9 is located across Union St. from W8, very very close to Landfill Creek. This is also extremely close to former landfill M1 which on maps is located on the former textile factory property on Park Ave.

Two other interesting facts. Was the location of the pilot test for In-Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) after 2012, beside Well W3 a tacit admission that either Sanyo or McKee were off-site (from Uniroyal) sources who contributed NDMA and or chlorobenzene to the aquifers? Secondly was the suggested "Northwest MU In Situ Area" and the suggested "Adjacent ML In Situ Area" encompassing M1, W8, W9 and the former textile companies also a tacit admission of off-site source areas? I believe that it is.


I wonder how much of this Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura and Lanxess have shared with their local partners in pollution? Usually I refer only to the Ontario MOE (MECP) as partners in pollution with Uniroyal and its successors. Right now I'm wondering how much they shared with their local co-opted citizens of which fortunately there are not many. I understand that these citizens were likely given a choice a few decades ago. Get along to go along and it will be in your best interests. Perhaps in fact you may even have more environmental influence with us and the MOE if you play ball cooperatively versus competitively. It is a seductive offer but takers knowingly or otherwise have to step off the public interest bus sooner or later.

OUR POLICE FORCE IS OUT OF CONTROL - THANK YOU WATERLOO REGIONAL COUNCILLORS & POLICE SERVICES BOARD

The front page article in today's Waterloo Region Record is titled "Former Cambridge woman alleges racial profiling by officer". I do not know anyone involved in this case but even if I assume that in this particular issue our local police force are completely within their legal rights (different from innocent), I have to ask the question "When will the abuse of citizens and residents end?" Over the last decade the stories about improper behaviour by our local police have been unending. These include both assaults and killings of citizens whose greatest "crime" seems to be mental illness and even if some have had small knives or other "weapons" why can a so called professional police force with pepper spray, batons, tasers, training and other less than lethal weapons not subdue them without shooting them multiple times in the torso, essentially guaranteeing death? The police assaults of citizens have even included sexual assaults of female police officers for God's sake.

I suggested in the first paragraph that I would assume that the police officer involved was within his legal rights. I did that for the sake of argument only. This article states that the officer told her that she matched the description of a person they were looking for. The problem is that the woman involved is a woman of colour. The police were looking for a man allegedly involved in a gun incident. No description of the male suspect such as white, brown or black was given. Seems to be one hell of a stretch. Also the fact that four Highway Traffic Act tickets (charges) were issued to her after her vehicle was searched and later the tickets were all withdrawn also seems awfully suspicious. It kind of smells like intimidation or blackmail to me.

It is literally years if not decades past time for our regional councillors and our Waterloo Region Police Services Board to step up and take control back from our police chief and deputy chiefs. These problems have been allowed to fester and grow with little or no supervision or discipline involved of offending officers. Whether it is attitudes, training or both these problems need to be remedied from the top down. To date they've mainly been excused, covered up and or victims paid off by those in charge. It must end.

CHEMTURA SENDS A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Yes Virginia, corporations do have feelings. Sort of. In the June 14, 2012 Elmira Independent, Josef Olejarz has had his Letter published. The title of his editorial is "Editorial contributes to confusion". Mr. Olejarz was responding to the Editorial published a week earlier in the Independent by Editor, Gail Martin.

Mr. Olejarz unfortunately is less than an unbiased, neutral observer. He is the plant manager of a chemical company with shareholders who demand the best possible return on their investment. This means Josef, in order to keep his job, must consistently present the company in the best possible environmental light in order to minimize their cleanup costs. Josef therefore starts off with a deceitful distraction. He alleges that the week earlier Editorial claimed that dioxins and DDT from the former gravel pits GP-1 and GP-2 were leaking into the groundwater. That is false. Gail Martin's Editorial clearly said that there is evidence that dioxins and DDT were leaking off-site into the downstream Canagagigue Creek which is true.

Josef also brags about Uniroyal/Chemtura's previous creekbank projects. Indeed they were environmentally beneficial as they have lowered the incidence of dioxins/furans and DDT in creek sediments thus aiding benthic organisms and other lifeforms. That said further creek testing since 2012 has made it clear that the former Uniroyal site continues to discharge dioxins/furans, DDT and more downstream even after the on-site creekbank cleanups.

This response as well as others has shown that corporations want their cake and to eat it as well. They don't want to spend money to clean up their own messes but they do want to deceive the public otherwise. For them it's all about public relations and getting away with avoiding cleanup costs. In this they are generally well aided by our governments at all levels. Afterall why would corporations donate to political parties if they weren't going to receive benefits, directly or indirectly, from the taxpayers?

APRIL 2019 LANXESS PROGRESS REPORT

It's a stinker! Out of nine off-site pumping wells, five of them are below target. That's the bad news including W9 that is at least two years behind schedule did not achieve its' goal of 13.6 litres per second although it did make 12.6 l/sec. The other failing wells are W5A, W6A, W6B, and E7. The various reasons are blah, blah, and blah. Seriously after all these years (decades) of excuses I just can't stomach reading the same old, same old month after month. There is some good news on the off-site pumping however. By pumping well W3R over its target the overall pumping on a historical rate isn't all that bad. The problem is that the overall pumping at its historical rate is inadequate which is why CPAC and the public were bullshitted in November 2012 by Conestoga Rovers and Chemtura when they said they's triple the off-site pumping and later said they's double it. So far its never been close to either.

Table A.2 is enlightening. The highest concentration of chlorobenzene in the groundwater is 4,700 ppb. found at newer well W8. The highest concentrations of raw groundwater for NDMA are 44.56 ppb. at W8 and 40.98 ppb. at W9. Wow! Why the hell weren't both those pumping wells (W8, W9) installed and pumping fifteen years ago? Those numbers are atrocious thirty years AFTER the 1989 Elmira Water Crisis began.

Table C.2, surface water in the Canagagigue Creek is going from bad to worse. Why are the concentrations of so many chemicals so much worse upstream than downstream? Perhaps the answer is that the Bolender Park Landfill is finally living up to its potential as a repository for both Varnicolor Chemical and Uniroyal Chemical toxic wastes. Just look at the difference between the arithmetic means upstream (SS-110) and downstream (SS+925) in the Creek. MBT, BT, NDMA and ethyl benzene are higher downstream while eighteen chemicals in the surface water are actually higher upstream. What the hell is going on?

ANOTHER SUSPICIOUS ANOMALY

Last Friday I posted here about a number of strange anomalies in Elmira and on the Lanxess site with landfills that relocate themselves, major drains and berms which don't show up on relevant maps, adjusted or altered Flood Plain maps, and even the relocation of GP-1 on two different occasions. Well we have at least one more to join the list.

The Conestoga Rovers April 2013 report titled "GP1 and 2 Remediation and Capping", drawing C-02 is the only source to date that I have seen which shows an opening at the top (north end) of the diagonal ridge of high ground located in Lanxess's south-east corner. The ridge is oriented in a north-west to south-east direction and is above the high water mark of a 100 year flood. Contrary or different maps clearly show that there is no opening at the north end of the ridge which would permit easier access of waste waters from the east side pits (RPE 1-5) to flow overland directly into GP-1.

The contrary reports I have seen include the most recent report produced by GHD in regards to the Canagagigue Creek investigation. That map produced by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) clearly shows that the ridge while indeed hooked on the north-west end nevertheless is continuously above the water level of a 100 year flood. So is this difference of significance? I believe it is as it made the selling of the story by Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura that ALL the overland waste waters conveniently flowed directly into GP-1 first then into GP-2 so much easier. Of course they did what they do best which is to make unlikely claims more plausible by both hiding behind the Ontario MOE and their own credentials. Also they did of course not provide essential information for more than twenty years, namely ground elevation maps and contour lines. Even then I believe they (CRA) did their best to hide crucial contour lines on the neighbouring Stroh property.

Some of these oddities, anomolies, and disparities may have a reasonable explanation. The fact that each and every one however appears to be a major structural support of now proven falsehoods is extremely suspicious. Each and every one requires both investigation and clarification. The best we are likely to get however is the MOE and or Lanxess cherry picking one of them as a representative of all, in order to stifle the fact that they have manipulated, massaged, or falsified evidence to suit their narrative and purposes which normally are to minimize the extent of contamination and hence cleanup costs.

GRCA PROCLAIMS "NO RISK" ASSOCIATED WITH THE SPILL AT THE SHADE'S MILL RESERVOIR

The article in today's Waterloo Region Record is titled "GRCA says Shade's Mills reservoir in Cambridge not adversely impacted by jet fuel spill". In this story the GRCA are making a pronouncement way out of their area of expertise which is water volumes, flooding etc. Yes they are relying on the Ontario Ministry of Environment which is long proven to be a discredited source of accurate environmental information. As far as the credibility of Waterloo Region Public Health let me point out that they were next to useless in regards to both the Bishop St. communities trichloroethylene (TCE) exposure issues and not much better regarding the exposure to NDMA of Elmira residents in 1989 and 1990. With regards to the ongoing air fumigations by Uniroyal Chemical from 1999 to 2001, they were even worse.

Allegedly citizens can safely partake of swimming, boating and fishing at Shade's Mills immediately. Are we to conclude from this that fish sampling has been underway and that there has been no uptake of contaminants by fish? Oddly I haven't seen any mention of fish tissue sampling having been done this past winter or spring.

I have seen and heard comments that kerosene-based jet fuel is insoluble in water. I believe that that may be simply a misnomer based upon the definition of "soluble". Kerosene and many oils, fuels and other hydrocarbon (hydrogen & carbon) mixes indeed are not FULLY soluble in water. Hence they will often float on top of the water however very small amounts can and do "dissolve" in the water. This solubility is very low and is often measured in parts per billion or even trillion. The problem is that the drinking water standards for these compounds are usually even lower than their solubility in water. Yes the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS) do indeed have concentrations for benzene, toluene, xylenes and numerous other hydrocarbons which form chains to produce gasolines, oils and other fuels.

Therefore I advise caution in and around Mill Creek and Shade's Mills for some time to come. Yes dilution and flushing of the surface waters of the creek greatly exceeds dilution and flushing of contaminated groundwater obviously. It is sad however when our authorities still hold "Dilution is the solution to pollution", so close to their hearts.

STRANGE OCCURRENCES AND OTHER UNI/LANXESS SELF-SERVING ANOMALIES

Where was the Stroh Drain hiding from 1985 until 2015? Since 2015 and my and CPAC publicly outing its existence it now is fairly regularly shown on maps of Lanxess's south-east corner including a tiny piece of the Stroh property. Afterall the Stroh Drain runs parallel to the Lanxess east side property line with Stroh and the Drain is only ten metres onto the Stroh property. Through diligent searching of any and all Uniroyal Chemical related documents I have seen the Stroh Drain on a map prior to 2015 all of once back in 1991.

Where has the major berm on the east side of the Stroh Drain been hiding from 1985 until early 2019? In fact I've seen it for the first time on a map earlier this spring. Never before. What I have seen however is an altered version of the Grand River Conservation Authority's (GRCA) 100 year Floodplain Map before. I am assuming that the earlier maps were altered because they did not include the Berm which I know exists because I (and others) have seen it with our own eyes.

GP-1 is found in three different locations on three different maps. I have to hand it to Uniroyal /Lanxess as each relocation has been in their best interests in the never ending facade that everything has been contained on their site for a very long time. The first location of GP-1 is on the north-east side of the long diagonal ridge (NW to SE) of high ground in their south-east corner. This location makes it more obvious that waste waters from the RPE (1-5) pits flowed into and around (east side) GP-1 and then moved downhill to the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB).

Municipal Landfill M-1, similar to the Bolender Park Landfill, appears to have legs. It has been relocated from the east side of Union St. in Elmira to the south-west corner of Park and Union St.

The service road built on the east side of the Uniroyal/Lanxess property also has a number of different configurations. It makes sense that it was built to service new monitoring wells and two pumping wells (PW2, PW3) in the south-east corner. These different configurations on maps over the last thirty-five years plus might actually have some reasonable rationale. If so I'd like to hear it. All the other migrating or invisible pits, landfills, drains, berms etc. may have a component of incompetence but are more likely to be in the service of a narrative that both the polluter and their regulator wish to bolster.

UNIROYAL CHEMICAL LIED TO LOCAL CITIZENS

Back in the early 1990s Uniroyal and their consultants CRA were planning how to contain the upper aquifer which discharged massive quantities and concentrations of toxic chemicals into the Canagagigue Creek on their Elmira site. As a direct result the Creek was dead. Not so much essentially dead as totally dead. There were no fish, no salamanders, no frogs and no benthic community consisting of sediment dwelling organisms upon which fish and other higher up the food chain organisms would predate on. Probably since around 1972 and most certainly after 1997 the benthic community has returned although they are mostly of the more pollution tolerant species. Fish have also returned although the vast majority are so called "coarse" fish or bottom dwellers that are also pollution tolerant. This would include carp, suckers, chub etc.

Hydraulic containment, also known as Pump & Treat was the least expensive form of remediation of a number of technologies. It required a small upfront cost for drilling pumping wells and constructing a treatment system for the contaminated water withdrawn from the ground. This method however was faster than Uniroyal's favourite which was do nothing, also called natural attenuation. Natural attenuation has long been favoured by polluters and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment as all that is required is the polluter to stop its everyday toxic discharges to the natural environment. Mild pollution can probably be remediated by bacteria in the soil as well as by groundwater dilution in fifteen to twenty-five years.

Uniroyal and CRA proposed starting in 1994 that all that was needed was hydraulic containment of one quadrant (south-west) of their site. They claimed that 97.5% of the contaminants to the Creek were coming from that south-west corner. Citizens' response was where are the discharges from the east side pits (RPE 1-5) going? The response from Uniroyal and CRA was that they were naturally attenuated by wetlands, bullrushes etc. between the east side pits and the Creek. Our retort to that was that there was indeed bull involved but it wasn't bullrushes. Being less sensitive to criticism in those days, Uniroyal ploughed on.

Some of this ploughing it turned out in hindsight was of furrows being intentionally ploughed in a north to south direction on the east side of their site. The purpose was to divert the overflowing east side pits into their south-east wetlands where they were diluted with groundwater at the surface as well as being mildly remediated by the action of some wetland plants. They then of course primarily flowed right back into the Canagagigue Creek either by ground water or surface water flow. This low-lying area was also prone to flooding each spring courtesy of the Canagagigue. Some of the more hydrophobic compounds such as dioxins/furans and DDT compounds readily attached to soil particles and were left behind for later erosion by heavy rains as well as the annual spring flooding.

These furrows have since been admitted to by Uniroyal/Chemtura personnel. They can also be seen on some older aerial photographs. There was also a major swale constructed at some point in time which ran down the immediate west side of the pits. Between the man made furrows and the swale visible on Google Earth satellite photos we now know the truth as to where the bulk of east side waste waters ended up and it was right back into the Creek albeit further downstream past the Uniroyal property lines.

Throughout all this from the 1950s or 60s, the 1990s and later where was the Ontario MOE? Oh yes, whether known as the Ontario Water Resources Commission or the Ministry of Environment, they were right there hand in hand with the polluter and destroyer of our ground and surface waters. They were protecting industry rather than citizens and the environment.

LONGSTANDING LIES AND DECEPTIONS AROUND GRAVEL PITS 1 & 2

The Elmira Independent published both an Editorial and an article on June 7, 2012 that were very enlightening. The Editorial is titled "Chemtura should excavate pits" and the article is titled "Waste pits source of contention at CPAC". In the Editorial, Gail Martin suggests that the MOE came close to ordering Chemtura to remove the soil from GP-1 & 2 but did not as it was on Chemtura's propertty. Wow! There folks is your Ontario MOE, best friend to polluters, in a nutshell. The downstream fish, creek sediments and creek bank soils are full of dioxins and DDT but the MOE didn't order on-site cleanup because... well the source is onsite. WTF kind of perverted, Kafkaesque, catch 22 kind of reason and logic is that? Right, it's MOE (MECP) logic. Hence once again Chemtura negotiated excavating one pit and merely capping the other one.

Regarding the article in the Independent there was concern that 100 year floods or even lesser ones could erode the contaminated soils and send them downstream as if that hasn't been happening for decades. "Dan Holt. chairman of CPAC, asked Martindale (MOE) whether the MOE has any plans to test for dioxins and DDT south of Chemtura. Martindale said there are no current plans but he would suggest it as a future project. He plans on bringing it up with the new acting director for his division, once that person is appointed." And there it is again folks! The unconscionable delay by the MOE in order to protect Chemtura Canada. Since that time Steve Martindale has retired, CPAC was falsely accused and removed by the new 2014 Woolwich Council and new members brought in. Unsurprisingly now in 2019, seven years later, these soil tests requested by knowledgeable citizens have NOT been done. That is precisely how Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura and now Lanxess "adjust the science according to their needs". They simply don't do the onvious testing that would clearly show where remediation (off-site) is required. They are refusing to test both the Martin property as well as the area in and around the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB).

WE'VE GOT ANOTHER BOLENDER PARK LANDFILL MAP!

This map comes courtesy of TAG member Joe Kelly. Joe has proven himself capable of independent thought AND willing to do the work necessary to inform himself about the Uniroyal/Lanxess situation, the Creek situation and lastly the Elmira Aquifer cleanup. Joe gave me a "General Plan of Elmira Prepared by the Town Planning Commission". Joe advises me that this map is from approximately 1930 and that it is in the Township offices somewhere.

Well firstly Elmira was tiny in 1930! My goodness. The Canadian Pacific R.R. was still active at the north end of town along with a train station not too far from the current Woolwich Observer newspaper. The Canagagigue Creek has visibly moved or been relocated both through the current Bolender Park as well as at the south end of the current Lanxess (formerly Uniroyal). Other differences would be proposed road extensions both at the south end of Snyder St. over to Arthur St. south (Hwy # 85), Union St. north and from Arthur St. north past the town limits in a south-east direction where it hooked into Church St. (now Hwy # 86 to Guelph).

Joe is correct in that the map he's provided clearly shows the area immediately south of the railroad tracks from Arthur St. in the west to George St. in the east being zoned industrial. The southward limit of this industrial zoning is at High St. which matches with the current situation. South of that zoning the lands on both sides of the Canagagigue Creek are zoned Parks and Playgrounds. Therefore the intent of the map in 1930 is very clear.

There are however other differences with today's reality. There are three schools clearly marked in this map and one of them is not a match for the current situation. Riverside school appears to be in its' original school zoned location. Elmira District Secondary School is very close to its' original zoned location however John Mahood School is not. It was zoned in this 1930 map to be on the east side of Arthur St. versus it's current location on the west side.

Now I am not saying that this map is absolutely wrong about the current location of the Bolender Park Landfill. What I am saying is this map was drawn around 1930 and the Landfill was constructed starting in 1962 during a time of pressure to replace the former M2 on the Uniroyal property which was the subject of numerous ongoing odour complaints about burning garbage. I thank Joe for his input and contribution and suggest that our authorities really need to determine accurately where their various leaking and discharging, multiple municipal and industrial landfills within Elmira are located.

TWO EXCELLENT ARTICLES IN TODAY'S K-W RECORD

The first is actually an Opinion piece by Dan Kraus a senior conservation biologist with the Nature Conservancy of Canada. It is titled "Think globally, conserve locally to help save a million species" and the second is by Josh Wingrove of Bloomberg News titled "Coal remains Canada's "dirty" little secret".

May 17 is World Endangered Species Day and a recent United Nations report by 455 scientists, researchers and experts has determined that one million species of either animals or plants are at risk of extinction. Extinction directly related to human activity which of course is significantly caused by human world wide population. Frankly we as a species are slowly killing everything else. This much needed reversal of habitat destruction and reduction in global biodiversity is negatively affecting we human beings as well. It is in everyone's and every living thing's interests to reverse this situation sooner than later. Nature provides benefits to human beings and in exchange we seem to do our very best to destroy nature.

Regarding the article on coal there are many ironies including Vancouver in British Columbia, long held as the hub of the Green movement in Canada, actually is also the hub of transportation of coal and crude oil. Oops! That takes some explaining and I suggest that this article does a fairly good job of doing that. Yes there are individuals getting filthy rich exploiting Canada's natural resources for their personal gain while the rest of us pay the environmental price. It is however not quite so black and white. There is a distinction made between "thermal" coal for electricity production (bad) and "metallurgical" coal used to make steel (good). To a certain point only I can understand that yes steel is a necessity for human beings however I also know that an awful lot of things are made with steel that certainly are not needed. You the readers can decide for yourselves how heavily you want to weigh "good" coal versus "bad" coal. You can also weigh how coal used for electricity is supposedly always bad whereas nuclear reactors producing electricity are always "good".

Two very interesting articles.

STAKEHOLDERS WILFULLY & INTENTIONALLY IGNORANT OR HONESTLY CONFUSED AND UNCLEAR?

The above title is not either or. In fact the stakeholders (broadly defined) are both. Some are honestly confused and unclear which is exactly what the willfully and intentionally ignorant stakeholders want them to be. Over the last several months TAG, CPAC and the public have been treated to a cacophony of fact, falsehoods, deflections, distractions, junk science and just plain bullshit.

I believe that suggestions by Joe and Tiffany of TAG that Uniroyal Chemical waste waters were absorbed either in the small pond that Joe spotted just south of RPE-5 or in the former wetlands along the "Gap" area are simply a matter of them at the time not having their heads firmly wrapped around the sheer volume of waste waters as well as of overland rain and creek water during floods. Yes currently the former wetland is dry courtesy of the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB) and would indeed be capable of absorbing a large amount of water; however prior to the likely 1983 construction of the SDDB the wetland area was exactly that. The water table had not been drained and the area was a wetland and further water flows into it would simply have temporarily raised the water level and then gravity flowed over to the lower elevation Stroh property. I expect that further thought and reflection will clarify this for Joe and Tiffany.

Statements from CRA, GHD, Chemtura and Lanxess that all overland flow of waste waters from the east side buried pits (RPE 1-5) ended up in either GP-1 or GP-2 simply defy credibility, common sense, rational thinking, ground surface contours (elevations) etc. Statements that all the east side overflowing waste waters were contained on site are even less than fantasy and wishful thinking. Just like the west side, the intent was to let everything go into the Creek while going through the motions of discharging on land and pretending/hoping/praying that the sands, gravels, clays and silts would neutralize, attenuate and breakdown the toxic components. Once again this is simple self-serving rationalizations and excuses. Statements from Jeff Merriman that the east side pits were intentionally drained on demand by Uniroyal are equally incredible. Jeff suggested that there was some sort of gate or release mechanism to drain the pits at Uniroyal's will. For the love of ...the environment, please show us some evidence of that. It is difficult for me to swallow that the pits (some) were built on top of a silt/clay aquitard limiting downward migration and at the same time massive volumes of liquids per day were pumped into these uncovered pits which also allowed rainfall entry. These pits overflowed daily and that is why both the admitted north to south furrows were ploughed in the ground as well as the large swales that can still be seen by satellite photos.

The simple refusal by experienced Chemtura/Lanxess/CRA/GHD personnel to acknowledge that the high elevation, diagonal north-west to south-east ridge deflected overland flow south-east onto the Stroh property is the dead give away. Joe Kelly and hopefully the rest of the TAG members present now see and understand the ridiculousness of the Lanxess position that nothing went onto the neighbour's property. Until or unless Lanxess and GHD are willing to acknowledge the obvious then quite frankly everything they say is tainted by their refusal to acknowledge the obvious.

LAST NIGHT'S TAG MEETING

Well it sure wasn't boring! TAG are now down to four members at recent meetings which is unfortunate. David Hofbauer is a technically savy and straightforward individual whose knowledge is missed whereas the other hopefully permanent departure of Pat McLean is long overdue. For at least the second TAG meeting in a row Sandy Shantz has attended apparently keeping an eye on things. I would like to think that she is trying to learn a few things about the environmental issues but I fear it's more about Lanxess/MOE concerns that the second Chair of TAG, Tiffany Svensson, may be open to reason and facts. That is an absolute no-no for the likes of the polluter, their alleged regulator and the polluter's consultants GHD. Quoting the saying on my daughter's T-shirt "Evidence is greater than Ideology". This is the motto of the national organization known as Evidence For Democracy.

There was a significant discussion of the 2018 Annual Monitoring Report with mention of both improvements in its written presentation as well as a lack of suggested changes from previous years. Discussion also focused on recommended reductions by Lanxess's consultants in various groundwater monitoring programs. The concern was the overall lack of intelligent rationale for these proposed reductions and TAG did not seem to be in agreement. Tiffany on a number of occasions referred to "enhanced pumping" of the Elmira Aquifers recently. In fact there's been a whole lot more talk about "enhanced pumping" than actual increases in the off-site pumping.

There was a good description and explanation of what Tiffany referred to as residual contamination left in the matrix. I interpret that as contaminants that have diffused from the groundwater into the various soils of the aquitard primarily although possibly also into the soils of the aquifers. Then as the groundwater concentrations are reduced through pumping these contaminants back diffuse into the aquifers. All of this is slowly cleaning the aquifers although the initial diffusion and subsequent back diffusion greatly slow the process.

This discussion then led into a discussion of enhanced remediation. These forms of remediation are literally decades overdue and include various forms of source control although the polluter and regulator don't want to admit that sources other than Uniroyal Chemical exist. The areas requiring "enhanced remediation" are therefore referred to as "hot spots". Gotta love the attempts to talk their way around inconvenient truths. Speaking of inconvenient truths, Sebastian pointed out that the last Chemtura Public Advisory Committee (CPAC) had been down that road already and the company did not respond well as they very poorly executed their pilot test of the In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO) enhanced remediation.

Joe Kelly gave a talk about the depression south of the former east side pits (RPE 1-5) and north of the Stroh Drain and GP-1 and GP-2. This depression usually has water in it as it did during our April 11/19 site tour. I believe this water is either snow melt, rainwater or even groundwater at surface. Joe seemed to be leaning towards thinking that this tiny pond would have absorbed or intercepted the former toxic waste water discharges from the RPE ponds. Sebastian pointed out that the volumes of waste water (he believes 163,000 gallons per day, I believe 175,000 gallons per day) would quickly overwhelm and overflow that tiny pond and then flow across it down into the Stroh Drain area. I would suggest that Joe does have a good point in that likely that small pond is a repository of some significant DDT and dioxin concentrations.

At this point Tiffany and Sebastian got into a great discussion/debate about where the admitted overland flow of waste waters ended up. Tiffany suggested at one point that they went into the flat low lying area of former wetlands on the Lanxess property and stagnated there. Sebastian said no that with sufficient daily volumes they would have gravity flowed across that saturated area at the time (before the Stroh Drain lowered the water table) over onto the Stroh property. The direction of flow would have taken them across the area known as the "Gap". We already know that there is some contamination in the "Gap" area due to extremely modest and problematic composite sampling. The big concentrations of dioxins/furans and DDT compounds are most likely in the lowest elevation areas immediately to the east of the Stroh Drain. These areas have an elevation of 345.0 and 345.5 metres above sea level. The good news is that both Joe and Tiffany are questioning the fallacy that all these waste waters solely ended up in GP-1 and GP-2. Clearly the high diagonal (North-West to South-East) ridge prevented that.

The other bone of contention was the proposed sampling location for the Stroh Drain. Sebastian wants both the sediments and the soils in and around the Stroh Drain tested. Tiffany, following Lanxess's wishes, suggested sampling at the mouth of the Stroh Drain as it enters the Canagagigue Creek. Susan Bryant concurred. I smell a huge rat with that location. Afterall does a concussion victim ask the doctor to examine his toes or his head? We know the most likely location that dioxins/furans and DDT have been deposited. Why refuse to test there and suggest other locations if you really want to know the truth?

CONCEPTUAL SITE MODELS (CSM) - BOTH ARE FLAWED

How could they not be? A couple of private citizens make private deals and agreements with the polluter and their corrupted regulator outside of the formal public consultation process. They then attempt to sell their intrinsically flawed understanding of the facts to a bunch of citizens with even less understanding of what's going on. The one or two on the committee with technical knowledge are often absent plus they are working eight to ten hours a day for their employer for good wages and can only take off so much family or personal time for this Elmira project.

There is a CSM for the Elmira sub-surface (aquifers, aquitards etc.) as well as one for the Canagagigue Creek. Dr. Thompson did a pretty good job of learning and incorporating various facts into his CSM for all of Elmira although certainly the guiltiest parties (MOE & Uniroyal/Lanxess) were not totally straight with him. How could they be? That would entail admitting to large scale deception of the facts surrounding the Elmira Water Crisis including the other sources in town. Dr. Richard Jackson certainly hammered home the point that Conestoga Rovers (CRA) on behalf of Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura were remiss in much of their studies and investigations to determine proper cleanup and remediation. Stunning isn't it that other than myself and the last CPAC primarily, no other institutions or authorities allegedly picked up on the self-serving nature of CRA's omissions.

Regarding this latest Draft CSM for the Creek (the "Gig") what is missing? How about ALL the probable sources of contamination to the Creek. That would be an incredible start. Yes they have included the four municipal landfills in town. These are the Bolender Park Landfill, the First St. Landfill, M-2 on the Lanxess property, and M-1 which like the Bolender Landfill appears to have developed legs as its' exact position and location has changed over time.

What hasn't been included are a number of other local industries located along our various creeks in town whether the "Gig" or creeks which discharge into it. Let's see there is Walco ( former name escapes me at the moment) on Arthur St. beside the "Gig" and there is the Elmira Shirt and Overall Co on Park Ave. beside the aptly named Shirt Factory Creek. Other names for this location include Park Ave. Textiles perchance plus others. Interesting to me is that one of the locations of municipal landfill M-1 is immediately beside this factory on Park Ave. Then we have McKee Harvestor and Sanyo Canada both whose property is located on the banks of Landfill Creek. Borg Textiles also encompasses part of Landfill Creek at the back of its' property. Just to be more inclusive let's not forget the 45 gallon barrels that we've all seen along or in Larches Creek on the west side of town prior to its' discharge into the "Gig". You get the picture. There has never been anything close to a real investigation of all the contamination sources in and around Elmira. Way too embarrassing for both local township councils as well as for the Ontario MOE. Politics strikes again folks.

HAWK RIDGE HOMES PUBLIC MEETING IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS LAST EVENING

There were seven local citizens who spoke at last evening's public meeting including myself. Susan Bryant raised the excellent point that Hawk Ridge Homes have basically ignored and avoided all the health and safety issues in regards to the location of their proposed subdivision across Union St. from Sulco (Canada Colours) and Lanxess (Uniroyal).

I spoke to the long history of air, ground and surface water, and soil contamination both on and off the Uniroyal site. I also mentioned some horrific chemicals that they have used and poorly disposed of on their site over the decades including NDMA, DDT, Agent Orange and accompanying dioxins, lindane, parathion, and solvents en masse. All of these and more are now both on and off their site continuing to this day and likely forever contaminating the natural environment.

Pat Mclean mentioned that local developers have had zero interest in this site because they know of its history and hence these current developers will build, collect money and then get out of town. Interesting point.

Sandra Baer, former CPAC member and apparently now an APT member, spoke to buffer zones and how there was supposed to be no sensitive uses (residential) of the land within appropriate safety distances from chemical companies.

Stephanie Gertz is a Green Party candidate and she spoke to green infrastructure and how this proposed subdivision was not following green principles for sustainability etc.

Murray Haight was very concerned with buffers around the chemical companies. He wanted to know what the current buffer distance was supposed to be and he asked whether a Risk Assessment for this proposed subdivision had been completed.

Lastly Vivienne Delaney mentioned that currently there are massive trucks running along Union St. in Elmira. These trucks end up on Duke St. and Church St. where they make noise, pollute the air and clog traffic. She feels that more residential homes along Union St. will only exacerbate the problems as well as the new residents will not know ahead of time as to how people and child unfriendly Union St. is with all the heavy traffic on it.

Dan Kennally of Woolwich Township started the public meeting with a brief history of the multiple attempts to rezone and develop this former apple orchard. Councillor Merlihan mentioned the frustration of citizens coming back multiple times to speak to this issue and he asked if there was a limit to how many times developers can keep coming bacl. Councillor Merlihan also criticized the claim by the representative for Hawk Ridge Homes when she suggested that the new homes would be complimentary with the current older subdivision on College and Bauman St.

Councillor Larry Shantz briefly referenced the "kill zone" wondering if and when a new "Worst Case Scenario" was coming from Lanxess Canada as their old one for Anhydrous Ammonia was out of date. All in all it is obvious that the community are not remotely in support of this new housing location and neither is Sulco (Canada Colours) as per their written submission. Oddly there was no sign of Lanxess Canada this time around which has me somewhat concerned that perhaps some kind of sweetheart deal has been privately arranged. Very strange.

"A WATER PISTOL IN A THUNDERSTORM" - I THINK NOT

Put differently the construct between the Ontario MOE and Uniroyal Chemical was that Uniroyal were the sole source of NDMA, chlorobenzene and other contaminants within the Elmira aquifer systems. They of course were not the sole source for either one however in exchange for an Indemnity as well as other considerations in their October 7, 1991 Settlement Agreement, Uniroyal so agreed. The MOE were also able to pretend that they simply missed that tricky devil NDMA and it slipped off the Uniroyal site and migrated at the speed of light (O.K. a little less) sixteen hundred metres south-west to Elmira's south wellfield before they found it.

Exhibit "I" dated January 27, 1990 at the Environmental Appeal Board (EAB) is a document from Uniroyal Chemical Research Laboratories in Guelph, Ontario. The title of the document is "N-Nitrosodimethylamine Contamination of Ground Water: A Literature Survey". This document states that there are three known sources for human exposure to NDMA. They are NDMA contained in food and beverages, airborne NDMA from for example leather and rubber/tire industries and thirdly endogenous and exogenous formation of NDMA.

This third source means NDMA can be spontaneously produced within the human body (endogenous) based upon diet and certain foods AND it can be produced spontaneously in Nature (exogenous). This spontaneous production in nature is based upon a precursor such as dimethylamine (DMA) being released into the natural environment combining with nitrates or nitrites already in the soil. An acidic soil environment is also helpful. Page 4, number 4. of this report is titled "NDMA In Ground Waters Of Agricultural Lands: Potential Sources."

Quoting from 4. "While the presence of most of these requirements needs no justification, as is the case with nitrate or nitrite, acidity, microorganisms, or photochemical energy, the question of the availability of the organic material, DMA, or a precursor of this substance, still needs to be addressed. In the absence of a direct emitter one must still seek a source capable of delivering large amounts of DMA (or NDMA) to the environment."

All of these natural requirements already exist in large parts of both Elmira and immediate surrounding areas. The Varnicolor Chemical location formerly had been a large scale pig farm. The direct emitter of NDMA certainly was Uniroyal. A direct emitter of DMA however was a few hundred metres closer to the south wellfield and that was Varnicolor Chemical. That company directly emitted dimethylamine (DMA) as well as its waste waters into the sub-surface natural environment via a floor drain and buried tanker into the outside yard. CH2M HILL, consultants to the Region of Waterloo have so stated in their 1990 and 1991 review of potential NDMA sources. Dimethylamiine was used by Varnicolor as a commercial can coating for corrosion inhibiting purposes. Other sources have also confirmed this and yours truly saw a barrel of Dimethylamine with his own eyes at Varnicolor Chemical when I worked there in the late 1980's.

The title at the top of this posting is a quote from MOE lawyer Stan Berger. He was trying to minimize the extent of Varnicolor's contribution to the destruction of the Elmira aquifers at the EAB hearings. Uniroyal prior to their Settlement Agreement and Indemnity in October 1991 produced this technical document as an exhibit to show the likelihood of other NDMA sources to the Elmira aquifers. They did not specifically name either Nutrite for their ammonia contributions nor Varnicolor for their multiple contributions including NDMA. The MOE covered this up in order to keep Uniroyal Chemical and their huge financial resources on the hook for cleanup costs. The Region and other parties also aided this coverup of Varnicolor, Nutrite and other contributors for self-serving reasons.

ON-LINE COMMENTS REGARDING HAWK RIDGE HOMES PROPOSAL

If one googles the "Woolwich Township" website and then clicks on Mayor and Council one can then scroll down the screen and see upcoming council and other meetings. Clicking on the council meeting for tomorrow's council meeting will bring up the Agenda and council package for the whole meeting. There are a number of other topics besides Hawk Ridge including a presentation by TAG Chair Tiffany Svensson.

Check out both the Township Staff introduction to the zone change application as well as a number of comments by different citizens from past public meetings on this matter. Yours truly had his delegation reduced to about five lines in the Minutes whereas others literally have pages after pages. Par for the course. Regardless, the comments are all worth reading and thinking about.

There is no good reason behind the location of this proposed subdivision other than private interests making money on the backs of the financially tight and unknowing citizens who will purchase these units. This is exactly what our governments tax the daylights out of us for. Allegedly they are taxing us in order to get efficiencies of scale and be better able to protect us from either the unscrupulous or worse. The reality however is that our governments are in bed with the unscrupulous and even sometimes with high end law breakers. Our governments at all levels are looking out for the divine right of the wealthy and powerful to steal even more money from the middle and lower classes. Whether this is done via internet, telephone, real estate etc. it is preying upon the most vulnerable.It is nothing more than a form of legal parasitism.

THE OUTRAGEOUS SHAME OF THE ONGOING SAGA OF HAWK RIDGE HOMES

Is the third time the charm? Why would Hawk Ridge Homes even try a third time to get a zoning change and planning approval for their proposed residential housing units across from Sulco (CCC) and Lanxess (Uniroyal) on Union St. in Elmira? The neophyte might suggest because they believe that they have adequately addressed the noise issue that scuppered them in front of the OMB several years back. A skeptic however (none of those nearby???) might suggest that the proponents of this development have an ace in the hole. Perhaps they've made private arrangements ahead of time to increase the likelihood of getting this project to finally proceed despite it neither being in the public interest nor the interest of future buyers of their homes. It is of course in the money making interests of the developers as it always is first and foremost.

The on-line Council package for this Tuesday's council meeting is an eye opener. Many of the past written and verbal comments in opposition to this proposed subdivision are included including my own. To say that the proposal has been an incredibly brassy, narrow sighted and self-serving plan thoroughly blinkered from reality is an understatement. The focus was and is on noise complaints rather than on life and death concerns when locating beside a chemical giant with a history of spills, fires, explosions and fugitive air releases of highly toxic chemicals. It is an abomination and I smell a huge rat albeit not the first nor the last time in Woolwich Township.

RAMIFICATIONS OF YESTERDAY'S BOLENDER PARK LANDFILL MAP AND POSTING

Do I think that the Ontario MOE are any more competent or honest than the brain trust running Woolwich Township? Of course not. Therefore the MOE's 1979 map showing the former municipal landfill completely within the current park's borders may be 100% accurate, 50% accurate or even possibly zero % accurate. My best guess is that both parties oscillate between beyond comprehension incompetent and pathologically dishonest. That said even a broken clock is right twice a day. Hence I have learned not to automatically dismiss every word out of their mouths as being a lie. Sometimes whetehr through good luck or good management they do get it right. the trick is knowing when that is.

How can we totally dismiss the landfill being further north running parallel to the Trans Canada Trail (former train tracks) and ending eastwards somewhere near the dead end of High St.? Not only have excavations close to the wrecking yard turned up garbage but there are decades worth of methane monitoring results in this further north area. True methane can and does migrate but wouldn't that be an absolute hoot if in fact Woolwich Township have been intentionally monitoring the wrong area for methane possibly in order to continue to hide the reality of buried garbage (or worse) further south in the park itself.

How bright are Woolwich staff and council going to look if they permitted (actually insisted upon) the construction of the children's splash pad in a playground with garbage and hence methane in it? How much worse are they going to look if as yesterday's map indicates, the splashpad and other childrens' amenities are built on top of Uniroyal Chemical's toxic wastes? Hoo boy I know they can guild the lily but really this is bad.

The likelihood is that some staff and some councillors knew the truth all along and simply pretended otherwise to their colleagues. Therefore some of the councillors voted in favour of the splashpad without full knowledge. They also voted in favour of not looking deeper into the methane irregularities and blatant unprofessional studies of the methane problem that I presented to them repeatedly in 2017 and early 2018.

There is local testimony that garbage was placed in the Park. There is also a soil study prior to the splashpad construction which identified "organics" in all the boreholes. "Organics" simply means rotting or decayed foodstuffs mixed in with the soil. Other reports besides this most recent MOE report have identified the Bolender Park Landfill as being a repository of Uniroyal (and likely Varnicolor Chemical) wastes. Lastly why do you think there are groundwater monitoring wells in and around the park itself? It's because Conestoga Rovers, Uniroyal's consultants, were hired to study both the Bolender Landfill and the First St. Landfill way back in the 1980s. Of course both the MOE and the Township have never let local environmentalists and citizens see those two studies. Guess why that is folks?

LIARS LIE & DECEIVERS DECEIVE

It's what they do. Check out the above picture. This was part of an exhibit at the 1991 Environmental Appeal Board hearing in Elmira regarding Uniroyal Chemical. It clearly shows this 1979 map of the Bolender Park Landfill being surprise/surprise in Bolender Park. Wow! It seems as if the Township may have sent nearby residents an incorrect map a couple of years ago when they were trying to convince them that they were not at risk from escaping methane gas. I wonder what else they may have misinformed residents about.

SMILE, BE HAPPY, ALL IS WELL IN THE WORLD

The good news queens (MOE) are telling the public that there is no evidence that there will be long-term or ongoing effects to to Mill Creek or Shades Mills reservoir from the 50,000 litre spill of jet fuel last January. These of course are the same folks who brought us the good news about Elmira drinking water being protected from Uniroyal Chemical, Northstar Aerospace and the Bishop St. community in Cambridge, Safety-Kleen and the shutdown of nearby drinking wells K70 and K71, oh and of course that Varnicolor Chemical also in Elmira had not spread its contamination to its neighbours (false) or to the municipal drinking water aquifers (false). You the readers decide how much credibility the MOE has.

Within the article in today's Waterloo Region Record titled "No long-term impact expected from Mill Creek fuel spill, ministry says", there are some inconsistencies. For example four months after the spill "...consultants working on the remediation project continue to observe and document sheen on the water, jet fuel odour and impacted wildlife." A paragraph later and the GRCA representative states that "To date there has not been any jet-fuel impact to wildlife." Strange. Also the MOE are advising that they do not expect an ongoing unacceptable risk to fish or the downstream fishery. Then several paragraphs later the article states that the MOE have started a fish study in Mill Creek. So are we to understand that the MOE commissioned the study already knowing what the results of it are going to be? That would be typical junk science in accordance with what we've had in Elmira, Ontario over the last three decades.

Maybe both the public and the natural environment have been spared the worst ravages of a 50,000 litre jet-fuel spill into a creek. Maybe the MOE and the GRCA have given this spill the Cadillac cleanup that they promise us with every environmental cleanup. Maybe Santa Claus and the Easter bunny are both real. Stranger things have happened, just not very often.