Friday, April 24, 2020

IS THAT ROTTEN FISH I SMELL OR IS IT SIMPLY DISGUST AT THE "LETS MAKE A DEAL" CLEANUP CRITERIA OF THE ONTARIO M.O.E.?


I've got money, power, influence, and friends in high places so you'd G D better discuss these onerous cleanup criteria with me, my lawyers and my consultants or else I'll see you in court for the next twenty years. Hey "we've got the best judicial system in the world...that money can buy" and that's not by accident. There is never any hurry for judges and courts and especially for the wealthier parties attending court. Courts are and always have been both playgrounds for the rich as well as whips to punish their inferiors (i.e. less well off).

So you have governments who essentially set up their own ministries to fail. No government, federal or provincial, ever want their biggest supporters and donors going bankrupt (or even being seriously inconvenienced) by an environment ministry under their control. Therefore it's all about well off companies navigating, stick handling and basically skirting the more onerous and expensive legally mandated cleanup criteria. To enable this the federal and provincial governments have passed legislation allowing a plethora of options for those with the time, money and expert talent (consultants) at their fingertips. For the rest of us or even for small, family owned business, you are essentially SOL. If the M.O.E. goes after you, you'd better behave or just like Severin Argenton of Varnicolor Chemical, the M.O.E. will get up on their big boy hind legs and crush you. He went to jail for doing a fraction of the environmental damage that
Uniroyal Chemical just down the road did. None of those @#$%&*+ have ever seen the inside of a jail cell.

Generic soil and groundwater criteria. Risk Assessment (RA) determined criteria. Limited Scope Risk Assessment (LSRA) determined criteria. Site Specific Risk Assessment determined criteria (SSRA). Modified Generic Risk Assessment (MGRA) determined criteria. "existing evidence of elevated background concentrations in the Guelph area" thus permitting less cleanup. Numerous different Tables allegedly for different criteria based upon environmental sensitivity such as distances from surface water, land uses, political affiliations, political donations etc. O.K. I may have exercised a tad of literary exaggeration with those last two. In fact it is my opinion that our governments are much more subtle and careful not to demonize themselves to the public especially if elections are upcoming.

Then of course there appear to be numerous options for "do overs". Well at least for those with the time and money. Or even better with municipal governments (say Guelph for example) who are using someone else's money (i.e. tax money). It sure appears that they did Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environmental Assessments (EA) for IMICO in February and April 2014 but also a Phase 1 and Phase 2 EA in December 2007. What the hell is that all about? Then they also did a "Preliminary Remedial Action Plan" in March 2008 followed by...you guessed it...a "Preliminary Remedial Action Plan" in April 2014. Didn't they like the first one? Was it too onerous for their liking?

Meanwhile there appeared to be some logic and reasoning behind starting with a non-invasive study and investigation of a suspected contaminated site via a Phase 1 EA. Then if the Phase 1 study brought forth greater evidence and likelihood of environmental impacts or infractions, then a Phase 2, more invasive (i.e.digging and drilling) EA would kick in. If indeed exceedances of mandated criteria were determined than a Remedial Action Plan would be next. That at first blush sort of is the path that the IMICO site has followed. The Chemtura Canada path over at 120 Huron St. in Guelph seems weirdly different. There is a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment (EA) completed in December 2007. Major excavation and cleanup occurred a couple of years ago. Where the heck is the Phase 2 EA as well as the Remedial Action Plan? Did the M.O.E. or Chemtura negotiate some sort of confidentiality agreement between themselves?

These previous five paragraphs all lead to my title above.

1 comment:

  1. I have added more information to paragraph four of this posting namely that there have been two separate Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environmental Assessments. The first were in December 2007 and the next in February 2014 and April 2014.

    ReplyDelete