ADJUSTING THE SCIENCE ACCORDING TO YOUR NEEDS OR SELECTIVE SAMPLING TO AVOID DATA YOU DON'T WANT

I found this report on my computer and the most recent sampling dates are September 6, 2017 hence I must have received this in the last couple of years. It is purported to be groundwater sampling for well OW 14, specifically OW 14d, OW 14i, and OW 14s. The d, s, and i stand for deep, intermediate and shallow and correspond to the municipal lower aquifer (ML), municipal upper aquifer (MU) and finally upper aquifer 1 (UA1). Well OW 14 is located in Uniroyal/Lanxess's south-east corner close to their border with the Stroh farm and actually very close to the north end of the SDDB (Stroh Ditch, Drain & Berm). The north end is where the galvanized steel pipe comes out of the ground (horizontally) and discharges year round into the SDDB which then runs mostly southwards although there is a jog both east and then west prior to its discharge into the Canagagigue Creek.

So why the snarky title you ask? Well both CPAC (2011-Sept. 2015) years ago as well as TAG had asked for all the current and historical data from well OW 14 based upon its location in a low lying area into which I believe vast amounts of Uniroyal Chemical's overflowing waste waters travelled on their way over to the even lower lying Stroh farm. The area to the immediate east of the SDDB just before the SDDB jogs to the east is the lowest lying area where I believe hydrophobic compounds such as PCBs, dioxins/furans and DDT likely settled out of the solvent contaminated waste waters. Keep in mind the SDDB was constructed years AFTER the waste waters en masse had stopped flowing from the further north pits (RPE 1-5). Therefore the SDDB could not have stopped or intercepted the flow of these waste waters. It was built most likely to mitigate the erosion of these PCB, DDT and dioxin/furan laden soils and their discharbe into the Canagagigue Creek and eventually the Grand River. In fact interestingly it was built a few short years before the Grand River was first used as a source of drinking water (1991) in Waterloo Region.

Here is the problem with what we received. Well OW 14d intercepts the deepest overburden aquifer namely the municipal lower (ML). That aquifer, next to the even deeper bedrock aquifer, is the most protected aquifer from surface contamination. It has two aquitards (clay/silt) above it to slow down or stop the vertical spread downwards of surface contamination. These aquitards are the UAT (upper aquitard) and the MAT (municipal aquitard). The sampling dates run from September 1981 until September 2017. Unfortunately the list of parameters tested for (i.e. contaminants) dramatically shrinks after 1990. In fact there was NO testing from December 1990 until October 2000 when all of one parameter was tested for. (O.K. there was one other sample and one parameter tested in November 1991). In October 2000 one sample with all of two parameters was tested for. Then we have another nine years before the next samples were taken from this well and this aquifer (ML). Besides general chemistry parameters there were all of two contaminants tested for namely NDMA and chlorobenzene. Every two years after that one sample was taken and still only two parameters tested for. Pathetic.

Well OW 14i had sampling done from 1981 until 1990. Yup that's it. Keep in mind that this intermediate depth well intersected the Municipal Aquifer (MU) which has one less aquitard between it and contaminants discharged at the surface. While contaminants like pesticides and PCBs were steadfastly ignored (i.e. not tested for) in OW 14d, the list of non-tested contaminants expanded for well OW 14i. Fewer volatile and semi-volatile compounds (solvents) also were not routinely tested for.

Well OW 14s had the same greatly shortened time frame for groundwater testing namely 1981 until 1990. This aquifer of course is closest to the surface and the most likely to be heavily contaminated from overflowing waste waters leaving the east side pits (RPE 1-5). The lack of testing of this aquifer closest to the surface from November 1990 until the present is ridiculous especially with the greatly enhanced and expanded knowledge of east side flow from the Uniroyal/Lanxess site over to the Stroh farm after CPAC's presentation in 2014 including the MTE (More Than Engineering Consulting Co.) report. Even the 1981 until 1990 testing was unacceptable with again no PCB testing and only one sample tested for pesticides in this nine nine year time period. Volatiles and semi-volatile testing was also sporadic.

There are many other issues including inconsistent protocols and methodologies over the years. There are a couple of incidents in which method detection limits exceed criterias such as happened with vinyl chloride. I may go further into these problems tomorrow.