Saturday, May 23, 2020


Last Wednesday I posted here about sampling data for well OW 14d, 14i, 14s purportedly covering the time period from 1981 until 2017. It was of course no such thing as stated in that posting. In fact none of the three different aquifers: d-deep i-intermediate or s-shallow (water bearing zones) actually even came close to fully covering that time period or to even fully testing for all the appropriate parameters (chemicals). In fact the intermediate (Municipal Upper Aquifer) and the shallow (Upper Aquifer 1) were only tested from 1981 until 1990 and only sporadically for well known ubiquitous and signature toxic chemicals used and discharged into the natural environment by Uniroyal Chemical.

Numerous chemicals were found in all three aquifers and were introduced at the surface by overflowing waste water from the east side Uniroyal Chemical toxic waste pits known as RPE 1 to 5. These waste waters gravity flowed southwards past well OW 14 (d, i, s) onto the Stroh farm and as well flowed onto the Martin farms based upon both the volumes of overflowing liquid wastes as well as the ground surface contour lines as well as other evidence.

These chemicals common to all three aquifers include 2,4,5-T, 2,4-D, picloram, toluene, methylene chloride, and benzene. Metals were also found at concentrations sometimes well above criteria including sodium, aluminum, maganese, iron, lead, and barium. Numerous ubiquitous toxic chemicals were not found due to either zero testing between 1981 and 2017 or due to limited testing such as PCBs and the whole category (i.e. multiple chemicals) of Pesticides used or produced by Uniroyal Chemical. Xylenes were not tested for in either the deepest aquifer nor the shallowest aquifer yet were detected in the middle aquifer (i or MU). Vinyl chloride (VC) is an extremely toxic breakdown product of trichloroethylene ( which was barely tested for) and VC was only tested for approximately three times in each aquifer over these decades.

Other anomalies go back to specific chemicals being found in either the intermediate or deep aquifers but not in the shallow aquifer which is closest to the surface. These chemicals include lindane, pentachlorophenol, xylenes, and 2,4,6 trichlorophenol. This is also nonsensical. Two chemicals were found in the shallow aquifer nearest the surface which certainly should also have been found in deeper aquifers most especially in the Intermediate or MU aquifer. These two chemicals are chlorobenzene which indeed is consistently found in the MU (municipal aquifer) in Elmira and is used as a key monitoring chemical and ethyl benzene which is a ubiquitous chemical found in hydrocarbon fuels and if tested for likely would have been found in the deeper aquifers.

Anomalies appear throughout this report. They include bizarre results such as ND(0),W. A Non-Detect result at a Method Detection Limit of zero ()) makes no sense to me. These are throughout this report. Similarly there are what might be construed as typographical errors throughout the report such that results will state the following: "ND(0.3)< ". What the hell is that supposed to mean? Non-Detect at a Method Detection Limit of .3 parts per billion is less than....? Less than what? That appears nonsensical to me.

All in all an excellent set of data in order to minimize the volume, duration and extent of liquid toxic contamination in this key area of the Uniroyal site. There is yet another significant comment to be made regarding what I view as probably intentionally deceptive and misleading data. That is the following obvious concern that this report is why public consultation needs to be open, transparent, regular and available to all members of the public not just those anointed from above with the blessings of either Woolwich Council, Uniroyal/Lanxess or the Ontario MECP/MOE. In other words perhaps some of my concerns or complaints could be clarified or even explained by Lanxess, Conestoga Rovers or GHD Consultants if only I (and other informed citizens) were not discriminated against by Woolwich Township (read Mayor & Council) and denied by Woolwich's rules to be allowed to ask those parties questions at public meetings such as TAG (Technical Advisory Group) and RAC (Remediation Advisory Committee). I'm sorry but hiding from informed citizens only solidifies their belief that the entire exercise is a sham.

No comments:

Post a Comment