PIECE BY PIECE THE EXTENT OF UNIROYAL CONTAMINATION THAT FLOWED TO THE STROH FARM (Eastwards) IS BEING REVEALED

On Tuesday here I pointed out Figures 7.7 and 7.8 in the CH2M HILL Report Volume II (Feb. 1991) which clearly indicated that CH2M HILL recognized that phenols from Uniroyal had spread over to the Stroh farm. Now from the same report we have NDMA doing the exact same thing as per Figures 5.1 and 5.3 . These two Figures represent NDMA in both the Upper Aquifer as well as in the Municipal Aquifer. This is hardly unexpected as NDMA is considered one of if not the fastest moving contaminant in groundwater from Uniroyal Chemical. Again similar to phenols, the NDMA concentration contours for both aquifers have crossed the invisible (from below) line/fence on the surface as they've migrated from the source areas (RPE 1-5) along and immediately beside the Uniroyal/Stroh property boundary over to the Stroh property itself. ........................................................................................... Interestingly to me I see a fairly clear bias by CH2MHILL in regards to their drawing of contaminant concentration contour lines. This goes for pretty much all their contaminants including benzene, chlorobenzene etc. This has occurred in both shallow and deeper aquifers as they have seemed to want to hammer the point home that the major source areas on the Uniroyal site are the west side operating lagoons. They have done this by showing the west side only as being source areas while including contaminated wells on the east side of their property within plumes originating from the operating ponds. This is simply inaccurate. Whether or not the west side has higher concentrations is irrelevant when all parties acknowledge the volumes of solids, sludges, tars and liquid wastewaters deposited into the east side pits over the decades. If nothing else this bias also shows how Conestoga Rovers were able to draw contaminant concentration contour lines to the liking of Uniroyal Chemical using subjectivity and "professional" interpretation. Ha! ................................................................................................................... One last point. This report clearly points out (pg. 57) that NDMA concentrations in many locations are far higher at depth than they are in shallow aquifers, even on the Uniroyal site. This is counterintuitive as usually contaminant concentrations are reduced as they migrate away from the source. This phenomenon may be relevant regarding second and third sources of NDMA in the Elmira Aquifers. The two additional sources that I'm thinking of are Varnicolor Chemical and Nutrite. Both have low level concentrations of NDMA in their shallow aquifers, while the much higher NDMA levels deeper beneath their sites are all attributed to Uniroyal. Of interest also is that CH2M Hill acknowledge right up to the final conclusion that Nutrite and Varnicolor are the two leading contenders (out of many) to be additional source areas. Also interesting is that it took over a decade for the public announcement that indeed Nutrite contributed ammonia to the Municipal Aquifer whereas allegedly not NDMA. That bizarre belated announcement was never properly explained. Afterall the sweetheart deal between the MOE and Uniroyal in October 1991 attributed everything to Uniroyal in exchange for a very limited cleanup ($$$$) plus the Region and Township got their alternate water supply paid for (provided they didn't let the cat out of the bag to the public regarding multiple other sources).