HAS MR. "BEEN CONSOLIDATED" i.e. BRIAN BEATTY BEEN CAUGHT AGAIN?

This posting is not an attempt to tease or poke fun at the Woolwich Observer, especially after yesterday's flattering posting here about our local newspaper. That said, the Merlihan brothers (hmm...one or both?) have advised me in the past that they got burned badly by publishing my testimony to them regarding Mr. Beatty being "consolidated" by Dr. David Ash of Uniroyal Chemical way back in the early 1990s. That particular incident involved Mr. Beatty quoting another hydrogeologist, Mr. Stan Feenstra, out of context regarding the 1% Solubility Rule and DNAPLS (dense non aqueous phase liquids). ................................................................................................................. Well danged but I'm going to do it again. I have of late been doing what I enjoy most and that is re-reading technical reports dealing with the contaminated former Uniroyal Chemical property here in Elmira, Ontario. Fortunately for me there is a lifetime of reading available. This of course is difficult for any new members of TAG or old members of RAC as they literally do not know what they do not know. There is of course no excuse for the old members of RAC not to have read many of these reports. The thing is RAC agencies and bureaucrats are there simply to give the public the impression that they care and are on top of things. What a joke. Next Thursday RAC are going to have their first meeting in a year! While municipal councils, TAG (Technical Advisory Group) and other committees of council have been holding virtual (Zoom meetings) for many months, RAC has not. Afterall they are primarily a knowingly and willingly uninformed group including the GRCA, Region of Waterloo, Woolwich Township, two TAG members, Lanxess and the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MECP). Even the MECP have turned over all their staff with decades of knowledge regarding this site. Now to be honest there are a couple of knowledgeable people present such as Eric Hodgins of the Region and perhaps one long bought and paid for Lanxess employee. ................................................................................................................ So what did I catch Mr. Beatty doing this time? In my experienced (and to gasps of horror and outrage from the entitled) and professional judgement I've caught Mr. Beatty again gilding the lily in regards to his presentation of hydrogeological data. The data is in multiple maps presented in the Annual Monitoring Report # 10, January 1992. These maps are contaminant plume maps of various toxic substances including benzene, toluene, phenols, chlorobenzene, NDMA etc. Keep in mind my use of the term "professional judgement" is based upon more than thirty years of reading, debating and discussing hydrogeological matters with folks with a four year university degree (BSc.) perhaps later combined with a MSc. and perhaps not. Also keep in mind that my "discussions" with experts, both honest and bought and paid for, has been seriously curtailed of late due to incompetent (at best) Woolwich Township politicos intentionally excluding opportunities for discussion with both the general public as well as with stakeholders such as myself who can hold their own with any and all hydrogeological experts. ..................................................................................................................... Mr. Beatty has portrayed the Upper Aquifer (UA) contaminants as being solely on the Uniroyal property (they are not) and as flowing solely west or south on the Uniroyal property versus east onto the Stroh property. Of course the fallacy of that has already been proven via the January 2019 excavations and partial cleanup of the northern end of the Stroh property along the Lanxess property line. That is public knowledge and undeniable. Mr. Beatty has also committed sins of omission by not including a major ground and surface water feature affecting off-site flow of liquid contaminants. These features include the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB) which is located a mere ten metres from and parallel to the property line between Lanxess and the Stroh farm. It is also possible regarding sins of omission that Mr. Beatty has incorporated inappropriate monitoring wells along the property line to bolster his inaccurate position that everything stayed on the Uniroyal property. These inappropriate wells include one that is out of commission (grouted) and three others that are NOT screened in the Upper Aquifer as indicated but rather are screened in the Upper Aquitard (UAT versus UA). It would seem clear that using contaminant concentrations from wells screened in the wrong stratigraphic unit to describe contamination in a different unit is wrong if not potentially intentionally deceitful. This by the way is not the first time that this trick has been used by Uniroyal Chemical (and successors) mouthpieces. Crompton's "Optimization" program was caught by me doing this back in 2004 (possibly well CH 44) and again during the Ammonia Treatment System discussions in 2007 (CH 97). ............................................................................................................ One could almost begin to think that "professional" client driven consultants like to have a few problematic monitoring wells available on site in order to back up some unlikely self-serving conclusions for those clients.