SOME MORE INTERESTING TIDBITS FROM THE REVISED EAST SIDE GROUNDWATER REPORT

 First of all the repeated assertions that all the east side pits (RPE 1-5) overflowed and then gravity flowed directly into GP-1 (gravel pit-1) are self-serving, unadulterated bullsh.t . There were no pipes, no culverts i.e. the overflowing liquid wastes were totally uncontained and flowing across the surface of bare ground, grasses and through a swamp/wetland. Directly between GP-1 and the admitted (Table 2.2) overflowing eastside pits and ponds was a well defined wetland that was the result of lower surface elevations combined with a high water table. These wetlands are not only clearly marked on different maps (CRA, GRCA) but have verbally and publicly been confirmed by Jeff Merriman of Chemtura to CPAC in approximately 2015. Furthermore Jeff was then advised by myself and some CPAC members  that the 1983 manufactured Stroh Drain had successfully drained the swamp and that the area was no longer under water. Prior to 1983 (and 1970) any overflowing waste waters would have entered this swampy wetland and mixed with the groundwater at surface. Then via gravity flow they would have migrated downhill (via topographical maps) in a south-east direction onto the Stroh property where they would pond in a bowl like low elevation area (345.0 masl). From there as that ponded area overflowed these waste waters would have continued southwards and joined the tiny Martin's Creek on its' way to the Canagagigue Creek.          ...................................................................................                                                                                        All of this is factual and provable, just not to professional liars, captured regulators, biased politicians or anyone else with an axe to grind or millions of dollars at stake. In other words most of the "stakeholders"  are in a gross conflict of interest position in that the public interest runs contrary to their own.                    .........................................................................                                                                                                  Page 2 of this report advises that iron oxide sludge, chlorobenzene, and DPA (diphenylamine) tars and contaminated soils were  used as backfill for the hole left in the ground by the 1993-94 excavations of RPE 4 & 5. Wow! That was a surprise to me. Also I've just put something together that's bothered me for years. Contaminated soil just south of RPE-5 was excavated around 1970 and put into RPE-5 leaving a large depression which has since filled with groundwater. It turns out that these liquid contaminants besides coming from the overflowing RPE-5 also came from the temporary overflowing TPE-2 as indicated in Table 2.2 of this report. Well, well, well.

EVEN OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RUNS AND HIDES FROM CANAGAGIGUE CREEK CLEANUP

Today is a bit of a history (recent) lesson. Back in 2016 under the guidance of Dr. Richard Jackson, Chair of TAG (Technical Advisory Group), yet another approach was made to the Federal (Canadian) government for help in cleaning up the Canagagigue Creek . There were two articles in the Waterloo Region Record of major interest namely on May 2/16 titled "Town pushes feds on creek water" by Paige Desmond and a Record Editorial on May 4/16 titled "Toxic time bomb must be defused".  Interestingly just half a month earlier there was a Letter To The Editor in the Woolwich Observer from Dr. Dan Holt titled "Standing up for the environment shouldn't invite council's (Woolwich) disdain".                           ......................................................................                                                                                                     Also of interest to me is that it was Woolwich councillor Murray Martin along with Mayor Sandy Shantz who behaved the worst towards Dr. Holt and myself in our attempts to speak to Woolwich Council about Chemtura Canada (formerly Uniroyal Chemical). Meanwhile Ms. Shantz half a month later went on the Record regarding federal help by saying "I don't think that you should make a small municipality take care of a problem that is bigger than itself."  Politicians don't you just love them?                                                  ..................................................................                                                                                                          So where are we today? Absolutely nowhere. Our Canadian federal government did not step up. They did nothing! The cleanup is still in the hands of the corporate successors to Uniroyal Chemical (Lanxess Canada) and they have almost sold their self-serving, assumption riddled, error filled Risk Assessment   to all the alleged "stakeholders" even the five minute wonder ones. Once again when all was said and done, more was said than was done.                  

ARE THE WRDSB COMPLETELY AROUND THE BEND OR ONLY PARTIALLY?

 WRDSB-Waterloo Region District School Board                                                                                            ....................................................                                                                                                                        The recent spate of negative publicity around the School Board is nothing new. Good Gosh Luisa D"Amato has been writing about various WRDSB misadventures for literally decades. Granted only a few of the most flagrant and egregious scandals/stories really have legs and carry on  for a lengthy timeframe. Two that come to mind are the Ron Archer child abuse stories and how the Board played "Pass the Trash" with that teacher from school to school all the while defending him from parents' outrage. The other which actually became public prior to the public outing of the Board's gutless and contemptible behaviour  regarding Mr. Archer was the case that I was involved in. Lots of court time involved as the School Board whined and lied to the Waterloo Regional Police each and every time I attended my child's school either for events oe even just to pick him up from school. Eventually after the first Trespass charge came to court and the Board looked like the petty, vindictive as.holes that they were, the Crown's office advised the Board that they would not prosecute any further Trespass charges that against me.                                        ...............................................................................................                                                                            Currently there are two more scandals/whatever the hell they are events making both the Trustees as well as the Board administration look mighty sketchy. The first is in regards to the former teacher who had the audacity to formally present herself as a Delegation to the Board only to be shut down four minutes into her Delegation. Apparently she suggested that certain books in the school libraries discussing sexual orientation, gender identity , transgender issues  etc. might be inappropriate for the children from Grade 3 to Kindergarten who also used the same library. That shut down behaviour of a Delegation did not make the Trustees look very good.                                                                                                                            .................................                                                                                                                                          The second recent issue is the Mike Ramsay affair. Yes this is the same Mike Ramsay who has been a Trustee for what: twenty or thirty years?  Well allegedly a tweet about Board business got him into trouble. Nobody wants to even publicly say what the issue is. Hmm! Is there any chance that these two most recent issues are connected??? Hey when our authorities decide to exclude the public from the discussion then it serves them right if the public jump to either conclusions or confusions. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS (CRA/GHD) EXPERT AT AVOIDING THE ISSUES

SMOKE & MIRRORS

Think of the old style mafia. You have a problem you remove it. Bomb, gun, knife or baseball bat as long as the result is the removal of the problem then you can move on. Our neighbour Hamilton I have recently learned was once nicknamed "bomb city" for that very reason. Powerful people always want to get their way. Historically as well as recently in China, Russia, Africa and other locales that meant by forceful removal of one's opposition. Allegedly more civilized countries have found smoother and easier ways namely by economic control. It's easier to bribe someone into submission than to have to stickhandle around the law and authorities after the fact. It's even easier to bribe a whole lot of people including entire systems set up to supposedly enforce the law. Past that if one is really smart they lobby (bribe via political "donations") as per the U.S. Congress. Hell that's mostly legal and hence reduces the risk in forcing one's wishes and will upon an ungrateful public.                                                                                                      ...................................................                                                                                                                        We have lots of environmental laws of which few are actually rigorously enforced. Loopholes and minimal penalties are all part of the lobbying process. Afterall politicians want to get votes from everybody so they do their darnedest to get support from both sides of an issue. If the public are demanding cleaner air and water then give it to them via flowery legislation with hard sounding phrases but avoid business/industry opposition by limiting its' scope and certainly emforcement penalties. Afterall many industries view environmental penalties as simply the cost of doing business profitably.                  ......................................................................................................                                                                    GHD suggest in their "Revised East Side Groundwater Report" that "The contamination beneath the Property (Stroh) has been fully delineated and no receptors are being impacted." They also suggest that because the 2021 round of sampling of all of two parameters (NDMA, 2,4 DCP) produced only Non-Detects that "Therefore no further sampling or delineation is needed." Lastly GHD recommends the remaining monitoring wells installed on the Property (Stroh) since 2017 be properly sealed and abandoned."  WOW talk about brass balls!  Their facts are wrong and in order to avoid proving that they want permission to remove the evidence i.e. the monitoring wells which in some sampling rounds have been allegedly non-detect and in others, detections of toxic contaminants have exceeded the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS).                                                                                                                 ...........................................                                                                                                                              GHD/Lanxess have successfully deflected the issues on the Stroh property. Those issues are  longterm sources in the soil of DDT, dioxin/furans and more to the Canagagigue Creek. The whole groundwater fiasco and phony conclusions are simply more of the mask hiding the real environmental issues and costs involved.   

CONTAMINATED GROUNDWATER STILL ON STROH FARM

 Fifty years after the end of dumping into Uniroyal Chemical's east side pits we have solvents and pesticides in groundwater as much as 29 metres  below surface on the neighbouring (east side) Stroh farm.  While there are likely many more contaminants, three were sampled for and detected namely NDMA, 2, 4, 6- Trichlorophenol and 2, 4-Dichlorophenol. Some of these contaminants have been measured as far as 250 metres to the east of the Lanxess/Stroh boundary line. The monitoring wells involved  (OW190, OW189, OW190) are not up or down gradient of groundwater flow but in fact cross-gradient which is very strange and totally unexplained by Lanxess, GHD or the Ministry (MECP).              ...................................................................................                                                                                        I am of course referring to the recently released Revised East Side Groundwater Report.   Sebastian and Dustin were the two biggest critics at Last Thursday's TAG meeting. Sebastian advised that in his opinion the report was still incomplete despite the author Alan Deal's (GHD) contrary opinion. Sebastian pointed out that absolutely zero wells had been drilled and sampled in the bottom (south) third of the Stroh property and hence a huge area had not in fact had it's groundwater delineated. This unsampled area includes the Stroh Drain area which then flows southward through the Martin farm where it is called Martin Creek. Dustin also stated that  GHD had failed to fully delineate the site as well although his criticism was based more on the failure of vertical delineation rather than lateral (horizontal). My criticism at this meeting, unstated by mandate/fiat of two Woolwich councillors, was that likely the vast majority of contamination from Uniroyal Chemical on the Stroh farm  was the result of overland gravity flow not via groundwater.                                                                                                                                                      ...........................................................                                                                                                                As bad as groundwater sampling has been on the Stroh and Martin property, it is soil sampling that is the most egregious and Lanxess self-serving.  Soil sampling that is as in there being little or none. There is zero done by GHD, Lanxess or the MECP on the southern third of the property as well as none other than along Lanxess's eastern border (i.e. Stroh's western border). It is a travesty. Soil sampling is much more likely to detect DDT and dioxins/furans as those chemicals are somewhat hydrophobic and they prefer to partition onto soil. Hence these chemicals are likely still available for remobilization via serious flooding which will take some of them into the Canagagigue Creek.  

LAST NIGHT'S TAG MEETING

 Agenda Item 5.2 is "Stantec response to TAG comments on the HHERA" (i.e. Human Health & Ecological Risk Assessment). Well I told them in writing 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years ago that Risk Assessments (RA), in Elmira at least, are nothing more than greenwashing and now they are beginning to understand. The most common statement last evening is that this issue and that issue are outside the scope of the Risk Assessment. Then there were the multiple statements regarding various assumptions used  in the RA.  Common sense and facts come a distant second to the RA process which includes a very limited scope and a plethora of mostly self-serving assumptions. RA's under the control of polluters and weak enforcement agencies are an environmental disaster waiting to happen.                       .................................................................                                                                                                     We learned from Linda Dickson that carbon dioxide emissions data astoundingly are not included in the Annual Environmental Report. This omission apparently is due to recent changes from the Ontario Conservative government. Oh what a surprise.                                                                                              .................................................                                                                                                                       Also the night time shunting of trains on the Lanxess and Sulco (CCC) sites are due to the LRT using the tracks in K-W during the day only permitting night time use in Elmira. Wow.                                        ............................................................................................                                                                          Back to Agenda Item 5.2, Susan Bryant expressed her  disappointment to Stantec's responses to TAG comments and suggestions. She stated that TAG only asked for the meager and do able namely removal of the limited extent of "hot spots" in the Creek and yet have been refused. She also suggested that if the Canagagigue  Creek flowed through an expensive residential neighbourhood in K-W such as Beechwood or Westmount, it would have been cleaned up long ago. She is correct. That said I also told her years and decades ago that the company whether  Uniroyal, Crompton, Chemtura or Lanxess were not ethical or honest. Their promises were meaningless. Nevertheless Susan followed her own direction including sneaking concessions to Chemtura behind CPAC's back and negotiating privately and without authorization from CPAC with the Ministry (MECP) and Chemtura. I warned her that the polluter and successors were not honourable and their word could not be trusted. She lied, deceived, manipulated and backstabbed some of her colleagues and for what? Exactly nothing. To date they have accepted money saving concessions (monitoring etc.) and given nothing back. Perhaps they will throw TAG and Susan a bone down the road and perhaps they won't.                                                                                   ............................................                                                                                                                           Both Tiffany and Wilson appeared to be not so much defending Lanxess/Stantec as explaining how Stantec under hire to Lanxess are restricting their comments and opinions to the RA requirements and scope. In other words the RA process is king and Stantec will not colour outside the lines by suggesting either RA weaknesses nor exceptions to it. Both Tiffany and Wilson did suggest that maybe the only hope lay in community concerns and acceptance i.e. that might push Lanxess into doing more. David Hofbauer clarified that most of the "hot spots" are directly caused by flooding and then the suspended sediments settling out in back waters and slower moving areas of the Creek. Both Sebastian and Wilson also suggested that Stantec's claim that the harm of mobilizing toxic sediments and soils could be greater than the benefit, needs to be clarified and proven. Wilson also questioned a number of specific assumptions within the RA including human and cattle exposure to toxic sediments, consumption of farm products (eggs, milk, beef) and more.                                                                                                   ........................................                                                                                                                               Regarding Agenda Item 5.3 (Revised Eastside Groundwater Report) Sebastian stated that it is incomplete as still the bottom 1/3 of the Stroh property has not been sampled by groundwater monitoring wells. Dustin Martin agreed and stated that laterally groundwater had been reasonably delineated but vertically it had not. As an example Dustin indicated that monitoring well OW7-29 at the northern end of the property line between Lanxess and Stroh had the highest concentrations of NDMA and yet was the deepest well tested. This is an anomaly that should have been explained but was not.      ................................................................................................                                                                      As fully expected the Risk Assessment (RA) will save Lanxess millions of dollars in appropriate cleanup costs while giving the veneer of scientific and factual approval. As always the winners are corporations and the losers the environment and humanity.                                                                                                                                                                                                  

LAST WEEK'S OBSERVER ARTICLE REGARDING A TRUCK PARKING LOT ON THE BOLENDER LANDFILL

I would rate the story by Leah Gerber as excellent. The title is "Petition against proposed parking lot is gaining traction". Both Dr. Dan Holt and Ed Northcott, local residents, speak out against the proposal. Mr. Holt points to the proposed location  next to the Kissing Bridge Trail, Bolender Park and the kids splash pad. He also adds that it is very close to the Canagagigue Creek which has had enough contamination over many decades. There are also noise and toxic odours (diesel) likely from a 115 truck parking area.              .............................................................................................                                                                              The Petition was at 815 signatures a week ago and was started by Ed Northcott. His and others concerns include increasing the already substantial truck traffic on Arthur St. near Church St. as well as the cutting down of 360 mature trees. There are also increased concerns regarding the still present methane gas at explosive levels. The proponent suggests that a gravel parking lot will allow the methane to vent naturally versus say a paved parking lot. The problem is that the methane has had approximately seventy years to vent yet is still present at explosive levels and higher.  Covering it even with a foot of gravel will decrease vertical venting to surface even more than it apparently already is. The last issue raised was the devaluing of the neighbours' property. 

VIRTUAL TAG MEETING TOMORROW

 The on-line meeting can be accessed via e-mailing Lisa Schaefer at lschaefer@woolwich.ca  . TAG of course refers to the Technical Advisory Group and the meeting starts at 6:30 pm. The Agenda consists of four items although I would suggest that the two most important are 5.2 Stantec response to TAG comments on the HHERA (Risk Assessment) and 5.3 Revised Eastside Groundwater Report. Both of these are relevant to the Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment of the downstream Canagagigue Creek ..........................................................................................................                                                                I've been watching and listening to TAG meetings for almost seven years now.  While I have over the years heard considerable criticism from various TAG members I have rarely if ever heard any anger, disgust or contempt. The one exception was Dr. Richard Jackson (Sept. 2015-Dec. 2016).  He had no use whatsoever for wimps, bullsh.t artists, prevaricators or anyone on the public dime cheerfully deceiving the public.                                                                                                                                                                ............................................................................                                                                                                Which if either methodology has worked best? I would suggest neither although Dr. Jackson's  blunt honesty only had a sixteen month run. I would also suggest that if TAG do not get hard nosed and aggressive that they will get little or nothing from Lanxess and the MECP. Finally I would also suggest that Dr. Jackson's blunt truth to politicians, bureaucrats, CRA, Chemtura and the Ministry of Environment is worth a thousand polite, deferential, credentialed experts demurely asking for more porridge please. Even in the unlikely scenario that they received anything at all, they have reinforced the false and self-serving narrative that the polluter should control their own cleanup along with pathetic "oversight" from the Ministry of Environment (MECP). 

ERRORS & OTHER WEIRD STUFF IN LANXESS"S "REVISED EAST SIDE GROUNDWATER REPORT"

 Page 8 continues the charade regarding the contaminated Stroh property. It's not so much that they aren't admitting it as they are deceptively refusing to name it for what it is namely THE STROH FARM or THE STROH PROPERTY. Throughout this report and others it's either called 6770 Line #86 or it's referred to as the Property. At the same time they refer to the pig pen of a mess of formerly Uniroyal Chemical now Lanxess Canada as "the Site". I guess that they think that far enough down the road people will forget that both cattle products (beef/dairy) and produce such as corn and soybeans were commercially grown on these contaminated lands and then distributed into the food chain.                      ...................................................................................                                                                                     Page 9 has a Table on it showing an inaccurate Ontario Drinking Water Standard (ODWS) for NDMA (N-nitrosodimethylamine). Most other references elsewhere as well as in this report have the ODWS as .009 ppb or ug/litre.  This Table claims that the ODWS for NDMA is ten times smaller at .0009 ppb or ug/l.                                                                          ..................................................................................................                                                                     Page 14 has further references to  the Property which frankly when you are reading a report dealing with Uniroyal/Lanxess  is confusing, possibly intentionally so. This page also seems to be nitpicking a bit when it states that UA1 and UA3 (Upper Aquifer 1 & 3) either disappears or pinches out. At the same time they do confirm that "...there is a sand layer at OW184-5 that corresponds to the UA (Upper Aquifer). The UA is present beneath the Property (i.e. Stroh) at monitoring well OW188, but it is not associated with the same gravel deposits near Canagagigue Creek." I suspect that while they are admitting that the Upper Aquifer on both sides of the property line between Lanxess and Stroh are contaminated (by Uniroyal), they are trying to set the stage for a lack of migration of these contaminants to the Canagagigue Creek  which seems highly unlikely. Also of great interest is that this page actually states in the text that "...the Surficial Aquifer (SA), is present in the extreme north-east corner of the Site and northwest corner of the Property. This is a huge admission and one that both Conestoga Rovers (CRA) and GHD have either avoided or hidden for decades in their monthly Progress Reports and elsewhere. The presence of this polluted aquifer (SA) on both Lanxess and Stroh property is yet another pathway besides overland gravity flow from Uniroyal/Lanxess property to the Stroh farm.                                                                                .....................................................................                                                                                                      Page 15 also clarifys the SA as it states that "The SA pinches out and is likely the source of the wet land present at the toe of the slope of this hill. The SA extends east on to the Property and is present at the OW180 monitoring wells nest. Further east, the ground surface elevation decreases, and a thick (6 m) layer of  sand and gravel and gravel is preset." Notice the last word in the quotation is "preset". It should be "present" and is just one more error. The SA also pinches out on the Stroh property and was likely the most direct source of vegetative stress to the corn and soybeans long grown in that field beside Uniroyal Chemical.                                                                                                                             ................................................                                                                                                                        Typographical and other errors continue on Page 16. Basically the writers of the report have confused the names of the aquifers being shown in Figures 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.11, 6.12 and 6.13 .They refer to UA1 when it should be SA and then ML (Municipal Lower) when it should be UA . They then appear to ignore Figures 6.12 and 6.13 which indicate the ML aquifer. This ongoing amateur hour writing occurred back in CRA's day as well and to me indicates a lack of professional editing and or simply nobody really cares because all serious and hard hitting citizen criticism is gone.                                      ...........................................................................                                                                                             My last point today is the revelation that in 1991 monitoring well OW7-29 had a NDMA concentration of 8,987 parts per billion (ppb) or ug/l. This well is on the Uniroyal/Lanxess property in their north-east corner right beside the Stroh farm. While over the decades I have seen some horrendous NDMA concentrations in the 1-3 thousand parts per billion area, this concentration is a prizewinner regardless of where it was taken or how deep below ground i.e. 29 metres or approx. 95 feet. Keep in mind that the ODWS is a tiny .009 ppb.   

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION STUPIDITY

 Interestingly the biggest adverse changes to the medical reporting system have occurred since 2018 when our Ford/Conservative government came to power. Now is this some kind of weird ideological right wing political position or is it more likely to simply be a new government jumping on a minor issue without any data, science or common sense to back them up?  The title of today's front page article in the Waterloo Region Record is "Guilty Until Proven Innocent" which neatly sums it up. Our Ministry of Transport under the Conservatives have further advanced their status as incompetent, bullying nincompoops.              ..........................................................................................                                                                                  There was also a front page article in last Saturday's  newspaper describing particularly egregious cases of   license suspensions based upon speculation, conjecture and possibly even spite. In one case a young woman had her driver's license suspended based upon a psychiatrist's report who one would think had at least interviewed the patient. Apparently not. In none of these cases had the citizen actually broken any driving laws. In none of these cases had they actually been reported to authorities for bad or illegal driving.  It appears to be bureaucrats running amok with an oversized joy in exercising their punitive powers. Make no mistake these are punitive actions being taken without the benefit of a hearing, an investigation or even an interview of the affected person. There is an appeal process but it can take up to a year depriving some people of their livelihoods again without a stitch of solid evidence of any kind of bad driving. Dear God if our police actually enforced driving laws above and beyond speeding and drunk driving there would be a massive number of dangerous drivers off our roads. That would be the drivers whom I've called HUA (head up ass) for decades and which our authorities have belatedly recognized as distracted drivers. These drivers are too busy talking, listening to others and simply multi tasking when they are barely competent to drive with their full attention on the road. They rarely signal turns, rarely watch ahead more than a single car's length,  wander over lane markings, drive slowly on highways in the fast lane, make left turns as far from the centre line as possible and just generally are a danger to themselves and every one around them. Rarely if ever do they get pulled over by police for those driving habits. This Ministry has long been short on proper enforcement of the rules of the road and long on puffery and self-aggrandizement (eg. allegedly best/lowest death rates in the world per capita)                                               

FURTHER UPDATES ON THE "REVISED EAST SIDE GROUNDWATER REPORT"

 Section 2 deals with Uniroyal Chemical's waste management history. Over the decades there have been a few mostly self-serving changes and adjustments to the story they have been selling to UPAC, CPAC, TAG and the public. This report is the same.                                                                                                    ........................................................                                                                                                                    This first item is not self-serving in that Lanxess are admitting that waste area IR-1 at the north west end of the site has a maximum depth of SIX meters. That is right, very close to twenty feet deep of chemical wastes right beside the Canagagigue Creek. This area was also described by Ken Reger back at the Environmental Appeal Board (EAB) as being highly problematic for wildlife such as muskrats. This site was filled with aniline sludges, nitrobenzene and some diphenylamine (DPA) tars. It's all still there with exactly zero discussions to remediate it even partially. IR-2 (Iron Oxide-2) was at the north-east end of the property and had aniline sludges as well as solids from RPW-6, 7 & 8 in it. Apparently a large part of IR-2 was excavated in 1993 prior to building the Envirodome/Mausoleum above it.  A small amount of black tar-like materials were put into the new Envirodome while a large portion of the contents were used to backfill the RPE-4 & 5 buried waste excavation of 93-94. That may well be new information to me

...........................................................................................................                                                                Page 3 in describing the east pits (RPE-1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ) continues with the false narrative that these pits drained southwards through a low lying swampy area and rather than following the ground surface topography and discharging onto the Stroh farm, they instead continued to flow straight south through a narrow gap giving them access to GP-1 (Gravel Pit 1). Oddly the next paragraph honestly states that "...RPE-1 was closed and covered over in the mid-1960s, but the waste materials were left in place." Even more oddly the next paragraph titled RPE-1 states the following:  " Specific details regarding the closure of this pit were not available for review. It is therefore not known if impacted materials were removed from this area." WTF!!! This is neither the first nor likely the last that CRA/GHD contradict themselves within their own reports.                                                                                                             .................................                                                                                                                                     In the late 1940s the above ground wooden 2,4-D pipeline from Building #15 which discharged into RPE-4 was replaced by a buried pipeline that was constructed beneath the Canagagigue Creek. I would very much like to know the fate of that pipeline or whether it still exists under the creek or not. Again on page 4 the self-serving nonsense is repeated that everything overflowing from the east pits gravity flowed into GP-1. There is also a somewhat confused story that sludges from RPW-6, 7, 8 were dumped into RPE-3 whereas liquids from RPE-3 were pumped over into RPE-4 and RPE-3 backfilled. We then are advised that the 2009 excavation  removed 565 tonnes of comingled fill and waste material from RPE-3 which I well recall. My recall is that we had previously been confidently told that RPE-3 had been excavated and remediated decades earlier. Apparently not.                                                          ....................................................                                                                                                                        On page 5 I am glad to see the correct number quoted in regards to the 1993 excavtion of RPE-4 & 5 namely 46,000 tonnes. At one time we were quoted lower numbers around 33,000 tonnes.                     ...............................................................................................                                                                            Page 5 under the heading of BAE-1 also has some confusing wording when it states that "Drums were buried along the east side of the Creek for a period of approximately ten years..." A few sentences later in the same paragraph BAE-1 is described as being "...adjacent to the future location of RPE-4." This in fact is where all the maps over the last thirty years plus have shown BAE-1 to be located namely on the east side of RPE-4 and immediately beside it which is absolutely no where near "...along the east side of the Creek."  The east side of the Creek is several hundred metres to the west. These kinds of errors, whether intentional or otherwise, are why involved citizens need to be able to both ask questions publicly AND to be able to demand intelligent answers.                                                              ........................................................                                                                                                               Again on page 6 GHD are still inaccurately selling the direct flow of Uniroyal Chemical liquid wastes from the east side pits into the former gravel pit known as GP-1. GHD also advise that most of the overflow went into GP-1 versus GP-2. That we already had figured out based upon higher concentrations of DDT and dioxins found in GP-1 and at that time we believed that some of the liquid wastes flowed through GP-1 and then into GP-2.  More likely the wastes that did get to GP-1      through the small gap then mostly stayed in GP-1. The wastes found in GP-2  likely flowed southwards around the east side of GP-1 and then some ended up in GP-2. I mean seriously why be in charge of the narrative if you can't amend it as needed?      

NEVERENDING BULLSH.T FROM GHD ON BEHALF OF LANXESS CANADA

 In yesterday's post I expressed my skepticism based upon memory of claims that GHD made in their Introduction to their latest report titled "Revised East Side Groundwater Report". I've now looked at more of the data and I was correct hence my strongly worded title above. Thirty-two years plus of unadulterated bullsh.t from both CRA and GHD and one begins (Ha!) to lose one's patience. Indeed as I surmised NDMA is present above drinking water standards in a deep aquifer 240 metres east of the Lanxess/Stroh property line. Yes the most "consistent" NDMA exceedances are in shallow groundwater right on and along the border between the properties. Another GHD "error" in the Introduction is claiming that 2,4 dichlorophenol does not  exceed its' drinking water standard (ODWS). In fact in well OW36-5(R) it does and interestingly the standard for 2,4 dichlorophenol is 900 parts per billion (ug/l) whereas the standard for NDMA is only .009 parts per billion (ug/l). Bluntly put NDMA while very toxic is only a very tiny amount of the toxic solvents and chemicals in Elmira's (and Stroh's) groundwater.                                        ..................................................................................................                                                                        Interestingly and surely by coincidence only the most relevant data in Table 6.3 is right at the very back of this one hundred page report. That is the data from both shallow and deep monitoring wells on the Stroh property, 240 metres east of the Lanxess property line. Indeed both NDMA  AND 2,4 dichlorophenol are detected in these wells both shallow and deep aquifers i.e. 22, 24, 26, & 29 metres below ground surface. That is stunning information. Yes NDMA with its' very, very low ODWS (.009 ug/l) has concentrations exceeding it whereas 2,4 dichlorophenol with its' very high ODWS (900 ug/l) does not exceed its' ODWS.                                                                                                                                                              ....................................................                                                                                                                        There are many other contaminants above their drinking water standards along the Lanxess/Stroh property line that magically, once again disappear from further consideration. These include benzene which far exceeds its' ODWS of 5 ppb or ug/l. Other contaminants are in high concentrations but allegedly have no criteria to exceed such as acetone among others. There are a few high Method Detection Limits which understate detections encountered albeit no where close to as many as in earlier reports. As stated in the title  it's all about the polluter/successor minimizing the extent of contamination especially off-site to reduce cleanup costs as well as public disgust with them. 

"REVISED EAST SIDE GROUNDWATER REPORT"

 Well already it's not looking too good and as I just received this report this morning (on-line) and have only read the first few pages including Title Page, Table of Contents and Introduction that isn't so good. So what is my beef already? It's a one hundred page report and the polluter and successors who caused the mess in Elmira have successfully transferred printing costs including Toners, paper and computer/printer onto the public the same way they pass as much of their cleanup costs onto the public purse as they can. Secondly there is no Executive Summary. Thirdly there isn't even a damned date on this report that I just received. Not on the first several pages at least nor on the last page of text. What the hell kind of report is undated? There is also an Oh Oh moment in the Introduction when they discuss NDMA exceedances in groundwater on the Stroh property still euphemistically referred to as 6770 Line 86. The text states that consistent NDMA concentrations greater than Ontario Drinking Water Standards are only along the eastern border of Lanxess with the Stroh property. Bullshit says I to that. Wait a minute is this simply more of GHD's verbal manipulations? Is the key the single word "consistent"? Ahh maybe they are being cute and ignoring the deep groundwater sample of NDMA that I recall several hundred metres to the east beside the driveway into the Stroh property. Further reading hopefully will clear that up. Obviously not of course for those who only read Executive Summaries or Introductions and not the whole report.

A LITTLE HISTORY LESSON

 Six years ago Woolwich Council humiliated themselves throughout Waterloo Region and further afield with their antics to shut down Delegations dealing with Chemtura Canada (Uniroyal). To be more specific they attempted to prevent  Dr. Dan Holt and myself  from addressing Council as Delegates which is our right. There was a great deal of Editorials, articles and even cartoons lampooning Woolwich Council for their behaviour. One of my favourites was the cartoon (Arnold) in the Woolwich Observer depicting council members and Mayor petting a skunk labelled "Censorship Policy". In the second frame of the cartoon the skunk has let fly stinking up the room and people. Councillor Merlihan says "Like we couldn't see that one coming." The caption at the bottom states "Even after a good airing, that some stenches tend to linger appears to be lost on some people."                                                                                                  ........................................................................                                                                                                    I am also aware that local citizens sent letters and e-mails to Council criticizing them for their apparent inability to follow their own rules such as their Procedural By-Laws. This By-Law is a two way street in that it indicates both how Delegates and Council members are supposed to behave. I would admit that certain Council members (M. Bauman, S. Hahn & Sandy Shantz) were likely still smarting from their public exposure as politicians unable or unwilling to follow other laws such as the Municipal Act and the  Municipal Elections Act. 

LANXESS CONTINUE TO SAVE MONEY BY NOT PUMPING ON & OFF-SITE GROUNDWATER ADEQUATELY

Linda Dickson of TAG normally updates TAG members in regards to the monthly Progress Reports including the On and Off site groundwater pumping. Unfortunately Linda has only been involve since 2015 and does not know the details of specific promises and commitments made to past UPAC and CPAC citizen members. Today I am briefly updating my readers regarding the March and April 2022 monthly Progress Reports and the On and Off site pumping.                                                                                        .......................................................................                                                                                                    March 2022 pumping failed to meet the on-site pumping Target of  4.7 litres/sec for the two on-site wells namely PW4 and PW5. Together they achieved only 4.2 l/sec over the month.  Keep in mind that at one point Chemtura Canada (Jeff Merriman) promised CPAC that on-site pumping would be very close to 6 l/sec in order to maintain on site hydraulic containment after the off-site pumping wells were operational. Off-site pumping was at approximately 62 litres/sec which while higher than the long term average (around 53 l/sec) was still far short again of promises made to CPAC, Woolwich Council and the public in November 2012 when Chemtura promised that off-site groundwater pumping  needed to TRIPLE in volume in order to achieve 2028 cleanup.                                                                                                        .........................................................                                                                                                                  April 2022 was worse. Both on and off-site pumping were far below Target. On-site was 4.2l/sec versus a Target of 4.7l/sec and off-site was approximately 51 litres/sec not even meeting the long term average which  was supposed to be tripled after November 2012. Currently Lanxess Canada have successfully diverted everyone's attention away from their groundwater cleanup failures and towards their Risk Assessment (RA) of the Canagagigue Creek. This RA is shaping up to be just like the rest of their environmental cleanups in Elmira, Ontario which is after all was said and done, more was said than was done. Any lie or deception will do for them to save money on cleanup. 

ALLEGEDLY SOME POLICE FORCES DIDN"T KNOW

Well I'm really not sure which is worse: Canadian police forces not knowing when their own officers breached citizens' Charter rights  or them knowing and doing nothing about it. Is this simply a case of plausible deniability such that the buck does not land on their desks? Starngely today's K-W Record ("Officer disciplined in Waterloo") lead front page story states that there were "...six rulings where judges found officers committed serious Charter breaches." in Waterloo Region. Wow that's bad but then Chief Larkin refused to advise the name of the officer involved or the incident in which a Waterloo Region Police Officer was disciplined citing Police Service Act (PSA) confidentiality provisions. "Under the provincial legislation, disciplinary matters that are deemed to be not serious in nature can be handled through an informal process. Informal discipline cases are not made public."  So which is it, "not serious" disciplinary matters or "...serious Charter breaches." Or heaven forbid were they serious Charter breaches but the PSA charges against the officer were not serious in nature? Clarification is needed if Chief Larkin or any other local big wigs think that this kind of lack of transparency is either acceptable or reassuring to the public. "You can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all the time."

IS OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM INTENTIONALLY ENCOURAGING POLICE MISCONDUCT IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN OR INCREASE THEIR MARKET?

In the title above "Market" refers to the business of dealing with criminal behaviour and or minor infractions including speeding, jaywalking, trespassing etc. In other words does the judicial system from police, prosecutors, lawyers, judges  etc. actively take steps to maintain a steady flow of business i.e. alleged lawbreakers, criminals, mental health challenged individuals? I'm asking these questions based upon decades of observation as well as the article in today's Waterloo Region Record titled "RIGHTS wronged".                                                                                                                                                          ...........................................................................                                                                                                First of all I am not a naive person. I have posted many articles here (and in the Waterloo Region Advocate) describing police misbehaviour, misconduct and more. I'm sure that I have also criticized the courts on occasion for egregious behaviour and or decisions.  That said I am truly shocked by today's article which describes a Toronto Star investigation into major police breaches of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The article also describes and comments in detail about the failure of the courts and judicial system to follow up on decisions and scathing comments made by judges condemning the behaviour of police forces across Canada including St. Johns Nfld., Montreal, London, Toronto, Brantford, Ottawa, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver. This failure to "follow up" simply refers to the obvious and clear need to ensure that notice of these serious Charter breaches are sent to the specific police forces involved. These notices (and lack thereof) are needed for educational and training purposes such that as has been identified, police officers involved do not repeat the same behaviours simply out of ignorance of the law.                                                                                                                                                              ....................................................................                                                                                                        Let me be clear. This article in today's Record does not come to the tentative conclusion in my title above. I have long wondered if the war on drugs etc. has been at least partially motivated by a desire by the entire judicial process to maintain a high rate of business. Imagine if our courts were grossly underbooked. Imagine if our police forces were even more bored than they already are. Imagine if retiring judges were not immediately replaced with new judicial appointments by our idiot politicians. Another example of over policing and poor laws would be the criminalization of homosexuality prior to about 1965 in this country. Could one even ask if  the current federal assault on legitimate gun ownership in Canada is an attempt to criminalize law abiding citizens with firearms licenses who have had the temerity to have legally purchased handguns, rifles or shotguns in some instances many decades ago? Laws that retroactively criminalize perfectly normal and accepted behaviour such as hunting and target shooting, plinking etc. are an invitation to non-compliance hence giving police and courts more to do. Perhaps to make up for lost "business" by the decriminalization of drug use including marijuana.                                  .............................................................................................                                                                              Again let me be clear. The Record's article actually overall is in my opinion, complimentary of the many judges across Canada who are openly and publicly in court condemning illegal police breaches of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Those judges deserve praise for their stands. Similarly in the cases of judicial decisions throwing out or reducing criminal charges in cases of Charter breaches by police; it is absolutely imperative that both the police forces involved as well as the individual officers involved be made aware of those decisions. Otherwise how can they not help repeating them if they are never advised or retrained?     

CORRUPTION, CONSPIRACY AND CITIZEN BETRAYAL IN WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP

My 27 Chapter book first published in the Waterloo Region Advocate in September/October 2019 gives the details. For approximately four months  it was available on-line at Amazon/Kindle books. I removed it from there due to slow sales combined with my not receiving the promised commission. In fact I'm still  waiting for those royalties. I have put my book back on the Waterloo Region Advocate with a somewhat easier format to access and read it.                                                                                                                  ..........................................................................                                                                                                Above and beyond all the evidence presented in my Book (Elmira Water Woes: The Triumph of Corruption, Deceit and Citizen Betrayal) there was my attempted presentation of a professional lab report to all the parties and alleged stakeholders last fall and early winter. What a disgrace!  The lab report showed relatively low concentrations of dioxins in two soil samples taken on the Stroh farm. Yes that's right, half a century after the flow of toxic liquid wastes from Uniroyal Chemical's east side ponds had ceased, the toxins are still in the ground. They got there by both groundwater and overland (surface) flow. Woolwich Council, Waterloo Region Council, GRCA, TAG, RAC, and the Ministry of Environment (MECP) all refused my offer to send them the report. Lanxess however said yes they would like a copy which I sent them. I also ended up sending all the pretend stakeholders and public officials the same lab report except for TAG. Plausible deniability is an important aspect of a coverup and conspiracy hence that is why the guilty parties/fellow travellors did not want to touch an independent lab report showing dioxin contamination with a ten foot pole.  I skipped sending TAG a copy because 1) they refused it  2) there are TAG members on RAC & Woolwich Council who received it through them (Tiffany & Sandy S.)  3) A strong request from an individual not to.                                                                                                          ................................................................................                                                                                            Lanxess of course did not want the lab report for any honest purposes. In their Draft Risk Assessment they actually misrepresented it by referring to it as Soil and Sediment  dioxin results. It was solely soil results. Can you believe that NONE (including Lanxess) of the phony stakeholders and guardians of the public interest have so much as asked me a single question or clarification of the lab report. NOBODY has asked exactly where the two analyzed soil samples were taken much less the other approximately fifteen soil samples that are still in proper storage awaiting analysis. Nobody asked me when they were taken. Nobody has asked me if there were any witnesses to the sampling event. These remaining soil samples may yet expose the corruption and conspiracy or not. After all there is overwhelming multiple lines of evidence to the flow of Uniroyal Chemical's toxins on to the Stroh and Martin farms which I have enumerated here in this Blog. They include dioxin and DDT contaminated soil samples on the north-west side of the Stroh farm, NDMA in deep groundwater 240 metres further east from Uniroyal's east side pits (overland gravity flow), two very high sediment results for dioxins and one DDT compound in the bottom of the Stroh Drain (SDDB) and finally my two analyzed soil samples to date.                                              .......................................................................................................                                                        Money, shamelessness, brass and political support and clout is all it takes in Woolwich Township. Facts and truth are both overcome by them. 

AND ANOTHER ARTICLE/OPINION PIECE AGAINST THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE BOLENDER PARK LANDFILL

 This Opinion piece is by Susan Koswan in today's Waterloo Region Record. The title of the photograph and article is "Speak up for Bolender Park forest". Indeed the former landfill as is is a buffer for noise and sightlines. Elmira Pet products is on the far side (north) of the landfill as well as further north of the actual Bolender Park. Too bad the trees on the site could not also buffer out odours from the pet food plant. Instead local residents will be allowed to mix diesel fumes in with their already noxious pet food odours. Along with leachate from the landfill and various spills from the pet food plant they can also enjoy a greater variety of contaminants in the creek from the diesel tractors including oil, grease, transmission fluid, power steering fluid and of course diesel fuel. The good news for our pro development, shaft the environment brothers and sisters is that the soils will very slowly absorb and later discharge via groundwater these additional contaminants to the Canagagigue Creek.  With any luck the slowly declining concentrations of manmade chemicals already in the creek will somewhat mask the more recently released chemicals into a relatively large body of surface water.                                                      .................................................................................                                                                                          Ms Koswan speaks about "...inherent problems associated with monitoring and maintenance of control systems on a continuous basis." That is very true especially as the pathetic failure of methane control and venting over many decades has been partially blamed on traffic hitting various gas probes as well as the collection system closer to the garage and former car wrecking yard. Do you think that tractor trailers will do a better job of avoiding gas probes poking out of the surface ?                                                                  ......................................................................................                                                                                    There is also the issue of the contents of the former landfill. Much effort has long gone into minimizing the industrial contents of all the landfills in the town of Elmira. Unfortunately Uniroyal Chemical, Varnicolor Chemical, furniture factories, foundries, textile mills and much more all contributed their industrial wastes to these various landfills including toxic wastes. Ms. Koswan diplomatically suggests that there is "...so little known about the contents of the landfill below...". She is referring to the Bolender Landfill and in fact the general  public may know little about the contents but older employees of the companies and industries listed above know lots. As do those of us who have gone looking and researching the sordid history of toxic industrial waste disposal in and around Elmira, Ontario    

SPECIFIC COMMENTS & RESPONSES FROM TAG AND STANTEC

 As suggested yesterday I will include some of the statements made by TAG and Stantec regarding the Draft Risk Assessment (Ecological & Human Health) for the Canagagigue Creek. These comments are not all encompassing as there are other issues affecting the credibility of this Risk Assessment including very high Method Detection Limits, locational biases, improper sediment sampling procedures (shovel vs. core samplers) etc.                                                                                                                                     .........................................................................                                                                                             "For example, at Station 21 in Reach 3, near the first bridge at New Jerusalem Rd. and near 3 farmhouses, one sediment sample (21BS1) had concentrations of total TEQ for dioxins as 868 and 1090 pg/g. The ISQG standard is.85 pg/g.  The sediment exceedance of the larger number is over 1000 times the standard. As there are only a few additional locations like this one, TAG requests that the hotspots be included in the targeted remediation for reasons outlined in more detail below. "                                   ..............................................................................................                                                                         Stantec's response on behalf of Lanxess is "While targeted remediation could remove these "hotspots" from the Creek, possible detrimental consequences to the aquatic floral and faunal communities within the area could also occur as a result". I view this response as weak and simply cost saving.                       ...................................................................................................                                                                   TAG states "...the assumption that land use will not change in the next 25 to 50 years is doubtful. Waterloo Region is one of the fastest growing and changing places in Canada. It is reasonable to assume that land uses will change from agricultural along portions of the creek. The pressure for increased recreational human activity along the creeks such as parks, trails. fishing etc. has the potential to increase human contact to these persistent toxins before the persistent toxins including DDT and dioxins have broken down."                                                                                                                           ................................................................                                                                                                       Stantec's response "Even if surrounding land use changed from agricultural to, for example, residential, the human receptors used in the HHRA and ecological receptors used in the ERA and exposure parameters would remain the same. Additional text will be added to the revised HHERA accordingly to address this comment." Well I fail to see how additional text in a Risk Assessment document either changes or fixes anything. I view this response as barely even lip service.                                                   ....................................................................................                                                                                    TAG writes "Furthermore, flooding is identified as one of the biggest climate challenge impacts in the Region going forward." "Any washout of the hotspots will end up in the Grand River, a source of drinking water for many."                                                                                                                               ..................................................................                                                                                                     Clearly TAG are again suggesting that more remediation (removal) of hotspots are required. Instead Stantec suggests "We agree that flooding could remove surface layers of soil and sediment, thereby bringing chemicals to the surface that were previously found at depth. That is why in the HHERA, all of the data, regardless of depth, were used in the characterization of risk. Therefore, should flooding events cause movement of soil and sediment, it is unlikely that the results of the HHERA would change since deeper samples were already included in the overall evaluation of risk. "   Good Lord are Stantec so hung up on the goodness and quality of their document (Risk Assessment) that they are intentionally deflecting the argument of deeper toxins being mobilized and spread further downriver? TAG's comments were for greater cleanup not to fix some stupid, riddled with assumptions, document allegedly providing insight when in reality it is simply greenwashing and reducing Lanxess's cleanup costs on the back of local residents and others.                                                                                 .............................................................................                                                                                         This is but a sample of this June 6/22 document sent to TAG Chair Tiffany Svensson by Stantec on behalf of their client, Lanxess Canada. This is how Qualified Persons (QP), intellectual prostitutes and others sell their services to well heeled clients. Truth is the first casualty of war and they are at war with both human health and the environment.  

TAG STRONGLY CRITICIZE STANTEC/LANXESS DRAFT RISK ASSESSMENT

 Stantec have included many of TAG's (Technical Advisory Group) comments in their June 6/22 responses to TAG's written comments sent to the Remediation Advisory Committee (RAC). Now do keep in mind that RAC are a fundamentally flawed body in a position of gross conflict of interest. First of all most of them don't have a clue technically. Secondly this group of bureaucrats, agencies and politicians are fundamentally just a bunch of appointees from regional council and Woolwich Council. They are not remotely independent either individually or as a group. If they were they would never have been appointed to  the GRCA or any other environmental or watchdog group by our elected politicians who jealously guard their turf. The last thing an elected official will ever do is appoint honest and independent persons to positions giving their appointees a platform unless the politicians are fully confident that their appointees will toe the line.                                                                                                                                                 ................................................................                                                                                                           I am pleased that much of the critical (of the Draft Risk Assessment) discussion at TAG appears to have actually made it into written comments and been presented to RAC. That is worthy of praise for Tiffany Svensson (TAG Chair)  who has appropriately not received much of that from me in the last two or three years. That said for me the proof is in the pudding. Will most TAG members rest on their laurels and be satisfied with simply verbal and written objections to what I view as an inherently flawed process (Risk Assessment) that is totally under the control of the polluter and his bought and paid for help (consultants and other fellow travellors maybe including some politicians )?                                                                    .......................................................................................                                                                                    I may elaborate on specific TAG and Stantec comments & responses tomorrow.   

ARE WOOLWICH TWN. PLANNING YET ANOTHER FAST ONE?

 Tonite's Woolwich Council meeting discusses various and assorted land use changes in and around Breslau, St. Jacobs and Elmira. There is some confusion for me regarding a couple of Figures namely pgs. 39 (Land Options: Elmira) and pg. 45 (Proposed Community and Employment Lands: Elmira). These figures and text can be found on the Township's website under Council Meetings/Agenda.                          .................................................................................................                                                                          Page 35 also is a Table showing various numbers on the left corresponding to locations on page 39.  Number 16 is in the south-east corner of Elmira and number 17 is the Stroh and Martin farms. Is the map on page 39 however showing an additional expansion of the countryside line to include ALL of the Stroh farm or not? Is this some surreptitious expansion or not?                                                                                ...............................................................                                                                                                            This is relevant as both the Stroh and Martin farm are proven to be contaminated (DDT, dioxins) and likely more by sediment samples provided by GHD and two soil samples provided by me DESPITE Lanxess and GHD nonsense, silliness and outright bull manure. The truth has never been anything more than a suggestion from which they can manipulate their own conclusions and "facts".  

CONGRATULATIONS TO ANGIE RIVERS & A FEW OF HER FEMALE COLLEAGUES

 News Flash:  1) Waterloo Regional Police Force male members:  the powers to be most likely did not decades ago introduce female police officers for either your sexual gratification or for your sexual fantasies                                                                                                                                                              .................................................                                                                                                                          2)  There are both publicly accepted rules and norms of behaviour AS WELL AS laws clearly defining various forms of harassment including sexual harassment.                                                                              ...........................................................................................................                                                                3) Neither Police Forces nor other employers are exempt from those laws and rules even when the majority of employees are male and some of them are fundamentally stupid.                                                  ................................................................................................................                                                            Officer Angie Rivers is being congratulated for her persistence, insistence and determination to insist upon her right and others to work in an already difficult and sometimes unsafe environment without fear of discrimination, harassment and or assault by her own colleagues and co-workers. Today's Waterloo Region Record carries a story written by Terry Pender titled "Sergeant docked 39 hours' pay for harassment".  The now seven year process of getting justice and fair treatment by the Waterloo Region Police Force continues on with an arbitration hearing currently underway. The entire lengthy, disjointed and cumbersome process has included Police Service investigations, Notices of Discipline, court proceedings for an attempted class action lawsuit as well as the current ongoing grievance procedure arbitration hearing.                                                                                                                                                              ..........................................                                                                                                                                  Based upon my own life experiences it is clear to me that the description of the entire police internal investigation and discipline process indicates it has been long perverted by privilege, bias, discrimination and ignorance. No honest investigation of  behaviours and facts within an organization needs to take seven years and counting. The entire purpose of dragging something like this out is to both discourage and defeat the complainant as well as to discourage other complainants from coming forward. It is essentially step one in the playbook for self-serving, dishonest and untruthful employers. Whether Angie Rivers wins or loses her arbitration case she has exposed Chief Larkin, senior police administrators, the Police Services Board and quite frankly Waterloo Regional Council (barely at arms length away) as being complicit cowards unwilling and unable to do the obvious right thing for fear of offending those in the wrong. Shame on the pack of them. Will every citizen in Waterloo Region commend her? No only those who are honest, thoughtful and pay close attention to both current events and to life around them.