Who exactly? There are so many! O.K. folks today's recipient is Uniroyal/Lanxess plus Conestoga Rovers (CRA). Now Uniroyal/Lanxess is somewhat awkward in that the date is around 2006/2007 when Uniroyal's name was either Crompton or Chemtura. Despite the fact that the lying about DNAPLS (Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquids) was at it's height back then the reality is that Lanxess know perfectly well that they've had and still have both residual and free phase DNAPL both on their site and off their site. The irony is that Dr. Neil Thompson whom they hired to produce a proper CSM (Conceptual Site Model) is the one who first publicly announced that there was something like an additional, unexplained 1,900 kg. of chlorobenzene in the Municipal Aquifers. By the way that weight is by memory and even so I believe it could well be low. Also chlorobenzene is a classic DNAPL chemical with a high density (> 1), a relatively low solubility plus other characteristics including being a chlorinated (chlorine) solvent.
Courtesy of Pat McLean and Susan Bryant (plus the other dimwits on CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Comm.)) , combined with the biased and ignorant Bill Strauss, Sandy Shantz, Mark Bauman, Murray Martin perhaps & other councillors I was kicked off of CPAC for allegedly slowing down the Ammonia Treatment System (ATS) construction. To my surprise my only ally on Council was Ruby Weber. The allegation was bullsh*% then just as it is now. I did appeal a MOE/MECP document due to a proven flaw in one of the on-site/off-site corresponding groundwater elevation wells that was proven then to hydrogeologist Wilf Ruland and later confirmed by the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) in their ruling. Dr. Henry Regier assisted me with a brief , biased meeting with CRA, MOE and Chemtura whereas Mr. Ruland rolled over under pressure like a wet sack of mud.
The reality is that Pat and Susan knew I had the goods on DNAPLS, especially helpful from the January 2007 meeting with U. of Waterloo Drs. John Cherry and Beth Parker. They, Chemtura, CRA , mayor Strauss and the Min. of Environment were terrified that from my pulpit on CPAC I would expose the entire DNAPL coverup. That was the real reason I got bounced not some stupid technical error I found and proved with the already under construction ATS .
So by all authorities and parties agreeing to pretend that DNAPLS were not on or off site they saved millions of dollars in excavation and removal costs and substituted long term lesser pump & treat costs.
CHEMTURA THANKS YOU SUSAN, PAT, BILL, MARK , SANDY & WILF FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THEM VERSUS TO THE PUBLIC
And now the chickens have come home to roost. Currently with barely four years to the deadline chlorobenzene has an average concentration of 123 ppb. in the Municipal Upper (MU) and 173 ppb. in the Municipal Lower Aquifer (ML). The criteria is 80 ppb. So folks ask yourselves this question: NDMA is at much, much lower concentrations namely an average of .091 ppb. in the MU and 1.6 ppb. in the ML. Why are the chlorobenzene concentrations so much higher even after 26 years of pump & treat? Secondly why is the location of the chlorobenzene plume in the ML in such a bizarre location? It is just east of Varnicolor Chemical. Part of the answer is the characteristics of DNAPLS with their very slow dissolving into groundwater combined with pumping wells W5A/B. There has been an underground tug of war between pumping well W4 (near Howard St. Water Tower) to the west of Varnicolor's former Union St. site and W5A/B to the east of Varnicolor, for decades. W4 has been discontinued while W5A in the ML is still pumping and pulling the slowly dissolved chlorobenzene from the free phase DNAPL found in well OW57-32 R located beside W4.
Also how did chlorobenzene DNAPL get so far down in the subsurface? It was discovered in the wellscreen of OW57-32, one hundred feet below ground surface, just the same as Bob Hillier, M.O.E. hydrogeologist, discovered free phase DNAPL on the Uniroyal site (west side) in OW62/PW4 around 1992 and brought a sample to UPAC. There are "windows" through the aquitard by the Howard St. Water Tower. These "windows" allow ready access of heavy DNAPLS downwards through the aquifers where the UAT (Upper Aquitard) between the UA (Upper Aquifer) and the MU (Municipal Upper) is very thin and where the MU and ML are actually joined with zero aquitard between them.
Once into the Municipal Lower Aquifer (ML) the slowly dissolving chlorobenzene can somewhat gravity flow south-west with the natural gradient or depending on which pumping well affects it most, can be pulled towards either W4 (very close to it) or further east to W5A especially after W4 was shut down. This is also why W4 as shown recently in Joe Ricker's somewhat bizarre presentation to TRAC has the highest rate of all off-site pumping wells in removing chlorobenzene. The off-site source is right there. Similarly this is why on-site pumping well PW4 has removed far more chlorobenzene than PW5 ever has. PW4 is right on top of the free phase DNAPL.
So Woolwich Council you are up against it yet again. None of you have dedicated enough time or energy to becoming competent on these matters. Therefore it is very easy to rely on expensive but readily volunteered "assistance" from client driven consultants, a long embedded CAO, Lanxess and or the Min. of Environment. All are compromised whether by money, fear of loss of reputation, guilt (especially the M.O.E./MECP) . The old adage of follow the money should be obvious but apparently hasn't been so.
One get off your duffs and do your own serious research and reading .
Two hire a truly independent, certified hydrogeologist paid other than by yourselves . Maybe the Feds? Maybe somebody else but if the money goes through the Region, CAO or mayor you'll likely just get their opinions gift wrapped with a bunch of additional degrees behind them.
Three have this independent hydrogeologist sit down with me for likely at least several hours. If I'm prepared to yet again donate several hours of my time to the cause then by God I'm going to have serious input into the process before I make any commitments to any twits or their fellow travellors.
PW4 "pumping" is shut down - while PW4 is right on top of the free phase DNAPL - what the hell is going on with that
ReplyDeletePW4 is the ON -site (i.e. Uniroyal/Lanxess) pumping well whereas W4 is the Off-site pumping well off to the west near the Howard St. Water Tower. W4 is shut down NOT PW4.
Deleteok the well codes make it confusing... what is the info and the history on the well directly over the free phase DNAPL?
ReplyDelete