Tell me it isn't so. I've just gotten through in a letter to TRAC describing Lanxess's appreciation of the MECP's service to the cause of sham cleanups. Now in the MECP's November 8/24 letter to Lanxess I see a tad of coincidence in that the MECP are asking TWO questions in a row about DNAPLS. I described the first question in last Thursday's post about residual DNAPL admitted to by Lanxess in former, on-site landfill M2. Today's post is about the second question by the MECP asking Lanxess why contaminant concentrations in CH-75B reacted conversely to each other starting in 2019. Apparently NDMA concentrations started dropping significantly then whereas chlorobenzene concentrations began rising significantly.
So is the MECP legitimately wondering or are they just advising Lanxess to do a better job in clarifying the non-existence of free phase DNAPLS preferably both on and off-site? To a non bought and paid for fellow travellor of Lanxess the answer is relatively obvious. W4 had been both containing and slowly dissolving the free phase DNAPL found 100 feet below ground at OW57-32 almost beside W4. Afterall why do you think the twits put the pumping well (W4) there in the first place but to deal with the non-admitted free phase DNAPL CRA inadvertently found in the first place.
Concentrations of chlorobenzene dropped significantly after years of pumping so in 2017 Lanxess quit pumping W4. Lo and behold the chlorobenzene then happily migrated under the pumping of well W3R. Along the way it also went past CH-75B where sampled concentrations began rising. No surprise at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment