NEXT THURSDAY'S TRAC AGENDA IS OUT - IS IT 465 PAGES OF UNADULTERATED BULL**IT?

 

Well it's been my experience that even world class liars can't produce 465 pages that have absolutely no social redeeming value. The trick of course is sifting through most of the crap looking for the rare nugget. I've literally spent decades doing that for free and while there are various scars of various natures for my efforts, I don't regret any of the major facts and issues that I have uncovered. 

First of all waiting four months between public meetings is par for the hypocritical course.  Chemtura and the M.O.E. without ever declaring a boycott began missing CPAC meetings in late 2014. Allegedly (according to Sandy & Mark) they were upset with how they were being treated.  Chairman Dr. Dan Holt did an excellent job under difficult circumstances running those meetings properly and professionally. Yes CPAC members including myself took no crap, guff or blatant lying from the M.O.E. and Chemtura without calling them on it. Boiled down that was their biggest whine in that people around the table no longer would compliment the polluter and their regulator about how sweet their horse apples smelled. Hence Chemtura and the M.O.E. knowing a new Council/mayor were on the way simply bailed. Well they got everything they wanted and they still don't seem keen on attending meetings filled with their acolytes, fellow travellors and others in way over their heads.

With the Ministry and Lanxess monopolizing the propaganda, unsuspecting citizens will hear lies about  asymptotic behaviour (again), followed by more lies about new directions in handling the groundwater remediation failures, followed by how the HHERA states that no downstream remediation is required, followed by more nonsense gilded with the patina of independent professional experts merely searching for the truth. 

It will be a highly entertaining, albeit somewhat incomprehensible, dog and pony show that we taxpayers are paying for one way or the other. 

 

HOW CULPABLE IS SUSAN BRYANT?

Was sha a fifth columnist right from the beginning? Or did she sincerely believe that polluting companies including chemical companies had an inherent right to make money and sell their products to willing customers? Did she possibly feel that the rhetoric coming from APTE members and co0ordinators was too much?

For years I thought that Susan and Sylvia's position on DNAPLS was basically the kiss of death regarding ever cleaning up the site. However I did not even begin to fathom the depth and width of their betrayal of Elmira citizens and their fellow APTE members until late in 2007 when I saw the lying and manoeuvering within CPAC to avoid bringing Drs. Cherry and Parker's DNAPL revelations to CPAC by Susan and Pat McLean. Until 2007 I had become aware of more and more contradictions in their behaviour versus their words. I also had long been concerned with Susan's allegiance with Pat Mclean who in my eyes had never shown much knowledge or care for the natural environment. I also had concerns with hydrogeologist Wilf Ruland who while ostensibly working for CPAC was in fact taking all direction from Pat and Susan. He was also way too deferential to CRA literally on all their hydrogeological pronouncements constantly favouring their client Uniroyal/Chemtura etc. . 

Is it conceivable that a master manipulator like Susan was actually so ill informed  that she embraced Uniroyal's often outrageous claims concerning cleaning their site, the Creek and Elmira's groundwater? I find that hard to believe. I also note that she stuck to her guns regarding the lack of shallow aquifer containment plus maintaining proper on-site Municipal Aquifer pumping in the early days. Yes she did give concessions to the polluter far too often for my liking regarding number of monitoring wells and timing of their sampling 

She and Sylvia worked hard to remove Richard, Esther and I from APTE. She did something similar with Dr. Regier  who was heads and shoulders more knowledgeable than Darryl & Susan multiplied by 100. It was that totally unnecessary behaviour combined with her enjoyment of private meetings with Uniroyal that finally got through to me. Susan and Pat led UPAC and CPAC for many years. Even the M.O.E. occasionally bragged about how CPAC was the best citizens committee in the province. I found that pronouncement bizarre as so very little was actually getting done. Frankly none of it made any sense and then the gross DNAPL behaviour after the two world experts (Cherry & Parker) clarified what should be done about it was the final straw.  Keep in mind that McLean, Bryant, myself and Ruland all attended that meeting at the U. of Waterloo and I was the only happy one of the four afterwards. Clearly McLean and Bryant saw the writing on the wall and eliminated me from CPAC as fast as their wagging tongues were able. 

Recently I've said shame on the APTE co-ordinators' 1994 DNAPL failure and now I say shame on CPAC in 2007 and 2008 for their stupidity and willingness to blindly follow Susan and Pat.  Clearly an inappropriate deal was made with two APTE co-ordinators in 1994 and renewed again in 2007 and 2008 at CPAC.  Apparently as long as polluters can convince the local politicians that their plans can save everybody money then honesty and ethics are out the door.   

LESSONS LEARNED FROM DEALING WITH WOOLWICH, RMOW, GRCA, POLLUTING COMPANIES, THEIR CONSULTANTS, MECP, THIRD PARTY CONSULTANTS HIRED BY THE POLLUTER

 

1)  "They all lie."   This is a quote emblazoned on T-shirts/pullovers by environmentalist Pat Potter.

2)  Their promises are wind.  Meaningless doesn't even come close to describing their promises.

3)   They are incestuous.    In other words getting a request turned down by a municipal Council almost                                              guarantees it will be turned down by the Region and the GRCA. Way too much                                            overlap in membership.

4)  Never accept their dates for delays.  Almost always these parties interpret a "delay" as meaning for                                                                       forever.

5)  If you ask a question assume their answer will be a lie.  This prevents disappointment as well as future                                                               expectations of good behaviour on their part.

6)  Make these "lessons" available to the parties listed above.  Let them know that you appropriately have                                                                zero confidence in them. 

7)  Let the parties know that despite these "lessons" you will keep track of future promises, statements,                                                               lies  delays and commitments.

8)  Never apologize for any of these lessons.    Thirty plus years of despicable behaviour can not be                                                                   undone by a future few years of good behaviour.

9)  Laugh at their outlandish claims and junk science regularly.

10)  Never feel the need to prove them wrong.   Yes it is satisfying but it only encourages even more lying                                                           from them.

THE 2024 ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT (AMR) HAS BEEN RELEASED

 

As usual it's a bit of a stinker with lots of back patting at every opportunity combined with professional explanations (excuses) each time hydraulic containment fails. Combined with this is the liberal use of statistics such as those over 90% to describe up times for various pumps and wells. Those with up times however of only 55% seem to get short shrift in the explanation department. 

We are also advised that the Ontario MECP has given  "temporary" relief to Lanxess in regards to their Bio-monitoring program. Apparently bringing in clams etc. from Balsam Lake has been a no-no for a long time that was conveniently ignored. Now it is being enforced hence Lanxess asked and received permission from the MECP for the "temporary" delay.  

I find as usual the Executive Summary to be an exercise in self-serving gratuitous bravado. Everything is good, trust us we are professionals, nothing really exceptional to see here folks kind of nonsense. To date I have seen no honest or legitimate explanations of decreasing on-site pumping while the off-site generally remains around 52 litres per second. When the off-site rises the odd month I see no explanation as to why the on-site pumping is also not rising to ensure hydraulic containment of contaminants so that they are not drawn off site by the higher off-site pumping.

This AMR appears to be the usual bought and paid for good news that Ontario polluters and their captured regulator (MECP) strive for.