MOE REVIEW OF GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION ON STROH FARM

First off this is not public consultation. I have been actively involved with UPAC, CPAC and RAC and TAG meetings since 1992. I am by far the most knowledgable local citizen bar none, or even groups of citizens, bar none, regarding geology, hydrogeology, chemistry, solvents, other contaminants, history of the site, Canagagigue Creek, contaminant fate and transport etc. All players including MOE, Lanxess, CRA, GHD, Woolwich Township, RAC, TAG, RMOW etc. know this. That said I received yesterday an APRIL 12, 2018 MOE DOCUMENT. Yes there have been worse examples of important documents being denied to and hidden and delayed from citizens but when is this going to stop? There will be Uniroyal trials as Pat Potter predicted and those guilty will be punished. Sending out documents asap to all other parties first and then waiting for them to show up on a correspondence list, literally months later, for me to begin inquiries is contemptible. Yes I have formally complained and yes I have been advised that attempts will be made to correct it. We will see.

The April 12, 2018 MOE Review is titled "RE: Lanxess Elmira - 2017 East Side Off-Site Investigation Report Groundwater Review Comments". It is written by a MOE hydrogeologist and sent to Jason Rice of the MOE who sent it along to Ramin Ansari of Lanxess Canada Co. "It is the view of the ministry that the implications of the observed NDMA exceedances in the shallow overburden on the East Side off-site Property need to be assessed." This east side property is of course the Stroh farm.To date the MOE have advised that the off-site groundwater assessment is deemed "incomplete". The MOE also clearly state that past conclusions regarding the Surficial Aquifer (SA) in Lanxess's north-east corner are totally unacceptable. This is huge especially since 2014 when the last and current CPAC proved that both ground and surface water had flowed eastwards, off-site onto the Stroh farm from the north to the south along the property line. As per page 3 the implications are that contaminated groundwater will continue to move off-site further to the east from an active or residual NDMA on-site source. "The current monitoring network in SA is deemed not adequate to conclusively confirm the existence of a flow divide and its location."

All of this has been known by the Ontario MOE, Uniroyal, CRA and other guilty parties for decades. They have all agreed to cover up this inconvenient truth for their own benefit. Myself, SWAT and CPAC brought this issue to light and paid the price of expulsion from public consultation courtesy of an incompetent and or corrupt Woolwich Council . This longterm and ongoing east side environmental cover up folks is corruption, plain and simple.

MOE REVIEWS 2017 EAST SIDE OFF-SITE INVESTIGATION

There is both good and bad in this review by the recently renamed Ministry of Expanded Corporate Pollution (MOECP) otherwise known as Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks. One of the goals with split samples was to ensure the accuracy of GHD's sample results. GHD failed, at least with their Dioxin results. Two sample areas in particular were a problem namely SS17C and SS18B. The measured Dioxin TEQ (Toxic Equivalency) by the MOE was higher than the applicable criteria whereas GHD on behalf of Lanxess measured concentrations of the same samples as below the criteria. This is very bad because once I or the public no longer even trust the supposedly accredited labs doing the analyses, then it's game over for the company and their consultants. Or in the alternative the labs have done a good job and the taking or mixing of samples was fudged.

Page 2 makes reference to former gravel pit GP1, allegedly south and west of the high diagonal strip of land in Lanxess's south-east corner. Interestingly, contrary to Jeff Merriman's comments to CPAC that the further north RPE pits were intentionally breached to allow contaminated liquids to flow southwards into GP1 1 & 2; this report states that it was "seepage and overflow" which caused waste water to flow southwards into these former gravel pits. This is not the first time that I have seen attempts by Lanxess to distance themselves from Chemtura/Crompton/Uniroyal personnel. Of interest is that Dwight Este also seems to be gone/transferred? No loss to the citizens of Elmira with that pair out of Elmira.

The reality is far more likely that the original map in the 1985 "History of Uniroyal Waste Disposal" written by A. Ralston, Wayne Jackman (MOE)and Tony Smith (GRCA) is the accurate one. It has GP1 located on the north-east side of the high diagonal strip of ground. This strip of ground runs from the north-west direction towards the south-east. If this is the case then the higher concentrations of DDT and Dioxin/Furans are far more likely to have run in a south and east direction through GP1 and over the border with the Stroh farm and then into the Stroh Drain. Lanxess and Chemtura dearly want to cover up this embarrassing and illegal fact.

The MOE point out that Table 2 criteria may not be appropriate for the soil samples taken at SS20 and SS21 on the Lanxess property because they are within 30 metres of the Stroh Drain. Table 8 criteria are 7 ppb. versus Table 2 criteria of 13 ppb. GHD measured SS21 as having 6.97 ppb which is one hell of an outstanding coincidence to my mind. Regardless the MOE measured the same sample as being at 10 ppb. which exceeds Table 8 criteria although not Table 2.

Another interesting point is that SS20 is sampled entirely on the high ground.This why its' neighbouring location (SS21) has higher concentrations of Dioxin/Furans as it is in the lower elevation area where overland water flow is more likely.

While there is good news in this belatedly delivered report to me; nevertheless the bad news is that the MOE have accepted the basic bullshit premise that surficial soil samples only 5.9 inches deep are acceptable for Dioxin and DDT sampling. As always you will never find what you refuse to test for which is Dioxins/Furans, DDT and more at depth, carried there by massive solvent concentrations in Uniroyal waste waters.

MECAC'S INCOMPETENCE OR IS IT CORRUPTION?

Last Thursday's Woolwich Observer had an article in their July 4, 2015 edition highlighted in "This Week in History". It indicated that the Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) had looked at Sandy Shantz's revised Financial Statements and pronounced themselves satisfied. They hence improperly dismissed my Application for a review and an Audit of her Financial Statements. What "This Week in History" doesn't mention is what came next. It turned out that an Audit of Sandy's Financial Statements was absolutely mandatory by law as she had exceeded $10,000 in campaign expenses. MECAC of course totally missed this and Sandy of course had noooooo idea that by erroneously and falsely reducing her listed expenses to less than $10,000 she had avoided the cost and hassle of a mandatory audit. So either MECAC are grossly incompetent including their Chartered Accountant Chair Carl Zehr OR they knew and acted in a corrupt fashion to thwart Ontario law. Did I mention that Sandy likes to brag that she was a book keeper? Seems like this "book keeper" knows how to keep the books far better than Carl, Sandy or any of the other MECAC members and former politicians.

SEBASTIAN REFUSES TO BACK DOWN AT TAG

Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach was outnumbered and out opinioned but that did not deter him. A number of TAG members tried to persuade him, sweet talk him and deflect him with half measures but none of it worked. He was unhappy that TAG wanted to endorse the MOE's recent review of the Lanxess/GHD soil sampling and testing just barely on the Stroh farm from the east side of the Uniroyal/Lanxess property. To say the sampling and investigation was superficial is a gross understatement. Worse than how small an area of the Stroh farm they tested along with the proven Micky Mouse depth of only 5.9 inches (15 cm); was the once again shoddy investigation of the "Gap" area. This area was named the "Gap" because of how it was studiously avoided in the first set of investigations on the Chemtura/Lanxess side of the property line back in 2015.

First of all this area is within 30 metres of a surface water body, namely the Stroh Drain hence the criteria should be the more stringent Table 8 not Table 2. David Hofbauer, a TAG member seemed to be in support of TAG recommending that the MOE accept Table 8 as the appropriate criteria. Sebastian will be writing a Motion for TAG to vote on in regards to the low lying area nearest the south end of the Stroh Drain where it is closest to the Lanxess property.

Two additional points need to be incorporated . They are 1) TAG must not fall into the trap of accepting the MOE's review first with the cap in hand request that additional and deeper sampling needs to be done in the Gap area. Either the MOE insists upon more sampling be done in that area as described by Sebastian or TAG should not accept/endorse the MOE's review. 2) Fill may or may not be relevant in the Gap area. The Dioxins and DDT could be very shallow in depth, one foot down or two metres down. Many examples exist on site of deep hydrophobic compounds including PCBs, DDT and Dioxin/Furans. Contrary to Chemtura/CRA fibs as well as Lanxess/GHD fibs these persistent organic pollutants in the presence of a myriad of solvents can and do penetrate into the earth. Sometimes they penetrate on their own and sometimes they are buried by fill. No more excuses and bullshit please MOE, GHD and Lanxess.

Pat and Susan seemed to be waffling and trying end runs around Sebastian. Tiffany also seemed to be trying to deflect Sebastian with talk of "confirmatory" sampling. "Confirmatory" sampling is bullshit when you are only digging down 5.9 inches. Dig down two metres and then talk to me about confirmatory sampling.

VARNICOLOR CHEMICAL & BORG TEXTILES DID IT

The evidence is strong in both cases. On a balance of probabilities Varnicolor contributed NDMA (N-Nitrosodimethylamine)to the municipal drinking water aquifers and Borg contributed chlorobenzene. Now do keep in mind that this is based upon evidence produced by client driven consultants for Uniroyal/Lanxess Canada Co. I am quite certain that if the current owners of the former Borg Textiles were to hire their own consultants they would pin the blame squarely on Lanxess or perhaps even on Varnicolor.

The big problem with blaming Varnicolor for what has been described as an excess of 1300 kilograms of chlorobenzene in the Elmira Aquifers by Neil Thompson of the University of Waterloo; is that chlorobenzene testing in Varnicolor's shallow aquifers back in the 1990s came up empty. Now there has been lots of additional testing since then but the Ontario MOE in their infinite capacity to be deceptive have done their very best not to share that data with the public. I believe, without any confirmation from Elmira Pump, that the MOE have even threatened Elmira Pump not to share this data with me. Elmira Pump are the current owners of the old Varnicolor site. I also believe that most likely Borg Textiles handled chlorobenzene. What has always bothered me is that Varnicolor as a paint and solvent recycler should have handled chlorobezene as well. If the MOE fudged the lab reports, one way or the other, then we are likely talking corruption on the jail time scale.

Then we have the NDMA issue. Varnicolor did come up with generally low levels of NDMA in their shallow groundwater in the 1990s. There were however a couple of very interesting, deep soil samples that were much higher in concentration. Again I am aware that the MOE have done everything possible to avoid looking for NDMA on the Varnicolor site. What you don't test for you will never find. That has been their out. I believe that their might have been all of one deep sample taken in the last fifteen to twenty years which is just ridiculous. Unless of course you don't want to muddy the waters of having Uniroyal/Lanxess take responsibility for the complete Elmira Aquifers cleanup. This certainly would explain the October 7, 1991 sweetheart deal that the MOE gave Uniroyal Chemical, including the Indemnity for all known contamination.

The last huge evidence also includes the Uniroyal/Lanxess Annual Monitoring Reports over the years. They have plume maps as well as contaminant trends graphs showing high concentrations of NDMA and chlorobenzene where they simply should not be if Uniroyal were the sole source to the Elmira Aquifers.

TAG MINUTES

The Technical Advisory Group (TAG) Minutes from their last meeting on April 19, 2018 were sent out late last week. Usually TAG members and others receive them approximately a week ahead of the next scheduled meeting which happens to be tomorrow at 6:30 pm. in Woolwich Council Chambers. As the next TAG meeting is scheduled for September 20, 2018 then the Minutes of tomorrow's meeting won't be available until approximately September 13, 2018 or two and a half months away. This process of waiting 2 1/2 months to see the Minutes after a meeting is inappropriate. It pretty much guarantees that some important items from the meeting don't make it into the Minutes and that members aren't likely to notice omissions.

I believe that the following items in the recently received Minutes are important. The GHD rep stated that the creek is a dynamic environment with sediments moving constantly.That is huge as it points out how bizarre it is to still be having toxic chemical exceedances decades after production and waste burial took place.

The same rep, Mr.Farquharson, also stated that the first step is a sediment transport study. This is huge and only decades overdue. Dr. Richard Jackson pushed for this and got absolutely nowhere so is this for real or just more of the same poo poo del toro?

TAG believes that there is an ongoing source of DDT and Dioxins (plus a lot more) leaching downstream from the site.This relates back to both point one (dynamic environment) as well as to the ongoing flood events over the decades.

The floodplain Reach 2 is literally miles downstream in the Canagagigue Creek and yet 50% of total Dioxin TEQ (Toxic Equivalency) results exceeds the criteria.

Sediment results in Reach 3, downstream of the Stroh Drain discharge, have 64% and 56% of their sediment samples exceeding the criteria. These could be from either the Lanxess facility directly or indirectly via the man made diversion off-site to the Stroh farm.

We are advised in the Minutes that Dioxin & Furan sediment results increase with sample depth at the majority of the sample locations. This is huge and helps put the lie to Lanxess and GHD claims that these contaminants tend to remain in very shallow soils.

Regarding the test results for creek bank soils there is a similar finding. DDT concentrations are consistent or increase with sample depth and Dioxins & Furans increase with sample depth. This is also huge for the same reason as the previous point.

The floodplain soil results summary also states that concentrations of Dioxins & Furans generally increase with sample depth. Wow again.

There are a number of tables purporting to compare one years sediments or soils with previous years results. Firstly they are cherry picking particular years and not showing all the years since 2012 that testing occurred and the Tables are not self explanatory. In other words you really have to go back to both reports being compared to figure out what they are trying to do.

MINISTRY OF EMPTY CORPORATE PROMISES (MOECP)

The devil made me do it! I just love when the MOE keep on changing their name. Funny how Lanxess (Uniroyal) have been doing the same thing. Trying to hide from their own behaviour and history seems likely to me. I was advised on the weekend that they have changed from Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) to Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MOECP). What a joke. A pig by any other name is still a pig. Or better yet putting lipstick on a pig doesn't changer what he is. Go Dougie Ford.

Further name possibilities for those of a creative bent. How about Ministry of Excuses, Corruption and Pollution? Or perhaps Ministry of Expanded Corporate Pollution. I really like that one.

I didn't go along with the last couple of meaningless and essentially stupid name changes. When it was the Ministry of Environment & Energy (MOEE) I called them the Ministry of Errors and Excuses. Since then I've stuck with either M.O.E. or MOE. MOE is appropriate as well when you think of the three stooges, Larry, Curly and MOE. MOE is obvious whereas Larry is the Ministry of Labour and Curly the Ministry of Transport. Just think of the state of driving as well as the safety these days. For the Minister of Labour try being a non-union employee in this province over the last fourty years. Discrimination is rife even when it's not about gender, race or religion. I think you get my point.

Last thought: Ministry of the Evolving Communist Party. OK that one is silly but sometimes silly is necessary.