HORRIFIC GROUNDWATER CONCENTRATIONS ON THE UNIROYAL ELMIRA SITE (90-91)

Funny how AFTER the south and north wellfields were admitted to be contaminated with NDMA in late 1989 (E7, E9 -south) and in 1990 (E2, E8 -north) that then some of the beyond belief groundwater contamination on the site came to light. This massive groundwater contamination was on both the west side of the site (and the creek) as well as on the east side of both. Undoubtedly after nearly thirty years of on-site hydraulic containment (i.e. pump & treat) these numbers representing dissolved contamination will have been reduced however the lack of source removal is why even today Uniroyal senior staff (Ramin Ansari) advise that on-site pump and treat will continue forever. If the pumping were to stop in the future the still buried wastes would again begin to increase the contaminant load in the on-site groundwater. Following are some of the awful groundwater readings: ................................................................................................ ........Location (well #, East or West)....Concentration (parts per billion (ppb)) ................................................................................................ dichloroethylene (DCE) ....OW62-17 .W ........300,000 ....................................OW50-15 .W ..........330,000 ....................................OW16-d .E ............320,000 ....................................OW18-d .W ..........139,000 ................................................................................................. phenols....................OW37-5A .E ........75,000 ................................................................................................. vinyl chloride ............OW10-14.W .........121,000 ..............................OW88-8 .W ..........50,000 ................................................................................................. toluene ...................OW10-6 .W .........178,000 ...........................OW51-6 .W ..........43,000 ...........................OW88-8 .W .........110,000 ................................................................................................. chlorobenzene............... OW10-6 .W ..........13,000 ......................................OW88-8 .W .........200,000 ......................................OW18-d .W ..........44,000 ................................................................................................. ethyl benzene ....................OW37-5A .E ..........3,300 ................................................................................................. 2-chlorophenol ...................OW37-5A .E ........100,000 ................................................................................................. aniline ...........................OW10-6 .W .........78,000 ................................................................................................. carboxin ..........................OW10-6 .W .........19,000 .....................................OW69-13 .E .........9,700 ................................................................................................. ................................................................................................. The above is a tiny, TINY listing of all the chemicals found in groundwater on the Uniroyal Chemical site. It is a tiny, TINY listing of all the different momitoring wells on site with ridiculously high concentrations of contaminants. Notice I didn't even bother with listings of NDMA which has concentrations hundreds, thousands and tens of thousands of times greater than the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS). Honest citizen activists wanted serious contaminant source removal on that property because leaving it to nothing more than pump and treat for the next three hundred years or more is NOT acceptable, practical or likely. At some point much sooner the unethical, immoral sons of ....... will call a halt to even the minimal pump & treat.

PIECE BY PIECE THE EXTENT OF UNIROYAL CONTAMINATION THAT FLOWED TO THE STROH FARM (Eastwards) IS BEING REVEALED

On Tuesday here I pointed out Figures 7.7 and 7.8 in the CH2M HILL Report Volume II (Feb. 1991) which clearly indicated that CH2M HILL recognized that phenols from Uniroyal had spread over to the Stroh farm. Now from the same report we have NDMA doing the exact same thing as per Figures 5.1 and 5.3 . These two Figures represent NDMA in both the Upper Aquifer as well as in the Municipal Aquifer. This is hardly unexpected as NDMA is considered one of if not the fastest moving contaminant in groundwater from Uniroyal Chemical. Again similar to phenols, the NDMA concentration contours for both aquifers have crossed the invisible (from below) line/fence on the surface as they've migrated from the source areas (RPE 1-5) along and immediately beside the Uniroyal/Stroh property boundary over to the Stroh property itself. ........................................................................................... Interestingly to me I see a fairly clear bias by CH2MHILL in regards to their drawing of contaminant concentration contour lines. This goes for pretty much all their contaminants including benzene, chlorobenzene etc. This has occurred in both shallow and deeper aquifers as they have seemed to want to hammer the point home that the major source areas on the Uniroyal site are the west side operating lagoons. They have done this by showing the west side only as being source areas while including contaminated wells on the east side of their property within plumes originating from the operating ponds. This is simply inaccurate. Whether or not the west side has higher concentrations is irrelevant when all parties acknowledge the volumes of solids, sludges, tars and liquid wastewaters deposited into the east side pits over the decades. If nothing else this bias also shows how Conestoga Rovers were able to draw contaminant concentration contour lines to the liking of Uniroyal Chemical using subjectivity and "professional" interpretation. Ha! ................................................................................................................... One last point. This report clearly points out (pg. 57) that NDMA concentrations in many locations are far higher at depth than they are in shallow aquifers, even on the Uniroyal site. This is counterintuitive as usually contaminant concentrations are reduced as they migrate away from the source. This phenomenon may be relevant regarding second and third sources of NDMA in the Elmira Aquifers. The two additional sources that I'm thinking of are Varnicolor Chemical and Nutrite. Both have low level concentrations of NDMA in their shallow aquifers, while the much higher NDMA levels deeper beneath their sites are all attributed to Uniroyal. Of interest also is that CH2M Hill acknowledge right up to the final conclusion that Nutrite and Varnicolor are the two leading contenders (out of many) to be additional source areas. Also interesting is that it took over a decade for the public announcement that indeed Nutrite contributed ammonia to the Municipal Aquifer whereas allegedly not NDMA. That bizarre belated announcement was never properly explained. Afterall the sweetheart deal between the MOE and Uniroyal in October 1991 attributed everything to Uniroyal in exchange for a very limited cleanup ($$$$) plus the Region and Township got their alternate water supply paid for (provided they didn't let the cat out of the bag to the public regarding multiple other sources).

NDMA PRODUCTION

In its most basic, NDMA can be formed by the chemical interaction of dimethylamine ((CH3)2 NH2) and nitrites (N02) forming N-nitrosodimethylamine or (CH3)2NNO with the C being carbon, the H being hydrogen, the N being nitrogen and the O being oxygen. Therefore the two most important precursers are dimethylamine and sodium nitrite (NaNo2). Both nitrites (NO2) and nitrates (NO4) are very common in the natural environment especially in rural, agricultural areas. They can be found in fertilizers as well as in septic tanks and animal feedlots. Dimethylamine can also be found in urine and feces as well as in sewage treatment plants and the leather, rubber and pesticide production industries. One can certainly see how Elmira and Uniroyal Chemical (rubber additives, pesticde prod'n) ticked all the boxes when our authorities were looking for the source of NDMA in Elmira's drinking water in 1989. ............................................................................................................ There are other factors involved in NDMA production. An acidic environment is one of them. Production wastewaters filled with various acids such as both 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T (2,4 dichlorophenoxyaceticACID and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyaceticACID) are an example. .................................................................................................. Soil moisture is yet another factor. Drier soils will produce more NDMA than wetter soils as one would find say on both sides of the Canagagigue Creek where Uniroyal Chemical was located. ...................................................................................................... A high carbon source in soils increases the production of NDMA as long as the two precursers are available (i.e. dimethylamine and nitrite). I suspect one high carbon source would be sugars perhaps such as automotive antifreeze. Any chance that pig feedlots would feed stale doughnuts or pastries to pigs? ...................................................................................................................... So besides Uniroyal Chemical in Elmira were there any other local industries that ticked all the boxes? The answer I believe is yes and that would be Varnicolor Chemical, just down the road (Union St.). They handled and used dimethylamine, antifreeze, acids (H2SO4), and had drier soils as they were at a higher elevation on Union St. than Uniroyal. They also were located on the site of a former pig farm plus they had a septic tank in their backyard that while formerly enriching the soils with nitrites (same as the pig farm) also discharged both sulphuric acid after a spill from a tankertruck inside the building connected to the septic tank and a buried road tanker and discharged dimethylamine that was used in a can coating process. Lastly this same underground discharge from inside their building on Union St. also discharged antifreeze (carbon source). ......................................................................................................... Perhaps if our authorities (MOE/MECP, Region & Township) had honestly provided this information in 1989 to 1991 then I might have at least a little confidence in their excluding Varnicolor Chemical from consideration of even contributing to the NDMA in our Elmira Aquifers. Keep in mind that the very same municipal aquifer that runs below Uniroyal Chemical also runs below Varnicolor Chemical. Keep in mind that the Ministry of Environment reneged on their promise to investigate and examine the "...full aereal and vertical extent of contamination on the Varnicolor site.". They waited for twenty-five years to release anything about the deeper subsurface contamination on the site. They also lied like dogs and were caught so doing multiple times by citizens in those early days (1989-1992). ................................................................................................................... Citizens have learned the hard way. Our authorities lie to us routinely. You can call it a coverup, a conspiracy or whatever you want. I look at it this way: Once I've caught you lying to me more than once, than your word is meaningless and you deserve both my contempt and my disbelief of whatever other misinformation you are trying to sell. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice and shame on me.

STILL MORE EVIDENCE OF UNIROYAL TOXINS TRAVELLING TO THE STROH PROPERTY

This time the evidence comes from the following report: "Elmira-St. Jacobs Water Supply Project Volume II- Elmira Aquifer System: Contaminant Plume Mapping And Source Investigation" prepared by CH2M HILL Engineering Ltd., Waterloo, Ontario, February 1991, on behalf of the Region of Waterloo. While I haven't completed my review as yet a few choice items have however leaped out at me. These speak to more than just the east side (Stroh property). ....................................................................................................................... On page iii (right at the start) we are advised that CH2M HILL assumes presumably based upon timing and production records that NDMA actually entered the municipal aquifer (MU) in the 1950s. Now this would also be due to the nature of the semi-impermeable aquitard being missing below one or two of the west side lagoons on the Uniroyal property hence allowing quick migration from the shallow aquifer directly into the MU. Between private wells in those days still in Elmira, as well as the municipal drinking water system from the nearby north wellfield drawing Uniroyal contaminated groundwater towards itself, I believe that it is highly likely that Elmira citizens were drinking NDMA contaminated water from likely as early as 1960 and maybe as late as 1970 until and after the Elmira water Crisis of November 1989. .............................................................................................. Indeed on page 1 we are advised that after the south wellfield (started in 1970) was shut down (wells E7 & E9) and well E2 shut down as well in the north wellfield that a contaminated with NDMA well (E8) was still in operation however allegedly it was diluted by the other north wellfield wells namely E5, E5A, and E6. I wonder if the tap water was below the current standard of 9 parts per trillion or the then interim standard of 14 ppt or perhaps neither. ....................................................................................................................... Two Figures in this report show heavy phenol contamination from the Uniroyal east side pits (north & south) had crossed over onto the Stroh farm property. The two Figures are 7.7 and 7.8 and they show significant contamination in the Municipal Aquifer (100 parts per billion) and incredibly high concentraions in the shallow aquifer right on the property line between 25,000 and 119,000 parts per billion (ppb). ........................................................................................................ Have no fear, Uniroyal/Lanxess apologists, fellow travellors, politicians and assorted others with axes to grind will continue to deny, deny, deny, and deny.

MORE INFO FROM THE "ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT * PHASE I " (Aug. 91) RE: STROH DRAIN, DITCH & BERM (SDDB) AREA EAST OF IT

First off on a barely semi-related note: This report above has a number of references to local landfills and Uniroyal Chemical and other industries contributing to them. This includes (pg. 33) part of the M2 landfill now on the Lanxess property being reburied in the First St. Landfill immediately downstream of Lanxess and right on the Canagagigue Creek. Pg. 26 & 33 also reference DPA (diphenylamine) tars being buried in M2. Plus more. .................................................................................................................. Page 37 references "vegetative stress" both along the Canagagigue Creek as well as to the east of RPE-1. Well to the east means the Stroh farm and this "vegetative stress" was visible for decades in planted crops next door as well as being proven a few short years back when the soil was (barely) tested i.e. 15 cm or 5.9 inches deep. .............................................................................................. Page 16 has a reference to "...recontouring the area in 1989." This area referenced was the extreme eastern side of the Uniroyal/Lanxess site right beside the Stroh farm. Despite this "recontouring" there were lots of high detections of DDT, dioxins/furans there and even some PCBs in a test pit. ............................................................................................................... There are further references to overflow from the east side pits being collected in open ditches and drained towards the gravel pit on page 39. The next page (40) suggests that many of the used drums deposited in RPE-4 & 5 ruptured at the time of disposal. An estimate of 3,400 drums were in these two pits with the majority in the southern pit RPE-5 which of course is closest to the SDDB (Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm). These two pits (RPE-4 & 5) were not excavated until the fall of 1993. .............................................................................................. There is no honest way around the huge probability of a sink of DDT, dioxins/furans and possibly PCBs and more in the lower lying area to the immediate east of the SDDB. Dishonest people with a financial conflict of interest will however maintain otherwise and their fellow travellors (politicians etc.) will support them.

VOLUMES OF OVERFLOWING WASTEWATERS FROM EAST SIDE PITS CONFIRMED BY MOE, CRA, GRCA

My review of the overland flow of wastewaters from the east side pits (RPE 1-5) continues. Two reports I am examing are "A History of Uniroyal Waste Management At Elmira" and the Environmental Audit. Phase I Report, August 1991. The first report was authored in 1985 by Wayne Jackman and Al Ralston of the Ministry of Environment (MOE) along with Tony Smith of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). The second (Environmental Audit) was produced by Conestoga Rovers & Associates on behalf of Uniroyal Chemical and as mandated by the Ontario MOE. .......................................................................................... Quoting from page 11 of the first report "There was in all likelehood surface drainage to the stream from the east side waste ponds as well as groundwater seepage to the stream from both east and west ponds." This quote is very important as it indicates the volumes of overflowing wastewaters leaving the east side ponds several hundred metres away from the Canagagigue Creek. Lesser volumes would have totally soaked into the ground over that significant distance and not gravity flowed both onto the Stroh and Martin farms as well as into the creek. .................................................................................................. The Environmental Audit delivers some fascinating information on pages 43 to 44 namely: "Seepage and overflow from the pits RPE1 to RPE5 was directed by drainage ditches into gravel pits located in the southeast portion of the Site. This practice began in the early 1940s until approximately 1970, when the east side ponds were closed and/or lined. Liquids would pond in the gravel pits and eventually seep down into the subsurface soils. Liquid waste water was continually standing in the gravel pits until the east side pits were closed. When seepage from these pits subsided in the early 1970s, the gravel pits dried up. The area of the standing water in GP-1 and GP-2 was approximately .23 and .36 hectares, respectively." Wow! Conestoga Rovers (CRA) are claiming that the volumes of wastewaters overflowing from the east side pits were so significant that wastewater "...was continually standing in the gravel pits...". That is an astounding statement in that it applies to any lower ground surface elevation areas along the paths of these overflowing wastewaters such as the area to the immediate east of the Stroh Drain, Ditch & Berm (SDDB). Also of great interest is the part of the quote which stated "Liquids would pond in the gravel pits and eventually seep down into the subsurface soils." Of course they would whether in GP-1 and GP-2 or wherever else they had ponded such as the low elevation area, basically a very large bowl, (345 -345.5 metres above sea level) to the immediate east of the SDDB. ..................................................................................................................... Stories have changed somewhat over the decades not based upon better evidence or scientific understanding but based upon the self-serving wishes of the polluter and the MOE not to have to spend more money on much needed cleanup.

LUISA D'AMATO TAKES QUITE A ROUND OUT OF OUR POLICE BOARD

First off kudos to Ms. D'Amato. The "civilian" police board has been fundamentally a sacred cow forever and it never should have been. Instead of three regional councillors, as well as regional council appointed citizen members and a provincially appointed citizen member all sitting on their duffs collecting their per diem and socializing, this Board has been needed to improve our local police force. It has failed miserably. ............................................................................................................. The title of Luisa D'Amato's Opinion piece is "Police Board members can't be silent about racism" and was published on September 11, 2020. I know what Ms. D'Amato means however literally she is incorrect. The police board can and is silent about racism. They have been silent about "carding". They have been silent about misconduct and harassment of female members of the force. They have been silent about police shootings and killings in Waterloo Region. Being silent, keeping their heads down and not rocking the police boat is what they do best. .................................................................................................... Ms. D'Amato singles out the following Board members namely Woolwich Mayor Sandy Shantz, Ian McLean, Karin Schnarr and Tony Giovinazzo for asking questions regarding spending by the police but nothing about racism, racist behaviour and or any difficult or awkward questions that oops might be construed as being provocative, embarassing or critical of the police. As Ms. D'Amato states "The silence is deafening. And heartbreaking." She later adds "Systemic racism in police services is inextricably woven into systemic racism in society." "In this task, polite silence is not our friend." .................................................................................................................. Full disclosure: I have in the past applied to be a civilian appointee to this Board. Apparently outspoken, hard working and opinionated people need not apply. No surprise at all.