ONLY PART OF THE DECADES LONG CONSPIRACY IN ELMIRA, ONTARIO

Yesterday I listed massive soil concentrations of solvents analysed by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment at a site here in Elmira. That site is at the extreme eastern end of Oriole Parkway, just across Landfill Creek and then across the railroad tracks. Locally and infamously it is known as Lot 91. In my opinion the site had both free phase LNAPLS and DNAPLS; neither of which were remediated. It is also likely that that site has contributed greatly to the contamination of the municipal aquifers in Elmira. It and its' sister site up on Union St. (formerly 62 Union) were part of Varnicolor Chemical. That site also had unremediated free phase LNAPLS and DNAPLS. Conspiracy One involving the M.O.E., municipal, regional and provincial politicians.

April/May 2012 CPAC passed and Woolwich Council endorsed a Resolution declaring that the 2028 cleanup deadline of the Elmira aquifers was years behind schedule and would not happen without significant source removal of subsurface toxic wastes. On May 18, 2012 Chemtura made a presentation to Michael Harris, MPP on the matter.The last page of their written handout was their "Concluding remarks". They state: "Chemtura is on target to remediate the Elmira Municipal aquifer to meet Ontario's Drinking Water Standard by 2028. The 2028 deadline is attainable using the current pump and treat strategy."

Then in November 2012, six months later, after publicly and privately denigrating CPAC and essentially stating that CPAC didn't know what they were talking about; Chemtura and Conestoga Rovers did an about face. They bragged about unilaterally remodelling their cleanup and independently determining that lo and behold that in order to meet their 2028 deadline they would have to triple the volume of off-site pumping and treating. Furthermore they would ALSO require some source removal in off-site "hot spots" and were going to test IN Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO).

Of course our splendid, long co-opted M.O.E. got in on the action as well by doing a public, written "Review of Groundwater Flow and Transport Model Update" on June 27, 2013. This was a review of what Chemtura publicly presented to CPAC the previous November. While they were firmly in Chemtura's and CRA's camp a year earlier, after CPAC and the only honest (mostly) Township Council in a very long time had passed the very damning Resolution; lo and behold they were now also believers.

The last page of their handout was titled "Will 2028 Clean-up Deadline be met?". Their own followup answer immediately next was "Without the proposed changes: no" "With the proposed changes: still uncertain".

The partners in pollution (Chemtura/M.O.E.) had been rolling along, going through the motions of remediating the Elmira Aquifers, at minimal cost to Chemtura, knowing full well that 2028 was a pipedream. When confronted with facts and evidence by a citizens group (CPAC), appointed by the past Woolwich Council, they denied and lied. This has been the history of the Elmira cleanup since 1989. It continues today with the current Woolwich Council, spearheaded by Councillor Bauman and mayor Shantz. Stay tuned, there's lots more to come.

AN ODE TO ANTI - CONSPIRACY NUTS (You Know Who You Are)

Recently a certain anonymous, female, pro "respectful" yet highly hypocritical Mayor publicly suggested that I was some sort of "conspiracy theorist". She compared me to author Dan Brown, whom I had to have my memory jogged to recall who he was. Apparently he writes fictional? literature dealing with the Catholic Church and various historical issues/scandals? over the centuries. Tom Hanks has starred in at least one of his movies.

While the allegation most recently was in regards to proven errors and contraventions of the Municipal Elections Act, it still remains for some body in authority (courts?) to "prove" either intent, bad faith or knowingly submitting inaccurate, sworn Statements to the Municipal Clerk, MECAC, myself and or Superior Court. News flash mayor: Just because the Clerk as an employee of Woolwich Township is willing to give you a pass doesn't make it right. Nor is your manipulation of the system in place to allow citizens to hold politicians accountable.

The inference was made clear that this "conspiracy theorist" charge includes decades of work with UPAC and CPAC trying to bring a well heeled, dishonest polluter, protected by both the province (M.O.E.) and the Township into compliance with both the law and with social norms such as clean up your own mess.

For those with even a slight knowledge of soil or groundwater contamination I wish to remind you of some soil samples taken twenty years ago here in Elmira. These following soil concentrations of solvents were not found on the Uniroyal/Chemtura site. These are M.O.E. data yet they refused to excavate the contaminated soil or do in situ cleanup of the site. Yes some shallow barrels were removed including at least one with P.C.B.s in it.

Benzene 7,220 parts per billion (ppb)

Toluene 39,560....335,000....460,000 ppb

Ethyl-benzene 98,000....131,000....176,000....280,100.....489,000 ppb

p,m xylene 104,000....178,000....537,000....697,000....1,119,000 ppb

0 xylene 137,000....258,000....380,900....522,500 ppb

These sample results are but a few of the higher ones found. There are many more disgustingly in excess of all health and safety standards. This site had a designation put on it by Woolwich Township prohibiting any kind of construction of buildings on it due to dangerous levels of methane gas. Methane (CH3) is commonly found as a breakdown product allegedly of municipal refuse but more directly from the breakdown of hydrocarbon solvents such as those listed above.

I will advise the location of this site in Elmira tomorrow as well as pointing out another example of the need for a conspiracy amongst our local and regional and provincial politicians to cover their tracks here in Elmira. Yes this one will deal with Chemtura Canada. Ask yourself how it is possible with informed citizens demanding answers and cleanup how our authorities have managed so well to avoid doing so much remediation.

A CHRISTMAS BONUS FOR MARK THIS YEAR

Thirteen months ago CPAC (now known as the Citizens Public Advisory Committee) received a report from MTE Consultants Inc. which cast major doubt upon the decades long claims of Uniroyal/Chemtura, their consultants Conestoga Rovers and their partners in pollution, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (more affectionately known as the Ministry of Excuses and Corporate Collusion or MOECC).

The MTE Report examined everything from soil conditions, ground and surface water flow, surface topography, monitoring well results and finally historic records describing activities and conditions on the east side. The conclusions of the Report were that both ground and surface water have exited from the Chemtura property onto the neighbour's property (Stroh) to the east as well as to the south (Martin). We are of course referring to highly contaminated water that has flowed both naturally off-site and based upon the timing and location of the Stroh Drain, possibly intentionally. Then of course we still have the unresolved issue of a potential groundwater trench which shows up on both Google Earth and GIS Waterloo. It appears to run from Chemtura's North-East area (just downslope from IR-2 & RPE-1) southwards and eastwards crossing the east side property line between the former RPE-5 and TPE-2.

Add to these revelations my two foot by four foot map of the east side and we have the makings of a public inquiry here folks. My map is based upon a topographical map produced by Conestoga Rovers which shows the south-east corner of the site and the alleged exact locations of GP-1 & 2. It was produced like so much of their work in order to back up unlikely and illogical claims that the many thousands of gallons per day of liquid wastes overflowing and infiltrating into RPE-1 - RPE-5 were magically trapped within the confines of these two former gravel pits. Yes gravel pits I said. As if there could possibly be a worse geologic situation to trap liquids whatsoever.

A careful look at the topographical contour lines makes it clear that the majority of surface water and contaminated liquid wastes absolutely did not flow into either GP-1 or GP-2. They gravity flowed eastwards off Chemtura's property and into the Stroh Drain. From there they discharged past the Martin Pond and into the Canagagigue Creek further downstream. The Stroh Drain also would have altered the local shallow groundwater regieme and helped drain the swamps both on Chemtura's and the Stroh property.

The final touch of course throwing cold water on Chemtura's claim that everything flowed into GP-1 & 2 is that old maps from the 1980's indicate that GP-1 is no longer located where it initially was claimed to be. Then it was indeed located on the east side of the still existing ridge of high land in the south-east corner. In that location it would have intercepted much more liquids versus where Chemtura/CRA now have it located which is on the west side of the ridge.

It is a scandal which thirteen months ago was unfolding due to the persistence, knowledge and honesty of CPAC. The old Woolwich Council were supportive. The new are not. Councillor Mark Bauman, ably abetted by our new Mayor, and with the gratitude of Chemtura and the M.O.E.; attacked, disparaged and lied about CPAC. They did Chemtura's dirty work for them. Hence they have been very bad children and are unlikely to receive much more than coal from Santa this year again.

Therefore I believe that it is only fitting for Mark especially to receive a very big Christmas Bonus this year from Chemtura for services rendered. Really it's the only fair thing to do. Jeff and Dwight can you get right on that please?

THREE AND A HALF MORE YEARS OF CHEMTURA/M.O.E. STALLING & DELAY

I get a chuckle out of the occasional commenter on my Blog who suggests more patience regarding my approach to the remediation here in Elmira. We are six weeks away from 2016. We are already in the eighteenth year of off-site pumping that started in 1998. We have but twelve and a half years until we reach the 2028 deadline. Keep clearly in mind this is not the thirtieth year since the wells were shut down. Oh no the powers that be didn't start the clock ticking until after nine years had pased from the shutdown of the Elmira south wellfield in 1989.

This past weekend I reviewed a June 27, 2013 report by the Ministry of the Environment. It is titled "Review of Groundwater Flow and Transport Model Update". This is a review of Chemtura/CRA's response to the Resolution passed by CPAC in the spring of 2012, when CPAC with both expert internal and external advice, publicly stated and distributed their conclusion that the 2028 off-site cleanup of the Elmira Aquifers was not achievable by the current remediation plans. Chemtura and CRA produced their alleged, already in the works, similar determination six months later (November 2012). Strange but their howls of protest and denial back in April/May were suddenly forgotten.

Chemtura publicly and repeatedly stated that they would need to both TRIPLE the volume of off-site groundwater pumping and treating AS WELL AS use some form of off-site source removal such as ISCO (In Situ Chemical Oxidation) in order to meet their 2028 deadline. What a turnaround! I was the first in Elmira/Woolwich Township to publicly state "The cleanup is a sham!" a few years earlier. CPAC professionally determined the same and then and only then after much denial, Chemtura/CRA/Ontario M.O.E. followed suit. Do we see a pattern here? Citizens lead and our government follows.

It has taken three years to date to install a few wells and study and reject ISCO as being unacceptable. No alternative technology has been proposed to date. The new TAG Chairrman, Dr. Dick Jackson, has suggested in his TAG 2016 Work Plan that Chemtura/CRA did not properly study or evaluate ISCO. The new off-site pumping, now promised to only DOUBLE off-site pumping is scheduled to begin sometime in 2016. The other kicker is whether this so called DOUBLING will be of either the 2012 pumping rate or even the 2015 off-site pumping rate. Afterall we are now being advised that supposedly there no longer is a need for well E7 in Elmira's south end (beside Voisin Motors) to remain pumping. This well has been the backbone of the off-site pumping for more than eighteen years. It alone has pumped half or more of the water removed and treated from the off-site aquifers. Therefore will this new DOUBLING of the off-site pumping be a Doubling before or after the pumping is cut in half?

Worst case scenario is that Chemtura with M.O.E. assistance has once again totally scammed Elmira and Woolwich Township. Best case scenario is that they have sucessfully dragged out another 3 1/2 years of testing and studies to avoid source removal both on and off-site. Either way they have as usual been assisted by our local Woolwich Council to the detriment of public health and the environment.

NAMES TO REMEMBER FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

These are names to remember the next time you are facing any kind of panel, board, tribunal etc.. These are allegedly "citizens" who have a leg up in getting appointed to these quasi judicial, quasi political bodies. All of them are on the current MECAC or Municipal Election Compliance Audit Committee. I have expressed my opinion here in the Advocate that they are dishonest and corrupt and in bed with local politicians. They were actually appointed via all the Municipal Clerks in the various Townships and cities of Waterloo Region. It is my belief that they appointed exactly who they felt would protect elected (especially) politicians from the accountability demanded in the Municipal Elections Act 1996.

A number of these names you should recognize such as Carl Zehr, former Mayor of Kitchener and a former Regional Councillor. Grace Sudden was a Woolwich Township Councillor years ago and then a Regional Councillor. Robert Williams is a political science prof at one of our local universities. Murray Stoddart is simply a yes man. Larry Aberle trys not to be a jerk but still goes along with the crowd. Thomas Jutzi is a lawyer who I will give credit to in that knowing he was in a conflict of interest position with mayor Shantz, begged off of the last meeting. He was however front and centre at the first hearing into her election expenses. Kevin Bambrick is the last of this pack.

Three of these members that I know of had conflicts of interest at the very least serious enough to give the appearance that they might not be unbiased. The other two are Carl Zehr and Grace Sudden, former Regional Councillors. Zehr is also on the Board of Governers of Metrolinx, a company with a multi million dollar ongoing contract with the Region of Waterloo. Oh did I mention that mayor Shantz is currently a Regional Councillor? Shamefully there were exactly zero "conflicts of pecuniary interest" declared over a total of four meetings. Is this use of the word "pecuniary" simply an out to hide bias in favour of the elected politician under scrutiny?

This pack made three asinine and contrary to both the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) and case law, decisions. Two of them were in denying a forensic/compliance audit of Mayor Shantz's four Financial Statements, multiple contraventions of the MEA (some admitted) and her constantly evolving election expenses and contributions AFTER I publicly revealed her contraventions all AFTER the March 27/15 MEA deadline. The third asinine decision involved Woolwich Councillor Scot Hahn. His ordered forensic audit was the only appropriate and correct decision MECAC made. Then inexplicably and contrary to reason, law (MEA), commonsense and case law they refused to send his case on to the courts despite strong evidence that receipts/invoices were manufactured after the fact for signs and or brochures that were never paid for or invoiced in the first place. The best line I heard was that the one invoice produced as the real thing was later referred to as a "sample" invoice. Such utter bullshit!

MECAC were in full possession of all the facts. These included case law examples and a report by the Ontario Bar Association (July 2013) clarifying the very low threshold required to order a forensic audit. Instead they relied upon biased legal advice given to them both in camera and in public by the law firm working for Woolwich Township. This law firm took their instructions from and were paid by Woolwich Council, whose bias in favour of protecting their elected councillor and mayor was evident from the beginning. Plus of course two of these Woolwich Council members (Hahn & Shantz) were voting members of Council while allegedly being scrutinized by MECAC. What a corrupt farce.

"BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE GRAND RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES 1966"

For those of us old pharts who have been involved since 1989 with the Uniroyal Chemical destruction of the environment and associated health damages of the residents, both human and wildlife, once again Dr. Henry Regier has provided clarity and insight. Last evening (read this morning) Henry provided a copy of the above named report in the title to select local environmentalists, CPAC members, one TAG member currently out of country plus one politician and one local bureaucrat. Henry has reminded us that while the 1995-96 M.O.E. report by Jaagumagi & Bedard has been recently quoted and reviewed again; in fact the first comprehensive report on the environmental damage throughout the Grand River watershed was done in 1966, nearly one half century ago. The pace of remediation has truly been glacial.

This report was published the year after the Elmira Sewage treatment Plant came on line. It was desperately needed for both human sewage as well as treatment of Uniroyal Chemical toxic wastes. Then in 1973 the Woolwich Dam was built in order to have sufficient clean water to dilute those still noxious wastes and to assist in some restoration of the creek itself. Of course after the drinking wells were shut down in November 1989 and we all learned the obvious fact that Uniroyal had destroyed the Elmira Aquifers; we also learned that NDMA was being discharged via groundwater into the Canagagigue Creek. Of course no mention was made in 1989 of the ongoing discharge of Dioxins/Furans and DDT as well. We didn't learn about those until the 1995-96 M.O.E. report.

The 1966 report does not focus solely on Uniroyal Chemical. It mentions less well known toxic polluters such as Hart Chemical, Biltmore Hats, Standard Brands, Tend-R-Flesh. Somehow it missed Breslube in Breslau and Candian General Tower in Cambridge. Regardless it spells out numerous areas that have sufferred extreme industrial and agricultural pollution. The agricultural pollution is the result of excess fertilizers finding their way into the river; promoting weed and algal growth, hence robbing the river of oxygen. It would also include the practice of grazing cattle both on river floodplains as well as having unfetterred access to the rivers.

The battle for the Grand River, Canagagigue Creek and the health of the residents will continue. I've said it before and I will repeat it again. We have the science, we have the knowledge, we know what needs to be done. What is lacking is the political will and that only occurs after major crises. Until the citizens again rise up and say enough; our politicians will continue to do the bidding of monied interests while mollifying us with cosmetic improvements only.

COMPLETELY FENCE OFF THE "GIG" & POST WARNING SIGNS

One week go today at a public TAG (Technical Advisory Group) meeting in Woolwich Council Chambers, Dr. Dick Jackson's 2016 TAG Work Plan was accepted by the TAG membership. This Work Plan lists three specific areas that have not been handled properly or professionally by Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. They are the Off-Site Remediation of the Elmira Aquifers, the ON-Site Remediation of LNAPLS and DNAPLS and thirdly the ongoing discharge of POPs (Persistent Organic Pollutants) such as Dioxins & Furans and DDT into the Canagagigue Creek at least as far downstream as the confluence with the Grand River, over a half mile south of West Montrose. These broad problem areas are the result of inadequate, unprofessional monitoring and or flawed testing and analysis of both ground and surface water samples.

Dr. Jackson's immediate action which will be presented to RAC (Remediation Advisory Committee) on December 3/15 in Council Chambers is reflected in the title above. This is an indication of the seriousness of the data that Mr. Jackson has seen to date. I am not yet certain that he has seen all of it which is why I sent him an e-mail last week regarding the M.O.E. report (2012 data) showing 12,000 parts per billion (ppb) of DDT in one sample spot downstream in the "Gig" (ie. Canagagigue). This combined with CPAC's 20,000 ppb. sediment sample taken this past May indicates the threat to wildlife and humans.

Dr. Jackson also pointed out a somewhat peculiar comment in the M.O.E.s most recent sampling report dated September 30, 2015. They compared the sediment concentrations in the "Gig" with a couple of other highly contaminated areas. The other two areas were Whitby Harbour/Pringle Creek and Trent(?). The problem according to Dr. Jackson is the large volume of water in those two areas compared to the very small, confined space of the Canagagigue Creek. In other words there is no getting away from sediment contamination in a small creek compared to in a much larger surface area and volume of water.

A second problem would be that the M.O.E. only gave a couple of results only, for Dioxins/Furans only. No mention of whether there is also DDT present along with the Dioxins/Furans as there is in the "Gig". Besides the unknown effects of multiple toxic componds present simultaneously, to date it appears as if the M.O.E. are more concerned with DDT as it more regularily is in high exceedance of various health standards.

Are the M.O.E. as usual setting up their excuses early? Are they going to use the mathematical joys of Risk Assessment to minimize the threat? Will they give us their version of safety when it involves other human beings and wildlife without a voice in the matter?