STAFF REPORT TO COUNCIL RE: "MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS MODERNIZATION ACT"

I have reviewed both the Woolwich Staff report to Council describing the proposed changes to the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) as well as the ten Recommendations sent in to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs by local citizen Richard Clausi. They are as different as night and day. Richard's Recommendations focus on the enforcement of the MEA as currently written with specific references to failures by Clerks, candidates and MECAC and hence improvements in those areas. The Staff Report covers a wider area with some emphasis upon changes to the MEA which they view as a positive step forward for election administrators.

This is typical provincial legislation in that the public were sold a bill of goods in that these proposed changes would make elections more honest and transparent. They were supposed to reduce opportunities for either outright cheating regarding election financing or at least to close loopholes through which unscrupulous candidates could drive trucks through. That has not happened. Instead there have been some superficial "fixing" of some areas while actually allowing more wiggle room and stickhandlng by candidates so inclined to do so.

Regarding brazen and outrageous behaviour/negligence by half our local Council there appears to be no tightening of enforcement whatsoever. In fact there has been a loosening according to the descriptions by Staff in their Report. No longer is a reasonable filing deadline months after the election mandatory. For a $500 fee candidates can get a 30 day extension beyond the deadline. Also candidates who file prior to the deadline are then allowed to make changes to their Financial Statements as they see fit.

The good old boy partisan appointments to MECAC by local municipal Clerks seem not to have changed. MECAC decisions, no matter how contrary to the MEA will remain effectively unchallenged except by those with more money than ethics. Prosecutions for contraventions will effectively be monopolized by Council complaints to the judicial authorities versus citizen complaints. Councils will take runs at the likes of Todd Cowan for example while ignoring lawbreaking by do not rock the boat, deeply embedded local luminaries.

Staff are in full support of this Bill 181. It puts no further onus on candidates to fully and voluntarily or otherwise follow the MEA regarding election financing and reporting. It does make a number of administrative changes that Staff feel will make their lives easier, hence they support it. These are not adequate grounds for Council to accept or endorse this Staff Report. Perhaps one of the most outrageous "reforms" is giving municipalities the option to ban corporate and union donations to candidates. This will ensure that half the province do not allow corporate and union donations while the other half do. What the hell kind of legislation is that? If there is a problem with corporate and union donations to municipal candidates than the province should outright ban them. Leaving it up to local Councils to do so or not simply guarantees inconsistency throughout Onatrio and these potential donors will be prosecuted in one jurisdiction for identical acts that are legal literally next door. Ridiculous!

PULLING THE WOOL OVER THE PUBLICS' EYES: POLITICIANS' RAISON D'ETRE

I got into some light reading on the weekend. It was a 1966 Report by the Ontario Water Resources Commission. They were the predecessor to our current disasterous Ontario Ministry of the Environment. The title of the Report is "A Water Resources Survey of the County of Waterloo".

A couple of commonalities throughout Waterloo County including both the rural and urban water supplies are that no tretment of the water was needed. Whether bacterial issues or industrial ones our underground aquifers had as yet not been comprimised either by animal or human sewage (coliform & E.Coli) nor by industrial discharges including solvents into the ground. The other commonality was that all the separate towns and cities were already looking towards either one of the Great Lakes or the Grand River for future water use. They also acknowledged that there would be greatly enhanced water treatment required for either of these surface waters.

Regarding the Elmira area, the OWRC knew exactly what industries were in town including textiles, furniture, farm machinery and chemicals. Early on there were complaints of odour and taste problems due to iron bacteria in a couple of the wells. In hindsight whatever the extent of the tastes and odours from iron bacteria perhaps they served to mask real health issues in the water from local industries.

The bacteriological quality of the water courtesy of both human and livestock had always been "satisfactory" nevertheless there was talk of both iron removal and the use of chlorine to eliminate the odour and taste problems. This is not the first time that I have heard of chlorination essentially to mask other taste problems.

The Elmira Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) came on line in 1965. Immediate problems arose from both Borg Textiles and Robin Textiles. Their liquid wastes were filled with fibres from their textile operations and were clogging various portions of the equipment at the STP. Naugatuck Chemicals (Uniroyal) had large volumes of high strength chemical wastes which required pretreatment in order to balance their PH as well as not overwhelm the bacteria used in the STP.

Both the predecessors to Nutrite (Yara) and Sulco (CCC) were also mentioned in this report. They were called Elmira Fertilzers Ltd. and Elmira Acid and Chemical Ltd. at that time. Creek water samples were taken at the Arthur St. bridge upstream of the STP and were affected by the Gordon Yonge outfall. Could Gordon Yonge have been the predecessor of the Great West Felt Co. now known as Walco?

There were further problems with two local industries upsetting the processes within the STP. It was hoped/expected that these could be overcome internally by these two companies. While Borg is not mentioned here as one of those companies they were named later on in a GRCA document as having damaged the bacteria used within the STP processes.

Dairy wastes as well as meat packing wastes were a problem in Kitchener and apparently Silverwood Dairies was also a problem in Elmira with their direct discharges to Canagagigue Creek. It is quite amazing to me how much was known by our local authorities in regards to which companies discharged which wastes either directly into the "Gig" or indirectly through the STP first. Odd isn't it that they allegedly couldn't figure out the bad industrial apples here in Elmira who eventually destroyed our drinking water aquifers?

CHEMTURA CANADA APRIL 2016 PROGRESS REPORT

The good news is that all the pumping wells achieved their targeted pumping rates in April, both on and off-site wells. The bad news is that four years after CPAC in conjunction with a consultant (Dr. Gail Krantzberg) publicly advised that Chemtura and the M.O.E. would not achieve their 2028 cleanup deadline with their current plans and three and a half years after which they agreed with that; they still are "in process" with higher pumping rates and In Situ Chemical Oxidation. In other words their target pumping rates are essentially unchanged. Yes they have raised pumping rates in some wells but also lowered others. We are still awaiting the so called doubling of the pumping volumes. In November 2012 we were promised a tripling of the rates. We also haven't seen to date any biological modeling to indicate if there will be effects on life within the creek after a doubling or more of the treated discharge to the creek.

The influent concentrations of organic chemicals to the treatment systems both on and off the Chemtura site remain at very high levels. Toluene on site is repeatedly in the thousands of parts per billion primarily due to unremoved free phase Toluene (LNAPL). NDMA concentrations remain thousands of times higher than drinking water standards in places both on and off site. There is a very, very long ways to go with only twelve years remaining in the deadline.

MISA (Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement) indicate very low levels of Lindane and Toluene are still being discharged to the Canagagigue Creek from Chemtura.

The surface water sampling of the creek indicate exceedances with Formaldehyde and Iron. Allegedly even the Formaldehyde is not a result of chemical contamination by Chemtura although I am skeptical. Furthermore ethylhexylphthalate and Toluene still show up in the long term averages slightly different upstrem than downstream. As expected Toluene is higher downstream courtesy of Chemtura whereas the phthalate is higher upstream indicating another source above Chemtura on the creek.

While these monthly Progress Reports are not a total waste of time nevertheless they continue to be primarily propaganda pieces for Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (M.O.E.).

ANOTHER MEDIA STORY ON THE FORMER VARNICOLOR CHEMICAL

This week's Woolwich Observer dated May 26 carried the following story on page 4 titled "Environmental assessment the first step in development plan for former Varnicolor site". This link only takes you to the Observer. At that point on the right side of their page you can download their newspaper and find this story on page four. Keith Metzger of Peritus Environmental was interviewed for the story as was David Brenneman, CAO of Woolwich Township. Both felt that the meeting was a good two way flow of information and questions. To date I still have no confirmation or clarification in regards to an alleged interview/meeting that I had with XCG consultants back in 2001 as part of the Environmental Site Assessment Phase 1 when the site was purchased by Elmira Pump from Phillip Environmental. This is both bizarre and disconcerting. Whether the three significant and informative meetings I had with Mr. Metzger of Peritus over the previous two weeks regarding the former Varnicolor site somehow atone for that bizarre issue, I do not know.

I was very pleased with the media interest in the former Varnicolor's Risk Assessment with CKCO-TV attending the meeting and our two local newspapers (Record & Observer) filing stories afterwards. All three appear to have understood the situation in that only the top ten to fifteen feet of the site has been well remediated. This is through no fault of either Elmira Pump nor Peritus Environmental. The Ontario Ministry of the Environment (M.O.E.) are in complete control of the process and if a new owner ever wants to receive a Record of Site Condition from the M.O.E. then they have to play ball. Thus wwhen the Ministry says put in fifteen to twenty shallow boreholes and monitoring wells and only one intermediate and one deep borehole and well; then that is exactly what you do.

The issue of still remaining deeper contamination while at low concentrations albeit above drinking water standards was raised at the public Risk Assessment meeting by both Mayor Shantz and myself. She expressed concern with leaving these contaminants including Trichloroethylene, Vinyl Chloride, Dichloroethylene and more in place. I believe that if NDMA had been tested for even half as much as the other contaminants that it too would have been detected at depth as well as previously in the surficial aquifer. The fact that the next step as indicated by Keith Metzger is to discuss the findings of the Risk Assessment with Chemtura and their consultants speaks volumes. Chemtura are tasked with remediating the entire Elmira Aquifers and perhaps it would be in their interests to do some deeper work at the former Varnicolor site (now Elmira Pump). I would suggest that if that occurs there is perhaps a fifty-fifty chance of it becoming public knowledge. Afterall nobody likes being told "I told you so".

MORE WORK ON THE FORMER VARNICOLOR SITE A GOOD IDEA

No I do not believe that more work is necessarily required to prove that the environmental risks involved to walk and work on the surface are any more than negligible. I have confidence that both Peritus Environmental and Elmira Pump have conscientiously and professionally done their due diligence plus. That said there is still good reason for more boreholes and monitoring wells being installed. Deeper boreholes and monitoring wells that is. Also the location needs to be changed. From my limited access to the Environmental Site Assessments (1 & 2) and the still in process Risk Assessment I believe that a major area of contamination has been missed. In the professional terminology that would be a PCA or Potentially Contaminated Area.

This missed area in my opinion does not alter the surface health and safety which is the focus of the Risk Assessment. That is because of two reasons. Firstly the Interceptor/Collector trenches near this area presumably have done their job and collected the contaminated Surficial Aquifer groundwater. Secondly the area I am referring to had its' contamination delivered at depth rather than at the surface as the rest of the site did. This area was behind the former orange Varnicolor building that used to face Union St. It consisted of a buried road tanker and a buried septic tank, both with pipe connections to a floor drain inside the orange building.

As indicated by testing of the contents back in 1991 as well as nearby soil, clearly these had been used to dump hazardous liquid wastes into the ground at depth. These toxic contaminants over time have migrated further downwards into the Upper Aquifer and Municipal Upper Aquifer both of which underlie the site. The purpose of deeper soil and groundwater testing in these areas now is to determine the extent of contamination still discharging into the Municipal Upper Aquifer which is under remediation throughout Elmira. If the former Varnicolor site is still a significant source of any contaminants, not just Chemtura's three favourites namely NDMA, Chlorobenzene and Ammonia, then on-site remediation needs to be considered. This could be unobtrusive in-situ chemical oxidation or even pumping and treating of the deeper groundwater.

Hence I believe that redevelopment is still immediately possible even with deeper testing and possible further remediation in order to assist cleaning up the Elmira Aquifers by 2028 as ordered. These additional costs however should not be borne by Elmira Pump who have done their due diligence plus much more. Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of Environment need to step up. Afterall they are the architects of the sweetheart deal between themselves which assigned all blame and responsibility to Uniroyal Chemical for the destruction of the Elmira Aquifers.

STILL OTHER SOURCE AREAS IN ELMIRA COMING TO LIGHT

As contaminant plumes shrink over time it can become possible to see more clearly where they originated from. For example the south-west corner of Uniroyal has long been obvious as the ongoing source of contaminants migrating into the municipal aquifer on site and then flowing in a south-west direction off-site. The contaminants originate in the former south-west ponds RPW5-8. Similarily it has long appeared both in the municipal upper and municipal lower aquifer plumes that there is a source of both NDMA and Chlorobenzene either at Varnicolor Chemical or at Borg or both. These two companies were just across Howard Ave. from each other. Other source areas are even more obvious by their plumes such as the longterm one at well OW60 situated beside Park and Queen St. in Elmira. What is less obvious is what is the source in this area? To date it is a mystery although I have two possible culprits in mind.

Pumping well W5A/B most likely is drawing contaminants from the First St. Landfill as well as from the southern end of Chemtura. The historically high concentrations of chlorobenzene just west of Varnicolor (OW57-32 etc.) most likely are originally from free phase chlorobenzene. If not Varnicolor and it would require outright fraud by the M.O.E. for it to be from them; then it would have flowed either from Uniroyal/Chemtura's south-west corner across Union St. and past Varnicolor or it came across Howard Ave. from the former Borg Textiles. The Borg source could have been (and probably still could be) determined by shallow and intermediate soil and groundwater sampling.

Well CH38 located beside Sanyo Canada on Industrial Dr. has held much too high NDMA and chlorobenzene concentrations for two decades plus. Again shallow and intermediate soil and groundwater sampling could have (and still could) exonerate or implicate Sanyo as a source area. My expectation is that based upon the use of cutting oils etc. that NDMA is more likely to originate from them than chlorobenzene. In the alternative NDMA could have come from Varnicolor or Borg with chlorobenzene more likely from Borg. There is yet another possibility and that is due east down Oriole Parkway. The proven source area of Lot 91 was never remotely adequately remediated. Again based upon subsurface stratigraphy Napls (Non Aqueous Phase Liquids) could have gravity flowed westwards from Lot 91 towards the corner of Oriole Parkway and Industrial Dr. where they settled and have been slowly dissolving into the groundwater for decades. All these possibilities could easily have been tested for and still could be if the Ontario M.O.E. were honest and transparent. Apparently that isn't so.

Further possibilities indicating other sources in southern Elmira would have to include the former McKee Harvestor location. Simply based upon manufacturing, painting, metal working and the use of solvents make this former business along Southwood Dr. a candidate for investigation. Investigation I might add that was either never done or never reported to the public or both.

Switching northwards we have long been advised that the north wellfield near the Trans Canada Trail and at the extreme northern end of Snyder Avenue was contaminated by it's pumping of Uniroyal's NDMA upgradient into the wellfield. While theoretically possible I wonder if there were other closer sources. For example the former Strauss Fuels on Arthur St. north which I helped remediate while working for Quantum Environmental years ago is very close. This and others may not have contributed NDMA but what if they contributed petroleum hydrocarbons as normally found in gasoline and diesel fuels? Was the bad taste of Elmira water in the 1980s solely due to NDMA? Hardly.

Here is the big picture. Elmira's groundwater was a mess in the 1980s due to both large scale and small scale dumping, spillage, leaks and Uniroyal's in ground pits and ponds. The water stunk. Along comes NDMA or at least it was allegedly "discovered" in late 1989. I suggest to you that Elmira's two wellfields should have been shut down years earlier with or without NDMA. NDMA was a very convenient scapegoat for the Ontario M.O.E.'s negligence. Uniroyal was as well, however they had a price to extract before they would put on the scapegoat's horns being fitted by the M.O.E..

WINDOWS THROUGH THE AQUITARDS IN AND AROUND VARNICOLOR CHEMICAL

While the Elmira Aquifers are a geological and hydrogeological wonder, they are extremely vulnerable to manmade contamination. The volume of sands and gravel beneath the surface of Elmira capable of both holding and transmitting water were a gift to this community. This gift was not fully appreciated until after it was lost due to complacency, cowardice, greed and stupidity. These character flaws have been the hallmark of far too many of our Woolwich councillors over the last sixty years. Alas our citizens as well have not shown in sufficient numbers their appreciation for and willingness to stand up for our local water supply.

Uniroyal Chemical were still peddling the fallacy of impenetrable, impervious clay aquitards between the aquifers or water bearing zones beneath their site in the early 90s. First off they simply don't exist here in Elmira and probably not in Waterloo Region. Aquitards are a manmade term to describe subsurface zones of lower water transmissivity. Yes aquitards with substantial clay in them do indeed seriously inhibit water flow. They don't stop it, merely slow it down. Think about it for a second. If the UAT or Upper Aquitard stopped vertically downwards water flow from the Upper Aquifer then there wouldn't be a water bearing zone beneath it called the Municipal Upper Aquifer. Simialrily if the MAT or Municipal Aquitard totally stopped flow downwards from the Municipal Upper Aquifer then there wouldn't be another aquifer below it called the Municipal Lower Aquifer and so on.

There are two issues with our aquitards here in Elmira. Firstly they aren't made out of impenetrable, impervious clay. Mostly they are mixtures of silt, clay, sandy silt and silty sand. Honestly those last two terms are used throughout Elmira to describe Till units also known as Aquitards. The second issue are "windows" through the aquitards. In areas there are significant, horizantal low permeability zones which significantly protect the aquifers immediately beneath them. The problem is that groundwater flows both horizontally as well as vertically. Hence while the bulk of it (85-95%) may be flowing horizontally due to an aquitard beneath it eventually it comes to areas where either the aquitard thins out dramatically, or the composition of it becomes much more permeable or worse yet the aquitard totally thins out to zero. While windows have been discovered directly under the Uniroyal site, many others have been discovered throughout Elmira including near the Varnicolor Chemical site.

Thus even if the much smaller Varnicolor site were spared windows in their subsurface aquitards their contamination would still go both vertically downwards as we now know conclusively it has, plus it flows off site to the east in their surficial aquifer (SA) where it immediately hits a window as the SAT or Surficial Aquitard disappears. Varnicolor's Upper Aquifer flows westwards where it too soon hits windows through the UAT or Upper Aquitard. These windows give direct access to the Municipal Upper Aquifer, one of Elmira's drinking water aquifers. I am constantly reminded of the words of Dr. Gail Krantzberg (McMaster) who did consulting work for CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Committee) in 2012. She advised that every drop of Uniroyal's liquid wastes that hit the ground or natural environment on their site, end up eventually being shared off-site.

Thus to those apologists, fellow travellors and co-opted citizens in Elmira as well as the Ontario Ministry of the Environment who have long wished to give Uniroyal/Chemtura 100% of the "credit" for destroying our drinking water aquifers; let me simply say "horse manure".