Unanswered questions
By now, many of you have read the report released by the DEP on Clyde Mine and Ten Mile Creek. From the report, one would get the impression that all is well with the discharge. I think you should take time to analyze the report carefully. There are some problems with this report and a lot of unanswered questions. I would like to discuss certain points that raise a red flag to me. I will let you decide for yourself.
Let us begin with radium (Ra) 226. The test used to determine the concentration of Ra 226 is the 903.1 test. This test is suspect since the results of the test can be influenced by high total dissolved solids (TDS). The alternate test is the Gamma Spec Test. The Izaak Walton League of America (IWLA) of Greene County has repeatedly asked the DEP to also do this test for Ra 226. The DEP has refused to do the Gamma Spec Test.
Why? Why not do both tests for the safety of the residents? If you have been following my articles, you know the safe drinking water levels for both Ra 226 and Ra 228 combined is 5 pCi/l. If you look at the data presented by the DEP and look at Ra 228 in June 2015, you will see the reading for Ra 228 was 19.5 pCi/l. Looking at Ra 228 in January 2016, the reading was 15.8 pCi/l. In April 2016, the reading for Ra 228 was 7.62 pCi/l. The final reading for Ra 228 was taken in June 2016 and was 9.29 pCi/l. These readings were taken from the sludge pit at the Clyde Mine. The DEP also stated in the report that no reading was over 5 pCi/l. This needs to be further explained. I don’t see any reading under 5 for Ra 228.
OK, let’s put that on the back burner. Let’s look at what is not being said about the discharge. The standard recommended discharge limit for electronic conductance (EC), or specific conductance, is 1000 µs. The EC limit is 500 mg/l. Let us look at these. The EC discharge in June 2015 was 8420 µs; in January 2016 EC was 8400 µs; in April 2016, it was 8660 µs, and in June of 2916 the reading was 8370 µs. All samples were taken after the water was treated.
OK, let’s look at TDS. The recommended standard for TDS is 500 mg/l. In June 2015, the TDS was 6850 mg/l; in January 2018 the TDS reading was 7034 mg/l; in April, the reading was 7012 mg/l, and in June 2016, the TDS reading was 7266 mg/l. I believe all of these were over 500 mg/l.
OK, let’s look at chlorides. The recommended standard for chloride discharge is 250 mg/l. In January 2015, it was 698 mg/l; in January 2016, it was 742 mg/l; in April 2016, the reading was 812 mg/l, and in June 2016 it was 812 mg/l. A little above 250 mg/l?
Just one final point — let’s look at bromide. There is no standard for bromide, but the highest readings for bromides from coal discharges in Pennsylvania was around 600 ppb. In June 2015, the bromide reading was 4482 ppb; in January 2016, it was 5298 ppb;, in April 2016, it was 5086 ppb and in June of 2016, it was 36 ppb. Wow! What happened? These test results were validated from other sources. I leave it up to you. Do you think all is well with the Clyde Mine discharge?
One last comment, a few months back, I stated that there was trihalomethene (TTHM) in Southwestern Water supply. At that time, I was ridiculed as if I didn’t know what I was talking about. No one came to me and asked me about my comment; instead, I was attacked. Well, I just received a letter from Southwestern Water that my water indeed was over the 80 ppb of TTHM. For those who attacked me, how do you like your crow? Baked or fried? I have data to back up my statements. If you have any questions about my reporting of the facts, call me before you attack me. The public needs to know the whole truth and not just convenient parts.