Clarington Transformer Station Hydrogeological Review (July 31 Final)
Transcript of Clarington Transformer Station Hydrogeological Review (July 31 Final)
Aug. 8, 2013
Adam Sanzo Project Officer Environmental Approvals Branch Ministry of the Environment 2 St. Clair Avenue West Toronto, Ontario M4V 1L5 416-314-8433 [email protected] RE: Clarington Transformer Station Draft ESR Dear Adam,
Please find enclosed a report entitled, “Hydrogeological Concerns for the Clarington Transformer Station
Class Environmental Assessment Draft Environmental Study Report” prepared by Dr. John Cherry, Dr.
Beth Parker and Dr. Jana Levison. We were retained by the Enniskillen Environmental Association to
conduct this independent review of the draft ESR from a hydrogeological perspective and are submitting
this report to you on their behalf.
Kindest regards,
Jana Levison, PhD, EIT Assistant Professor Water Resources Engineering G360 Centre for Applied Groundwater Research School of Engineering University of Guelph 519-824-4120 ext. 58327 [email protected]
Independent Review
Hydrogeological Concerns for the Clarington Transformer Station Class Environmental
Assessment Draft Environmental Study Report
Prepared for:
Enniskillen Environmental Association c/o Clint Cole and Douglas Taylor
Prepared by:
John Cherry, PhD, P.Eng. Director, University Consortium for Groundwater Contamination Research
Adjunct Professor, University of Guelph Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Waterloo
Beth Parker, PhD
Director, G360 Centre for Applied Groundwater Research Professor and NSERC Industrial Research Chair, School of Engineering
University of Guelph
Jana Levison, PhD, EIT Assistant Professor, School of Engineering
University of Guelph
July 31, 2013
2
Prepared by :
______________________
John Cherry, PhD, P.Eng. Director, University Consortium for Groundwater Contamination Research Adjunct Professor, University of Guelph Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Waterloo
______________________
Beth Parker, PhD Director, G360 Centre for Applied Groundwater Research Professor and NSERC Industrial Research Chair, School of Engineering University of Guelph
______________________
Jana Levison, PhD, EIT Assistant Professor, School of Engineering University of Guelph
3
Summary
The Enniskillen Environmental Association (EEA) comprising residents who live in the vicinity of the
proposed Clarington Transformer Station site are concerned about the undertaking outlined in the Draft
Environmental Study Report (ESR) (Hydro One, 2012). The EEA is particularly concerned about impacts
of the undertaking on the quality of their drinking water supply. Following review of the Clarington
Transformer Station Class Environmental Assessment Draft Environmental Study Report (Hydro One,
2012) and related documents, it is our expert opinion that insufficient site specific hydrogeological
characterization has been conducted to ensure the safeguarding of groundwater: 1) used by residents in
the area for domestic supply from private wells; and 2) for the protection of “hydrologically sensitive
features”.
The development of a scientifically defensible site conceptual model (SCM) for the proposed site as
discussed in Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013) is inadequate. The SCM needs to be developed to a
level of detail that is commensurate to the problem being addressed. There needs to be greater
description and investigation of: the site hydrology and geology; contamination sources and properties;
release mechanisms and rates; environmental fate and transport processes; possible receptors; and any
other elements that will help to define and resolve issues related to the undertaking (USEPA, 1993).
We recommend that further hydrogeological study and SCM development is completed prior to decision
making regarding appropriate siting of the transformer station in order to ensure that “hydrologically
sensitive features” and water resources used by residents for domestic supply are not adversely
impacted by the development. From a hydrogeological and contaminant transport perspective we
support EEA’s request for a higher level of assessment (bump up to an Individual EA) to allow the
opportunity for the development of a scientifically defensible SCM.
4
Table of Contents
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
1.0 Introduction and Scope ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.0 Deficiencies Pertaining to the Investigation of Hydrogeological Impacts ........................................ 7
3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................... 16
References .................................................................................................................................................. 18
Appendix A – Expertise (Short CVs) ............................................................................................................ 20
Appendix B – Regional Stratigraphy............................................................................................................ 35
5
1.0 Introduction and Scope
Hydro One has proposed the construction of the Clarington Transformer Station on Hydro One-owned
property located northeast of Concession Road 7 and Townline Road North in the Regional Municipality
of Durham. This undertaking is subject to the “Class Environmental Assessment for Minor Transmission
Facilities” (Hydro One, 1992) under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, 1990. In November 2012
Hydro One prepared a draft Environmental Study Report (ESR) for this proposed undertaking (Hydro
One, 2012). The proposed transformer station dimensions are approximately 280 metres by 600 metres.
The Enniskillen Environmental Association (EEA) comprising residents who live in the vicinity of the
proposed transformer station site are genuinely concerned about the proposed undertaking outlined in
the draft ESR for several reasons. One of their major concerns is the potential impact of the undertaking
on the quality of their drinking water supply. They feel that insufficient investigation has been
conducted to ensure the protection of the groundwater. The residents obtain their domestic water from
private wells and thus depend on sufficient quantity and safe quality of groundwater resources. The
closest private well is within approximately 50 m of the project area (Stantec, 2013). Additionally, there
is evidence of “hydrologically sensitive features” at the proposed site (see proceeding discussion) which
warrants further investigation. The EEA is dissatisfied with the draft ESR and wrote to the Ontario
Ministry of the Environment in December 2012 expressing their concerns (EEA, 2012). At that time they
requested: 1) that a higher level of environmental assessment be conducted (Part II Order request); or
2) for the proposed undertaking to be relocated to a more suitable site.
Due to their concerns, we have been retained by EEA as subject matter experts to independently review
the draft ESR (Hydro One, 2012) for the proposed undertaking from a hydrogeological perspective.
Other related reports were provided to us by EEA which we have included in this review (i.e., Stantec,
2013; exp, 2012). The objective of the Stantec (2013) report was to: 1) characterize hydrogeologic (and
hydrologic) conditions at the site; and 2) determine if the hydrogeology (and hydrology) would be
impacted by the development. We also looked at pertinent peer-reviewed scientific literature on the
hydrogeology of the Oak Ridges Moraine referenced herein (e.g., Gerber et al., 2001; Gerber and
Howard, 2000; Gerber and Howard, 2002) and technical reports related to conservation authority
hydrogeological studies for the area.
This is strictly a limited desktop review of existing literature conducted for EEA. We focused on the
reports we were provided and reviewed others that were otherwise available publicly. We were not
present during the geotechnical drilling referenced in Stantec (2013) to observe subsurface material,
and are relying on the interpretation of borehole logs, for example, as presented in previous reports. We
did not conduct primary research for this review. The EEA, and hence we, were not privy to additional
hydrogeological work conducted or data collected by Hydro One (if so done) for this proposed site, with
the exception of the work summarized in Stantec (2013). Any third party use of this report or decisions
based on our opinions expressed herein are the responsibility of the third party.
6
As researchers based at G360 Centre for Applied Groundwater Research in School of Engineering at the
University of Guelph, our expertise lies in the area of investigating groundwater flow and contaminant
transport in a variety of hydrogeological environments. Please see our short CVs in Appendix A for
summaries of our expert qualifications.
This report outlines our findings from reviewing the aforementioned literature. We also make
recommendations for essential further site specific hydrogeological study for the proposed transformer
station.
7
2.0 Deficiencies Pertaining to the Investigation of Hydrogeological
Impacts
Following our review of the draft ESR (Hydro One, 2012) and available additional studies referenced
herein, it is our expert opinion that insufficient site specific hydrogeological characterization has been
conducted to ensure the safeguarding of groundwater: 1) used by residents in the area for domestic
supply from private wells; and 2) for the protection of “hydrologically sensitive features”. The
professional must gather and use as much detailed scientific data as is required to evaluate any impacts
of development such as the proposed undertaking. This is critical when a common resource like
groundwater is at issue. Standard practice to provide scientifically defensible data for groundwater
vulnerability assessments and development decisions requires, at a minimum, detailed assessment using
process-based approaches (see Focazio et al., 2002). It is the obligation of the professional to develop a
specific site conceptual model (SCM) (USEPA, 1993) to a level of detail appropriate to address the
problem statement and to ultimately address uncertainty. The SCM is a decision making tool that
couples historical research and primary site characterization. Following USEPA (1993), an adequate SCM
must include information such as:
1) site hydrology and geology;
2) potential contamination sources and properties;
3) potential release mechanisms and rates;
4) environmental fate and transport processes;
5) evaluation of potential receptors; and
6) other elements that will help to define and resolve issues related to the undertaking.
Assessment of groundwater vulnerability to contamination requires both an understanding of the
groundwater flow system and the subsurface geochemical system. Prior to any decision about the use of
a particular field site for development, a rigorous, quantitative field based hydrogeological investigation
must be conducted to produce a detailed SCM to reduce uncertainty of any impacts on groundwater
resources. It is our expert opinion that insufficient hydrogeological study has been carried out to make
fulsome decisions regarding site selection for the proposed Clarington Transformer Station. The
proposed site may be sensitive due to siting on the Oak Ridges Moraine and the potential of seepage
areas (“hydrologically sensitive features”). Sparse or insufficient data does not adequately contribute to
a detailed SCM used to make important decisions related to water management.
When drinking water, as well as ecological habitats (i.e., groundwater discharge features) are at risk the
professional needs to use investigative and monitoring techniques and infrastructure that provides
detailed insight in order to develop and refine the SCM to make scientifically-informed land or aquifer
use decisions. Hydrogeology often involves a lot of interpretation because we do not have a continuous
view of the subsurface. We must support interpretations and strengthen the decision making process
(and minimize risk) by obtaining a depiction of the subsurface conditions and flow system through the
development of the SCM.
8
The costs of not protecting water supplies cannot be underestimated. The susceptibility of groundwater
to contamination is described clearly by Focazio et al. (2002):
The intrinsic susceptibility of a ground-water [sic] system depends on the aquifer properties
(hydraulic conductivity, porosity, hydraulic gradients) and the associated sources of water and
stresses for the system (recharge, interactions with surface water, travel through the unsaturated
zone, and well discharge). In this way, intrinsic susceptibility assessments do not target specific
natural or anthropogenic sources of contamination but instead consider only the physical factors
affecting the flow of water to, and through, the ground-water resource. The vulnerability of a
ground-water resource to contamination depends on intrinsic susceptibility as well as the locations
and types of sources of naturally occurring and anthropogenic contamination, relative locations of
wells, and the fate and transport of the contaminant(s).
The Oak Ridges Moraine is a sensitive, significant and complex hydrogeological formation in southern
Ontario. The proposed transformer station site is located within the boundary of the area defined by the
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (O.Reg. 140/02) under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act,
2001.
The draft ESR (Hydro One, 2012) describes in a very brief manner the “groundwater hydrology” in
sections 3 and 7. In our opinion, conclusions have been drawn in the draft ESR relating to the site
hydrogeology that are not strongly supported by scientific evidence and field based observations. During
hydrogeological investigations one must keep in mind two important laws of groundwater vulnerability
(NRC, 1993): 1) all groundwater is vulnerable; and 2) uncertainty is inherent in all vulnerability
assessments. To reduce uncertainty regarding vulnerable groundwater resources, rigorous, quantitative
understanding of the flow system and geochemical interactions is required through the development of
a SCM. Using poor-quality data or data that is too sparse temporally or spatially increases uncertainty.
Chronologically following the ESR, the “Hydrogeologic & Hydrologic Assessment Report Clarington
Transformer Station” dated April 12, 2013 was prepared (Stantec, 2013). This report endeavors to
evaluate the site setting and proposed development from a hydrogeological perspective using available
regional data and limited site-specific information. It is our opinion that further site-specific
investigation is essential to develop a SCM to evaluate any hydrogeological impacts of the proposed
development. Important issues at hand include that: 1) the residents are concerned the development
will negatively affect their groundwater supply; and 2) there is indication that seepage areas
(“hydrologically sensitive features”) are present at the site.
Our primary concern is that a detailed SCM has not been developed to make the hydrogeological
conclusions drawn in Hydro One (2012) (and in the related Stantec (2013) report). The following points
summarize information that is lacking regarding site specific hydrogeological investigation and the
development of the SCM.
9
1) The hydrogeological work conducted for the Class Environmental Assessment provides
inadequate scientific evidence regarding hydrogeological impacts of the undertaking.
From a hydrogeological perspective, the resulting draft ESR does not adequately evaluate
impacts of the proposed transformer station. The Class EA should be elevated to a higher level
of assessment (Individual Environmental Assessment), which will provide the opportunity to
develop a defensible SCM to address the concerns of the local residents (the EEA) and to make
decisions regarding suitable site selection and development based on technical hydrogeological
findings rather than on minor study. An Individual EA will allow the proponents to assess more
fully the impacts of the undertaking on water resources prior to development. A guiding
principal of the Individual EA is to systematically evaluate net environmental effects (MOE,
2009). Reasonable site alternatives should also be evaluated from a hydrogeological
perspective.
2) Insufficient monitoring well infrastructure has been installed at the site to characterize the
subsurface for an assessment of hydrogeological impacts.
Geotechnical drilling was conducted in 2012 by exp and INSPEC-SOL and four monitoring wells
were installed as outlined in Stantec (2013). However, these geotechnical boreholes and the
four monitoring wells were only installed to a maximum depth of approximately 16 m below
ground surface and thus do not provide much information about the flow system and the
boundaries (and interactions) of different formations. Thus far (e.g., Stantec, 2013) the newly
installed monitoring wells and MOE water well records have been used to draw conclusions
about hydraulic gradients and depth to groundwater. The MOE water well records have been
compiled over multiple years by numerous well drillers with various (inconsistent)
interpretations of the subsurface, and are thus not necessarily reliable sources of accurate
technical data to develop a SCM. There is insufficient clarity and information concerning vertical
variability of hydraulic head.
Multilevel monitoring wells, or well nests, drilled to a sufficient depth (e.g., into the Thorncliffe
Formation – see Appendix B) are instead required to make conclusions regarding vertical
gradients and recharge/discharge processes and to better understand the flow system. This
detailed well infrastructure is current industry practice to characterize the subsurface for flow as
well as contaminant transport applications to develop a SCM for decision making purposes.
3) Appropriate hydraulic testing and characterization have not been conducted.
There insufficient information concerning variability of hydraulic conductivity. No site-specific
hydraulic testing has been conducted, to our knowledge, which is basic hydrogeological
information essential to developing a SCM and to quantifying potential flow or contaminant
impacts. Typical in situ hydraulic characterization methods include, for example, pumping tests
10
and slug tests to determine hydraulic conductivity, storage characteristics and interconnectivity
of the subsurface flow system.
4) Following (2) and (3), there is insufficient site specific hydrogeological data to make the strong
conclusion that a surficial till aquitard will impede water and contaminant flow.
Hydro One (2012) states “the South Slope physiographic region is underlain by a dense and
competent glacial till material. As such, this landform and its materials have very little sensitivity
relating to human activities (Gartner Lee, 1978).” Both Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013)
make reference to the presence of the Newmarket Till at the ground surface (see interpretive
schematic and cross sections in Figures 3, 6 and 7 of Stantec, 2013). Stantec (2013) similarly
states “a low permeability material, such as clay or till, such as the Newmarket Till acts as an
aquitard, impeding the flow of groundwater.” The competency of the till from a hydrogeological
perspective cannot be assumed and requires quantitative analysis to draw such conclusions.
Cherry et al. (2006) and Bradbury et al. (2006) comprehensively present the types of
investigations that should be done to quantify flow and contaminant transport in aquitards. It is
not sufficient to just conclude that because a glacial till is present at the site there will not be
pathways (e.g., fractures) for surface to subsurface contaminant transport. Again, a SCM must
be developed to address uncertainty.
Detailed hydrogeological field characterization and associated numerical modeling for a site
west of Oshawa (Gerber et al., 2001) demonstrates that the Northern (or Newmarket) Till is a
“leaky till aquitard” with relatively high vertical groundwater velocities attributed to the
presence of fractures and till heterogeneities. The results show evidence of “an active
groundwater flow system within the Northern Till and they identify the physical pathways for
groundwater flow through the aquitard”. There is evidence of surface to subsurface
contaminant transport in the form of increasing sodium and chloride levels attributed to road
salt application through the shallow Halton Till in the town of Whitchurch-Stouffville (TRCA,
2007).
There is insufficient clarity for the conceptualization of the subsurface stratigraphy. As noted
above, Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013) describe the presence of the Newmarket Till at the
ground surface, yet according to other regional interpretations (see Appendix B) the Halton Till
overlying the Oak Ridges (or equivalent) may extend to and beyond (south of) the site. The
geotechnical boreholes and future drilling logs should be reevaluated considering this
subsurface paradigm for SCM development.
11
5) An evaluation of the subsurface transport (from both a hydrogeological and geochemical
perspective) of the transformer oil in the event of a containment system leak or release to the
environment has not been conducted.
Groundwater vulnerability and contaminant transport depends on both the flow properties of
the system and the properties of the contaminant and how these properties can be modified by
physical, chemical or microbiological subsurface processes. An evaluation of the transport and
fate of the transformer oil (should the engineered spill containment system leak or a release
occur) must be addressed in the SCM. The MSDS for the transformer oil (manufactured by
Texaco Lubricants Company) provided to EEA has little important information regarding the
physical characteristics (e.g., solubility, pH, vapour pressure, etc.).
According to the MSDS, this highly refined mineral oil has a specific gravity of 0.82 to 0.89 and a
viscosity of 8 to 9 centistokes (cSt) at 40oC. Chemical properties are required to determine
subsurface geochemical interactions and any unforeseen issues that could occur in the event of
a leak or release based on the site specific flow system and geochemical properties. This
requires further field investigation to develop the SCM. Mathematical modeling can be used to
help elucidate and refine the SCM. There is also a lack of appropriate information available, at
least in Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013), about any environmental health hazards
associated with this undertaking. If contaminants such as mineral oil enter the groundwater
system they can cause strong biogeochemical reactions that will change the groundwater quality
by reducing the redox conditions and releasing natural metals such and iron and manganese or
other constituents that can render well water unusable. Thus, the oil itself need not be the
actual contaminant that does the main harm. Certain contaminants appear to be harmless but
the secondary effects can be the main impacts. This needs to be investigated during
development of the SCM.
Hydro One (2012) states “the station will be fully equipped with spill containment and oil/water
separation facilities. In the event of equipment failure, oily water will not escape from the site”
and later “Hydro One is confident that, in the event of equipment failure, mineral oil will not
escape from the site.” What is the uncertainty related to these statements? What is the risk of
failure? More evidence that “oily water” will not be released to the environment is required in
the SCM. A project site should be chosen where the groundwater resources will be the least
affected should a leak or release occur. For potential environmental releases in section 7, Hydro
One (2012) also states:
In addition, the station will be situated on land with a deep overburden of glacial till which
has very low permeability. In the rare event that oil did escape the containment system, the
response time by Hydro One would allow for cleanup of the oil in advance of any movement.
Consequently, no effects to the groundwater hydrology of the study area are anticipated.
Further, the monitoring well installed at the site will be maintained and monitored regularly
for groundwater depth and quality.
12
Considering our discussion herein of the lack of hydrogeological characterization (e.g., measured
hydraulic conductivity; interpretation of the groundwater flow system) contributing to the
development of a SCM, it is our opinion that the above statement cannot be concluded.
Quantitative assessment is required.
6) Extent or connectivity of the shallow flow system has not been investigated in a fulsome
manner.
To determine any possible impacts of the undertaking on the private wells used by nearby
residents, detailed information about the physical flow system is critical for SCM development.
From shallow geotechnical drilling, Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013) both describe and
illustrate using cross sections “sand lenses” present in the top 15 m below ground surface that
are “about 3.2 m thick” (Hydro One, 2012) and up to 5.8 m thick (Stantec, 2013). Hydro One
(2012) notes “it is expected that these sand lenses whose continuity is unknown, may be the
water source for the shallow wells in the area and seepage areas noted by local residents.”
Stantec (2013) states that “based on the available data, a significant, continuous aquifer was not
noted within the local study area” and “the aquifer material is interpreted as an intermittent
sand and gravel lens up to 5.8 m thick, with no significant continuous aquifer noted across the
project area” and “nearby private wells are installed within these intermittent sand lenses, as
encountered at various depths”. A geological assessment of the origin of these sand bodies is
required in the SCM.
In our opinion, insufficient site specific data has been collected to determine the flow system
interconnectivity. As illustrated in orange in the regional cross-section presented in Appendix B
the Oak Ridges (or equivalent) layer may be present at the site which lies between Conc. Rd. 8
and Conc. Rd. 7. Hydraulic characterization for the SCM as outlined in (3) is a data gap. It is
needed to determine the flow properties and interconnectivity of the shallow system in order to
evaluate any impacts of the proposed undertaking on neighboring water supply and on
“hydrologically sensitive features”. Connections of the shallow system to the deeper aquifer
(i.e., Thorncliffe Formation) should also been investigated, which will require the installation of
multilevel or nested monitoring wells to determine vertical gradients and to obtain groundwater
samples for analysis.
7) A scientifically defensible investigation of “hydrologically sensitive features” has not been
conducted.
According to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 “hydrologically sensitive features”
include “seepage areas and springs”, O. Reg. 140/02, s. 26 (1). Wetlands and streams are also
sensitive features. The regulation continues to state:
(3) An application for development or site alteration with respect to land within the
minimum area of influence that relates to a hydrologically sensitive feature, but outside the
13
hydrologically sensitive feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone,
shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation under subsection (4).
(4) A hydrological evaluation shall,
(a) demonstrate that the development or site alteration will have no adverse effects on
the hydrologically sensitive feature or on the related hydrological functions; …
Hydro One (2012) states that CLOCA (2011) mapping identifies no potential groundwater
discharge areas within the project area. Yet, as noted in Stantec (2013) there is anecdotal
evidence of seepage areas at various locations on the proposed site. Additionally, the hydraulic
head measured for monitoring well BH11-12 is above the ground surface (it is a flowing artesian
well) as reported in Stantec (2013). This well is situated adjacent to Wetland Area 1 (see Figure 9
in Stantec, 2013). The relation between the existence of the wetland and nearby artesian
conditions and relationships to groundwater seepage has not been evaluated. A thorough
understanding of the discharge processes across the entire site with conclusions drawn from
detailed hydrogeological characterization is required to ensure that the “development or site
alteration will have no adverse effects on the hydrologically sensitive feature or on the related
hydrological functions”. This needs to be described using the SCM.
The hydrogeological characterization conducted thus far, in our opinion, has not sufficiently
investigated seepage/discharge areas in a scientifically defensible manner. Understanding local
groundwater discharge in headwater areas is critically important to maintain downstream
hydrology and biodiversity (e.g., Meyer et al., 2007; Winter, 2007). From detailed
hydrogeological investigations, Gerber and Howard (2002) describe various groundwater
discharge mechanisms for the Oak Ridges Moraine in the nearby Duffins Creek watershed west
of Oshawa. They observed that about 24% of the total system recharge emerges above the 275
m above mean sea level (amsl) contour while the rest: “(i) moves in the Upper aquifer and
discharges to headwaters immediately below 275 m amsl; (ii) moves within the Upper aquifer
and enters streams situated within the South Slope physiographic region, well to the south of
the headwater area; (iii) moves within the Upper aquifer to discharge as springs along deep river
valleys where the river has eroded into or beneath the Northern [i.e., Newmarket] till; (iv)
enters the Middle and Lower aquifers and re-emerges as groundwater discharge to streams in
the southern part of the study area; and (v) moves within all aquifers to discharge at Lake
Ontario.”
Hydro One (2012) states that tributaries of headwater streams at the site were at times dry and
it is assumed that “the tributaries are minimally, if at all, supported by groundwater.” This is a
difficult conclusion to draw without detailed (continuous) measurements of stream stage/flow
rate and adjacent groundwater hydraulic heads. Any groundwater-surface water interactions
with the streams, wetland areas and seepage areas need quantitative evaluation using, for
example, appropriate well infrastructure to obtain samples for water parameter analysis (e.g.,
environmental isotopes). This quantitative evaluation needs to be used during the development
of the SCM.
14
8) The determination of “aquifer vulnerability” (high or low) has been based on regional scale
mapping.
Hydro One (2012) states “the sandy silt till retards water penetration and is referred to as an
aquitard. This supports the Gartner Lee (1978) findings stated above and CLOCA (2011) findings
which indicate that the lands upon which the project area is located are not considered an area
of Significant Groundwater Recharge, nor within an Intake Protection Zone (CLOCA, 2011).”
Similarly, Stantec (2013) describes that the aquifer is low vulnerability as indicated in CLOCA
(2012). As discussed previously in (4), there is no site-specific evidence to support that the sandy
silt till “retards water penetration”.
Hydro One (2012) states “although portions of the surrounding area are categorized by CLOCA
as having medium or high aquifer vulnerability, the entirety of the land within the proposed
station is considered to have low aquifer vulnerability.” The evaluation of Significant
Groundwater Recharge areas and the evaluation of aquifer vulnerability have been based on
regional scale mapping (i.e., Aquifer Vulnerability Index for vulnerability assessment) and a
refined interpretation should be conducted using site specific data for the development of the
SCM. A detailed aquifer vulnerability study, based on site specific infiltration, conductivity data
and hydrostratigraphy is more appropriate (e.g, Focazio et al., 2002) for this undertaking.
9) The hydrogeological impacts of the proposed underground drainage system, construction
dewatering and new site grading have not been evaluated quantitatively.
Due to near-surface groundwater, dewatering during construction is anticipated and a drainage
system for the operation phase is planned (Hydro One, 2012). An evaluation and development
of the SCM is required to determine: will these site modifications affect groundwater recharge
and discharge (i.e., local seeps, springs, wetlands, and streams)? How will the grading of the site
(i.e., up to 6 m of excavation near well BH11-12 where artesian conditions are observed;
Stantec, 2013) impact the water table and hence groundwater recharge and discharge
processes? Stantec (2013) states that groundwater seepage will likely result from excavation in
the eastern portion of the site. Mathematical groundwater modeling of the site pre- and post-
development could contribute to the SCM.
10) The proposed groundwater monitoring program is inadequate for both spatial and temporal
frequency.
Water level measurements of the currently installed four (shallow) monitoring wells, to our
knowledge, have only been taken on a few discrete events. We are unaware of water sample
results if they have been analyzed. The monitoring program presented in Stantec (2013) is an
adequate first step, but more detailed monitoring is required to obtain a fulsome picture of
water flow and any contaminant transport issues for the SCM. Quarterly water level monitoring
was recommended (Stantec, 2013). In our opinion, continuously logging pressure transducers
15
should be installed in new multilevel or nested monitoring well infrastructure prior to site
development to help determine more about the flow system and connections to the surface
including recharge and discharge processes for the SCM. This is common practice in research
and industry.
Semi-annual (spring and fall) water sampling was recommended for general chemistry analysis
(Stantec, 2013). More frequent, as well as additional analytes including environmental isotopes
(to help resolve recharge and discharge processes) would be beneficial. Spatial and temporal
variations of groundwater sample results can be significant. Three discrete monitoring events of
private wells (Stantec, 2013) is a good start, but they: 1) will not provide adequate data to
determine if the water levels of residents are being affected since there is no understanding of
seasonal processes and recharge events; and 2) will not provide a detailed understanding of
water quality due to any seasonal variations. More detailed is required for the SCM.
11) An appropriate evaluation of uncertainty has not been conducted.
First, detailed hydrogeological characterization must be conducted to develop the SCM. An
assessment of the uncertainty of measured and derived parameters that define the flow and
geochemical systems presented in the SCM must be described.
16
3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
It is our opinion that prior to development of the transformer station a comprehensive field based
assessment must be carried out to obtain a clearer understanding of the hydrogeological and
geochemical implications of the proposed undertaking. The data for development of a scientifically
defensible SCM is currently inadequate in Hydro One (2012) and Stantec (2013). See, as an example, the
detailed investigation conducted by Gerber et al. (2001) west of the proposed Clarington site to obtain
an extensive understanding of the flow system. We recommend that further hydrogeological study and
SCM development is completed prior to decision making regarding appropriate siting of the transformer
station in order to ensure that “hydrologically sensitive features” and water resources used by residents
for domestic supply are not adversely affected by the development. From a hydrogeological and
contaminant transport perspective we support EEA’s request for a higher level of assessment (bump up
to an Individual EA). We recommend that further study could include (but should not necessarily be
limited to) the following to contribute to the development of the SCM:
1) Determine the basic, essential properties of the flow system (e.g., hydraulic conductivity,
hydraulic gradient, effective porosity, etc.).
2) Install numerous nested or multilevel monitoring wells for this purpose. Further analysis is
required to determine the appropriate locations, depths and number of monitoring wells.
3) Evaluate with site specific investigation the inputs and outputs to the groundwater system (e.g.,
recharge and discharge areas; pumping effects) to elucidate groundwater-surface water
interactions.
4) Determine the age of the groundwater.
5) Improve the conceptual model of the hydrostratigraphy and flow system. This requires drilling,
hydraulic characterization, and installation and monitoring of multilevel or nested monitoring
wells. An investigation of till flow properties and characteristics is required.
6) Collect detailed (i.e., continuous) water level measurements and frequent (e.g., at least
monthly) water samples for analysis.
7) Evaluate the impact of the proposed shallow subsurface water collection on the “hydrologically
sensitive features” and overall flow system. Processed-based mathematical groundwater flow
models can be used to elucidate the SCM.
8) Quantitatively evaluate the aquifer vulnerability using field-measured parameters.
17
9) Evaluate the transport and geochemical effects of a potential discharge of the transformer oil to
the subsurface in the event of a leakage or spill. Process-based solute transport models can be
used for this purpose. The likelihood of a release of transformer oil to reach the water table and
domestic well receptors should be evaluated. Information about the source of potential
contamination (i.e., solubility, concentration, volume, etc. of the transformer oil) is required.
Performing a detailed hydrogeological assessment of any impacts of development (and choosing the
most appropriate site based on the findings) prior to construction can ultimately be less expensive than
remediation post-contamination should a leak or release to the environment occur. The above
recommendations are minimum components for the development of a SCM. Should the proponents
desire to pursue the undertaking at the currently proposed Clarington site, it is our opinion that detailed
hydrogeological and geochemical study should be conducted to provide scientifically defendable
evidence that the groundwater resources (quality and quantity) will not be adversely impacted by the
proposed development. This project cannot move forward responsibly without a more thorough
investigation of any hydrogeological impacts of the development on “hydrologically sensitive features”
and to private well users in the area. Data gaps must be filled. The SCM needs to be developed to a level
of detail that is commensurate to the problem being addressed. There needs to be greater description
and investigation of: the site hydrology and geology; contamination sources and properties; release
mechanisms and rates; environmental fate and transport processes; possible receptors; and any other
elements that will help to define and resolve issues related to the undertaking (USEPA, 1993). It is
essential to use scientific evidence to protect in the most comprehensive way human and environmental
health.
18
References Bradbury, K.R., Gotkowitz, M.B., Hart, D.J., Eaton, T.T., Cherry, J.A., Parker, B.L. and Borchardt, M.A. (2006) Contaminant transport through aquitards: Technical guidance for aquitard assessment. AWWA Research Foundation Report, Denver, CO. Cherry, J.A., Parker, B.L., Bradbury, K.R., Eaton, T.T., Gotkowitz, M.B. and Hart, D.J. (2006) Contaminant transport through aquitards: A state of the science review. AWWA Research Foundation Report, Denver, CO. CLOCA (2011) Black/Harmony/Farewell Creek watershed existing conditions report, Chapter 14 - Hydrogeology. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, Oshawa, Ontario, 45 pp. CLOCA (2012) Approved assessment report, Central Lake Ontario Source Protection Area. Chapter 4 –
assessing vulnerability of drinking water sources. CTC Source Protection Committee, Oshawa, Ontario.
EEA (2012) Letter and report to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment RE: the Clarington transformer
station draft ESR. Enniskillen Environmental Association, Clarington, Ontario.
exp (2012) Hydro One – Clarington TS Final Report (project number BAR-00025036-A0). Exp Services
Inc., Barrie, Ontario.
Focazio, M.J., Reilly, T.E., Rupert, M.G. and Helsel, D.R. (2002) Assessing ground-water vulnerability to
contamination: providing scientifically defensible information for decision makers. U.S. Geological
Survey circular 1224. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, 33 pp.
Gartner Lee (1978) Environmental sensitivity mapping project. Report to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Gartner Lee Associates Limited, 93 pp. (Note: this report was not reviewed but it is cited in this document in a quote from Hydro One, 2012) Gerber, R.E. and Howard, K. (2000) Recharge through a regional till aquitard: three‐dimensional flow
model water balance approach. Ground Water, 38(3): 410-422.
Gerber, R.E. and Howard, K. (2002) Hydrogeology of the Oak Ridges Moraine aquifer system:
implications for protection and management from the Duffins Creek watershed. Canadian Journal of
Earth Sciences, 39(9): 1333-1348.
Gerber, R.E., Boyce, J.I. and Howard, K.W. (2001) Evaluation of heterogeneity and field-scale
groundwater flow regime in a leaky till aquitard. Hydrogeology Journal, 9(1): 60-78.
Hydro One (1992) Class environmental assessment for minor transmission facilities. Pursuant to the Environmental Assessment Act. Report No. 89513. Hydro One, 64 pp.
19
Hydro One (2012) Clarington transformer station class environmental assessment draft environmental
study report. Report Number: 590-CLEA-12-11. Environmental Services and Approvals, Hydro One
Networks Inc. Toronto, Ontario.
Meyer, J.L., Strayer, D.L., Wallace, J.B., Eggert, S.L., Helfman, G.S. and Leonard, N.E. (2007) The
contribution of headwater streams to biodiversity in river networks. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association, 43(1): 86-103.
MOE (2009) Code of practice: preparing and reviewing environmental assessments in Ontario.
Legislative Authority: Environmental Assessment Act, RSO 1990, Chapter E.18. Government of Ontario.
Toronto, Ontario.
NRC (1993) Ground water vulnerability assessment, contamination potential under conditions of
uncertainty. National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 210 pp.
Stantec (2013) Hydrogeologic & hydrologic assessment report Clarington transformer station, 1609-
60745. Prepared for Hydro One Networks Inc., Stantec Consulting Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, 102 pp.
TRCA (2007) Rouge River state of the watershed report. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority.
Toronto, Ontario.
USEPA (1993) Guidance for evaluating the technical impracticability of ground-water restoration. Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C., 29
pp.
Winter, T.C. (2007) The role of ground water in generating streamflow in headwater areas and in
maintaining base flow. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43(1): 15-25.
JOHN A. CHERRY, Ph.D., P. Eng., FRSC Adjunct Professor
University Consortium for Field-Focused Groundwater Contamination Research
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1
Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Waterloo
Email:[email protected] ; Cell: 647-628-0941
PERSONAL INFORMATION Name: John Anthony Cherry
Date of Birth: July 4, 1941
Place of Birth: Regina, Saskatchewan
Citizenship: Canadian
Home Address: 660 Markham St.
Toronto, ON Canada M6G 2L9
DEGREES
Ph.D. (1966) Geology with specialization in hydrogeology, University of Illinois, Urbana
M.Sc. (1964) Geological Engineering, University of California, Berkeley
B.Sc. (1962) Geological Engineering University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon
EMPLOYMENT
Feb. 2008:Adjunct Professor and Director, University Consortium for Field Focused
Groundwater Contamination Research, School of Engineering, University of
Guelph, Guelph, Ontario
Aug. 2006: Distinguished Professor Emeritus and Adjunct Professor, University of Waterloo
1996-2006: Professor and holder of NSERC Industrial Chair in Contaminant Hydrogeology and
Director, University Consortium Solvents-In-Groundwater Research Program,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario
1988-1996: Director, University Consortium Solvents-In-Groundwater Research Program
1987-1996: Professor, Department of Earth Sciences and member, Waterloo Centre for
Groundwater Research, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario
1982-1987: Professor and Director, Institute for Groundwater Research, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario
1971-1982: Associate Professor, and then Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of
Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario
1967-1971: Assistant and then Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of
Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba
1967: Post-doctoral Fellow Sponsored by NRC and NATO, Hydrogeology Institute,
University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
AWARDS
1. Lifetime Achievement Award for career as a world expert on Behaviour of DNAPL and
Quantitative Hydrogeology. Presented at the 8th
International Battelle Conference,
Monterey, California, United States, May 22, 2012.
2. Lifetime Achievement Award, Groundwater Resources Association of California,
September 16, 2010
3. Distinguished Professor Emeritus, University of Waterloo, June 13, 2007
4. Excellence in Research Award; University of Waterloo, October 23, 2004
5. Hydrogeology Division Award; The Canadian Geotechnical Society for outstanding
contributions to hydrogeology. Presented at the 54th Canadian Geotechnical Conference
and 2nd Joint IAH-CNC Groundwater Specialty Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada,
September 16-19, 2001.
6. Distinguished Service Award of the Hydrogeology Division of the Geological Society of
America, October 1998.
7. Air & Waste Management Association Waste Management Award, presented at
A&WMA’s 91st Annual Meeting & Exhibition, June 14-18, 1998 in San Diego, CA.
8. William Smith Medal presented by The Geological Society, London, England, June 5,
1997.
9. Joint winner of the Miroslaw Romanowski Medal for significant contributions to the
resolution of scientific aspects of environmental problems presented by the Royal Society
of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Annual General Meeting, November 22, 1996.
10. Ministry of the Environment Province of Ontario, Excellence in Research Award, 1987,
in the area of Liquid and Solid Waste Research.
11. Science Award, 1987, National Water Well Association (USA), for Major Scientific
Contributions to the Ground Water Community.
12. Horton Award, 1985, Hydrology Section, American Geophysical Union, For
contributions to the understanding of the physical and chemical aspects of groundwater
contamination.
13. Meinzer Award 1985, Geological Society of America, for a group (five) papers in The
Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 63, no. 1-2, May 1983. Volume Title: Migration Of
Contaminants In Groundwater At A Landfill: A Case Study, 197 pp.
14. Best Paper Award: Canadian Geotechnical Society 1982, Morin, K.A., Cherry, J.A.,
Lim, T.P. and Vivyurka, J.A. 1982. Contaminant migration in a sand aquifer near an
inactive uranium tailings impoundment, Elliot Lake, Ontario. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal 9 (2): 49-62.
OTHER HONOURS
Honorary Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Hong Kong University, 2006-present
Highly Cited Researcher in the field of Engineering Ecology/ Environment in Current
Contents, ISI Thomson Scientific (one of 250 most-cited authors in this field world-
wide), 2000
Certificate of Merit for Distinguished Achievement in Furthering University-Industry
Research Co-operation presented by Corporate-Higher Education Forum, November,
1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995
Elected: Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, June 6, 1988
Elected: Fellow of the Geological Society of America, May 13, 1988
Elected: Fellow, Rawson Academy of Aquatic Science, Canada, 1987
SERVICE ON EDITORIAL BOARDS
Editorial Advisory Board, Hazardous Materials Magazine, 1990 – 1996
Editorial Board, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 1987 - 1995
Associate Editor, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1986 – 1991
PUBLICATIONS
Books and Monographs
1. Cherry, J.A., B.L. Parker, K.R. Bradbury, T.T. Eaton, M.G. Gotkowitz, D.J. Hart and
M.A. Borchardt, 2007. Contaminant Transport Through Aquitards: A State of the Science
Review. Awwa Research Foundation, Denver, Colorado, 126 pp., Report 91133A
2. Bradbury, K.R., M.G. Gotkowitz, J.A. Cherry, D. J. Hart, T.T. Eaton, B.L. Parker and
M.A. Borchardt, 2007. Contaminant Transport Through Aquitards: Technical Guidance
for Aquitard Assessment. Awwa Research Foundation, Denver, Colorado, 143 pp.,
Report 91133B
3. Ward, C.H., Cherry, J.A. and Scalf, M.R. (Editors), 1997. Subsurface Restoration
Handbook, Ann Arbor Press, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan, 491 pp.
4. Pankow, J.F. and Cherry, J.A., (Editors), 1996. Dense Chlorinated Solvents and other
DNAPLs in Groundwater (a textbook), Waterloo Press, 522 pp.
5. Freeze, R.A. and Cherry, J.A., 1979. Groundwater (a textbook), Prentice-Hall Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 604 pp.
Recent Papers In Refereed Journals
Chapman, S., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, S.D. McDonald, K.J. Goldstein, J.J. Frederick, D.J. St.
Germain, D.M. Cutt and C.E. Williams. 2013. Combined MODFLOW-FRACTRAN
application to assess chlorinated solvent transport and remediation in fractured sedimentary
rock. Remediation Journal, doi:10.1002/rem.21355.
Wang, X., J. Jiao, Y. Wang, J.A. Cherry, K. Xingxing, K. Liu, C. Lee and Z. Gong. 2013.
Accumulation and transport of ammonium in aquitards in the Pearl River Delta, China, in
the last 10,000 years: Conceptual model and numerical modeling. Hydrogeology Journal,
doi:10.1007/s10040-013-0976-1 .
Keller, C.E., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker. 2013. New method for continuous hydraulic
conductivity profiling in fractured rock. Ground Water, doi: 10.111/gwat.12064.
Farah, E.A., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2012. Hydraulic head and atmospheric tritium to
identify deep fractures in clayey aquitards: Numerical analysis. AQUA
mundi,doi:10.4409/Am-051-12-0045.
Pehme, P., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, J.W. Molson and P. Greenhouse. 2012. Enhanced detection
of hydraulically active fractures by temperature profiling in lined heated bedrock boreholes.
Submitted to Journal of Hydrology, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.048.
Parker, B.L., J.A. Cherry and S.W. Chapman*. 2012. Discrete fracture network approach for
studying contamination in fractured rock. AQUA mundi,doi:10.4409/Am-052-12-0046.
Acar, O., H. Klammler, K. Hatfield, M.A. Newman, M. Annable, J. Cho, B.L. Parker, J.A.
Cherry, P.Pehme*, P. Quinn and R. Kroeker*. 2012. A stochastic model for estimating
groundwater and contaminant discharges from fractured rock passive flux meter
measurements. Water Resources Research,doi:10.1002/wrer.20109.
Lojkasek-Lima, P., R. Aravena, B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2012 Fingerprinting TCE in a
bedrock aquifer using compound specific isotope analysis. Groundwater, doi:
10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00897.x
Pehme, P., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, J.W. Molson and P. Greenhouse. 2012. Enhanced detection
of hydraulically active fractures by temperature profiling in lined heated bedrock boreholes.
Journal of Hydrology, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.048.
Quinn, P.M., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker, 2012. Hydraulic testing using a versatile straddle
packer system for improved transmissivity estimation in fractured rock boreholes.
Hydrogeological Journal, doi: 10.1007/s10040-012-0893-8.
Quinn, P., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2012. Validation of non-Darian flow effects in slug tests
conducted in fractured rock boreholes. Journal of Hydrology, 486, (0) 505-518.
Meyer, J., B.L. Parker and J. A. Cherry. Characteristics of high resolution hydraulic head profiles
and vertical gradients in fractured sedimentary rocks. Journal of Hydrology, submitted
December 2012.
Pierce, A.A., B.L. Parker, Aravena, R. and J.A. Cherry. Field Evidence for trichloroethene
degradation mechanisms in fractured sandstone. Submitted to Environmental Science and
Technology, Resubmitted July 2012.
Quinn, P.M., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker. 2012. Hydraulic testing using a versatile straddle
packer system for improved transmissivity estimation in fractured rock boreholes.
Hydrogeological Journal, doi: 10.1007/s10040-012-0893-8.
Quinn, P.M., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2011. Using constant head packer tests to determine
apertures in fractured rock. Journal of Contaminant Hydrogeology, 126, (1-2) 85-99.doi:
10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.07.002.
Lojkasek-Lima, P., R. Aravena, B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2012 Fingerprinting TCE in a
bedrock aquifer using compound specific isotope analysis. Groundwater, doi:
10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00897.x
Quinn, P.M., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker. 2011. Quantification of non-Darcian flow observed
during packer testing in fractured rock. Water Resources Research. 47 (9): W09533
doi:10.1029/2010WR009681
Perrin, J., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2011. Assessing the flow regime in a contaminated
fractured and karstic dolostone aquifer supplying municipal water. Journal of Hydrology,
400: 396-410.
Jiao, J.J., Y. Wang, J.A. Cherry, X. Wang, B. Zhi, H. Du and D. Wen, 2010. Abnormally high
ammonium of natural origin in a coastal aquifer-aquitard system in the Pearl River Delta,
China. Environmental Science & Technology, 44, 7470-7475. doi:10.1021/es1021697.
Parker, B.L., S.W. Chapman and J.A. Cherry, 2010. Plume persistence in fractured sedimentary
rock after source zone removal. Ground Water. 48(6): 799-803, doi: 10.1111/j.1745
6584.2010.00755.x
Britt, S.L., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2010. A downhole passive sampling system to avoid
bias and error from groundwater sample handling. Environmental Science and Technology,
44(13):4917-4923, doi: 10.1021/es100879w.
Pehme, P.E., Parker, B.L., Cherry, J.A. and Greenhouse J.P, 2009. Improved resolution of
ambient flow through fractured rock with temperature logs. Ground Water, 28(2): 191-21.
doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2009.00639.x.
SERVICE
Present and Past Memberships on National or International Committees and on
Committees or Boards of Professional Societies, Conference Organization Committees
Chair, Harnessing Science and Technology to Understand the Environmental Impacts of Shale
Gas Extraction Panel, Council of Canadian Academies, 2012.
Primary Program Organizer and Syposium Introduction, Canadian Aquitard Symposia,
Saskatoon, 2009 and Ottawa, 2011
Peer Review Committee, EPSRC (Engineering & Physical Sciences Res. Council, UK), 2006-
2009
Distinguished Service Award Committee, Hydrogeology Div, Geological Soc. America, 2003-
2005
Councillor, Geological Society of America, 1994-1997
DISTINGUISHED INVITED LECTURES
Keynote Lecturer, FlowPath 2012 Hydrogeology Pathways Conference, Bologna, Italy, June
21, 2012.
2012 David Keith Todd Distinguished Lecture Series, sponsored by the Groundwater
Resources Association of California, United States.
2009 Farvolden Lecturer, University of Waterloo: A Glimpse of Groundwater
Contamination in China, October 23, 2009, Waterloo, ON
Keynote Speaker, ABAB 1st International Congress on Subsurface Environment: DNAPL
Contamination of Groundwater: North American Experiences & Implications, Sept. 15,
2009, São Paulo, Brazil
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro: DNAPL Contamination of Groundwater: Examples
from North America, September 14, 2009
CETESB (Environmental Company of São Paulo (government)): Characteristics of
chlorinated solvent DNAPL source zones: Results from field research. September 16,
2009
Honoured Keynote Speaker, Symposium on Aquitard Hydrogeology, Univ. of
Saskatchewan: A Glimpse at Aquitards in Contaminant Hydrogeology Context:
Evolution of Concepts and Methods, June 4, 2009, Saskatoon, SK
Charles University, Prague: Contaminant Migration in Clayey Aquitards, May 30, 2007
2006 Lumb Lecturer, University of Hong Kong: lecture delivered at 5 universities in China
after HK lecture: Geo-Environmental Aspects of Groundwater Pollution, October 14,
2006
2006 Geological Engineering Lecturer, University of British Columbia: Contaminant
Migration in Clayey Aquitards: A Perspective Based on Field Studies, January 12, 2006
Stanford University, Dept of Geological & Environmental Sciences: Contaminant Migration
in Clayey Aquitards: Perspective Based on Field Studies, November 15, 2006
Maunsell Civil Engineering Visiting Fellowship Lecturer, University of Hong Kong: Role of
Aquitards in Protection of Aquifers from Contamination & Groundwater Contamination
Caused by Common Organic Industrial Liquids, October 3 & 4, 2005 (2 lectures)
Numerous other invited lectures have been delivered at universities, research organizations
and at professional and environmental public interest group meeting
Beth L. Parker, Ph.D. Curriculum Vitae
Professor, Environmental Engineering NSERC IRC Chair, Dual Citizenship: Canada/ USA Groundwater Contamination in Fractured Media Res. Tel: (519) 836-9382 School of Engineering Bus. Tel: (519)824-4120 x53642 University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1 Bus. Fax: (519) 836-0227 Email: [email protected]; [email protected] Mobile: (519) 400-9442 Adjunct Professor, University of Waterloo Degrees Ph.D. Earth Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (April 1996)
Major: Hydrogeology Thesis: Effects of Molecular Diffusion on the Persistence of Dense Immiscible Organic Liquids in Fractured Porous Media
M.Sc. Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, North Carolina, USA (Dec. 1983) Major: Environmental Engineering Minor: Soil Science Thesis: Magnetic Separation of Ferrous Material from Shredded Refuse
B.Sc. Environmental Sciences and Economics, Allegheny College, Pennsylvania, USA (June 1982) Majors: Aquatic Environments and Economics Minor: Mathematics Thesis: An Economic Perspective of Marginal Natural Gas Drilling in Crawford County, PA
Summary Statement My research primarily concerns intensive field studies at carefully selected industrial sites where organic contaminants have occurred in the groundwater for a long time (i.e. decades). I apply new methods of data acquisition and improved versions of existing methods, both at exceptionally detailed spatial scales, to determine the contaminant distributions in ways best suited to identify and quantify the dominant processes of transport and fate responsible for the contaminant distributions. My main contributions to groundwater science include: 1) development and field proof of innovative methods, 2) understanding of processes most relevant to the critical scales of geologic and chemical heterogeneity, and 3) advancement of conceptual models in contaminant hydrogeology. I began my PhD research concerning contaminant hydrogeology in 1992 and completed the PhD degree in 1996. My research focus continues to evolve. The early years were focused mostly on fractured clayey aquitards, then much of my attention was directed at heterogeneous sandy aquifers and in the last decade my work has mostly concerned fractured sedimentary rock. I am strongly collaborative in ways aimed at improving the scope and rigor of my field studies and enhancements in data interpretation using mathematical models. I have authored/ co-authored 55 papers in refereed journals and many other papers. For my published works, The Google Scholar citation index reports a total of 979 citations, of which 682 are in 2007 and more recent. I have arranged the five most important contributions below according to this evolution of emphasis in my research. Current Research Focus Contaminant hydrogeology with emphasis on industrial organic contaminants, field studies and remediation in diverse geologic domains including fractured sedimentary rock, clayey aquitards and sandy aquifers. Development of the Discrete Fracture Network Approach for investigating contamination in fractured rock. Current Responsibilities Conduct research in the field of contaminant hydrogeology, secure and manage research funds from external sources; supervise graduate students, post-doctoral fellows and research associates; project management including Associate Director of University Consortium for Field Focused Groundwater Contamination Research; manage an organic contaminant analysis laboratory and co-manage field investigation facilities; teach graduate course in groundwater contaminant in fractured media and occasionally an undergraduate course (physical hydrogeology); employ undergraduate co-op research assistants.
Major Research Initiatives NSERC Senior Industrial Research Chair (IRC) in Groundwater Contamination in Fractured Media with a budget of greater than $1.1M CAD per year commenced in September 2007. Lead Research Principal Investigator, Ontario Research Funding – Research Excellence (ORF-RE), Round 3 project titled: Sustainable Bedrock Water Supplies for Ontario Communities, commenced in July 2009. This is a large collaborative project with funding of nearly $1,000,000 per year from ORF for five years, involving three Ontario universities and 12 professors. Associate Director, University Consortium for Field Focus Groundwater Contamination Research (former Solvents in Groundwater Consortium established in 1988) moved its administrative office from UW to UG in 2008 and hosted the Consortium Annual meetings at UG in May 2009, 2010, June 2011 and 2012. Groundwater Research and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) is a University of Guelph Institute dedicated to conducting collaborative groundwater protection, restoration and sustainability research, including subsurface characterization, contaminants fate, transport and remediation, and groundwater supply and management. Conceived the design and secured funding ($250 000) for construction (2010) of the Bedrock Aquifer Field Facility (BAFF) at the University of Guelph Arboretum used in research, education and community outreach for the management and protection of groundwater resources. Academic and Professional Awards and Honours Herbette Visiting Professorship Award at the Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (Sept – Dec 2012) As a professor, the John Hem Award for Excellence in Science & Engineering, NGWA, AGWSE division (2009) NSERC Senior Industrial Research Chair (IRC) in Groundwater Contamination in Fractured Media (2007-present) Canadian Foundation for Innovation, New Opportunities Award (1998) Ontario Research & Development Challenge Fund, CFI matching award (1998) Eastman Kodak Company Educational Scholarship (1991-1994) As an undergraduate student, James A. Finnegan Foundation Award (Summer 1982), Allegheny College, PA. Lyndon B. Johnson Scholarship: Internship with Hon. Barber B. Conable, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC (Summer 1981) Allegheny College: Alden Scholar (1979 and 1980), Frank Wilbur Main Scholarship in Economics (1980-1982), Pi Gamma Mu Social Science Honor Society (1981-1982) Patents Klammler, H.R., K. Hatfield, M.D. Annable, J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker. United States Patent 7,334,486. Feb. 26, 2008. “Device and method for measuring fluid fluxes, solute fluxes and fracture parameters in fracture flow systems.” Related to devices and methods for measuring cumulative dissolved solute (contaminant) fluxes and cumulative fluid fluxes in flow systems. Detection of organic and inorganic contaminants as well as natural dissolved constituents related to the analysis for water supplies. Parker, B.L., M.D. Nelson* and J.A. Cherry. United States Patent 6,274048. August 14, 2001; Canadian patent 2,302,628. September 28, 2004: “System for alleviating DNAPL contamination in groundwater”. In situ destruction of organic contaminants by injected discs of liquid chemical oxidants that reach contaminants by density-driven advection and diffusion while minimizing displacement. Parker, B.L. and J.A. Cherry. United States Patent 5,641,020. June 24, 1997; Canadian Patent 2,149,812. May 13, 2003: “Treatment of Contaminated Water in Clays Etc.” Use of induced fracturing techniques to inject and distribute chemical reactive materials into otherwise low permeability geologic media for in-situ passive or semi-passive destruction of contaminants in clayey deposits and sedimentary rocks.
Patent Licensing Arrangements An Agreement has been negotiated with Stone Environmental Inc. , Montpelier, VT since 2006, for commercialization of the CORE DFN ™ (Characterization Of Rock Environments) technique, which is a unique methodology for obtaining and quickly analyzing rock samples for volatile organic contaminants. An agreement with Gamsby and Mannerow Limited for rights to apply one patent related to permanganate for remediation of chlorinated solvents in sandy aquifers for which I am the lead inventor is in the final stage of negotiation.
Professional Memberships National Ground Water Association, Member (1986-present) American Geophysical Union, Member (1992-present) Geological Survey of America, Member (1993-present) International Association of Hydrogeologists (2005-present) Canadian Geotechnical Society (2005-present) Previous Employment University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON (February 1, 2004 to March 31, 2007). Research Associate Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON (May 1, 1996 to January, 2004*). Research Assistant Professor,
Dept. of Earth Sciences (*6 months maternity leave in 2001-02). University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON (January 1991 – April 1996). Ph.D. Candidate and part-time
Research Associate. Department of Earth Sciences. Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY (Dec. 1985 – Feb. 1991). Environmental
Engineer/Hydrogeologist, Health & Environment, Corporate Groundwater and Subsurface Management Program.
Technical Univ. of Denmark, Denmark (Sep. 1984 - May 1985). Res. Assoc. Dept Environmental Engineering
Galson Technical Services, Inc., East Syracuse, NY, USA (Jan. 1984 - July 1984). Groundwater consultant
Publications (*asterisk indicates research involving student or research associate supervised by B.L. Parker) Adamson, D., S. Chapman*, N. Mahler, C. Newell, B.L. Parker, S. Pitkin, M. Rossi and M. Singletary.
Membrane interface probe optimization for contaminants in low permeability zones. Ground Water, in press June 2013.
Chapman*, S., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, S.D. McDonald, K.J. Goldstein, J.J. Frederick, D.J. St. Germain, D.M. Cutt and C.E. Williams. 2013. Combined MODFLOW-FRACTRAN application to assess chlorinated solvent transport and remediation in fractured sedimentary rock. Remediation Journal, 23: 7-35. Doi:1002/rem.21355.
Quinn*, P.M., B.L. Parker& J.A. Cherry. 2013. Validation of non-Darcian flow effects in slug tests
conducted in fractured rock boreholes. Journal of Hydrology, 486, (0) 505-518.
Keller, C.E., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker. 2013. New method for continuous hydraulic conductivity profiling in fractured rock. Ground Water, doi: 10.111/gwat.12064
Farah*, E.A., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry. 2012. Hydraulic head and atmospheric tritium to identify deep fractures in clayey aquitards: Numerical analysis. AQUA mundi,doi:10.4409/Am-051-12-0045.
Parker, B.L., J.A. Cherry and S.W. Chapman*. 2012. Discrete fracture network approach for studying contamination in fractured rock. AQUA mundi,doi:10.4409/Am-052-12-0046.
Acar, O., H. Klammler, K. Hatfield, M.A. Newman, M. Annable, J. Cho, B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, P.Pehme*, P. Quinn and R. Kroeker*. 2012. A stochastic model for estimating groundwater and contaminant discharges from fractured rock passive flux meter measurements. Water Resources Research,doi:10.1002/wrer.20109.
Pehme*, P., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, J.W. Molson and P. Greenhouse. 2012. Enhanced detection of
hydraulically active fractures by temperature profiling in lined heated bedrock boreholes. Journal of Hydrology, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.048.
Pehme*, P. and B.L. Parker, 2012. Time-Elevation Head Sections: Improved visualization of data from multi-levels. Technical Note. Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation,doi:10.1111/gwmr.12000.
Puigserver*, D., Carmona, J.M., A. Cortes, M. Viladevall, J.M. Nieto, M. Grifoll, J. Vila, and B.L. Parker, 2012. Subsoil heterogeneities controlling contaminant mass and microbial diversity in porewater in mega-site contexts. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2012.10.009
Wang, X., A.J.A. Unger and B.L. Parker, 2012. Simulating an exclusion zone for vapour intrusion of TCE from groundwater into indoor air. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2012.07.004.
Quinn*, P.M., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker, 2012. Hydraulic testing using a versatile straddle packer system for improved transmissivity estimation in fractured rock boreholes. Hydrogeological Journal, doi: 10.1007/s10040-012-0893-8.
Lima*, G., B.L. Parker and J.A. Meyer*, 2012. Dechlorinating microorganisms found in a sedimentary rock matrix contaminated with a mixture of VOCs. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, doi: 10.1021/es300214f.
Chapman* S., B.L. Parker, T. Sale and L. Doner, 2012. Testing high resolution numerical models for analysis of contaminant storage and release from low permeability zones. Journal of Contaminant Hydrogeology, doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2012.04.006.
Yu*, S.Y., B.L. Parker, A. Unger and T. Kim, 2012. Allocating risk capital for a brownfields redevelopment project under hydrogeological and financial uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Management, 100, 96-108, doi: 10.1016.
Lojkasek-Lima*, P., R. Aravena, B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2012. Fingerprinting TCE in a bedrock aquifer using compound specific isotope analysis. Groundwater, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00897.x.
Quinn*, P.M., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2011. Using constant head packer tests to determine apertures in fractured rock. Journal of Contaminant Hydrogeology, 126, (1-2) 85-99.doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.07.002.
Perrin, J., B.L. Parker and J. A. Cherry, 2011. Assessing the flow regime in a contaminated fractured and karstic dolostone aquifer supplying municipal water. Journal of Hydrology, 400: 396-410.
Quinn*, P.M., J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker, 2011. Quantification of non-Darcian flow observed during packer testing in fractured rock. Water Resources Research. 47 (9): W09533 doi: 10.1029/2010WR009681.
Parker, B.L., S.W. Chapman*, and J.A. Cherry, 2010. Plume persistence in fractured sedimentary rock after source zone removal. Ground Water. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2010.00755.x.
Loomer, Diana D., T.A. Al, V.J. Banks, B.L. Parker and K.U. Mayer, 2010. Manganese and trace-metal mobility under reducing conditions following in situ oxidation of TCE by KMnO4: A laboratory column experiment. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 119 (13-24), doi:10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.08.005
Loomer, Diana D., T.A. Al, V.J. Banks, B.L. Parker and K.U. Mayer, 2010. Manganese valence in oxides formed from in situ chemical oxidation of TCE by KMnO4. Environmental Science and Technology, 44, 5934-5939, doi: 10.1021/es100879w.
Britt, Sanford L., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2010. A downhole passive sampling system to avoid bias and error from groundwater sample handling. Environmental Science and Technology, 44 (13):4917-4923, doi: 10.1021/es100828u.
Amirtharaj*, E.S., B.L. Parker, M.A. Ioannidis and C.D. Tsakiroglou, 2010. Statistical synthesis of imaging and porosimetry data for the characterization of microstructure and transport properties of sandstones, Transport in Porous Media, 86 (1): 135-154. doi: 10.1007/s11242-010-9612-x.
Hartog*, N., J. Cho, B.L. Parker and M.D. Annable, 2010. Characterization of a heterogeneous DNAPL source zone in the Borden aquifer using partitioning and interfacial tracers: Residual morphologies and background sorption. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 115 (1-4): 79-89. doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2010.04.004.
Pehme*, P.E., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry and J.P. Greenhouse, 2009. Improved resolution of ambient flow through fractured rock with temperature logs. Ground Water, 48(2): 191-205. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2009.00639.x.
Yu, S., A.J.A. Unger and B. L. Parker, 2009. Simulating the fate and transport of TCE from
groundwater to indoor air. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 107: 140-161.
Henderson, T.H., K.U. Mayer, B.L. Parker and T.A. Al, 2009. Three-dimensional density-dependant flow and multicomponent reactive transport modeling of chlorinated solvent oxidation by potassium permanganate. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 106:195-211.
Abe., Y., R. Aravena, J. Zopfi, B. Parker and D. Hunkeler, 2009. Evaluating the fate of chlorinated ethenes in streambed sediments by combining stable isotope, geochemical and microbial methods. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 107: 10-21; doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2009.03.002.
Parker, B.L., S.W. Chapman* and M.A. Guilbeault*, 2008. Plume persistence caused by back diffusion from thin clay layers in sand aquifer following TCE source-zone hydraulic isolation. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 102:86-104; doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2008.07.003.
Hwang, Y.K., A.L. Endres, S.D. Piggott and B.L. Parker, 2008. Long-term ground penetrating radar monitoring of a small volume DNAPL release in a natural groundwater flow field. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 97:1-12, doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2007.11.004.
Meyer*, J.R., B.L. Parker and J.A. Cherry, 2008. Detailed hydraulic head profiles as essential data for defining hydrogeologic units in layered fractured sedimentary rock. Environmental Geology, 56(1): 27-44, doi 10.1007/s00254-007-1137-4.
Borchardt, M.A., K.R. Bradbury, M.B. Gotkowitz, J.A. Cherry and B.L. Parker, 2007. Human enteric viruses in groundwater from a confined aquifer. Environmental Science & Technology, 41(18): 6606-6612.
Pehme*, P.E., J.P. Greenhouse, and B.L. Parker, 2007. The active line source temperature logging technique and its application in fractured rock hydrogeology. Journal of Environmental & Engineering Geophysics, 12: 307-322; doi: 10.2113/JEEG12.4.307.
Cavé, L., N. Hartog*, T. Al, B. Parker, K.U. Mayer and S. Cogswell, 2007. Electrical monitoring of in situ chemical oxidation by permanganate. Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation, 27(2): 77-84.
Cherry, J.A., B.L. Parker and C. Keller, 2007. A new depth-discrete multilevel monitoring approach for fractured rock. Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation, 27(2): 57-70.
Klammler, H., K. Hatfield, M.D. Annable, E. Agyei , B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry and P.S.C. Rao, 2007. General analytical treatment of the flow field relevant to the interpretation of passive fluxmeter measurements. Water Resources Research, 43, W04407, doi:10.1029/2005WR004718.
Chapman*, S.W., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, R. Aravena and D. Hunkeler, 2007. Groundwater-surface water interaction and its role on TCE groundwater plume attenuation. Journal of Contaminant
Hydrology, 91: 203-232, doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2006.10.006. Dincutoiu, I, T. Górecki and B.L. Parker, 2006. Microwave assisted extraction of volatile organic
compounds from clay samples. International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry, 86(15): 1113-1125. doi: 10.1080/03067310600797580.
Parker, B.L., J.A. Cherry and B.J. Swanson*, 2006. A multilevel system for high resolution monitoring in rotosonic boreholes. Ground Water Monitoring & Remediation, 26(4): 57-73.
Al, T.A., V. Banks, D. Loomer, B.L. Parker and K.U. Mayer, 2006. Metal mobility during in situ chemical oxidation of TCE by KMnO4. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 88: 137-152. Annable, M.D., K. Hatfield, J. Cho, H. Klammler, B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry and P.S.C. Rao, 2005.
Field-scale evaluation of the passive flux meter for simultaneous measurement of groundwater and contaminant fluxes. Environmental Science &Technology, 39(18): 7194-7201.
Chapman*, S.W. and B.L. Parker, 2005. Plume persistence due to aquitard back-diffusion following DNAPL source removal or isolation. Water Resources Research, 41 (12), W12411, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004224.
Sterling*, S.N., B.L. Parker, J.A. Cherry, J.H. Williams, J.W. Lane Jr., and F.P. Haeni, 2005. Vertical cross contamination of trichloroethylene in a borehole in fractured sandstone. Ground Water, 43(4): 557-573.
Guilbeault*, M.A., B.L. Parker, and J.A. Cherry, 2005. Mass and flux distributions from DNAPL zones in sandy aquifers. Ground Water, 43(1): 70-86.
Parker, B.L., J.A. Cherry, and S.W. Chapman*, 2004. Field study of TCE diffusion profiles below DNAPL to assess aquitard integrity. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 74(1-4):197-230.
Jana K. Levison, Ph.D., EIT
Assistant Professor, Water Resources Engineering School of Engineering, University of Guelph
50 Stone Road East, Guelph, ON Canada N1G 2W1 Phone: (519) 824-4120 x58327 Email: [email protected]
Education
Ph.D., Hydrogeology, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Queen’s University 2009 Kingston, Ontario, Canada Thesis: Anthropogenic impacts on sensitive fractured bedrock aquifers
B.A.Sc., Civil Engineering (Environmental Option), Queen’s University 2004 Kingston, Ontario, Canada Thesis: Potable water: appropriate technologies for rural developing communities (focus: Chinandega Norte, Nicaragua)
Professional Experience
Assistant Professor, Water Resources Engineering 2012-present School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Canada
Postdoctoral Fellow, Groundwater Modeling 2011-2012 Dépt. des sciences de la terre et de l'atmosphère, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Canada
Acting Executive Director and Research Fellow 2009-2010 Ontario Centre for Engineering and Public Policy, Professional Engineers Ontario, Toronto, Canada
Geoscience Technician, Drinking Water Source Protection 2008-2009 Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority, Kingston, Canada (part-time) Awards
Global Environmental Change Centre (GEC3) Award, 2012
Ontario Graduate Scholarship in Science and Technology (OGSST), 2008-2009
Alexander Graham Bell Canada Graduate Scholarship (NSERC CGS-D), 2006-2008
A.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium Grant, 2008
A.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium Poster Award, 2008
IAH-CNC J. Toth Award (runner-up), 2007
Robert J. Mitchell Prize, Queen’s University, 2007
NSERC Postgraduate Scholarship (PGS-M), 2004-2006
Queen’s Graduate Award, 2004-2009
Civil ’85 Award, Queen’s University, 2004
Edward H. McLellan Scholarship in Coastal Geotechniques, Queen’s University, 2004
McMil Award in Environmental Engineering, Queen’s University, 2004
Canadian Geotechnical Society Report Award (runner-up), 2004
Dean’s Award and Dean’s Honour List, Queen’s University, 2001-2004
Queen Elizabeth II Aiming for the Top Scholarship, 2000-2001
Principal’s Entrance Scholarship, Queen’s University, 2000-2001 Professional Memberships
Professional Engineers Ontario (Engineering Intern)
Geological Society of America
International Association of Hydrogeologists
American Geophysical Union
Teaching Responsibilities
Currently instructing the following courses at the University of Guelph:
ENGG*6740 Groundwater Modeling
ENGG*3340 GIS in Environmental Engineering
ENGG*2230 Fluid Mechanics Instructed the following courses at past institutions:
SCT8161 Modélisation Hydrogéologique (co-instructor), UQAM
CIVL 204 Effective Technical Writing, Queen’s University Teaching Assistant experience at Queen’s University:
CIVL 467 Capstone Design Project
CIVL 382 Groundwater
CIVL 204 Effective Technical Writing
APSC 190 Professional Engineering Skills
APSC 100 Practical Engineering Modules
Research Focus
My research focuses on groundwater resources, specifically flow and contaminant transport with an interest in sensitive fractured bedrock aquifers. My approach includes coupling field research and mathematical modeling to characterize and study vulnerable aquifers with the intent to technically inform policy to protect water resources. During past research I have focused on rural (agricultural) and climate change impacts on groundwater quality and quantity. My other areas of research interest include: source water protection; innovative field characterization techniques; appropriate potable water technologies for marginalized communities; and fostering engineering and technological input into public discourse.
Selected Recent Publications
Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles 1. Levison, J., Larocque, M., Fournier, V., Gagné, S. and Ouellet, M.A. (2013) Dynamics of a
headwater system and peatland under current conditions and with climate change. Hydrol. Process., In press.
2. Levison, J. and Novakowski, K. (2012) Rapid transport from the surface to wells in fractured rock: a unique infiltration tracer experiment. J. Contam. Hydrol., 131: 29–38.
3. Levison, J., Novakowski, K., Reiner, E. and Kolic, T. (2012) Potential of groundwater contamination by polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in a sensitive bedrock aquifer (Canada). Hydrogeol. J., 20(2): 401–412.
4. Levison, J. and Novakowski, K. (2009) The impact of cattle pasturing on groundwater quality in bedrock aquifers having minimal overburden. Hydrogeol. J., 17: 559–569.
Conference Papers and Abstracts 5. Levison, J., Larocque, M., Ouellet, M.A. and van Waterschoot, L. (2013) Groundwater modeling
including climate change scenarios for an ecohydrological study in Covey Hill, Quebec. Canadian Geotechnical Conference and the 11th Joint CGS/IAH-CNC Groundwater Conference, Montréal, QC, 29 Sept.-3 Oct.
6. Larocque, M., Parrott, L., Green, D., Lavoie, M., Pellerin, S., Levison, J., Girard, P. and Ouellet, M.A. (2012) Modélisation hydrogéologique et modélisation des populations de salamandres sur le mont Covey Hill. 5e Symposium Scientifique d’OURANOS, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC, 19-21 Nov.
7. Ouellet, M.A., Levison, J. and Larocque, M. (2013) Changements climatiques et résurgences d’eau souterraine: une bonne nouvelle pour les salamandres de ruisseaux?" La Recherche hydrologique au Québec dans un contexte de changements climatiques, Québec City, QC, 25 Apr.
8. van Waterschoot, L., Levison, J. and Larocque, M. (2012) Effects of climate change on the hydrodynamics and groundwater-dependent ecosystem of Covey Hill, Québec. A.D. Latornell Conservation Symposium, Alliston, ON, 14-16 Nov.
9. Levison, J., Larocque, M. and Ouellet, M.A. (2012) Simulating the hydrological dynamics of bedrock springs under current conditions and climate change scenarios. Confronting Global Change, 39
th
International Association of Hydrogeologists Congress, Niagara Falls, ON, 16-21 Sept. 10. Ouellet, M.A., Larocque, M. and Levison, J. (2012) Linking climate change and groundwater: effect
of climate model uncertainty on predicted recharge and groundwater levels. Confronting Global Change, 39
th International Association of Hydrogeologists Congress, Niagara Falls, ON, 16-21 Sept.
11. Larocque, M., Levison, J., Girard, P., Ouellet, M.A., Parrott, L., Lavoie, M., Green, D. and Pellerin, S. (2012) Modélisation hydrogéologique et écologique sur le mont Covey Hill: perspectives pour la conservation des habitats en présence de changements climatiques. 80ième congrès de l’ACFAS, Montréal, QC, 7-11 May.
12. Levison, J., Larocque, M. and Ouellet, M.A. (2011) Groundwater discharge and habitat protection: a local-scale investigation of the impacts of climate change. NGWA Focus Conference on Fractured Rock and Eastern Groundwater Regional Issues (#5017), Burlington, VT, 26-27 Sept.
13. Levison, J. and Novakowski, K. (2011) Rapid transport from the surface to wells: a unique infiltration tracer experiment. GeoHydro, 1
st Joint Meeting of CANQUA/IAH-CNC, Québec City, QC, 28-31 Aug.
14. Levison, J., Larocque, M., Ouellet, M.A., Fournier, V. and Gagné, S. (2011) Impacts des changements climatiques sur l'écoulement souterrain d'un bassin amont. 79ième congrès de l’ACFAS, Sherbrooke, QC, 9-14 May.
15. Levison, J. and Wallace, D. (2010) Civil engineering and public policy engagement. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering Annual Conference, Winnipeg, MB, 9-12 June.
16. Levison, J. and Novakowski (2009) Fractured bedrock aquifers and agriculture: importance of source protection in this vulnerable setting. 44
th Central Canadian Symposium on Water Quality
Research, CAWQ and NWRI, Burlington, ON, 23-24 Feb. Reports and Articles 17. Larocque, M., Parrott, L., Green, D., Lavoie, M., Pellerin, S., Levison, J., Girard, P. and Ouellet,
M.A. (2013) Modélisation hydrogéologique et modélisation des populations de salamandres sur le mont Covey Hill: perspectives pour la conservation des habitats en présence de changements climatiques. Final technical report for PACC26 research, OURANOS, Montréal, Québec.
18. CRCA (2011) Cataraqui Source Protection Area amended proposed assessment report, Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority, Kingston, ON (Levison: contributing author to Chapter 5: Groundwater Sources).
19. Levison, J., Sossin, L. and Wallace, D. (2010) Towards the best policy directions for engineering regulators. Engineers Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 142 p.
20. Levison, J. (2010) Doing it right (ground source heating and cooling). Can. Consult. Eng. Mag., 51(3): 14-16.
21. Levison, J. (2010) A zero waste future and the engineer. J. Pol. Engage., 2(2): 17-19. 22. Levison, J. and Novakowski, K. (2009) Filthy water cannot be washed. J. Pol. Engage., 1(5): 2. Invited Lectures 23. "Making the case that filthy water cannot be washed: Importance of (ground)water research
technology transfer", World Water Day Panel: “Water, water everywhere, but much of it isn’t fit to drink: What is Guelph doing about it?”, University of Guelph Better Planet Project Speaker Series, Guelph, ON, 2013-03-22.
24. "Écoulement des eaux souterraines dans les aquifères de roches fracturées", Guest lecture for SCT 5310 (Hydrogéologie), Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC, 2013-02-04.
25. "Investigating the impacts of climate change on Canadian groundwater resources", Robert and Joyce Jones Civil Engineering Forum, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, 2013-01-31.
26. "G360 / Water Resources Engineering", Catalyst Centre: Business after 5, Guelph, ON, 2012-11-27. 27. "Water Resources Engineering at UofG", Science and Engineering Sunday, Guelph, ON, 2012-11-
18. 28. "Applied groundwater research at G360", University of Guelph Catalyst Centre Chatham-Kent
Industry Connector Event, Chatham, ON, 2012-11-08.
29. "Women in engineering", Go Eng Girl at University of Guelph, ON, 2012-10-13. 30. "Groundwater engineering: overview and applications", Guest lecture for ENGG*3670 (Soil
Mechanics), University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, 2012-10-01. 31. "Groundwater modeling in a changing climate", Engineering Matters: Ministry of the Environment’s
Fifth Annual Engineers’ Professional Development Day, Toronto, ON, 2012-03-06. 32. "Sensitive bedrock aquifers: a field study of agricultural impacts on water quality in Ontario", Série de
conférences en hydrogéologie GRIES/AIH-CNC QC, Montréal, QC, 2011-02-07. 33. "Expanding horizons through civic engagement", National Conference on Women in Engineering,
Ottawa, ON, 2010-11-20. 34. "Engineering and public policy in Ontario", Panel discussion and fundraiser for the University of
Western Ontario Engineers Without Borders Student Chapter, London, ON, 2010-02-25. 35. "Engineers and public policy development", Robert and Joyce Jones Civil Engineering Forum,
Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, 2010-01-14. 36. "1) Engaging engineers in the development of public policy and 2) Anthropogenic impacts on
sensitive fractured bedrock aquifers", Water Environment Association of Ontario Student Chapter, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, 2009-10-05.
37. "Anthropogenic impacts on sensitive fractured bedrock aquifers", Conservation Ontario Fractured Bedrock Working Group, Vaughn, ON, 2009-09-02.
38. "An overview of Youth Encounter on Sustainability (YES)", Robert and Joyce Jones Civil Engineering Forum, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, 2008-03-06.
39. "Youth Encounter on Sustainability course", Graduate Student Seminar Series, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, 2008-01-29.
Current Service at University of Guelph
School of Engineering Graduate Committee
School of Engineering Awards Committee
School of Engineering Liaison Committee
School of Engineering Working Group on Problem Analysis
School of Engineering Graduate Attributes: Problem Analysis Panel
Science Olympics for School of Engineering
Darcy Lecture at the University of Guelph
School of Engineering United Way Campaign
Profs are People Too (participant) Recent Professional and Community Service
Professional Engineers Ontario Government Liaison Committee [Chair of Regulatory Issues Sub-Committee], 2013
Organizing Committee, GeoMontreal 2013, Canadian Geotechnical Conference and the 11th Joint CGS/IAH-CNC Groundwater Conference
International Association of Hydrogeologists 2012 Congress session convenor and co-chair: “Groundwater Quality and Policies for Groundwater Protection”
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Don Watershed Regeneration Council, 2010
Canada Wide Science Fair Judge, 2010
NYCO Symphony Orchestra (Toronto) Board of Directors, Personnel Manager, 2010
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering Annual Conference 2010 session chair (invited): Urban Storm Water Management"
OCEPP Annual Conference 2010 session convenor and chair: "Ontario’s Waste Management Future"
Professional Engineers Ontario Green Team, 2009-2010
Geoscience Working Group and Fractured Bedrock Sub-Group, Conservation Ontario, 2009-2010
35
Appendix B – Regional Stratigraphy
1) Plan view illustrating the location of the regional cross section in (2) along Townline Road (pink
line). The figure shows the Oak Ridges Moraine Plan boundary (blue line), the approximate site
location (light blue shading), the CLOCA boundary (red line), and the boundary of the Lake
Iroquois shoreline (thin black line) (provided by Richard Gerber of the Oak Ridges Moraine
Hydrogeology Program).
2) Regional cross section (provided by Richard Gerber of the Oak Ridges Moraine Hydrogeology
Program). The site is located between Conc. Rd. 8 and Conc. Rd. 7.