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 adam.sanzo@ontario.ca 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 jlevison@uoguelph.ca

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.

20

Appendix A – Expertise (Short CVs)

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:cherryja@rogers.blackberry.net ; 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: bparker@uoguelph.ca; diffusionfx@sympatico.ca 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: jlevison@uoguelph.ca

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.

36

37