In regards to the water, the presence of oil (or oil like substance) does not negate the presence of vinyl chloride contamination. We already know -- and have known -- that it can enter the air, soil and water when improperly disposed of.
Oil in the water would simply prove that it was contaminated from the incident in some fashion, which provides the vector of truth that it has entered the water.
The presence of oil is only the presence of oil; it doesn't "prove" anything else. Showing it as an illustration of more serious contamination is just being deceptive. The real problem with contaminated water is that it looks the same as uncontaminated water. And, in fact, the water may be acceptable...but the stream bed may contain contamination.
In regards to the water, the presence of oil (or oil like substance) does not negate the presence of vinyl chloride contamination. We already know -- and have known -- that it can enter the air, soil and water when improperly disposed of.
Oil in the water would simply prove that it was contaminated from the incident in some fashion, which provides the vector of truth that it has entered the water.
The presence of oil is only the presence of oil; it doesn't "prove" anything else. Showing it as an illustration of more serious contamination is just being deceptive. The real problem with contaminated water is that it looks the same as uncontaminated water. And, in fact, the water may be acceptable...but the stream bed may contain contamination.