Re: [CPEO-BIF] Gowanus Canal update, Brooklyn, New York

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

Rich,

Politics may indeed explain the "deliberate" process, but I'm curious 
about the relatively rapid movement at the Raritan Bay Slag site. That's 
the anomaly. It usually takes EPA just 30 days to screw in a light bulb.

Cleaning up the Gowanus Canal is more than a Superfund cleanup. In my 
view, the Combined Sewer Overflow actually represents a greater threat 
to public health. That doesn't justify delay in listing, but making the 
site safe will also require the involvement of Clean Water regulators 
and a huge investment by the City of New York.

Lenny

R CHAPIN wrote:
> If EPA wants to list a site on the NPL quickly, they can do it. The 
> Raritan Bay Slag site was proposed in April 2009 and listed in November 
> 2009. That site also had significant backing of the local congressman, 
> the NJ's senators etc. The EPA's Removal Branch did a lot of work on a 
> quick schedule support the listing.
>
> NYC has a proposed plan and has submitted written objections. Not sure 
> in what capacity this was (i.e., the municipal government where the site 
> is, or as a PRP. Anyone know about this and can enlighten us?) I don't 
> know if NY congressman and senators have officially weighed in; 
> hopefully someone can also fill in this data gap.
>
> One man's opinion: EPA is not jumping in till it's sure it has to, and 
> hasn't gotten to that point, for a number of reasons. Maybe they don't 
> have the resources (i.e., people) to properly staff the job AND BIG 
> money is surely required to clean this up. Remember, superfund is not 
> awash with funds and hasn't been for years. (How long ago did that tax 
> expire?) If EPA doesn't/can't  "jawbone" a PRP to spent its own money 
> the site must get in line with the other NPL sites. EPA people have told 
> me many times if they start a site they will finish it, so they they 
> won't just jump into it. (If it hadn't been for ARRA, many major 
> projects here in Jersey would still be stuck in limbo.) I'm sure Region 
> 2 knows what it can and can't do with this years funding for its 
> superfund sites. And we shouldn't forget that superfund wouldn't be the 
> fastest route to completing the actual work or the most economical. If 
> they did list it, it would have to compete with all the other NPL site's 
> for staff and $. I doubt anyone in Region 2 would or could tell you that 
> Gowanus Canal would "win out" over all the other sites out there; they 
> have no way of knowing this. I suspect a combination a factors 
> (technical, financial and other) have resulted in EPA taking the 
> currently "safe" route of collecting more data. They are working on the 
> site, they just taken it all. (It is possible, BTW, that EPA just 
> couldn't/wouldn't accept the existing data's QA/QC and/or needs to fill 
> in "critical data gaps" that it identified before proceeding. This 
> wouldn't be the first time that questionable data (or just questioned 
> data)  has slowed cleanup work.)
>
> Rich Chapin
> _____________________________________________________
> Richard W. Chapin, M.S., P.E., BCEE
> President, Chapin Engineering
> 27 Quincy Road, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
> 908-647-8407 908 625 5697 (cell) 908-647-6959 (fax)
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lenny Siegel" <lsiegel@cpeo.org>
> To: "Brownfields Internet Forum" <brownfields@lists.cpeo.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 1:15 PM
> Subject: [CPEO-BIF] Gowanus Canal update, Brooklyn, New York
>
>
> > EPA in no rush to Superfund; more tests coming for filthy canal
> >
> > By Stephen Brown
> > The Brooklyn Paper (NY)
> > December 4, 2009
> >
> > Hopes for the Gowanus Canal to quickly be designated a Superfund site 
> > were reigned in on Thursday night as a top federal official cautioned 
> > that it is very rare for a proposal to be approved in less than a year.
> >
> > "It is unusual for a Superfund listing to be made in less than one 
> > year, even for sites that aren't as controversial as this one," said 
> > Walter Mugdan, the regional Superfund director for the Environmental 
> > Protection Agency, which started the Gowanus process in April.
> >
> > Given how much time has passed - and how much is already known about 
> > the toxic corpse of water - hopes were high that this informational 
> > meeting would actually serve as the forum for announcing the Superfund 
> > designation.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > For the entire article, see
> > http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/32/49/32_49_sb_gowanus_meeting.html
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Lenny Siegel
> > Executive Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
> > a project of the Pacific Studies Center
> > 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
> > Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
> > Fax: 650/961-8918
> > <lsiegel@cpeo.org>
> > http://www.cpeo.org
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Brownfields mailing list
> > Brownfields@lists.cpeo.org
> > http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/brownfields-cpeo.org 




--


Lenny Siegel
Executive Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
a project of the Pacific Studies Center
278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
<lsiegel@cpeo.org>
http://www.cpeo.org



_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@lists.cpeo.org
http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/brownfields-cpeo.org