Re: [CPEO-BIF] "Novel Strategy for Dealing with Toxic Contamination: DoNothing"

["Larry Schnapf" <larry@schnapflaw.com>]

Interesting that the article does not appear to mention petroleum sites
where this approach has been used far more widely than for haz waste sites.


Lawrence Schnapf

55 East 87th Street #8B
New York, New York 10128
212-876-3189 (p)
917-576-3667(c)
Larry@SchnapfLaw.com
www.SchnapfLaw.com 

2016-17 Chair-NYSBA Environmental Law Section
AV Preeminent Rating from Martindale-Hubbell
Listed in 2010-16 New York Super Lawyers-Metro Edition
Listed in 2011-16 Super Lawyers-Business Edition
Listed in The International Who's Who of Environmental Lawyers 2008-16
Chambers USA 2009-10 Client Guide of America's Leading Lawyers for Business.


-----Original Message-----
From: Brownfields [mailto:brownfields-bounces@lists.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of
Lenny Siegel
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 5:58 PM
To: Brownfields Internet Forum <brownfields@lists.cpeo.org>
Subject: [CPEO-BIF] "Novel Strategy for Dealing with Toxic Contamination:
DoNothing"

Novel Strategy for Dealing with Toxic Contamination: Do Nothing

By Dan Ross
Fair Warning
February 28, 2017

At toxic cleanup sites across the country, environmental agencies have
allowed groundwater contamination to go untreated and slowly diminish over
time-a strategy that saves money for polluters but could cost taxpayers
dearly and jeopardize drinking water supplies.

The strategy is called monitored natural attenuation, or MNA. With little
public awareness or debate, it has come into increasing use nationally since
the 1990s as a way to cope with the enormous cost of some groundwater
cleanups.

Despite the imposing bureaucratic name, it basically means keeping a
watchful eye while natural processes purge groundwater of chemical
pollution. According to Environmental Protection Agency guidelines, it's an
acceptable approach under some circumstances. That includes when
contaminants are expected to degrade in years rather than centuries, and
where there is no risk of polluted water seeping into, and spoiling, fresh
water supplies. MNA can be effective with contaminants such as petroleum
hydrocarbons that are eaten by microbes in the soil and groundwater.

But some advocates and experts say MNA sometimes has been approved in
violation of EPA guidelines. Because it is usually much simpler and cheaper
than active cleanup methods-such as pumping water out of the ground and
treating it-they say that MNA is being aggressively pushed by polluters at
many contaminated sites, often with too little pushback from regulators.

...

For the entire article, see
http://www.fairwarning.org/2017/02/novel-way-dealing-toxic-waste/

--

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
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

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