|
US Fish & Wildlife Service to the US EPA on the Fox River PCB Clean-up Agency Urges Strong Reponse to
|
|
(click
here to see images of the dredging contamination)
Frank Lyons
Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590 Dear Mr. Lyons: As the Authorized Official for the U.S. Department of the Interior (Department) for the Green Bay Natural Resource Damage Assessment, I am writing to urge immediate action to address an environmental emergency that has occurred at sediment management unit 56/57 (SMU 56/57) on the Lower Fox River. Specifically, I am writing in support of a unilateral administrative order, pursuant to Section 106 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), to address the greatly elevated concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that have been exposed as a result of the dredging project conducted at the site under the auspices of the January 31, 1997, agreement between the State of Wisconsin and certain paper companies on the Lower Fox River (Agreement). As you know, the surface layer of sediments now contain very high concentrations of PCBs in areas where dredging was begun but not completed. The natural resource trustees are greatly concerned that this situation presents an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, the environment, and associated natural resources. The newly exposed PCB-contaminated sediments can be reasonably expected to migrate both downstream (during high flow events) and upstream (due to Green Bay seiches) of SMU 56/57 and cause further injuries to natural resources. In light of these concerns, we are prepared to provide any technical assistance that could help the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) in issuing an order to address the elevated PCB concentrations at SMU 56/57, as well as to ensure that any order is as effective as possible in protecting natural resources throughout the Green Bay Environment. In addition, consistent with the partnership approach we have taken at this site, the Department would be willing to sign the order jointly with you, and we are working to explore the opportunities for taking such an action jointly. Mr. Frank Lyons There are several critical issues which must be addressed by any order if it is to maximize our opportunities to eliminate the imminent and substantial harm to natural resources at or near the SMU 56/57 project. First, we must act very quickly. We cannot afford to waste most of the field season preparing the order or mobilizing equipment. The river most assuredly will freeze again next winter, and it is important that any emergency response action or interim emergency response action be completed before then. Further, even though Northeast Wisconsin has just experienced the sixth driest winter on record, the Fox River is already above its average flow because of seasonal high flows. A substantial rain event or above average rainfall could cause catastrophic resuspension of PCBs into the Green Bay Environment if we fail to respond in time. Therefore, it is critically important that actual work begin no later than May 1, and even earlier if it would be possible to expedite the process by concurrently drafting the order, assigning an on-scene coordinator, accessing the Superfund, and mobilizing contractors. A second critical issue which must be addressed by any order is the need to design a discrete project that can be completed during a single field season. As we have seen at SMU 56/57, an inability to completely remove highly contaminated sub-surface layers during a single field season is likely to result in elevated PCB concentrations. Therefore, no new surface area should be dredged at all unless that area can be dredged completely to remove the more highly contaminated sub-surface layers during a single field season. Further, except in the context of a complete OU4 remedy, no new surface area should be dredged unless that new dredging would reduce PCB concentrations at the edge of the expanded project area. Finally, no new surface area should be dredged unless sufficient funding, equipment, and personnel are in place to complete the entire project this field season. Obviously, this must include realistic contingencies for both cost and time overruns. A third critical issue which must be addressed is day-to-day control of the project. It is my strong opinion that day-to-day control of the project should rest exclusively with an Agency on-scene coordinator. This will ensure that the project is conducted in accordance with the requirements of CERCLA, its implementing regulations, and Agency policy. Moreover, an Agency on-scene coordinator will ensure that the sole focus of the project is to achieve the intergovernmental partners' objective of responding to this emergency quickly and effectively, without the potential diversion of incorporating any of the various modeling, demonstration, or mass removal goals associated with the original project. Finally, we remain skeptical regarding the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of large-scale capping in OU4, given the river bed elevation data in "Technical Memorandum 2G" prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the lack of data during very large flows caused by floods and seiche events. Nevertheless, we believe that temporary capping may be necessary at SMU 56/57 in two instances: (1) as a temporary measure to prevent sloughing and erosion at the edge of the project where it intersects with (previously) sub-surface layers of highly contaminated sediment, and (2) at the end of field seasons, as a temporary measure to minimize risks associated with exposing sub-surface layers with elevated concentrations, if dredging of OU4 is undertaken but cannot be completed within a single field season. Therefore, responding to SMU 56/57 may provide the ancillary benefit of testing the effectiveness of temporary caps for reducing winter risks in a multi-year dredging project for OU4. I believe that the four critical issues I have identified will determine whether the intergovernmental partners are successful at addressing the emergency situation at SMU 56/57. At a minimum, therefore, I recommend the following course of action: 1. Immediately post signs in the River near the SMU 56/57 project and at boat ramps in Ashwaubenon, De Pere, and Green Bay warning fishermen to avoid the area because of newly exposed PCBs.Please call me at 612-713-5301 if you would like to discuss any of this further, including the opportunity to issue a joint order. Sincerely, Mr. Frank Lyoncc: Apesahnekwat, MITW, Keshena, WI Gerald Danforth, OTIW, Oneida, WI John Lindsay, NOAA, Seattle, WA George Meyer, WDNR, Madison, WI bcc: Joan Goldfarb, SOL-CW, Washington, D.C.
Files:
|