MEC&F Expert Engineers

Thursday, April 1, 2021

EPA Proposes Plan for Next Phase of Cleanup at the Sherwin-Williams/Hilliards Creek Superfund Site in Gibbsboro, Lindenwold, and Voorhees, New Jersey

 




EPA Proposes Plan for Next Phase of Cleanup at the Sherwin-Williams/Hilliards Creek Superfund Site in Gibbsboro, Lindenwold, and Voorhees, New Jersey

 

NEW YORK (April 1, 2021) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a cleanup plan to address waterbodies of the Sherwin-Williams/Hilliards Creek Site in Gibbsboro, Lindenwold, and Voorhees, New Jersey. The proposed plan calls for the dredging of contaminated sediment, along with excavation and capping of floodplain soil at Silver Lake, Bridgewood Lake, Kirkwood Lake, and Hilliards Creek.

“The cleanup of these waterbodies has long been sought by these communities and we are proud of this proposal,” said EPA Acting Regional Administrator Walter Mugdan. “The proposed cleanup addresses arsenic and lead contamination that poses serious risks to people, fish and wildlife.”

There are three Sherwin-Williams Superfund sites that are sources of contamination to the waterbodies. The sites are located within the municipalities of Gibbsboro, Voorhees, and Lindenwold, New Jersey. Contamination from past paint manufacturing originates within the area of the Former Manufacturing Plant (Sherwin-Williams/Hilliards Creek Superfund Site), the Route 561 Dump Site, and the United States Avenue Burn Superfund Site. These source areas are being cleaned up under separate actions. Contaminants from these three sites have moved downstream throughout the lakes and creeks within Gibbsboro, Voorhees and Lindenwold.

EPA’s proposed plan calls for the dredging of 128,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment from Silver Lake, Bridgewood Lake, Kirkwood Lake, and Hilliards Creek. This plan also includes the construction of a system to temporarily divert streams during the cleanup.

In addition, EPA proposes to remove approximately 42,000 cubic yards of the top two feet of soil located with the floodplain areas and cap contaminated soil below two feet. EPA’s proposed plan provides for treatment, transport and disposal of excavated sediment and soil off-site at a permitted facility, and implementation of institutional controls in the form of deed notices. This plan will be protective of human health and the environment while preserving high-value wetland areas.


Throughout the proposed cleanup, EPA will monitor and further study the cleanup progress to ensure the effectiveness of the remedy and conduct a review of the cleanup every 5 years to ensure its effectiveness. Under the proposed plan, the estimated cost of this cleanup is approximately $90 million.

A 30-day public comment period for the proposed plan will occur from April 1, 2021 to May 3, 2021. EPA will host a Virtual Public Meeting on April 12, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. To register for the public meeting, visit https://epa-sherwin-williams-ou4.eventbrite.com. To learn more about the public meeting, contact Pat Seppi at Seppi.Pat@epa.gov or (646) 369-0068. 

Written comments on the EPA’s proposed plan may be mailed or emailed to Julie Nace, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway – 19th Floor, New York, NY 10007, Email: nace.julie@epa.gov


Wednesday, March 31, 2021

EPA Issues Administrative Order Requiring City to Construct Sewage Retention Tanks for Gowanus Canal Superfund Site Cleanup

 




EPA Issues Administrative Order Requiring City to Construct Sewage Retention Tanks for Gowanus Canal Superfund Site Cleanup

 

NEW YORK (March 30, 2021) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ordered the City of New York (city) to construct and operate two Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) retention tanks to control contaminated solids discharges at the Gowanus Canal Superfund site in Brooklyn, New York, which is a key component of the Gowanus Canal cleanup. The EPA’s order follows previous orders that EPA issued in 2014 and 2016 to require the city to find a location for and design the two tanks. Controls to reduce CSO discharges and prevent other land-based sources of pollution, such as street runoff, from compromising the cleanup are a critical part of the site’s cleanup plan.

“This order will ensure that EPA’s cleanup efforts will not be undermined by uncontrolled combined sewer overflow discharges that have contributed to the chemical contamination of this waterway and impacted this community for the past century and a half,” said EPA Acting Regional Administrator Walter Mugdan. “To ensure the integrity of the dredging work, the retention tanks will control New York City’s sewer outfalls over the long-term.”


The administrative order, issued on March 29, 2021, requires the city to construct one 8-million-gallon tank, located at the head of the canal, and one 4-million-gallon tank, located at a New York City Department of Sanitation Salt Lot near the middle of the canal.

The order also requires the city to, among other things:

  • Ensure that developers comply with municipal stormwater regulations within the Gowanus area to prevent additional sewer volume from impairing the effectiveness of the CSO tanks;
  • Provide treatment for separated stormwater discharges;
  • Perform monitoring of sewer solids discharges to ensure protection of the dredging remedy;
  • Perform associated maintenance dredging, if determined by EPA to be necessary;
  • Construct a bulkhead on City-owned property to prepare for the second phase of dredging work; and
  • Adhere to an overall schedule for remaining tank design work and construction.

The 2013 cleanup plan for the Gowanus Canal Superfund site includes dredging to remove contaminated sediment from the bottom of the canal, which has accumulated because of industrial activity and CSO discharges. More than a dozen contaminants, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls, and heavy metals, including mercury, lead, and copper, are present at high levels in the Gowanus Canal sediments. Dredged sediment that contains high levels of liquid tar will be thermally treated at an off-site facility and disposed. The less contaminated dredged sediment will be processed at an off-site facility to transform it into a beneficial use product, such as landfill cover. Certain areas of the native sediment, below the original canal bottom, that contain mobile liquid tar and are too deep to excavate, will be mixed with cement and solidified to prevent the migration of the tar into the water of the canal. Following dredging and solidification of areas of the native sediment, construction of a multilayer cap in dredged areas will isolate and prevent migration of any dissolved chemicals remaining in the deep native sediments. 


Cleanup work to resume next month at Grasse River Superfund Site in Massena, New York

 




Cleanup work to resume next month at Grasse River Superfund Site in Massena, New York

ALBANY, NY (March 30, 2021) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that in-river work will resume next month to address sediment contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) at the Grasse River Superfund Site (aka Alcoa Aggregation) in Massena, New York.

“It’s exciting to see the tremendous progress that has been made as we near the finish line for this critically important project,” said Walter Mugdan, Acting Regional Administrator. “EPA, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe continue to work together on the oversight of the various components of the project.”

In 2013, EPA selected a cleanup plan for the site that called for dredging and capping of PCB‐contaminated sediment in a 7.2‐mile stretch of river. The 2021 work will primarily include placement of a 12-inch sand, gravel and/or stone cap in the lower five miles of the main river channel from the Route 131 Bridge to the mouth of the Grasse River, covering over 200 acres; sand backfilling in areas dredged in 2020 near Snug Harbor; and habitat reconstruction throughout the site. The major elements of the in-river work are expected to be completed by the end of 2021. COVID-19 protocols will continue to be followed and safeguards will be maintained for the protection of site workers and the community.

To support this year’s work, an extended underwater pipeline will be used to transport some clean capping material from two staging areas to river locations. This operation will occur 24 hours a day, six days a week. The pipeline will be submerged along the river shoreline, with some floating sections near the cap operations. The pipeline will be marked with orange and white buoys. Designated crossing areas will be marked with green and red buoys in the channel. The remainder of the capping material will be transported by barges pushed by tugboats and placed mechanically on the river bottom using excavator-type buckets. On-river warning signs will be posted to alert oncoming boating traffic.

Information on boater safety can be found on the Arconic project website: www.thegrasseriver.com. Additional recreation advice is available from the New York State Department of Health: “Recreation Advice for Lower Grasse River During Dredging and Capping.” Recreational boaters are asked to take caution, reduce speed and adhere to traffic patterns in the project area.

A limited amount of dredging will be conducted in the navigational channel in 2021 just downstream of Snug Harbor. Snug Harbor is a small embayment (an embayment is a part of a body of water that extends beyond the general shoreline) on the north shore of the Grasse River, located about a third of a mile upstream from where it joins the St. Lawrence River. In 2020, EPA modified its original cleanup plan to include removal of an additional 90,000 cubic yards of sediment, instead of capping, from an area of the river near Snug Harbor. This additional removal was needed to accommodate a new, larger tugboat purchased by the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, which operates its tugboat out of Snug Harbor. Dredging was substantially completed at Snug Harbor in 2020. Approximately 110,000 cubic yards of sediment was removed from 20 acres of the river. Clean backfill material will be placed in this area in 2021.


 

Two shoreline support areas will be used in 2021 to store and manage capping material; one is the staging area located near the intersection of County Route 42 and Route 131 in Massena and the other is a newly constructed staging area on Haverstock Road. Clean capping material will be brought to these areas by truck and transported by barge or pipeline to the cap placement equipment on the river. As with previous phases of work, a traffic management plan will be in place to address the increased truck traffic at and near the staging areas. The Alcoa East Plant dock will also be used to support the project. While efforts will continue to be made to minimize traffic impacts, residents should exercise caution when driving in these areas.

Health and safety plans have also been developed to protect workers and area communities while work is underway. The air and river water will be monitored during the work, and the results will be available on Arconic’s project website: www.thegrasseriver.com. Noise and lighting in the work zones will also be monitored. Efforts will be made to mitigate noise generated from the construction activities. The submerged pipeline is expected to help reduce noise levels associated with capping operations during nighttime hours. Mechanical capping will be limited to daytime hours.

Howmet Aerospace Inc. (formerly Arconic Inc.) is responsible for performing the work at the site on behalf of the parties responsible for the Superfund cleanup.


Saturday, March 27, 2021

Drinking water supplied by New Jersey utilities between 2012 and 2017 contained 107 contaminants

 


NJ Drinking Water Contaminants Increase, Survey Says

Advocacy group says some substances top recommended health limits; most samples met standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

The latest tally of contaminants was 26 more than in the last report by the Environmental Working Group.

Drinking water supplied by New Jersey utilities between 2012 and 2017 contained 107 contaminants — some of which were at levels that advocates say are harmful to human health, according to a survey published on Wednesday.

The advocacy organization Environmental Working Group used data from the state Department of Environmental Protection on drinking water quality at New Jersey’s 579 utilities, as part of its national U.S. Tap Water Database, a biennial report. The latest tally of contaminants was 26 more than in the last report, covering the years 2010-2015, which was released two years ago.

In New Jersey, the report found some samples from larger utilities contained contaminants at levels that exceeded health limits as recommended by other states or by the nonprofit itself, although nearly all samples met standards set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Although the samples were taken as long ago as 2012, the contamination levels found are probably the same now unless a supply has been treated, said Chris Campbell, vice president for information technology at EWG.

“It is likely, barring installation of some form of treatment, that the levels now are similar to 2015-2017, which is the timeframe used on most contaminants,” he said.

The ‘Erin Brokovich’ chemical

The most common contaminant in New Jersey was hexavalent chromium, the so-called “Erin Brockovich Chemical” — named after the well-known public-health campaigner in California — that is used in the manufacture of dyes, paints, inks and plastics, and can cause lung cancer if regularly inhaled, according to federal health experts. The chemical was found at above EWG-recommended health limits in the water of 202 New Jersey utilities serving some 7.5 million people, the report said.

The second most common contaminant was bromodichloromethane, a chemical formed when chlorine is used to disinfect drinking water, and which has been linked in animal studies to cancer of the liver, kidneys and intestines, according to federal scientists. In New Jersey, there were 193 utilities serving some 5.1 million people where the chemical was found at above EWG’s recommended health limits, the report said.

EWG bases many of its health recommendations on standards set by California, or its own research. In New Jersey, there were 10 contaminants that exceeded the EWG-recommended health levels but only two that exceeded federal legal limits, the report said.

Utilities where multiple contaminants were found included Atlantic City, which had 10 chemicals that exceeded EWG’s health standards — the same number as in the 2017 survey. Still, the city’s water met all federal health requirements between January and March this year, the report said.

The Atlantic City contaminants included PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfate), one of the potentially carcinogenic PFAS family of per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals, at 33 times EWG’s recommended limit, and the related chemical PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) at 12 times the limit. The PFOA level was just within a new health limit that’s being adopted by the Department of Environmental Protection, while the PFOS level exceeded the state standard. EWG said it had no information on the source of contamination at Atlantic City.

Meeting federal standards

Atlantic City’s water also contained arsenic at 31 times EWG’s health guideline, and chloroform that was 40 times higher than the recommended EWG health limit. Arsenic is the only one of the 10 contaminants in the city’s water that’s subject to a federal legal limit of 10 micrograms per liter.

Still, Atlantic City, whose water system serves about 152,000 customers, complied with federal standards on lead, the survey found. Only 3.2% of the households sampled in Atlantic City exceeded the EPA’s lead health limit of 15 parts per billion (ppb) during the latest testing in 2017.

Among other utilities, New Jersey American Water’s western region system, serving some 264,000 people, also exceeded EWG’s health guidelines for 10 contaminants including hexavalent chromium and chloroform, neither of which have a legal limit.

New Jersey American Water said the substances identified by EWG in its water are mostly by-products of water disinfectants, which meet all regulatory requirements, and were previously reported to the DEP. Others are chemicals in source water at levels well below “recognized” state or federal drinking water standards.

“While we do not specifically treat for these unregulated compounds, their presence is affected by the overall treatment process,” the company said in a statement. “New Jersey American Water treats and delivers water that meets or surpasses EPA and New Jersey drinking water standards.”

Using California’s public health goals

The company’s president, Cheryl Norton, said the health limits advocated by EWG often use California’s public health goals that are a lot stricter than implemented state standards that take into account other factors like detectability and the cost of treatment. For example, she said California’s enforceable limit for arsenic is 2,500 times higher than its public health goal and matches the federal level.

At Woodbridge-based Middlesex Water, serving about 233,000 customers, hexavalent chromium and PFOA were both found at above recommended levels.

Middlesex’s chief executive, Dennis Doll, said the report was in line with the company’s own findings. “We don’t agree with the EWG’s methodology but the results they are reporting are not an unreasonable representation of our numbers,” he wrote in an email.

He noted that EWG’s health limits are recommendations, not regulations, and so the reported levels do not violate any legal limit. He called EWG’s proposed limit of 1 part per trillion (ppt) for PFOA “outrageously low and not based on sound science.” The PFOA level in the EWG report is based on only one Middlesex well, and so represents a very small part of the company’s overall system, he said.

While the PFOA level in the Middlesex system topped EWG’s recommendation, it was within the level that is being adopted by the DEP.

Unsound science driving ‘race to zero’?

The Water Research Foundation, a national group that Doll chairs, believes pressure on utilities and regulators from EWG and other advocates is resulting in “a race to zero” that he said is not being driven by sound science or EPA policy.

Still, EWG said the data shows that the EPA should set stricter standards on drinking water contaminants. “Legal does not necessarily equal safe,” the group said. “Getting a passing grade from the federal government does not mean the water meets the latest health guidelines.”

For its part, the EPA said it has set enforceable maximum contaminant limits (MCLs) for some chemicals including arsenic and chloroform, and has issued a number of regulations since the 1995 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act to reduce the risks of pathogens in ground water and surface water, and from disinfection by-products.

On PFAS, the agency reiterated that it will decide by the end of this year whether to begin regulating PFOA and PFOS, and is evaluating other PFAS chemicals for possible regulation.

Andrea Drinkard, a spokeswoman for EPA, said the agency distinguishes between the enforcement levels and “Maximum Contaminant Limit Goals” (MCLGs), as set by the Safe Drinking Water Act. For example, the MCLG for arsenic is zero because there is no level of arsenic in water that is without risk, but the EPA has set 10 micrograms per liter as the enforcement level “in accordance with SDWA requirements that EPA consider the feasibility, costs, and benefits when establishing regulations,” she said.

Different standards

Arsenic is one of 14 contaminants for which New Jersey has stricter limits than the EPA, according to the DEP’s Annual Compliance Report for 2018, which describes the different standards that water utilities are required to meet. That report names 49 water systems that exceeded maximum contaminant limits for different chemicals during the year, and another 29 that topped the EPA’s “action levels” on lead and copper.

The survey comes as New Jersey lawmakers and advocates step up their efforts to renew aging water pipes and sewers that leak drinking water and spill raw sewage during rainstorms. Municipal and investor-owned water utilities are also working to ensure that public water supplies are free of contaminants such as the lead that comes from antiquated pipes, and the PFAS chemicals that persist in many water systems long after their industrial uses have ended.

On Oct. 10, Gov. Phil Murphy set a target of replacing the state’s estimated 350,000 lead service lines — pipes that connect individual homes with water transmission lines — within 10 years. He proposed a $500 million bond to help utilities comply with the target, which is expected to cost some $2 billion in total.

Murphy’s initiative came on the same day as a major report on lead from Jersey Water Works, a consortium dedicated to renewing the state’s antiquated water infrastructure, and followed recent alarm over lead contamination in Newark where authorities are already replacing lead lines and helping residents install in-home filters.

Facts About the World Water Crisis

 


10 Facts About the World Water Crisis

  1. 784 million people around the world are without basic water access. That’s more than twice the population of the United States.
  2. More people die from unsafe water than from all forms of violence, including war.
  3. Two billion people, or about 1 in 4, lack access to a toilet or latrine.
  4. Diarrheal diseases, caused primarily by unsafe water and poor sanitation, kill more children under 5 years old than malaria, AIDS, and measles combined.
  5. Diarrheal disease kills one child every 60 seconds.
  6. About a quarter (22%) of health facilities in Least Developed Countries have no safe water.
  7. In sub-Saharan Africa, women and girls spend an estimated 40 billions hours a year collecting water.
  8. An estimated 400 million school days are lost each year due to water-related diseases, with 272 million lost to diarrhea alone.
  9. Lost time gathering water significantly reduces productive farming time for women in parts of the developing world. With safe water nearby, it’s estimated that women could feed 150 million of the world’s hungry.
  10. For every $1 invested in safe water and sanitation, a yield of $5 to $28 USD is returned in increased economic activity and reduced health care costs. Access to safe water stimulates the economy for the long-term.