Superfund Site Information
March, 2006
Michael Levin, Ph.D., F.A.A.A.S., a Havertown resident and activist for the conditions at the Havertown Superfund Site is asking all township residents to notify their Commissioners to contact the EPA regarding the Superfund Site and its effect on our quality of life. This is an issue that crosses township boundaries. Dr.Levin has graciously given permission to post his comments here.
|
WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS IN STORE AT THE SUPERFUND SITE
March 13, 2006
Vapor intrusion into structures on or near contaminated soils of the Havertown PCP site, which is on the National Priority List (NPL #542) since 1983, was raised at the January 2006 commissioners’ meeting. After the meeting a two page copy from EPA was handed to me and described as answering the question. It doesn’t. What it does show is: vapor intrusion could occur, the properties were not tested and there are no plans to do so. Thus, the question remains: where is the experimental testing design, have property owners been notified, and when will the testing take place. While I’m asking questions, where is the current map showing the extent and boundaries of the Havertown Superfund site including the recently found contamination.At least nine (9) toxic contaminants were stored, mixed and used in wood products manufactured at the site. These wood products were used in wood for outdoor and in-ground applications such as retaining walls, wood decks, and railroad ties; they also found their way into military installations, utilities and parks and recreation areas. Their use is now banned. Drive by a park and you will see preserved wood outdoor playground equipment has been/is replaced by plastic because the chemicals are toxic; a number are known carcinogens.
It was hoped that soils would be analyzed for contaminants by the EPA approved Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) that would identify the chemicals present in the soil. This critical step, required by federal and state environmental authorities seems to have been bypassed in favor of removing some – but not all – mostly undefined contaminants from ground water leaving those contaminants covered up in the soil. The site is not being cleaned up when contamination is left in place. This is unfortunate because the site – wherever it is and whatever its boundaries – has constrained uses even though over $20Million will be spent by 2013 when EPA flips the site to the state.
After the contaminated site is under state control, under law, no federal funds may be used, so it will revert to state funding; this will be paid for by Pennsylvania taxpayers; that’s us. There are over 65 such sites in the five county area in eastern Pennsylvania alone. You can count on the additional work being done on the cheap.
From this point, the state will rule the site to be a Brownfield, which means a developer would have to come forward with a plan acceptable to the state for the site to be developed. If he does, then there might be limited liability for future toxic effects from the site, meaning no one left to sue for adverse impacts or toxic effects. If contamination still remains on-site, as may be expected, the site will remain unbuilt and undeveloped. If someone becomes ill from suspected contamination at a site which has been developed and is cloaked in limited liability, it will be deemed uninhabitable and likely abandoned..
Conclusions. Haverford is being led down the federal and state Superfund/Brownfield “Garden Path” while your Commissioners’ and unqualified administrative staff do nothing.