Residents Urge EPA To Extend Public Comment Period on Dupont Dredging of Toxic Lake Sediments

October 31, 2014

Dear Regional Administrator Enck:

We are pleased that EPA proposed a draft RCRA Corrective Action permit modification to Dupont for the partial remediation of off site releases of mercury.

We are also pleased, as stated in the draft RCRA permit modification, that US EPA consulted with the US Fish and Wildlife Service prior to public noticing the draft permit.

The scientific basis for the remedial activities required by the draft permit is complex. The remediation is driven by the ecotoxicology of mercury, especially the effects of bioaccumulation on fish and wildlife and human health.

As you know, during the previous RCRA permit cycle, in a February 9, 2012 consultation letter – which was issued after the close of the public comment period and thus unavailable for public review during the permit process –  the USFWS raised significant concerns regarding the prior draft permit, see:

http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/nj/2_21_12_FWS_Pompton_Lakes_review.pdf

In that letter, USFWS stated:

“The Service does not believe that the proposed remedial action, as currently planned, will completely address historical releases nor be sufficient to protect against future injury to Federal Trust resources from residual contamination originating from the PLW….  The Service may consider performing a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) to evaluate injury to Trust resources from historical exposure and residual contamination following the proposed remedial action, and we have initiated contact with the Applicant in that regard.” (emphasis mine)

USFWS went on to raise substantive objections to, among other things, the ecological assessment that formed the basis of the remedial plan and permit modification.

Accordingly, given the critical importance of the ecological issues, we need sufficient time to fully review the draft permit, particularly in light of USFWS’s prior 2012 concerns.

We need to fully understand how those concerns were addressed in the 2014 version of the cleanup plan, particularly in light of the major work negotiated by EPA and conducted by Dupont during the Environmental Appeals Board process.

In order to review the complete administrative record – in addition to the documents posted on EPA’s website and otherwise made available by EPA – we are contemplating FOIA requests.

Given FOIA timeframes and the complexity of this draft permit, we ask that the public comment period be extended by at least 60 days so that we may review the full administrative record.

We appreciate your prompt and favorable consideration.

Respectfully,

Lisa J. Riggiola, Executive Director, CCPL

Bill Wolfe, Director, NJ PEER