‘Perpetuity’: No end date in Nease cleanup
By LARRY SHIELDSSALEM - The cleanup of the Nease Chemical plant Superfund site will be be managed into "perpetuity," Mary Logan, the Remedial Project Manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5, said Thursday night.
Logan, Susan Pastor, the Community Involvement Coordinator for the EPA and Sheila Abrams of the Ohio EPA spoke during the hour-and-a-half meeting that laid out three mirex cleanup options to a gathering of about 30 people during a public meeting at the Salem Public Library Thursday night.
The proposed option requires bringing mirex-contaminated soil back to the plant site, burying and covering it there, an action some guests didn't like.
The Nease Chemical contamination saga spans more than a quarter of a century and now cleanup could begin during the construction season in 2011 with ongoing monitoring beginning five years after the local bio-system recovers and "settles down," Abrams said, noting the cleanup of the worst part, a 6.5-mile downstream section, stretching from the plant to about river mile 31, will receive the most attention in what the EPA calls "targeted remediation."
Nease Chemical operated the plant, 2.5 miles north of Salem on state Route 14 from 1961 to 1973, producing household cleaners, fire retardants and pesticides, some using an uncommon chemical called mirex. It did not manufacture Agent Orange, a carcinogenic defoiliant use in the Vietnam War, Logan said, in response to a statement from a guest.
Unlined ponds were used to treat chemical wastes, which seeped into the area's soil and ground water.
The Superfund site consists of 44 acres that Rutgers Organics, a German company, acquired in 1973 but never operated. The site
See NEASE, Page 5A
was placed on the Superfund National Priorities List in 1983.
The EPA reviewed a feasibility study prepared by Rutgers, which is the responsible party and recently proposed plans to clean up mirex-contaminated soil and sediment in two creeks near the plant.
It sent out 4,000 notices to area residents advising of a public comment period that runs until Aug. 13.
To date, Rutgers has spent $19 million to cleanup the grounds.
Logan pointed out that when Nease was fully operational there were no federal regulations, or EPA.
The EPA considered three options and one has been proposed. Thursday's meeting was part of the procedure required for a "record of decision" expected by the end of September which will lead to a final decision by the end of October.
The EPA is proposing "Alternative C," a $3.8 million plan that includes removal of the most contaminated sediment in the Middle Fork of the Little Beaver Creek, removal of feeder creek sediment and of the most contaminated floodplain surface soil.
Logan said "all sediment" and the feeder creek will be removed either by dry or wet excavation. Considering the size, Logan expected the excavation by scooping it out from the shoreline.
The floodplain will be excavated by conventional equipment and the area could reach back into shrubs and trees, leaving bare soil that will need to be re-seeded.
Logan said the most contaminated sediment, based on sampling, in the 6.5 mile section will be removed in containers and placed with other contaminated soil, covered with clean soil, monitored and controlled.
She said, "We're trying to minimize what we take out."
The long-term sampling will continue to "confirm" the mirex removal goal is met, Logan said, adding that sampling will include fish tissue.
"There is no risk from direct contact now. You can go in the creek," she said.
The Ohio EPA Web site has information consuming fish from the creek.
The proposed cleanup plan is the best one, Logan said, because it will remove the contaminated soil, provide protection for people and the environment and can be implemented quickly.
Inside the plant site, the two most contaminated ponds have been stripped and capped and Logan explained there is about 12,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and substance and 50,000 cubic yards or more that will be brought in and treated.
She said there is not a "huge volume in the creek bed itself...we're targeting the most contaminated.
Abe Bricker, whose property is near the plant, said he thought they were underestimating the remediation area. Logan said they found the floodplain was not equally contaminated for those living "real close" to the site, owing to gradients, width and the speed of the water flow.
She said, "For people who live in the 6.5 miles, we're not saying we're definitely going to be excavating your property."
Guest John Gilbert wondered about truck traffic into the site at three and four in the morning. A Rutgers representative said no chemicals were going in and ongoing cleanup waste was being removed.
Abrams, from the Ohio EPA, said she and her inspector were satisfied.
Gilbert later said they weren't doing enough.
One guest asked why the soil was being brought back to the plant site, and Logan said another site was considered but "there aren't a lot of landfills."
She added the EPA would "manage it to perpetuity."
Another guest was concerned about the half-life of mirex, which Logan said couldn't be answered, but the questioner disagreed saying it was "close to 100 years."
Another guest was was concerned about property values, an issue, Logan said, the EPA didn't deal with.
Guest John P. Tolson asked about the number of sampling sites used and over the years, Logan said it was about 400 with the most recent samples taken in 2005 and 2006.
Steve Roloson, the Northeast Ohio Scenic Rivers Manager for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, was concerned that engineers familiar with river restoration, people who "understand river processes" are employed in the cleanup.
He explained that material may have to replace excavated soil requiring placement of loose soil on top of stable soil.
"That's one concern," he said, adding he was also worried about re-introduction of mirex into what he called "upper watershed of the Little Beaver Creek." He suggested using containment bags during the soil and sediment removal.
Another resident wondered about taking the contaminated soil to another dump site and Gilbert said Rutgers "Needs to pay for that."
He added, "That soil needs to be removed and they need to pay for it."
One Salem resident, Mickey Cope Weaver, said she was disappointed in the lack of representation by city and county officials at the meeting.
Salem Utilities Department Superintendent Don Weingart was the only Salem official who attended.
The EPA had also approved a cleanup plan, in 2006, to address a portion of the site known as Operable Unit 2. Ground water and mirex-contaminated soil cleanup is still under way and is expected to continue through 2011.
Residents can also provide comment to the EPA by writing via the Internet at www.epa.gov/region5/publiccomment.nease-pubcomment.htm or by faxing comments to Pastor at 312-353-1155.
Pastor and Logan can also be reached by e-mail at: pastor.susan@epa.gov and logan.mary@epa.gov.
Larry Shields can be reached at lshields@salemnews.net
