DEM Slaps Court Complaint on City Waste Recycler

By ecoRI News staff

EAST PROVIDENCE — The state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) is getting tough on a controversial construction processing facility that is long overdue in complying with a city regulation.

TLA Pond View, on Dexter Road, was hit with a DEM compliant in Providence Superior Court on Jan. 5 for failing to secure a letter of compliance. City officials, however, haven't issued the letter due to zoning violations relating to the amount and type of construction waste the company processes.

DEM first asked for the letter last July 26. On Dec. 14, DEM demanded that the document be provided by Jan. 4 or risk having its license yanked.

After TLA Pond View failed to meet the latest deadline, DEM asked the court to order the company to cease operations until the letter is issued by the city. If the court approves the request, the company's license would be suspended immediately. It also would be forced to stop taking in construction debris and remove and dispose of existing construction waste material within 14 days.

Despite a Statehouse protest last April attended by neighbors and activists, DEM gave permission for TLA Pond View to process 1,500 tons of construction and demolition waste a day, or 10 times its original permit of 150 tons daily.

A call to TLA Pond View was not returned. A hearing on the complaint will be heard in Superior Court on Jan. 23.

Neighbors of the facility have complained of toxic dust and other pollutants that have allegedly been emitted by the facility. Residents say the pollution has caused respiratory illness, headaches, nausea and other health problems.

"Residents have been urging DEM to enforce the law for over a year and couldn’t be happier that the day has finally come," said Taryn Hallweaver, a community organizer for Boston-based Toxics Action Center.

Davis Site in Smithfield to Get Groundwater Cleanup

By ecoRI News staff

SMITHFIELD — The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reached a settlement with respect to the Davis Liquid Waste Superfund site, in which the defendants will implement a groundwater cleanup and be financially responsible for 100 percent of future response costs.

The Davis site has presented real and potential threats to the residents of Rhode Island for too long, according to Janet Coit, director of the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM).

Remediation of the site has been complex and time consuming, and has included the treatment of almost 30,000 yards of contaminated soil, the removal of buried hazardous waste drums and the purging of more than 6 million discarded tires, according to the DEM.

“We look forward to participating in this final step of the process by treating the contaminated groundwater that remains on the site,” Coit said. “This agreement further emphasizes that the (DEM) is going to work diligently to hold parties responsible for their acts, to ensure protective cleanups that safeguard our natural resources and protect environmental quality for all Rhode Islanders.”

In 1992, the attorney general initiated a suit against William Davis requiring the removal of millions of tires that had been disposed at the site as far back as the 1970s. Although the last of the tires were removed in 2000, the attorney general’s office remained committed to the remediation of the environmental hazards that existed on the site as a result of decades of solid and hazardous waste storage.

Throughout the ’70s, the 10-acre site on Tarkiln Road accepted liquid and chemical wastes such as paint and metal sludge, oily waste, solvents, acids, caustics, pesticides, phenols, halogens, metals, fly ash and laboratory pharmaceuticals, according to the EPA. Liquid wastes were transported in drums and bulk tank trucks and were dumped directly into unlined lagoons and seepage pits.

The major contaminants of concern that exceeded federal and state standards are: volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as tetrachlorethene, trichloroethene, vinyl chloride and benzene; semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), including bis (2-chloroethyl)ether; pesticides, such as aldrin and dieldrin; and metals, including arsenic and manganese, according to the EPA.

Exposure risks to residents from contaminated groundwater have been minimized since homes in the area are now on public water, the EPA said.

The settling defendants include: Ashland Inc.; the Black and Decker Corp.; FKI Industries Inc.; Bristol Inc.; Morton International LLC; Rohm and Haas Co.; and Life Technologies Corp.

The EPA will contribute up to $9.5 million to the groundwater cleanup from payments made by previous settling parties that were set aside specifically for use at this site.

T.F. Green Plans to Better Catch Harmful Runoff

By ecoRI News staff

WARWICK — The Rhode Island Airport Corporation plans to spend $25 million during the next three years to stop chemicals from airplane deicing trucks at T.F. Green Airport from polluting the environment.

Every winter, airports across the country, including T.G. Green, spray millions of gallons of deicing chemicals onto planes and allow the runoff to trickle away. When these chemicals end up in nearby waterways, the deicing fluid can turn streams bright orange and create dead zones for aquatic life.

The proposed collection system at T.F. Green Airport is scheduled to be completed by March 2015. It’s part of an agreement recently reached between the airport corporation and the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to reduce the amount of deicing pollutant that is discharged into Buckeye Brook and other nearby wetlands.

This new collection system will enable the airport to collect 60 percent of the glycol-based deicing solution used on planes as compared to its current collection rate of 35 percent to 45 percent, according to the agreement.

Aircraft deicing/anti-icing fluids typically contain water, glycols and additives. The toxicity exhibited by these fluids is due in part to the presence of glycols, which typically make up between 45 percent and 65 percent of the total fluid by weight, but is also due to the additives contained in the fluids, according to environmental groups.

Several toxicity studies have been performed using pure ethylene glycol and propylene glycol, but few studies have been performed using formulated aircraft deicing/anti-icing fluids. The formulations are considered trade secrets, and only limited information is available on the actual chemical compositions of these formulated fluids.

500 Open Cases of Environmental Violations in R.I.

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

PROVIDENCE — There are 503 open cases for alleged environmental violations across Rhode Island. The number may seem excessive, but officials say the case load has been constant in recent years. A more pressing concern is the drop in the number of investigators the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) now employs to investigate infractions.

Six years ago, DEM's Office of Compliance and Inspection had 40 employees; today it has 24. Its staff now has less time and resources to go after polluters, issue air and water violations, stop wetland destruction and monitor septic systems and cesspools.

"Every year, we lose a couple (employees) and we don't fill it. The staff keeps dwindling," said David Chopy, chief of DEM's compliance and inspection office.

Much of the focus of compliance investigation lately has been addressing the odor problem at the Central Landfill in Johnston. Although complaints have dropped during the past two weeks, DEM was investigating some 50 calls a week due to odor problems reported in November. So far, DEM has filed seven violations over objectionable odors reaching 5 to 8 miles from the landfill, while it keeps a near-constant staff presence at the facility.

Other Rhode Island environmental violations also are getting additional attention. In recent months, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been publishing a watch list of water, air and hazardous waste polluters. To make the list, called ECHO (Enforcement and Compliance History Online) a business or other entity hasn't fulfilled its terms of a violation and deemed a "significant non-complier" by the EPA. Much of the local data is based on DEM reporting.

In September, seven Rhode Island businesses made the list, including Bio Waste LLC in Cumberland, Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. in Cumberland, Northland Environmental Services Inc. in Providence, R&R Polishing Co. in Cranston and Unique Plating Co. in Johnston. In November, two remained: D&D Chrome Plating on the West Side and Block Island Power. Officials say D&D owes $6,000 in fines relating to hazardous materials storage and protections dating back to violations in 2007. Block Island Power apparently has an unresolved air pollution violation from an inspection 10 years ago.

The ECHO watch list doesn't include dozens of violators who have settled their penalties or some 100 that are in dispute or yet to be resolved. About 300 wetlands, septic, solid waste and dam violations are excluded entirely from the online EPA database. The entire list is available upon request to the DEM.

A list of EPA completed enforcement actions by year for air, water and hazardous waste violation is available here. The EPA and DEM resolved some 47 local cases in those three categories during the past year.

Chopy noted that in his department's annual report that the Office of Compliance and Inspection is streamlining it methods for resolving enforcement actions, which has helped reduce the number of pending cases.

Still, he admitted, keeping his staff intact would make a difference.  "There's certainly a fair percentage (of cases) that if we had the proper resources we could move them forawrd."

R.I.'s Idling Law: Unenforced or Unenforceable?

By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

Emissions from diesel engines, when compared to those of an everyday car engine, are a nastier lot. What makes these emissions more dangerous than typical car exhaust fumes is the presence of fine particles in the puffs of black smoke emanating from exhaust pipes.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), these fine particles can aggravate asthma and cause lung damage. They are also classified as a likely human carcinogen.

This Providence Water truck was recently seen idling away at the corner of Pitman Street and Butler Avenue on the city's East Side, while its occupants ate lunch in the cab. (Dave Fisher/ecoRI News)Fortunately, all six New England states have enacted diesel idling restrictions (pdf). In Rhode Island, owners and operators of diesel-powered vehicles are subject to fines of up to $100 for the first violation, and up to $500 for successive violations. The regulation has a host of caveats concerning emergency vehicles and the like, and restricts idling to five consecutive minutes in any 60-minute period.

The cumulative fines for trucking and transportation companies could stack up quickly into tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. Since the EPA issued national regulations concerning diesel-engine idling, more than $3 million in fines have been issued in Massachusetts. It's a safe bet that these companies, after being fined repeatedly, make sure their drivers are aware of the law when they are in Massachusetts.

Enforceability is a major concern to those who craft and institute pollution laws. In addition to the law and parking enforcement officers who can cite violators of this law in Rhode Island, the law also is enforceable by the state Division of Motor Vehicles and Department of Environmental Management (DEM). Due to the broad range of possible enforcers of the law, State Police give the idling law a 10 out of 10 for ease of enforcement. One would think that with such an easily enforceable law, tickets would be written left and right, but that hasn’t been the case in Rhode Island.

According to Thomas Laliberte, administrator of the Rhode Island Traffic Tribunal — where all idling violations issued in the state would be adjudicated — there have been no recorded violations of the idling law. This may be a clerical error, though. State Police insist its officers have cited operators of diesel vehicles for excessive idling, though not frequently, since the law went into effect in July 2007. In comparison, 91,000 speeding tickets were issued in Rhode Island in 2010 alone.

When enacting new regulations, communication and awareness of new laws are tall hurdles to overcome. While researching this story, ecoRI News conducted an informal poll of 30 police officers in Woonsocket, Lincoln, North Smithfield, Providence and Warwick. Of the 30 officers, only three were aware that the DEM regulation had passed as a General Law (RIGL 31-16.1) and that excessive idling was restricted by the state and an actual fineable offense.

Older diesel engines emit more toxins and particulates than newer models, and federal guidelines are actually tiered into three groups based on the age of the vehicle. Pre-1990 diesel engines are subject to the least stringent standards, vehicles produced between 1991 and 2000 have more strict guidelines, and diesel cars and trucks manufactured after 2001 must adhere to the strictest federal emissions standards. A glut of money — some $2.25 million — has been made available in Rhode Island through the EPA and federal stimulus funds for the state and municipalities to retrofit their diesel fleets to bring them into compliance with state and federal emissions standards.

Officials at DEM and the State Police assure that the trucking and transport industry has done a more than adequate job of bringing their private fleets into compliance with state and federal standards.

Regardless of the lowered level of pollutants emanating from increasingly compliant vehicles, excessive idling is still forbidden in Rhode Island, and one doesn't have to go far to see violations. In the past month, ecoRI News has seen several diesel trucks idling away in parking lots and on roadsides, including delivery trucks for food and parcels, and in one infuriatingly ironic case, a Providence Water maintenance vehicle.

The transportation sector is the primary producer of air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. In fact, carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S. transportation and shipping sectors are greater than every other country’s total emissions, with the exception of China.

Rhode Islanders with chronic pulmonary conditions — and those that hold clean air as an invaluable resource — would certainly like to see our idling law be a bit more vigorously enforced. One would think that these laws would warrant a bit more prioritization, given that air pollution causes more deaths than speeding and drunken driving combined. The World Health Organization has estimated that worldwide 3 million deaths annually can be attributed to air pollution, three times more than the 1 million deaths attributed to traffic accidents.

DEM Issues Ultimatum to E. Providence Recycler

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

TLA Pond View, a construction waste recycler in East Providence, might lose its license to operate. (Tim Faulkner/ecoRI News)EAST PROVIDENCE — The state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) is turning the screws on a controversial construction waste recycler.

The DEM sent notice Dec. 14 to TLA Pond View demanding that the company file overdue paperwork with the state by Jan. 4 or have its license to operate yanked.

The late paperwork is a letter of compliance from the city, which DEM first asked for July 26. The city, however, hasn't issued the letter due to zoning violations relating to the amount and type of construction waste the company processes.

Nearby residents, city officials and advocacy groups have long complained about the spread of lead and toxins from the dust created by the processing of construction waste at the Dexter Road facility. Despite Statehouse protests and several anti-Pond View public hearings, DEM allowed the company in May to expand its operation by up 10 times its current volume of waste.

DEM said the facility has met all regulations, but lacks the compliance letter from the city — thus putting the company in danger of operating illegally.

Dust from the grinding of construction material such as pressure-treated wood releases lead paint and asbestos, according to the Boston-based Toxics Action Center (TAC). The dust settles on nearby properties, including a playground and the Myron J. Francis Elementary School. Residents have complained of respiratory illness, headaches and nausea, according to the advocacy group. There also are concerns that Omega Pond, which Pond View draws water from for its operations, is polluted.

"The last year has been a roller coaster for local residents," said Taryn Hallweaver, Rhode Island community organizer for TAC. But DEM's recent action, she said, is a significant plus for the campaign. "They've been dragging their feet for the last six months, but we're grateful that they are finally stepped up to enforce the law."

"It's really a victory for the people of East Providence," said Jo-Ann Durfee of the East Providence Prevention Coalition, who lives about 700 feet from the TLA Pond View facility. She, Hallweather and other residents plan to meet with DEM on Dec. 16 to make sure the state agency keeps up enforcement.

"We're not giving up," Durfee said.

TLA Pond View has challenged the Zoning Board ruling and the case is currently in state Superior Court. A call to company officials wasn't returned.

Field's Point has a Handle on Raw Sewage

Reporting by TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

Video work by RAMON GARCIA/special to ecoRI News

PROVIDENCE — In the three years since the the Field's Point wastewater treatment facility was built, upper Narragansett Bay has become considerably cleaner. Before the 3-mile tunnel opened, raw sewage would dump into the bay about 90 times a year. It now happens about four times a year.

The $350 million, seven-year project completed its first phase on time and under budget. Phase 2 and 3 will bring in sewage and stormwater from other parts of Providence and eventually will accept wastewater from Central Falls and Pawtucket.

The Narragansett Bay Commission (NBC) runs the facility, known as the Combined Sewer Overflow project, from its Field's Point headquarters off Allens Avenue. The NBC has many other green projects in the works, including a biogas-to-energy installation and three new wind turbines slated for installation in March.

Here’s the Scoop: Keep Pet Waste Off R.I. Beaches

By AMIE PARRIS and LAUREN RUSSO/special to ecoRI News

Don’t leave Fido’s meal from last night on the beach for some kid to incorporate into his sandcastle. (Photo courtesy of Elizabeth Gooding)We all love our pets. They are our best friends and favorite companions; however, what they leave behind can be harmful to our health and the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified pet waste as a pol­lutant and has included it as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.

Pet waste is 57 percent more toxic than human waste, according to the EPA, and can harbor bacteria and parasites that cause illness in humans. Diseases spread by pet waste include campylobacteriosis, giardiasis, salmonellosis and toxoca­riasis. All of these illnesses can cause nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Some of the other symptoms may include fever, rash and/or headache.

Children who are playing in beach sand can come in contact with pet waste and then put their unwashed hands in their mouth. In addition, rainwater or the tides can carry and spread pet-waste bacteria into swimming waters. In both of these cases, pet waste can make people sick. Just two or three days’ worth of waste from 100 dogs can contribute enough bacteria to temporarily close a large area to swimming or shell fishing.

Pet waste also contains high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus, and can cause an increase in algae growth — algal blooms — in Narragansett Bay. When bacteria decomposes algal blooms, they require oxygen from the water. During decomposition, the water’s oxygen supply is used by bacteria instead of by animals.

When pet waste is thrown in storm drains, the runoff from streets to these drains washes the waste right into the bay and ocean.

In 2011, the state Department of Health’s Beach Program partnered with the University of Rhode Island Undergraduate Research Initiative to investigate the extent of pet waste at Ocean State beaches. Data was collected from beach managers, the public and from water-quality analysts. In addition, URI students visited saltwater beaches throughout the state and evalu­ated each for pet use, visible pet waste, visitors’ perspectives and opinions regarding pets at the beach.

If pet waste was observed on a beach, water samples were collected and ana­lyzed for the presence of E. coli bacteria — one in five of the beaches where pet waste was observed had elevated levels of E. coli bacteria. Results from the study were utilized in edu­cational outreach materials that stress the importance of cleaning up after pets.

Regulations regarding pet use at beaches vary by facility management, according to the study/survey. Many Rhode Island beaches allow pets year-round while some have restric­tions based on seasons or times of the day.

More than 100 people were polled at beaches throughout the state during the investigation. The results of the survey included:

82 percent of respondents said pet waste on the beach is a problem.
23 percent had seen or come across pet waste on the beach.
74 percent said pet waste on public beaches should be better regulated.
Less than half of the respondents knew the regulations regarding dog use at the beach they were visiting.

In Rhode Island, there are some 255,000 dogs that pro­duce about 70 million pounds of waste annually. If you are visiting a beach in Rhode Island with a four-legged friend:

Know and follow the rules of every beach and public area that you visit.
No dogs allowed on state beaches from April 1 to Sept. 30.
Ordinances and potential fines vary by municipality, but rules are generally posted at each city/town beach.
Dispose of pet waste in a proper disposal receptacle.
Don’t throw pet waste near or in storm drains.

Amie Parris and Lauren Russo are with the state Department of Health’s Beach Program. This article originally was published in the Winter 2011 Narragansett Bay Journal.

Funding Scarce to Make R.I. Less Toxic

By KEVIN PROFT/ecoRI News staff

Barrels of contaminated waste dug up at Picillo Farm in Coventry during the clean-up effort in 1982. (Photos courtesy of DEM)PROVIDENCE — Terry Gray from the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) began his presentation by describing the Superfund as “a program that works to protect people from the messes created by their parents, grandparents and great-grandparents.”

At the recent Superfund Research Program seminar hosted at Brown University’s Barus and Holley Hall on Hope Street, Gray, assistant director of waste, air and compliance for the DEM, and Matthew DeStefano, DEM’s supervising engineer for federal programs, educated and updated attendees on the history, progress and future of the federal Superfund program and its state-run counterpart.

Until the 1970s, there was a complete lack of environmental regulation in place in the United States. This began to be remedied with the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in December 1970. Then, 10 years later, Congress saw the need to create a fund that would allow the EPA to identify parties responsible for contaminating the environment and forcing those parties to clean up the mess. The act was named the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, but is more commonly referred to as the “Superfund.”

The fund got off to a slow start during the laissez-faire economics of the Regan administration, but was bolstered in 1986 during an amendment process that increased funding, improved the technology being used at Superfund sites and made clean-up requirements more rigorous. Unfortunately, since that time, the program has declined as a priority in the federal budget, and is now grossly underfunded.

Program funding has been reduced to the point where the adoption of new sites by the program has become rare. With the exception of large-scale mining operations in the Rocky and Sierra Nevada mountain ranges that are contaminating hundreds of miles of streams and watershed, and require hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up, no new sites are being added to the Superfund program.

In Rhode Island, a Superfund site hasn’t been added since 2000, when the Centredale Manor Restoration Project in North Providence was initiated.

"The Superfund was never meant to go into perpetuity when it was conceived by Congress back in 1980,” DeStefano said.

That being said, the Dec. 2 seminar made it clear that it’s hard to justify eliminating the program completely, considering the high number of contaminated sites requiring attention in the United States.

The topics of the seminar included the Picillo Farm site, the Rose Hill landfill, and the state’s efforts to pick up the slack after it realized, back in 1993, that the Superfund program couldn’t handle all of the state’s contaminated sites.

Picillo Farm, in Coventry, is certainly one of the state’s most interesting Superfund sites, because of how it became contaminated. During the mid to late 1970s, Picillo Farm began supplementing its pig farm revenue by accepting any and all contaminated waste and burying it in trenches across the property. The farm accepted barrels containing hazardous waste and explosives, and even an 18-wheeler that was backed into a trench and then buried after detaching the rig.

The money was pouring in until 1977, when the chemical waste and explosives all came together in a blast that is rumored to have been visible from Providence 15 miles away. The farm’s owner skipped town for Florida, and Rhode Island was left with a serious mess.

Picillo Farm was listed as a Superfund site in 1983, and is still listed today. To clean up the site, all of the waste had to be dug up and removed. Much of the contaminated waste initially was shipped out of state. The site was so contaminated that clean-up workers had to wear head to toe decontamination suits in which the environment could be controlled and air could be supplied to workers by oxygen tanks on their backs.

After the waste was removed, the sites were paved to stop water from penetrating the contaminated soil and becoming contaminated itself. Next, a pumping station and wells were built to remove the groundwater so that it could be decontaminated at an on-site treatment station and then discharged into the environment in a nearby swamp. Other wells were built to extract contaminated soil vapor. The project at this point is basically on cruise control and is expected to remain that way for many years, according to officials.

Without the Superfund program, however, the site would have remained contaminated for centuries.

The Rose Hill landfill in South Kingston was added as a Superfund site in 1989. The site got its start as a 70-acre gravel pit, and later was turned into a 30-acre landfill. While in operation, landfill managers accepted mostly anything, which resulted in contaminated waste barrels finding their way into landfill. The site was polluted enough to turn water from a nearby river from clear to orange as it flowed past the landfill. While the level of contamination at Rose Hill was nowhere near the level experienced at Picillo Farm, a major clean-up effort was still required.

First, much of the solid waste had to be dug up to test the site's levels of contamination. Then, the multiple landfill sites on the property were collected into one giant site so that it could be more easily managed. The areas where all the waste was moved away were then filled with uncontaminated soil and monitored, while the new mega-landfill was capped. It’s now in a long-term “operation and maintenance phase.”

Clean-up costs are high. The Picillo Farm site has cost tens of millions of dollars to date, while the less-intense Rose Hill site has cost $13 million to clean up, which has been absorbed by the Superfund program and the party responsible for the contamination. These high costs weigh heavily on the Superfund budget.

In response to the Superfund’s inability to handle all of the contaminated sites in Rhode Island, a state-initiated program was developed in 1993 to pick up the slack. Currently, there are 13 listed Superfund sites in Rhode Island, while its state-level counterpart is managing 1,800 sites, including the Cranston sanitary landfill and the Gorham site. In almost all cases, the state program requires the contaminating party to pay for the entire cleanup, but the process can be slow depending on the amount of litigation required before cleanups can move forward.

With the Superfund program no longer accepting new sites, more and more pressure is being placed on the state to take care of these environmental messes on its own.

“We try to be proactive whenever possible,” DeStefano said. “In addition to cleaning up previously contaminated sites, we want to stop new contaminated sites from happening in the first place.”

N. Providence Superfund Site Years in the Making

By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

NORTH PROVIDENCE — Rhode Island is home to 13 official Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund sites that rank on the National Priorities List. One of those sites is a 9-acre area of contaminated fill on parts of the Centredale Manor and Brook Village apartment properties. The EPA has proposed a large-scale cleanup to remove contaminants in the soil and pond sediment surrounding the site.

Proposed cleanup areas at the Centredale Superfund site in North Providence. Click for full size image. (Map courtesy of EPA)At the end of Rhode Island’s booming textile industry, from 1921 to 1940, the Centredale Manor site was occupied by the Centredale Worsted Mill and then the Olneyville Wool Combing Co. Site usage from 1940-43 is unknown, but between 1943 and 1971 the site was used by two companies — the Atlantic Chemical Co./Metro-Atlantic Inc. for chemical manufacturing and the New England Container Co. Inc. for drum recycling.

The first signs of trouble at the site were aerial photographs, taken during the 1960s and '70s, that show areas of uncovered, outdoor drum storage, along with some disturbed areas. Further investigation of the disturbed areas found that the fill contained glass, concrete, paint and other waste materials.

Fire insurance rate maps compiled in 1956 and '65 depict areas of drum cleaning and storage on the southern portion of the site. In the early '70s, all the buildings on the site were demolished, but the whereabouts of the demolition debris is unknown. The Brook Village and Centredale Manor apartments were built on the site between 1976 and '79 and 1982, respectively.

Trash turns toxic
Construction of the Brook Village complex was halted in 1977, when the state Department of Health (DOH) Division of Air Pollution Control responded to complaints of noxious fumes at the property, and found more than 50 abandoned drums. In the early 1980s, more drums were fiund at the site by the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Division of Air and Hazardous Waste Management. One of the drums contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); other drums appeared to have contained an acid or caustic material — based on the presence of polyliners — solvents and ink wastes.

Dioxin 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) contamination from fish collected from the Woonasquatucket River was first documented in 1996. Three years later, the DOH issued a fish consumption advisory for any fish caught downstream of the site. To date, elevated levels of contaminants, including dioxin/furans, PCBs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-VOCs and heavy metals, have been detected in the soil, sediment, wetlands groundwater and surface water at the site.

Stormwater runoff is a major problem, given the site’s proximity to the Woonasquatucket River, and the tailrace to the east. The channel formerly extended north of Route 44, originally diverting water for use at the Centredale Worsted Mill. It's now defunct, and receives stormwater runoff via a headwall to the north, overland flow from the eastern half of the site and a stormwater drainage pipe from Centredale Manor. Low-lying areas within the site flood and the site includes portions of the Woonasquatucket River 10-year floodplain. Surface water runoff from the site enters the Woonasquatucket River and drainage channel directly at numerous points.

The contaminated fill area at the site — estimated at 219,869 square feet — is on a peninsula that extends about 135 feet further south of the site's southernmost parking area. The source of the hazardous substances present in the fill can’t be determined, but is likely due to unregulated use, storage and disposal of hazardous substances on the property for nearly 60 years, according to state and federal officials.

Following soil sampling in 1999, which showed TCDD levels at an extremely high 115.82 parts per billion (ppb), the site was proposed to the National Priorities List (NPL) and accepted in February 2000. For reference sake, the EPA maximum contaminant level for dioxin in drinking water is 0.00003 ppb. Dioxin is one of the most toxic contaminants.

Partial remediation completed
In January 1999, prior to the site being proposed to the NPL, the EPA conducted "urgent removal activities" at the property, including: sampling; clearing; the erection of fencing; a flood evaluation study of the site and surrounding area; designing and implementing interim soil caps for specific areas; and community outreach.

The design and construction of a third soil cap as part of reconstruction of a former tailrace began in 2003 and was largely completed within the next year. Additional work on caps was completed in 2006. In 2009-10, excavation of contaminated soil and installation of a cap over the impacted area to address contaminated groundwater discharge into the Woonasquatucket began. Maintenance of all the capped areas continues.

Reconstruction of the Allendale Dam and restoration of Allendale Pond was completed in February 2002. Following additional soil sampling in 2002, contaminated soil from residential and recreational-use properties at the site was removed. Final dam and pond restoration actions were completed in fall 2003.

From 1970 to 1986, DEM conducted or supervised several investigations at the property. In February 1982, according to DEM records, about 400 drums were excavated from the site. Of these, about 30 had unknown chemical residue, and of these at least eight were found to have hazardous material. Later that year, DEM required that prior to the construction of Centredale Manor, soil samples be collected in the area of the building footprint. As a result of this sampling and analysis, about 6,000 cubic yards of soil were excavated and disposed of as non-hazardous solid waste.

What’s next?
As mentioned, the EPA has proposed a large-scale cleanup in hopes of removing the remaining contaminants from the site and restore the Woonasquatucket River south of the propety.

The proposed plan includes:

Removal of buried waste and a majority of river sediment and floodplain soil near and downstream of the site.

Installing new caps over contaminated soil and thin layers of soil to the wetlands and floodplains to accelerate the natural decontamination processes.

Permanent restrictions on the use of groundwater and temporary prohibition of eating fish from the river.

Long-term monitoring of the river and floodplain to determine possible future actions.

Bringing the area's drinking water into EPA compliance.

Minimizing contribution of site contaminants to the Woonasquatucket River's surface water.

EPA’s proposed cleanup plan would be implemented through additional investigations, design, construction, maintenance and five-year reviews. The estimated cost of EPA’s preferred cleanup method is about $100 million. The proposed cleanup plan can be viewed here (pdf).