1171

erfund

Zweig Group is social and posting every day! C O N N E C T W I T H U S

facebook.com/ ZweigGroup

twitter.com/ ZweigGroup

linkedin.com/company/ ZweigWhite

blog. ZweigGroup .com vimeo.com/ ZweigGroup

$1.5 billion. So where, according to the city of Portland, did the EPA go wrong? “The City is concerned about the accuracy of the EPA’s proposed plan cost estimates, par- ticularly the assumptions about construction parameters such as sediment management area footprints, continuous dredging, vol- umes dredged and thickness, and/or types of capped layers,” the city says. “This is one of the largest economic and environmental issues facing Portland. The stakes are high.” While Portland ultimately called the plan a “reasonable starting point to move forward with the cleanup,” the city also acknowledged that “the cost evaluation presents a mislead- ing estimate of the total remedy cost to the public, and could impact the willingness of performing parties to step forward and lead the larger cleanup effort.” Annie Von Burg, a senior program manag- er with Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services, says that while the city’s comments are strong, they are meant to improve the overall plan, not impugn the EPA. “We recognize there are a lot of uncertainties around cost at these early stages,” Von Burg says. “This is one of the most complicated sites in the country. We’re confident EPA can adjust those numbers to be more accurate.” Referencing the undergirding sentiment in Portland, a city known for its environmental awareness, Von Burg says, “In general, there’s been a wide array of comments, from ‘This plan is not enough,’ to ‘This is too much,’ and everything in between.” More than 140 potentially responsible par- ties have been identified by the EPA as pol- luters. And at some point, the cost for the cleanup will have to be divvied up among those found to be liable. As that scenario un- folds, the Lower Willamette Group will re- main on center stage. Composed in part by important companies like Arkema Inc., Bay- er CropScience, BNSF Railway, Chevron USA, and Union Pacific Railroad Co. – companies that could bear the brunt of the cleanup cost – the Lower Willamette Group, or LWG, has already spent in excess of $100 million doing its own assessments of the superfund site.

And the group is not happy with the conclusions arrived at by the EPA. In its request for a dispute resolution regarding the EPA’s feasibility study – a dispute resolution that does not include the city of Portland or the Port of Portland – seven members of LWG had this to say: “EPA’s estimat- ed costs for performing each of the alternatives continue to omit signifi- cant cost elements and dramatically understate other cost elements on the basis of unrealistic and in some cases impossible assumptions about dredge production rates and volumes, remediation waste processing, en- gineering design, construction management, best management practices A 10-mile stretch of the Lower Willamette River in Portland has been a superfund site since 2000. The EPA is in the final stages of developing a remediation plan for the contaminated area. / Anchor QEA, Lower Willamette Group

EPA intends to require, and the present value of money.” The Zweig Letter was unable to reach the EPA for a statement.

The agency is under pressure to address the comments from Portland stakeholders and produce a record of decision by the end of the year. Adding to the urgency surrounding the Portland Harbor Superfund, Von Burg says, is the looming presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Regardless of who wins, the new president, among See SUPERFUND, page 8

ober 10, 2016, ISSUE 1171

Made with FlippingBook Annual report