Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Street roots. (Portland, OR) 1998-current | View Entire Issue (June 10, 2016)
Commentary Page 12 Street Roots • June 10-16, 2016 Pollution in our commons: Time to speak out on river clean-up BY BARBARA QUINN not remove enough persistent pollutants and leaves most of the site untouched (natural recovery/spreading) to wash hreats to our health coming from the contaminants downriver into the Columbia. air and water have been exposed to It also has no known time frame for the light of day. Agencies and leaders whose job it is to protect the community achieving cleanup goals. The Community Advisory Group and have been found to be lax in saying no to other community stakeholders, such as The businesses who have treated our commons, Audubon Society, both Willamette and the air and water, as their personal disposal Columbia Riverkeepers and the Yakama system. Nation all agree on one thing: EPA’s Plan is The chemical waste dumped in the lower not sufficient to achieve a healthy river and Willamette River is no exception. Callous it does not promise fish as safe and edible disregard for our community-owned river immediately upriver, a primary goal for has resulted in 10 miles of disgustingly some community groups. contaminated beaches and bottom The equity equation for the lower sediments that are rife with hundreds of Willamette gets even more unbalanced with chemicals: DDTs, agent orange, also known the likelihood of a 14-acre toxic waste dump as 2,4,5-T & 2,4-D, dioxin/furans, PAHs proposed at T-4 in S t Johns. The dump (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) from (don’t be fooled by the euphemistic title, petroleum products and PCBs “Confined Disposal Facility”) would be filled (Polychlorinated bipheyls) from insulation with contaminated dredge spoils and located products, along with a host of toxic heavy in an earthquake and flood hazard zone. It metals such as lead, cadmiuih, mercury, would be separated from the river only by a arsenic and zinc. The toxins make any permeable sand and dirt berm allowing human or animal contact with river contaminants to slowly leak back into the hotspots, sediments and resident fish or river, as the EPA admits. But they want us shellfish risky. It is one of the largest to look at the bright side: they chirpily Superfund sites in the nation with 155 announced that savings on dredge transport adjacent entities having likely responsibility. will keep costs below $1 billion! A clear The pollution is made more acute by the concession to politics, rather than good fact that some of the contaminants do not science or the safety of the community. break down easily or at all. The community, A. mega-site such as the Willamette, with th e largest stakeholder in th e Superfund CONTRIBUTING COLUMNIST T p rocess and owner of th e river, now h as a 13 h otspots which could each h e an chance to weigh in. individual Superfund site, is going to be expensive to fix, likely more than $1 billion. The companies who damaged our river, among the largest in the world, have combined profits in the multi-billions and can afford an effective cleanup. Nonetheless, a business subset known as the Lower Willamette Group, that includes the City of Portland and the Port of Portland, has indicated a likely lawsuit directed at EPA with a massive Freedom of Information Act Request for every email, report, recording and note since 2012 that have led to the clean-up plan. It’s a ploy meant to intimidate, timed immediately The proposed plan On June 8, the Environmental Protection Agency announced its proposed plan for the cleanup of the lower Willamette, the 10 miles between the Broadway Bridge and the Columbia River. The announcement starts a 60-day public comment period which is the public’s chance to be heard. The proposal includes a combination of methods: dredging, capping and so-called natural recovery (or more accurately, natural spreading). Unfortunately the proposal does PHC N orthwest 5312 NE 148th Ave. Portland, OR 97230 Free career training for persons with disabilities in janitorial and building maintenance R equirem ents: • * ...................* ” * \ \ \ "• • Documented proof o f disability Proficiency in understanding and speaking * ...» .................. * • Pass aiminal background check Pass drug lest D isab ilities: Physical, m ental hea lth, intellectu al, d e v e lo p m e n ta l, a n d le a rn in g Q uestions ? Please Call: (503) 261-1266 or (800) 874-7917 email: careers@phcnw.com before the release of the proposal. It displays a sense of entitlement that is wholly inappropriate for publicly funded bodies, such as the city and the port, who purport to represent residents. They blatantly act against community interest in safe, healthy access to the river achieved only with an effective plan. In spite of a city study that concluded that every dollar spent on the Superfund site will result in well over a dollar return on investment, the city continues to act mostly on behalf of businesses who prefer to avoid paying to fix the river. Community Advisory Group recommendations The most important thing residents can do is offer feedback on the proposal. Residents, the largest stakeholder, have the ability to push the cleanup in a more effective direction. Check the Community Advisory Group website, PortlandHarborCAG.info or EPA’s website for the proposed plan summary. There are also hard copies at the Central and St. Johns libraries. Feedback can be given online either at the EPA or Yakama Nation websites. The advisory will be writing and posting a response to the plan on our website as will our consultant, Dr. Peter deFur. The advisory group recommends a plan with less reliance on “natural recovery” (aka, natural spreading) and instead encourages an option we call G+, not listed in the feasibility study, that includes 1,000 acres of dredging and will achieve goals within a known time frame. We want a plan that results in fish that are as safely edible as those immediately upriver. This is a mega-site, 10 miles long, one of the largest and most complex in the nation and should be'dealt with effectively. The potentially responsible parties are able to afford to fix what they’ve damaged and residents require safety when accessing the river and catching fish. Barbara Quinn is a member o f the Portland Harbor Community Advisory Group PUBLIC FORUMS AND EVENTS The EPA Is hosting community hearings to gather feedback from residents. See their website or the Community Advisory's at PortlandHarborCAG.info for times and places. ■ June 21,7-9 p.m.. the Community Advisory Group is hosting a public forum at Harriet Tubman School at 2231 N. Flint. Ail are welcome. Dr. Peter deFur will explain the proposed plan in understandable terms There will be a question and answer session with panelists. Avenues for feedback to the EPA will be shared. 8 June 30, 6-9 p.m., The Portland City Council hosts a public hearing at University of Portland s Bauccio Commons at 5000 N. Willamette Blvd. also with panelists. ■ July 31, noon to 7 p.m., the Willamette River Festival hosted by the Community Advisory and St. Johns Main Street Coalition on the Cathedral Park waterfront. There will be live music, food vendors, a boat launching, environmental fair, walking tours, and feedback methods
