DEC blasted on draft Hazardous Waste Siting Plan

Simonson, Burmaster to file joint resolution opposing plan as 'inadequate, unacceptable'

by Terry Duffy
Lewiston Porter Sentinel,
Niagara Wheatfield Tribune, December 3, 2003

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, acting on a 1987 Environmental Conservation Law which called for it to produce a draft Hazardous Waste Siting Plan, announced the release of that document for public review on Nov. 19 and the scheduling of legislative public hearings for commentary in January at locations throughout the state, including one in Niagara Falls.

Issuance of the Siting Plan comes off of DEC's own determination on the need for a generic Environmental Impact Statement, which it also released, covering suitability issues with regards to a waste site's potential impact on air, land, water and public health in a locality.

The documents are available for viewing on-line at the DEC website, www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dshm/index.html. A hard copy version may be obtained from any of DEC's nine regional offices.

Hard copies have also been obtained by the northern Niagara citizens environmental group Residents for Responsible Government for distribution to local residents. RRG reports that local residents may pick up a hard copy at the following locations: Porter Town Hall, 3265 Creek Road; Lewiston Town Hall, 1375 Ridge Road; the Lewiston Public Library, 305 South Eighth St.; the Youngstown Free Library, 240 Lockport Street, and the Ransomville Free Library, 3733 Ransomville Road.

DEC reports it will be holding a commentary session on both the draft siting plan and generic EIS, on Wednesday, Jan. 7, in the main auditorium of the Niagara Falls Public Library, Earl W. Brydges Building, 1425 Main St. in Niagara Falls. Commentary sessions will be offered from 2:30 to 4:30 p.m. and at 6 p.m. that day. All sessions are open to the public.

DEC will be accepting written commentaries at its Albany offices through the close of business on Jan. 19, 2004. Comments made be sent to: Mr. Glenn Milstry, New York State DEC, Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials, 625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-7251.

County Interests Ignored

Years overdue, this lengthy document while intended by DEC to address the future siting issue of hazardous waste locations, taking into consideration such factors as existing sites in its planning -- locally, Niagara County's well-publicized environmental problems and the presence of Chemical Waste Management -- in fact fails to do so, charged two of the county's legislature's leading environmental watchdogs.

Responding to what they view as a questionable document prepared by DEC, both 12th District Legislator Lee Simonsen and 13th District Legislator Cylde Burmaster have come out in strong opposition to the siting plan document and draft EIS, labeling DEC's response "inadequate as well as unacceptable" to county residents. The legislators also raised objections to DEC's determinations on siting with regards to it being practical or relevant to the health and safety issues facing northern county residents.

Release of these documents comes as CWM is in the midst of pursuing two separate permit applications with the state DEC, one which will allow it to maintain its presence in northern Niagara for years to come, the other to expand its hazardous waste disposal operations at the Balmer Road facility. Critics view the expansion request by CWM as part of its process to secure designation as a repository for the millions of pounds of volatile PCBs to come from the government-ordered Hudson River remediation/cleanup project south of Albany. As the sole licensed facility in New York state to accept hazardous PCB wastes, the CWM Porter site stands as likely destination for their ultimate disposal.

Many Opposed

That issue has stirred fears into communities statewide from Albany to Buffalo and north to Porter, of endless truck transports -- as many as 176,000 truck loads in all -- carrying PCB wastes to northern Niagara County. CWM, as mentioned, is the only licensed facility in the state to accept high level wastes including PCBs and stands to gain the windfall of a half-billion dollar-plus contract for the treatment and storage of the volatile compounds. As a result dozens of communities as well as officials from Lewiston and Porter, to Niagara County, to Buffalo and Erie County and points east have come out in strong opposition to that possibility.

Bill Rolland of RRG whose group has been spearheading the local opposition to CWM's application plans and its continued presence on Balmer Road, lashed out at the state and the DEC for what he viewed as their continued catering to CWM.

"New York state is a major importer of toxic waste," said Rolland. "There is more coming into the state than going out," as he cited data showing the state currently imports 234,000 tons of toxic waste annually and exports 114,000 tons -- a net difference of 120,000 tons. "All of that goes to CWM in Niagara County."

International Dump Site

Noting how CWM's Porter operations receive hazardous wastes from 30 states, Canada and Puerto Rico, Rolland added, "We are an international dump site in Niagara County."
Rolland went on to chide state DEC for preparing "a very erroneous, deceptive statement on the uniform distribution of waste sites" statewide in its report. He argued DEC included assorted low level acceptance areas in its hazardous waste sites listings when in essence CWM Porter remains as the sole repository destination.

"The bottom line is New York only has one commercial waste site. It's in Niagara County when you do it on a tonnage basis," said Rolland as he alluded to the aforementioned tonnage data. "CWM is the only commercial site" to accept hazardous wastes, noting the 120,000 ton difference. "There's no equity, this is the only site."

Rolland also blasted DEC for what he viewed as their limiting the public comment period. "It took them 16 years too produce that document. Now they're providing the public a limited opportunity to comment," noting the fact that the state DEC has stated that comments, written or otherwise need to be received by DEC at the close of business on Jan. 19 and with the holidays, residents are limited in their commentary period.

More Complaints

RRG's Vince Agnello took issue on DEC's failure to address various items in the draft, from health issues affecting an area with waste sites, to DEC' s categorizing of what it considers acceptable hazardous waste storage sites, to DEC's 'environmental injustice' of communities.

Noting Niagara's saturation of waste sites, from Niagara Falls to the Lewiston Porter areas and including the CWM facility, he said, "This would raise a presumption (to DEC) that there could be a health problem. This document does not cover that, yet Niagara County has indeed major health issues.

Chiding DEC on what it considers a commercial dump site, Agnello said, "The proposal by DEC is totally outrageous. They stressed geographics, yet we're the only commercial dump site. They're combining us (CWM Porter) with all the landfills (statewide), regardless of size, tonnage."

Zeroing in specifically in their categorizing, Agnello said that DEC looked at sites, and grouped them in the commercial waste site category based on such factors as the temporary storage of hazardous waste on site as well as volume. In other words a site could fall under the commercial category if held a limited amount of hazardous waste on a temporary basis. CWM by comparison holds a very large volume in terms of storage for a permanent time frame.

"It doesn't measure up," he said.

Also raised by Agnello was the "environmental injustice" issue, where DEC, as directed by law, should have looked at the demographic factors of locating a waste site and its impact on the health and well-being of minority, impoverished populations, yet the in its siting document, DEC failed to address it -- particularly with regards to Niagara County.

Doesn't Consider PCBs

Furthermore, he charged the DEC document didn't focus on the major environmental issue facing Niagara County -- the potential for Hudson River PCBs coming to Porter. "This siting plan doesn't even mention PCBs," he said.

And Agnello joined with Rolland in arguing that DEC was shorting the public with regards to the commentary time frame. "After 16 years, they picked absolutely the worse time ever for a public commentary," Agnello said, noting that four holidays fall within the 60-day commentary period and the public was getting shorted on with less time to comment. "What is DEC going to do, open on Jan. 19?" asked Agnello. "That's Martin Luther King Day, a government holiday."

Simonson as well as Burmaster, who as noted are both strongly against the continued hazardous waste operations in northern Niagara, particularly with regards to CWM, announced this past week their intent to file a joint resolution at the legislature's Dec. 16 meeting opposing the draft plan.

Not Practical

Calling DEC's statement on locating such sites "not practical or relevant" to the county's interests, the two raised issue with the length of time DEC took to draw up the document -- 16 years -- as well the state agency's considerations, or lack of them -- with regards to determining siting locations and the granting of permits.

Simonson blasted DEC on the report's total analysis, saying, "It's 47 pages long. It took them 16 years to write and it says absolutely nothing."

Zeroing in on his arguments of DEC not being "practical or relevant," Simonsen charged, "DEC has invented a new catch phrase TSDF (treatment, storage or disposal facilities). It's an all-encompassing category" which names sites and groups them as commercial waste facilities. CWM the only commercial site," he said.

The Resolution

Their lengthy resolution, to be presented Dec. 16 for approval by the Niagara County Legislature, reads as follows:

"WHEREAS: It has taken the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 16 years to comply with state law and produce a draft Hazardous Waste Siting Plan, and

"WHEREAS: This draft plan has been released and clearly avoids addressing the issues which the original law mandated the DEC to discuss and resolve, and

"WHEREAS: DEC has indicated in this proposed document that it has no intentions of developing a plan that will mitigate the importation of hazardous waste into our state and community that is being landfilled through its permitting process, and has no plan in managing the hazardous waste which originates within the boundaries of New York that must be landfilled, and

"WHEREAS: While the document states, 'Based on the historic rate of waste receipts and remaining capacity, it is estimated that the [CWM landfill in Niagara County] will reach capacity by 2005,' it does not provide any alternatives, ideas or options of what the state should do when the capacity at this facility is reached, and

"WHEREAS: While the document examines historic data and trends, it does not include any information or projections regarding the impact of the largest environmental cleanup in United States history which is planned for the Hudson River, or where the millions of pounds of contaminated PCB soil will be dumped, and

Contradictory Statements

"WHEREAS: The document contains contradictory statements, such as (page 5-3), 'The closest facility may not be the most economical choice for a generator's waste management needs,' while suggesting the opposite several pages later (page 6-2), 'The nearest permitted hazardous waste disposal facility (to New York) is located in Michigan and may not represent an economically viable option for treated hazardous waste disposal for the northeast,' and,

"WHEREAS: The document categorically states (page 6-3), 'A determination of the number, size, type and location by area of new and expanded TSDF's (treatment, storage or disposal facilities) in the state is not practical or relevant,' and yet, that determination was the exact reason the state Legislature and governor required the DEC to present this plan in the first place, and

"WHEREAS: Despite the DEC's contention that the number, size, type and location of the new disposal facilities is 'not relevant,' it admits 'the need for developing additional land disposal capacity in the northeast region by 2005,' thus contradicting itself again, and

"WHEREAS: The document does not explain how the new Commission Policy - 29 Environmental Justice and Permitting, relates to the future need for developing additional landfill capacity, thus setting the stage for the perpetual injustice that has disproportionately forced the residents of Niagara County to host the only licensed commercial hazardous waste dump site in New York State, and

"WHEREAS: The people of Niagara County, and the state of New York, expect and deserve more than half-hearted attempts by DEC to comply with its mandate to produce a plan to satisfy the projected need for additional land disposal capacity,

Unacceptable to County

"SO THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: It is the considered judgment of the Niagara County Legislature that the draft Hazardous Waste Siting Plan presented by DEC is both inadequate and unacceptable in satisfying the 1987 law which charged DEC with the creation of a plan, and is also woefully deficient in satisfying the mission of the DEC which is to 'conserve, improve, and protect the state's natural resources and environment, and control water, land and air pollution, in order to enhance the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state,' and

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That Niagara County takes strong exception to DEC's position that the number, size, type and location of new and expanded hazardous disposal facilities is not relevant, and that Niagara County believes those issues are extremely relevant to the safety of its citizens and the environment, and

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That Niagara County, respectfully yet emphatically, requests DEC to rewrite the draft plan to resolve contradictory statements and to address major issues such as:

"1) Where should millions of pounds of contaminated soil from the Hudson River be dumped?

"2) Where should hazardous wastes generated in New York State be dumped after its existing capacity is reached in 2005?

"3) Why should DEC permit any more landfill permits if adequate capacity exists out-of-state?

Wants County Input

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the effort to revise this draft document include the input from citizens from Niagara County who are informed, sensitive and better suited to the problems brought about by the inequitable distribution of hazardous waste in the state, and

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That Niagara County emphasizes that no hazardous waste landfill permits be granted in New York State until an acceptable plan is adopted, including the issues addressed above, and

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Niagara County Legislature encourages its citizens, state legislators, and local municipalities, to protest this draft plan and demand appropriate revisions at the public hearings scheduled in Niagara Falls, New York, on January 7, 2004, at the Earl W. Brydges Library, 1425 Main Street, from 2:30-4:30 p.m. and 6 p.m..

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: Copies of this resolution be sent to Niagara County's state legislators, the governor's office, and the Commissioner of the DEC, who is respectfully requested to acknowledge receipt of this resolution, along with a written response to the Niagara County Legislature, c/o Clerk of the Niagara County Legislature, Court House, Lockport, New York 14094."