Chemical Waste officials, CAC discuss truck concerns

by Terry Duffy
Lewiston Porter Sentinel, December 9, 2006

Members of the Citizens Advisory Committee representing the towns of Lewiston and Porter met this week to review the CAC-CWM agreement, the recent PCB hazardous waste spill incident involving trucks heading to CWM Chemical Services in Porter (Sentinel, Nov. 18) and other truck traffic concerns, and to hear from company officials as well as the Department of Environmental Conservation on what can be done to better prevent such incidents in the future.

CAC member Peter Diachun of Youngstown, a member of the Porter CAC and a representative of Town Supervisor Merton Wiepert, who was absent on personal business, inquired as to the validity of the current CAC agreement that dates back to the early 1990s, and its effectiveness on covering both transportation and safety compliance concerns as well as enforcement. Recent news surrounding the CWM trucks has ranged from the PCB spill in Niagara Falls, to reports of CWM-bound trucks passing the Lewiston-Porter Creek Road campus during pre-K student drop-off, to reports of truck convoys and of trucks stopping at locations en route to the CWM Balmer Road facility, which they’re prohibited from doing.

CWM Manager of Regional Operations Dick Sturges, who was in attendance along with five other company representatives, said he was uncertain of the varying specifics of the CAC agreement reached between CWM and Lewiston and Porter interests. He said the document, which dates from 1993, was revised in September 1997, amended since and contains now expired provisions, presented ambiguity as to what’s covered and its enforcement mechanisms. Sturges said attorneys representing the towns of Lewiston and Porter and Niagara County would be further studying the issue.

“The issue is relatively clear; we’re not sure who would enforce compliance and enforcement,” said Lewiston Town Board member Al Bax, who chairs the committee.

Monitoring ‘Difficult’

Sturges, joined by DEC’s Jim Strickland who also sits on the CAC, responded it was CWM who is charged with abiding by the guidelines of the CAC agreement and respond to problems. Asked by CAC member Amy Witryol how CWM actually monitors truck-related complaints, such as convoys, he responded, “It’s very difficult. We rely on our employees to help us monitor,” said Sturges, adding that all trucking interests – whether they’re actual CWM carriers or independent truckers – are all provided Transporter Rules and Regulations by the company and are expected to abide by them.

“It all boils down to compliance,” said Sturges, adding there are traffic situations on Creek Road, which make enforcement difficult. As an example he mentioned restrictions on truck convoys, and how the traffic signal at Creek and Pletcher roads contributes to the problem during morning restricted hours when CWM trucks are prevented from passing the Lew-Port campus. Trucks back up at the light or other locations en route.

“It’s a persistent problem,” said Witryol. “Can’t CWM have someone out there to monitor this,” she said as she raised issue with the truck convoys, allegations of leaky cargo and trucks containing hazardous materials not being sufficiently covered.

Sturges responded they’re all DEC violations. “It’s up to DEC’s own resources and how they choose to respond.”

Strickland added the agency was somewhat limited on its monitoring and enforcement capabilities, pointing out DEC has two monitors for traffic enforcement issues in the Buffalo-Niagara Falls area, and with the very heavy volume of trucks -- CWM-bound and otherwise -- crossing the north Grand Island Bridge into Niagara County, it presents a problem. “How could we monitor this?” asked Strickland, pointing out there’s a huge volume of truck traffic on the Thruway other than CWM vehicles.

next page