Town of Cumberland Asks EPA for Significant Revisions to Controversial Blackstone River Cleanup Plan

CUMBERLAND, RI – The Town of Cumberland, RI has asked the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make significant revisions to the EPA’s proposed cleanup plan for a Superfund site in Cumberland, which sits on the banks of the Blackstone River across from Lincoln, R.I.  Noting that the Town is the most significant non-PRP (Potentially Responsible Party) stakeholder within the Superfund site, Mayor Bill Murray asked the EPA to develop a new plan that would “allow for significantly more flexibility in the Remedial Design phase of the project.”

The Town’s comments were submitted in a letter to the EPA after the Town hired GZA Geo-Environmental Inc. to advise the Town on the best way to address their concerns about the EPA’s controversial proposal.  The EPA proposal, unveiled on July 31, 2014, has run into mounting opposition from local residents, elected officials, and community leaders from both Lincoln and Cumberland. Chief among the fears are that the EPA plan would require the cutting and removal of almost every tree across 50 to 70 acres of land and permanently prevent re-use of the area for recreational or passive use.

“This large area is currently used for recreational activities such as canoeing and cycling along the Blackstone River Bikepath,” Mayor Murray said in the letter. “The recreational value of this land is of paramount importance not just to Cumberland residents, but to residents across the greater region.”

The 200 acre Peterson/Puritan, Inc. Operable Unit 2 (OU-2) Superfund Site in Cumberland consists of the inactive, privately owned J.M. Mills Landfill, an unnamed island, and a parcel of land just north of the Pratt Dam on the Blackstone. The Blackstone Valley Bike Path is directly across the river from the clean-up site.

In its letter, the Town also insisted that the EPA provide assurances in writing that the Town will have a formal role in the future as site closure design and reuse decisions are made.

“As ‘Community Acceptance’ is one of the primary remedial option evaluation criteria, it is important that the Town continue to be involved in the review process as the design details are developed (during the Record of Decision [ROD] development and Remedial Design [RD]),” Murray stated.  “This continued involvement should be formally memorialized in a written plan to ensure that key design deliverable are properly vetted and receive public input in a timely manner.”

Among some of the revisions the Town suggested for consideration would be the ability to use an evapotranspiration cap within the site.

“The Town would support the implementation of an evapotranspiration (ET) landfill cap for the JM Mills landfill and Nunes Parcel,” the letter stated, assuming that the ET cap was safe for the community and the environment. “A ET cap’s final cover surface could be landscaped to blend into the surrounding area with a mixture of trees, shrubs, and grasses more in line with the surrounding area.”

The Town also said the EPA proposed plan needs further detailed evaluation of flooding and floodplain impacts along the Ashton Pratt stretch of the Blackstone River.  Other topics highlighted in the letter presented concerns such as additional investigation of the materials present, the Town’s preference for a lower-impact cap, landfill gas control, future land use, and potential community impacts during construction phases.

In addition to the local residents and local officials voicing concern about the EPA proposal, several community groups have stepped forward to weigh in. The Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor (BRVNHC) asked the EPA to develop a plan that includes no physical or psychological barriers to the Blackstone. BRVNHC also requested that the EPA provide illustrative site/concept plans to help determine if the proposal is consistent with the goals for the effort “and to consider whether the proposed solution avoids a significant adverse impact to the resources of our National Heritage Corridor.”

Moreover, The Blackstone Valley Tourism Council, one of the leading advocates for the national park proposal, expressed reservations about the clean-up plan, as well. “The remediation plan should use an approach that is environmentally safe of course, but it must also use an approach that is esthetically pleasing and useful,” wrote Tourism Council President Dr. Robert Billington. “Scenic paths, vegetation and river access are minimal requirements for this site. We do not see the USEPA plans meeting these needs.”

The EPA comment period officially closed on January 23, 2015 and is currently reviewing those comments filed.

Click here to read the Town of Cumberland’s comments.

Click here for more background on the clean-up project:  http://blackstonecleanup.com/

Leave a comment