An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plan to clean up the Willamette River that has been in the works for almost two decades might soon change in scope, and some Portland environmental groups aren’t happy about it.
In 2000, the EPA identified the Portland Harbor on the Willamette as a high priority on its “Superfund” list. The Superfund is a federal program to clean up highly polluted sites across the country—and because of the high levels of toxicity found in the Willamette’s sediment, water, and fish, the harbor qualified.
The Willamette Superfund cleanup has long been delayed amid questions of whether polluters will be made to pay for it, and changes in the EPA’s plan.
So it wasn’t too surprising when, back in October, the EPA announced a proposed change in the plan. As OPB reported at the time, the change came about after a new EPA study revealed that one chemical found in the Willamette—benzo(a)pyrene, or BaP for short—wasn’t as toxic for humans as previously thought. BaP, which is emitted from burning coal and oil, is one type of a pollutant category called polyaromatic hydrocarbons. It is known to cause cancer, but the level of BaP present in the Willamette is now thought to be relatively non-toxic.
This revelation prompted the EPA to propose reducing the scope of the Willamette cleanup, lessening its size by about 17 acres (it’s 2,200 acres altogether) and requiring less work to remove BaP from the river.
The public comment period for the proposed changes ends Friday at 5 pm—and several Portland groups, some of them staunchly opposed to the change, are encouraging residents to speak up before it’s too late.
Both the Portland Audubon Society and the Portland Harbor Community Advisory Group are wary of the plan’s reduced scope. Among their complaints: while the EPA’s new study on BaP does look into the impact of ingesting or inhaling the chemical, it does not touch on the risks of skin contact; and that the EPA’s study focuses largely on impact on humans, overlooking the potential risks to Portland wildlife. These concerns and others are laid out in a comment template on the harbor advisory group’s website.
Suzanne Skadowski, a spokesperson for the EPA, told the Mercury that the neighborhood groups’ concerns are not necessarily accurate, but that it is EPA policy to not publicly respond to comments until after the comment period ends, when the concerns will be addressed in a written response. She said that it is common procedure for Superfund cleanup plans to change as new facts become available.
