Toxic Donations coming to Vermont (Updated)

UPDATE: The Free Press reports this deal is off. Cool. Wonder if that means they’ll ask for their contribution back from the Governor. -odum


The Free Press takes note today for Vermonters of the imminent arrival of approximately 33,000 tons of contaminated soil. This hazardous soil will be shipped to Interstate Waste Service’s Moretown landfill. The dioxin-contaminated soil is coming from a Massachusetts Superfund site where wood was treated chemically. This ARRA funded cleanup will make way for a 120 space parking lot. According to a Foxboro Ma. Newspaper, it will take roughly one thousand round trips and 100 work days to haul it away.  

Vermont Powerless unless the soil is reclassified?

The soil is a hazardous “substance” according to Federal EPA and must be removed from the Massachusetts site. However, in logic that’s worthy of Catch 22, the soil is not a hazardous “waste” and therefore can be dumped in Vermont. A manager at Interstate Waste’s Moretown site couldn’t say “offhand” if they tested leachate for dioxins.[to clarify: leachates at the Moretown Landfill]     Vermont’s ANR Dave DiDomenico says unless the Federal EPA reclassifies the soil as hazardous, it can do nothing to stop the dumping in Moretown.

“They are private landfills. We can’t force them to take a waste, and we can’t not allow them to take something that isn’t hazardous,” he said.

 

Douglas’ Waste Service Donations

In July last year Seven Days and Green Mountain Daily noted that among other donations   Governor Douglas had received large (by Vermont standards) $2,000 campaign donations from the Interstate Waste Service Moretown landfill and a small landfill in South Hadley Mass. The South Hadley landfill is owned by the town and operated by Interstate Waste Services.  

12 thoughts on “Toxic Donations coming to Vermont (Updated)

  1. Its so uplifting to know that the state gets to be Massachusetts dumping ground! Wonder if any other states want to start “donating” their waste to us.  

  2. But is that true? I mean, even if they can’t prevent IWS from bringing certain types of material to the facility, can’t the state REQUIRE monitoring be put in place before it can be dumped?  

    There HAVE to be regulations that can be called upon to ensure that dioxins do not get into our ground water.

    Something smells very fishy about this whole affair.

  3. Just to be fair to the FP, the FP actually did a pretty good job of explaining more than this diary did.  For example, it pointed out that there is a difference between a dioxin contaminated soil on the surface where it people come in contact with it (and presumably where it could erode into streams, etc), and a dioxin contaminated soil that is in a lined landfill.  The article also points out that tests have been conducted to determine if the dioxin will leach — they tested with acid to determine if it would leach.  Given the above, the EPA determined that a landfill with a impermeable liner would be sufficient.  The article also points out that the state (in the form of the Solid Waste Program) has not yet approved dumping it into the Morestown site, although the SWP’s ability to prevent it may very well be hampered by federal regulations.

    Overall, while there are definitely questions I’d like to ask about it all, I also don’t know enough of the science to disagree with the EPA’s position.  I agree that it sounds wrong — how could something being removed during a Superfund cleanup not be hazardous waste — but I also see that there might well be legitimacy  in saying that putting it in a properly constructed landfill is an appropriate treatment.  While there have been quite a few misuses of science data, sometimes people are too willing to get upset about issues that have a appearance of being wrong, without fully understanding the underlying science.  I don’t know what side this falls on and I ask that before people get totally bent out of shape about this, that something more than the BFP be the source of the science information.

  4. looks like Douglas can protect the environment when he chooses.As Odum notes in his update at the top you have to wonder if Douglas will have to return his campaign loot.

    Vermont officials say the dioxin-laced soil is hazardous waste, and ineligible for dumping at the Interstate Waste Services landfill in Moretown.

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the soil is a hazardous “substance” – but not a more toxic hazardous “waste.”

    http://www.thesunchronicle.com

Comments are closed.