aboutthecig [2]

The June meeting of the Community Input Group will be different than our usual meeting. Instead of one part with updates from FMC and the agencies and the second part a discussion between CIG members only, June's meeting will be devoted to a question and answer session with the agencies. The questions have been submitted to the EPA, DEC and DOH. They include many which have been asked by Middleport citizens over the years. The meeting will begin at 5:30 PM at the Masonic Hall and end around 7:30. The usual lite meal will be available. All citizens are welcome to attend. To review the questions, click on the "Read Full Article" link below. It is expected the agencies will send their answers in advance so they can be reviewed prior to the meeting. When received, they will be posted on the site as well.

1. In the past, residents believe they have not been considered in negotiations between the Agencies and FMC. Also comments expressed at open community sessions do not appear to have been considered or acted on. The residents are going to be the ones who have to live with whatever is decided. What are the agencies plans for public participation and consideration of our concerns?



2. How will the agencies determine the final action level? Will it be the same for all properties?



3. Will the agencies demand all residential properties have soil arsenic levels equal to or lower than 20 ppm regardless of any risk considerations or soil background level considerations?



4. Do the agencies believe remediation of contaminated soil can only be accomplished by cutting down all the trees and removal of approximately 12 inches of soil on a property? What rights will a property owner have in the selection of a remediation alternative for his or her own property?



5. How do the agencies plan to gain community acceptance of the decisions for Middleport and the final outcome of the remediation project?



6. Will the Agencies place deed restrictions or other controls on a residential property where the owner declines to have their property remediated? If not, exactly what will happen to a property for which the owners have decided not to have a remediation carried out?



7. Why is NYSDEC Albany controlling the project and not the local Region 9 office in Buffalo? Wouldn't this change enhance the communications between residents and the agencies?



8. Why haven't the agencies recognized FMC's derived arsenic biovailability factor or their biomonitoring study and use the results in assessment of risk and possible cleanup levels?



9. The NYS Brownfield Cleanup Program and Development of Soil Cleanup Objectives site the statistical 98th percentile for background calculations. Why do the agencies insist on using the statistical 95th percentile instead of the 98th when calculating arsenic background in Middleport?



10. Arsenic is present at elevated levels in Middleport (due to past orchard use, pesticide spraying, etc.) therefore, isn't the local soil arsenic background level likely higher than 20 ppm regardless of any possible contribution by FMC?



11. What is the reduction in human health risk if a residential property is reduced from an average contamination level of 40 PPM to 20 PPM of arsenic taking onto account other health risks that exist?



12. Once an area is used as an orchard and arsenic containing pesticides historically used, won't the arsenic remain in the soil so that the theory "once an orchard, always an orchard' be valid when calculating the background level?



13. Would a risk-based approach likely result in a higher soil arsenic "trigger level" or cleanup level than using a standard statewide cleanup level?



14. The Agencies have failed to communicate the comparative risk of arsenic exposure to other "real" risks such as smoking etc. Aren't there other risks we should be more concerned about than arsenic buried in our soil?



15. Wouldn't any additional RFI sampling requested by the Agencies cause a delay in the RFI/CMS process for Middleport properties?