THEA Tells EPA Latest San Jacinto River Plan Inconsistent And Insufficient
By Jackie Young Medcalf
THEA has reviewed the proposed plan to clean up the Northern Pit of the San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site a n d warned the EPA that it contains a number of problems. This proposal was developed by the two companies responsible for the site and was supposed to outline its final plan to remove tons of contaminated material from the remaining pit. However, our review found a number of places where the plan doesn’t meet the EPA’s requirements and contains sections that are vague and lack necessary details.
The EPA will consider the plan and comments in deciding whether to allow the responsible party companies to continue to lead the cleanup or to remove them and take the project over.
The following summary of the THEA letter to EPA indicates the type and extent of problems found in the review:
THEA is writing to provide our comments on the 100% Remedial Design for the San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site (San Jacinto Site). The comments reflected in this letter and in our design review are rooted in genuine community input, local knowledge, THEA’s expertise, and our experience engaging with this Superfund process for over a decade.
THEA holds the position that the 100% design package, as prepared by the Responsible Parties (RPs), does not meet the standards expected of a complete remedial design plan. We believe this design package fails to completely address the concerns outlined by the EPA in the agency’s 2024 Notification of Serious Deficiency.
There are numerous inconsistencies within the document, along with plans that defer critical specifications and procedures to the remedial contractor. In our opinion, this renders the design incomplete and unprepared for contractor bidding or successful remedial action.
Through our review of the extensive 100% design documentation, several key themes emerged that require immediate attention.
1. Inconsistencies with the Record of Decision (ROD): Certain aspects of the design do not satisfy the requirements established in the ROD, including the Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs). Specifically, while Monitored Natural Recovery (MNR) was selected for the Sand Separation Area (SSA) in the ROD, increased concentrations of dioxins were discovered during the design investigation. It is common practice, and was observed at the Northern Impoundment, for plans to adjust to encompass additional contamination found during the design investigations. Additionally at the SSA, a mix of erosional and depositional environments were identified post-ROD.
Therefore, the plan should be adjusted to reflect these findings, particularly in relation to RAO #4, which mandates the reduction of exposure to dioxins by remediating affected media to appropriate cleanup levels. Further inconsistencies of concern are related (but not limited) to sampling and the seasonal excavation approach. The seasonal excavation approach is not supported by the local communities and defies the 27 month timeline in the 2017 ROD.
2. Contaminants of Concern (COCs): There are significant concerns regarding the concentrations of dioxins, the adequacy of sampling, and the presence of PCBs at the Site. These issues must be thoroughly addressed to ensure the protection of the health of the community and the environment.
3. Worker and Community Safety: The design raises concerns for the safety of site workers and the surrounding communities. These include potential risks associated with transportation, pollution, and the release of contaminants during remedial activities. Specific, enforceable safety measures must be included in the design to mitigate these risks.
4. Determination Ahead of Remedial Action (RA): Considerable details are being left to the remedial contractor to decide, which should be determined now to ensure consistency and thoroughness in the RA. This includes, but is not limited to, the design and implementation of measurement systems, sampling procedures, and data handling protocols. Such elements should not be left open to interpretation during the RA.
5. Integrity Concerns: We have serious concerns about the integrity of the project and its components during the RA, particularly in light of the site’s exposure to severe weather conditions and its location within a tidally influenced river. Local residents are immensely concerned about the barrier wall (BMP) designed to an elevation below major storms experienced locally. The San Jacinto Site is at one of the most dynamic sections of the river and it is imperative that worst case storm and flood scenarios are fully considered.
6. Biddability Issues: The design, as it stands, appears unready for construction bids. The lack of detail and the deferral of significant decisions to the remedial contractor create uncertainty that could negatively impact the bidding process and the overall success of the remediation.
7. Additional Information Needed: Several sections of the design lack sufficient content or leave critical questions unanswered. Two specific topics raised by community members were the Texas Department of Transportation bridge replacement and water management in flood/high-water scenarios.
8. Compliance and Accountability: The design must include clear “checks and balances” to ensure compliance with EPA standards throughout the RA process. Includes concerns and needs for consultation/ approval from EPA and necessary testing.
During our review, we noted the RPs’ use of Lavaca Bay as a comparison site for the SSA MNR.
However, Lavaca Bay’s monitoring protocol, while effective for that site, may not be suitable for the SSA. Lavaca Bay has been closed to the public since 1988, whereas the SSA is located in a river subject to barge traffic, tidal influences, and flooding, which could contribute to greater dispersion of contaminants. Additionally, the RAOs for the San Jacinto Site focus on the remediation of affected media, while the RAOs for Lavaca Bay are primarily concerned with reducing surface sediment mercury levels. Given these differences, the plan for the SSA should be reevaluated and adjusted accordingly.
The San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site has made considerable progress through the Superfund process over the past decade. Our communities are eager for this progress to continue, as the risk to public health and the environment remains as long as the San Jacinto Site is present in the river. We strongly urge the EPA to address these critical issues to ensure a safe and complete remediation of the San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. We look forward to your response and to a continued effort to protect the health of our communities and the environment.
Sincerely,
Jackie Medcalf THEA Founder | CEO | Executive Director