All Brooklyn news
Neighborhood Map
Bay Ridge
  • Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights
Brooklyn Heights
  • Downtown, DUMBO
Carroll Gardens
  • Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Boerum Hill
Fort Greene
  • Clinton Hill, Crown Heights
North Brooklyn
  • Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
Park Slope
  • Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace, Greenwood Heights
GO Brooklyn
Dining Guide
Where to GO
Events calendar
Classifieds
The Brooklyn Wire
Not Just Nets
Police Blotter
Perspective
Parenting
Politics
Transit
Podcasts
Brooklyn Cyclones
Special sections
About The Paper
Mobile site
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds

Fed, Bloomy ‘Superfund’ battle slogs to the finish

The Brooklyn Paper

The Gowanus Canal is in an unusual position of having two governments bitterly fighting for the right to clean the horribly toxic waterway — and both Mayor Bloomberg and the federal Environmental Protection Agency are upping the rhetoric with less than a week left in the public debate.

The EPA favors adding the infamous canal to its Superfund program, which was started in 1980 and has had mixed results at forcing polluters to pay for the cleanup of contaminated sites. The city says it can do the job cheaper and quicker with an untested initiative that relies on voluntary cooperation from polluters and unprecedented appropriations from Congress.

Bolstering the case for the Superfund option was an admission on Tuesday from Caswell Holloway, chief of staff to Deputy Mayor Ed Skyler, that despite the Superfund designation, the city can still proceed with $175-million of water quality improvements to meet the standards of the Clean Water Act.

Since April, when the EPA signaled it wanted to remove the toxic sediment on the floor of the canal, the city has said a Superfund cleanup might be incompatible with this work it intends to begin this fall.

This work includes modernizing a tunnel that circulates cleaner water from the Buttermilk Channel through the otherwise stagnant canal and expanding a pumping station that will reduce the amount of raw sewage dumped into the Gowanus by 34 percent.

Although Superfund won’t be as much of a hindrance as the city claimed, the mayor’s office is still pushing ahead with its alternate cleanup.

The Bloomberg administration says that those efforts to cultivate a viable option without the stigma and duration of Superfund are yielding their first fruits.

On Tuesday, Holloway said that National Grid is about to agree to share the cost of the first phase of a cleanup. The power utility is already responsible for fully funding a cleanup of three former gas plants near the Gowanus Canal.

This would be the first sign that the polluters would opt to participate in a voluntary fund to pay for environmental studies, planning and, ultimately, the necessary dredging and uplands remediation.

After months of criticism that Superfund takes too long due to lawsuits, the EPA now says it could do a full cleanup of the canal and the land that leaches pollutants into it, just as fast as the city.

“My timeline is pretty much the same — 9-1/2 years,” said Walter Mugdan, who directs the EPA’s Superfund program in New York and New Jersey said at a meeting last Tuesday in PS 32 on Hoyt Street. “There’s nothing we do that’s intrinsically different [than the city’s proposal].”

Mugdan said a Superfund-designated Gowanus Canal would get cleaner faster than ongoing cleanups of the Hudson and Passaic rivers because the Superfund program is better than it was 30 years ago.

Reader Feedback

Eric McClure from Park Slope says:
Two governments are not "bitterly fighting for the right to clean" the Gowanus Canal.

One government, the federal one, is fighting to clean the canal. The other, New York City's government, or more precisely, the Bloomberg Administration, is fighting to keep developers -- principally Toll Brothers, but others as well -- from having to deal with the truth about environmental conditions while trying to market their luxury condominiums.

This is no fight about principle; it's about doing what is right versus doing what is expedient and profitable. And it's more than a little maddening that our Mayor cares more about private development interests and corporate profits than he does about the public's well-being or our environment.

Superfund Gowanus -- now.
July 3, 2009, 10:39 am
070309 from here says:


If the city finds that removing tixins form the canal bed is incompatablity with their Fluching Tunnel work, doesn't that just go to show how blind the city was to doing anything about those toxins untill the Superfund Listing came along to shine some light on the extent of the problem. The city has been blind to the canal toxic problems up until now--why would the citizens of this city want to believe that the city has come up with a better cleanup plan just a few months later. Where was the city with the toxic issue back when they were approving the area for dense housing projects?
July 3, 2009, 6:29 pm
Kevin Duffy from Carroll Gardens says:
There has been a deafening cry for 'Help' to clean the Gowanus for a very long time and the city has opted instead to neglect the health and safety of the local residents.

The city cannot claim to take the mantle from the EPA to clean the Gowanus when history has already proven they cannot follow through, indeed unwilling, to comply with the Clean Water Act of 1972.

NYC has had more than 30 years to bring the Gowanus Canal into compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972. The city has even delayed the Flushing Tunnel work, first slated to be completed in 2008, because the city DEP did not see this work as a priority back in 2005.

How naive can we be? This is akin to asking an alcoholic to mind the bar...

This is serious business and should be left to the pros...the EPA. Not developers.
July 3, 2009, 9:25 pm
gowanee from Gowanus says:
Great new, easy to understand video clip about City vs EPA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otpmjA0cXGQ
July 4, 2009, 2:03 pm

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Links