News from Skylands CLEAN, Inc.

RINGWOOD - Sludge Hill battle ahead

(by Teresa Edmond - Staff Writer - June 25, 2008)

RINGWOOD - For the Upper Ringwood community and environmental advocates, getting better control of soil erosion at Sludge Hill could be a battle.

Although the Hudson, Essex and Passaic Soil Conservation District signed off on stormwater control methods for Sludge Hill – a mishmash of dirt, garbage and toxic waste piled up at the end of Van Dunk Lane – the community and environmental advocates doubt whether such methods are adequate.

Rainwater control is a great concern at Sludge Hill because of its location in the Superfund site where Ford Motor Co. dumped toxic paint sludge roughly 40 years ago. With the impact of rainwater, many residents say the toxic sludge could run off Sludge Hill and seep into other parts of Upper Ringwood and its vicinity, which includes the Wanaque Reservoir.

The issue was raised during the June 17 Community Advisory Group (CAG) meeting at Borough Hall, where attendees and CAG members looked at Soil Conservation Director Gary Van Olden’s letter. The Soil Conservation District “finds that soil erosion and sediment controls are adequate and well maintained at… remedial locations,” the letter said.

The letter did not ease the minds of some CAG meeting attendees. Robin O’Hearn, the executive director of the local environmental group Skylands CLEAN, said that just because Van Olden signed off on a property as having sufficient storm water management doesn’t mean people should take his word for it.

To prove her point, O’Hearn displayed photographs of a Crescent Drive housing subdivision during its first construction phase in 2003. She said that even though Van Olden signed off on the property, the water still was running from the development site into nearby West Brook – just a mile away from the Wanaque Reservoir.

After much pushing from Skylands CLEAN and Pequannock River Coalition, Van Olden eventually got the subdivision’s owner to set up better storm water controls, O’Hearn said.

“It took several attempts to get this individual to put up silt fencing, to put gravel around drainage so the water is controlled,” she said. “If this site (the Crescent Drive subdivision) is any indication of what will happen at that site (Sludge Hill), then I think you ought to take a second look.”

Robert Spiegel, executive director of Edison Wetlands Association (EWA), questioned whether the Soil Conservation District inspected the fencing during rainfall because, he said, the silt fencing does not do its job well against rainwater, and therefore, frequent inspections of such fences are recommended. He said the Soil Conservation District inspected the storm water controls during dry weather.

“I’ve seen enough silt fencing fail because they put it down, and the wind blows it and the water moves it. Unless you check it every time it rains, you don’ t know if it’s still in place,” he said.

Joseph Gowers, the Superfund site manager from the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said he agrees with Spiegel that silt fencing is vulnerable to “washing out,” and therefore Ford’s contractor Arcadis inspects the fencing every two weeks and after every rainfall.

“It’s common knowledge that that event happens,” Gowers said about possible washouts.

A proposal for new fences
Last week, Arcadis submitted a draft proposal to set up fencing around the O’Connor Disposal Area, the Cannon Mine and the Peters Mine Pit areas, all in Upper Ringwood, Gowers said. He also said he’s still waiting to hear from Arcadis.

CAG members and liaisons discussed other aspects of this fencing proposal, like the right wording for fence warning signs.

Former mayor and CAG member Wenke Taule said that the planned fencing should not give Ford, Arcadis or the EPA the go-ahead to slack off the cleaning progress for contaminated properties.

“Shouldn’t CAG make clear that just because now fencing will go up, that doesn’t mean they should drag their feet and take years and years to clean up the site? They should continue moving forward,” she said.

In response, Gowers said the fencing would be a “short-term” solution and that the EPA will “fully intend to continue the remedial investigation and the feasibility studies.”