Toxins Allowed to Seep into Waterways, Group Says
Valley News Dispatch
2 April 2012
By Mary Ann Thomas
Two environmental groups are pushing PPG Industries to clean up
toxins such as arsenic and lead that are seeping into the
Allegheny River in Armstrong County and white-washing portions of
a hillside.
PennEnvironment, with an office in Pittsburgh, and the Sierra Club
refiled a complaint in federal District Court, Western District of
Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh recently alleging that PPG is violating
the federal Clean Water Act and the state Clean Streams Law with
unpermitted and untreated discharge of pollutants into the
Allegheny River.
The waste site, located off Route 128 in Cadogan and North Buffalo
townships, is discharging arsenic, chromium, lead, manganese,
copper, zinc, mercury and other toxins into the river and a local
stream, Glade Run.
The pH level of some of the leakage is as high as 12.69, the group
said, about the same as household bleach.
Ammonia has a pH of about 11.
The dump has racked up 162 discharge violations and 33 reporting
violations, according to PennEnvironment's complaint and monthly
monitoring reports submitted by PPG to the Pennsylvania Department
of Environmental Protection from February 2010 through December,
2011.
"We filed the suit because PPG has had five decades to remediate
this site and stop the pollution and protect the Allegheny River,"
said Erika Staaf, clean water advocate with PennEnvironment.
The nonprofits are seeking judgment, imposing of penalties and
coverage of legal expenses.
In the lawsuit, PennEnvironment argues that neither the federal
Environmental Protection Agency nor the state Department of
Environmental Protection is "diligently prosecuting a civil or
criminal action to redress the violations."
Jeremy Neuhart, PPG spokesman, said the lawsuit's allegations are
without merit and the company has been working with the state
Department of Environmental Protection on a final cleanup plan.
The company is committed to develop a final plan to address the
problems at the Cadogan site, he said.
"PPG's former operations in and around Ford City played a very
significant role in the company's history," he said, "And PPG will
continue to work to fulfill its environmental responsibilities
there."
Festering problem
A festering pollution problem that started decades ago, PPG
discarded a slurry used in glass polishing from about 1950 to 1970
from its bustling glass plant in Ford City into waste lagoons
covering almost 77 acres on company-owned land across rthe river.
PPG sent the slurry waste from the plant via a pipe system under
the Allegheny River to several lagoons on the Cadogan and North
Buffalo site, which the company had formerly used as a sandstone
quarry, according to the court papers.
In the same area, the company deposited about 20 million cubic
feet of solid waste from the 1920s to 1970s, according to the
complaint.
The company sold the waste site for $1 to Ford City borough in
1972, but PPG is responsible for the site, which now contains a
park and ballfields.
As the property owner, Ford City borough is a defendant in the
case. There's no effort, however, to force the borough to do
anything.
"The attitude in Ford City is 'if there's an issue here, let's
resolve it,'" said Frank Wolfe, borough solicitor. "I don't think
it's a secret that PPG has issues with this property, but the
company and DEP have been dealing with it.
"I know that they (PPG) are trying to do things," Wolfe said.
"It's not as though PPG is trying to ignore it."
Elusive final plan
The company has been working with the state for decades on the
Cadogan site.
According to court documents, PPG and DEP entered into an
agreement on the discharges from the site into the river in 1971,
citing it was violating the state's Clean Streams Law.
The agency and the company continued to exchange correspondence
and work on a proposed remediation plan over the years.
Then PPG withdrew it cleanup plan in 1973, according to the
complaint.
According to Neuhart, DEP concluded in 1984 that there was "No
Action Needed (no hazard)" at the site, based on its own sampling
and assessment.
The company conducted multiple extensive environmental
assessments, including a conclusion that there "was not material
adverse risk to human health or the environment," he said.
In 2010, PPG installed an interim collection and treatment system.
The company is in compliance with discharge limits set by DEP in
July 2009, according to Neuhart.
However, PPG is still out of compliance with DEP's 2009
administrative order, according to John Poister, DEP spokesman.
"The department issued that order after years of back and forth
with the company requiring them to clean up the site and stop the
leaching of contaminated water into the Allegheny River," he said.
PPG appealed the order, which DEP rejected, but the company did
install a temporary treatment facility that was not "adequate,"
according to Poister.
"There have been continued discussions resulting in the company
filing a revised plan this past November which is under review,"
he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
Mary Ann Thomas can be reached at mthomas@tribweb.com or
412-782-2121 x1510.