Text Box:  The more things change the more they stay the same.  The current dispute between the Army and the USEPA is based on a familiar theme that has cropped up periodically during the long period of time that Picatinny Arsenal has been a Superfund site.  The center of the maelstrom is the Feasibility Study (FS) for Mid-Valley groundwater.  The Army and the USEPA engaged in numerous discussions at various technical meetings aimed at refining an approach for the FS.  The revised FS submitted by the Army in November 2007 included a different approach than what had apparently been expected by the USEPA.  
Text Box: The first discussions regarding the dispute took place at a routine technical meeting in January 2008.  At that point the issue of dispute resolution was broached but mentioned only as a possibility if the matter could not be

POINTS OF INTEREST:   

· A meeting was held at the offices of the NJDEP to discuss the remedial approach at Area B on June 24, 2008.

· Representatives of the USEPA and the Army met on July 24, 2008 as part of their ongoing effort to resolve their dispute.

· Arcadis conducted a technical meeting with representatives of Picatinny, the USEPA, and the NJDEP on May 29, 2008.

· The last RAB meeting was held on May 29, 2008.

· The next RAB meeting will begin at 6:30 pm on October 23, 2008 at Bucky’s in the Arsenal. It will be preceded by a site tour beginning at 4:30 pm. Notify Mr. Ted Gabel by 2 pm on October 22 to request a pass :  973-724-6748.

RCI FIELD WORK

2

GREEN POND BROOK

3

RCI UXO REMOVAL

4

TRAINING

4

AREA B

5

USEPA POSITION

6

TAPP THANKS

6

ASSEMBLY TO RAB

7

ARMY POSITION

8

PUBLIC HEARING

8

PLAN HIGHLIGHTS

9

NEW DEP REGS

12

Text Box: The Picatinny Arsenal Environmental Restoration Advisory Board’s 
TAPP Contractor presents

Summer 2008

Volume 6, issue 2

Text Box: Environmental Happenings
At Picatinny Arsenal
Text Box: IN THE FIELD…..
Text Box: Recent field activities for April through July of 2008 included the following:
Site 180:  Sampling for lead in soil.  (June)

Text Box: CDC Footprint:  Construction support for stump removal.  (June)

BRING IT ON:  ARMY AND EPA STANDOFF

Text Box: Editorial Reviewers
David Forti, Michael Glaab, Courtenay Huff
Technical Advisors
Ted Gabel, William Roach,   Gregory Zalaskus
Image of Boxers in arena

handled at the project manager level.  A second meeting was held on February 19th although details regarding the meeting were not made available; however, it was eventually revealed that a resolution had not been reached.  The USEPA laid out the grounds for the dispute in a letter dated June 27, 2008 to LTC Stack of  Picatinny

 

Arsenal and Mr. George Pavlou, Acting Director of USEPA Region II Emergency and Remedial Response Division.  A dispute resolution position paper accompanied the letter.  In that position paper the USEPA detailed the nature of the dispute.  The USEPA does not believe that the “radically new approach” is protective of public health and the environment.  The USEPA states that “the Army no longer intends to apply ARARs to ground and surface water contamination at Picatinny unless risk levels are unacceptable for a restricted use scenario (industrial research worker).” 

As mentioned in the Spring 2008 newsletter the USEPA requires that groundwater be restored to its “designated or beneficial use.” 

 

 

In the case of Picatinny Arsenal the site is underlain by a sole source aquifer.  In addition the Army contends that there are no ARARs that apply to surface water because there are no “unacceptable human health or ecological risks.”  Further discussion on the dispute from each side is presented in the following sections.

Next Page PAERAB Home