1
Narrative: The name “Murphy’s Island” is a misnomer. This is a section of shoreline made into an “island” of habitat by railroad and highways. Historically, the shoreline of Onondaga Lake included lots of wetland areas. Much of this was filled in or eliminated through changes to the water levels in the Lake. Murphy’s Island contains some of the last “natural” wetlands around the Lake (as shown on this map) and, because of the barriers created by the railroad tracks and adjacent highways, remains relatively unused by people. The County’s proposed trail across Murphy’s Island will change that status, raising concerns for the eagle roost that is establishing itself on this land. Beyond the impact on eagles, the proposed trail and recreational use of Murphy’s Island has two primary environmental consequences: (1) impacts on wetlands and (2) potential visitor exposure to an unremediated Superfund site. 2
Wetlands Impact: This map shows the originally proposed trail alignment (in purple) and one of the newest proposals (in yellow). The currently proposed trail will run through wetlands and will involve construction, placement of fill or other disturbance within the wetlands. Because of the area of disturbance and the size of the wetlands, this activity will require two permits – a Freshwater Wetlands Permit from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NY DEC) and a Clean Water Act permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACoE) (Section 404 – Dredge and Fill permit) The DEC permitting decision will focus on whether the proposed project is compatible with the wetlands function and whether the need for the project outweighs lost benefits. NY ECL § 24-0705(1); 6 NYCRR §§ 663.5(d), (e). DEC can impose conditions or limits on construction to minimize or mitigate the negative impacts of a proposed project on wetlands, NY ECL § 24-0705(4)., and will typically work with applicant to establish the necessary conditions to allow the project to go forward. The USACoE permitting decision will similarly focus on whether impacts to wetlands are necessary to the goals of the project; whether they can be minimized or avoided; and, if 3
not, whether on-site or off-site mitigation (often in the form of wetlands construction) is possible. (United States Army Corps of Engineers (2014). Regulatory Program Applicant Information Guide, p. 17, available on-line at www.nan.usace.army.mil/Portals/37/docs/regulatory/geninfo/ Applicant_Guide_2014.pdf). Again, the USACoE is likely to work with County to minimize impacts or find mitigation. [NOTE: The Legend on the above map says: Alternative A: Trail Length – 2550 L.F. (Old wetland boundary: 0.523 acres wetland disturbance; Aug 2018 wetlands boundary: 0.613 acres wetlands disturbance) Alternative B: Trail Length – 2800 LF (Old wetland boundary: 0.673 acres wetland disturbance; Aug 2018 wetland boundary: 0.647 acres wetlands disturbance) Purple line with squares – 2018 wetland boundary Dash/dotted line – old wetlands boundary Red line – parcel boundary] 3
The second key environmental issue is that the trial is being proposed for a known contaminated site. Murphy’s Island is not historically a “natural” area, however. According to studies of the site done as part of the overall Lake remediation process, the current configuration of Murphy’s Island was created between 1915 and 1926 when wetlands and shoreline were filled in. The fill is believed to have come from dredged material from the Lake, dredgings from the Barge Channel near Oil City and the Manufactured Gas Plant, and fill from other industrial sites around the Lake. The industrial or contaminated sources of the fill dumped on Murphy’s Island (and, potentially, run-off from the railroad or adjacent industrial sites) has resulted in widespread contamination on Murhpy’s Island. (Honeywell, Revised Remedial Investigation Wastebed B/Harbor Brook Site, March 2015.) Murphy’s Island is acknowledged to be a contaminated site – part of the Onondaga Lake Superfund site. Parcle has been studied a lot – at least four rounds of sampling between 2000 and 2014. Sources of contamination include: • Historic fill from other industrial sites • Dredgings from the Lake and/or the barge terminal near Oil City • Materials used to fill the former Onondaga Creek channel 4
• Wastes from the Manufactured Gas Plant • Run-off/emissions from railroad (oils, grease, particulates) and Oil City • Solvay wastes • Tarry wastes that may have been from the Semet Tar facility or other industrial sites (Marley property) (Honeywell, Revised Remedial Investigation Wastebed B/Harbor Brook Site, March 2015.) 4
Most relevant contaminants for trail users – surface soil contamination levels. Until the site is remediated, hikers or birders who stray off the trail – to get closer to the eagles or to sit along the shoreline or to investigate the flora on the Island -- may be exposed to surface soil contamination. The 2015 Remedial Investigation reports surface soil sampling and testing in 30 locations across the site. Tested for a range of contaminants, including volatiles, metals, and pesticides. The red circles on the map indicate locations where surface soils are documented to be in exceedance of commercial use standards for at least one contaminant of concern. Findings: • In 23 of 30 sampling locations, one or more contaminant tested above “Commercial Use” levels (applicable to passive recreational use, like trails) • In 17 of 30 sampling locations, two or more contaminants above commercial use levels. • In 11 of 30 sampling locations, three or more contaminants above commercial use levels. • Cadmium exceedances are present in 17 sampling sites; mercury exceedances in 9 sites; PCBs in 7 sites. 5
• In 26 of 30 sampling locations, one or more contaminant tested above “Restricted Residential Use” standards (applicable to active recreational use, which involves more than minimal contact with the soil) • In 19 of 30 sampling locations, three or more contaminants tested above restricted residential use standards • In 15 of 3 sampling locations, four or more contaminants tested above restricted residential use standards • Cadmium and mercury exceedances are present in 19 sampling sites; chromium in at least 15 and possibly 19 sites; and PCBs in 7 sites. (Honeywell, Revised Remedial Investigation Wastebed B/Harbor Brook Site, March 2015.) Contaminants documented as exceeding commercial standards: • Benzo(a)pyrene (probable human carcinogen, linked to birth defects and low body weight) [NOTE: Recent studies suggest that benzo(a)pyrene may be less toxi than previously assumed. However, the remedial standards applicable to this contaminant have not changed.] • Cadmium (carcinogen, linked to kidney disease, lung disease, and fragile bones) • Mercury (can cause brain and kidney damage and exposure in utero can cause brain damage, mental retardation, incoordination, blindness, seizures, inability to speak, and damage to the nervous system, digestive system and kidneys) • PCBs (can cause behavioral changes and immune system issues for children exposed in utero ) • Chromium (some forms of chromium are known to be carcinogenic; chromium can also cause skin ulcers, irritation of the digestive tract if ingested and irritation of the lungs if respired) (ATSDR, ToxFAQS, available on-line at www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp) One other environmental concern. Recent studies aimed at determining who is responsible for polluting Murphy’s Island found two unregulated contaminants – PXE and PTE. • PXE and PTE are widespread – found in more than half the samples taken on SYW-12. More prevalent in wetlands soils than in surface soils outside the wetlands areas. • Professors at SU, ESF and SUNY-Upstate have been studying these compounds, which are similar in structure to DDT. • Initial work suggests that PXE and PTE are more toxic than DDT – exposure to concentrations of PTE/PXE of only 0.1-1.0 uM was correlated with fatal deformities and increased vulnerability to seizures in fish and amphibians exposed during development. • Levels of PTE/PXE found on Murphy’s Island exceed these trigger points by 5 to 50 times on average. • Additional study is required, but there is reason to be cautious about exposure to the PTE/PXE that is relatively widespread on this site CURRENT STATUS OF REMEDIATION: 5
Recommend
More recommend
