To the editor:
Perhaps unintentionally, the title of Peter J. Most’s Viewpoints article titled “Let the river flow”—in which Mr. Most explicitly condones and approves the building of a toxic polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) dump in Lee—is sadly ironic. If the Lee PCB dump goes forward, yes, the river will “flow,” as Mr. Most says. It will flow alongside a 75-acre pit of toxic, dangerous, and cancerous waste that Mr. Most seems to think is acceptable. Forever. That is not acceptable.
Amidst Mr. Most’s “oh well, aw shucks!” logic and acquiescence of the Lee dump, his article ignores one simple fact: The building of the Lee PCB dump was not some inevitable foregone conclusion. The only reason we are even talking about the possibility of a PCB dump being built in Lee is because that is what General Electric (GE) wants to do. GE wants to build a toxic dump in Lee. The EPA did not make GE build a dump in Lee—or anywhere in Berkshire County. The EPA did not recommend it. Nobody did. GE fought for it. This is what GE wants.
Let’s not forget that, in October 2016, the EPA ordered GE to excavate and remove nearly 1 million cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the Housatonic River, its floodplain, and surrounding areas and ship this contaminated material off site to a licensed facility equipped to handle the disposal. GE could have and should have simply complied with this mandate, especially after all GE has done in past decades to decimate the river. But GE fought this and appealed. And, yes, GE won the appeal in 2018 when the EPA issued a decision that gave GE the green light to try to build a PCB dump right next to the very river GE polluted. But, again, even with the EPA’s approval, GE did not have to move forward with the Lee PCB dump. GE was not required to build a dump in Lee. GE consciously decided and chose to aggressively move forward with the Lee PCB dump because that is what GE wants to do. The fact alone that GE wants to do this is a slap in the face to anybody who lives in Berkshire County, and especially to the folks who will be most affected in Lee and Lenox Dale.
There is no question that off-site disposal of the PCBs by GE would be and is safer for the community of Lee, Lenox Dale, and all of Berkshire County. You do not need to be a PCB expert or rocket scientist to reach this conclusion. With either off-site disposal or building a PCB dump in Lee, of course, there will be excavation of PCB-contaminated sediment and soil. However, the question then becomes: What is the safest way to dispose of the contaminated sediment? To be sure, building a PCB dump in Lee (or anywhere in Berkshire County for that matter) will necessarily involve a tremendous amount of trucking, shipment, moving, and relocation of toxic PCB waste within the towns of Lee and Lenox Dale. Surely, this will involve countless trips by numerous dump trucks—back and forth and to and from various parts of the river in Berkshire County to and from the Lee dump. Obviously, this “rinse and repeat” process of excavation (followed by transportation and ultimate disposal in the Lee dump) will mean that this PCB waste will be carted, driven, and transported throughout the towns and communities of Berkshire County, over and over and over again. By stark contrast, removal of the PCB sediment and shipment offsite—while initial excavation would be required—would get the problem (i.e., the toxic PCB waste) out of Berkshire County (1) permanently and (2) once and for all. Unlike the re-dumping that will occur all within Berkshire County if the Lee dump goes forward, off-site disposal would avoid unnecessary repeat contamination and spreading of the PCBs throughout Berkshire County since the waste would be permanently removed from the county and dumped elsewhere in a properly licensed and existing facility.
Mr. Most’s letter states that “there is no funding for less onerous alternatives” than a PCB dump in Lee. This statement is perplexing. According to a search I did today on macrotrends.net, as of today, GE’s net worth—meaning how much GE is worth—is $121,920,000,000 (that’s $121.92 billion, in case you lost track of the zeros). “No funding,” Mr. Most? The “funding” can and should come from GE, and GE certainly can afford to clean up the Housatonic River and Woods Pond to the fullest extent possible without it being a drop in the bucket—no pun intended—for GE’s bottom line. GE caused the problem. So they should pay for its clean up. It’s that simple.
Mr. Most states that certain unnamed and unidentified “scientists have assured us that the landfill is perfectly safe.” Firstly, Mr. Most ignores whether any of these unnamed “scientists” have been paid or compensated, directly or indirectly, by GE. But, more importantly, completely missing from Mr. Most’s article is reference to the expert report prepared by Dr. David J. De Simone, Ph.D. Dr. Desimone is an expert in surficial geologic mapping and geomorphological interpretations, with past experience as a professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), lecturer at Williams College, professor at Bennington College, and owner of a geologic mapping and research firm for the past 38 years. In fact, Dr. DeSimone has specific experience mapping the surficial geology of PFOA-contaminated regions in Hoosick Falls and Petersburg, N.Y., as well as in Bennington and Rutland, Vt. Dr. DeSimone previously wrote a report in which he “reviewed documents and evaluated the surficial and bedrock geology for the proposed PCB landfill site north of Willow Hill Road and south of Woods Pond, Town of Lee, MA.” In Dr. DeSimone’s opinion:
“The bottom line is the geology of the proposed PCB and landfill location is very likely to result in leachate contamination of surficial and bedrock aquifers if leachate penetrates the landfill liners. Based upon site geology, PCB disposal in a landfill in this location is a very poor choice that may result in PCB contamination of the sand and gravel acquifer and the underlying Stockbridge marble acquifer.” (Emphasis in original.)
Mr. Most’s letter talked down to the residents of Lee, characterizing their understandable outrage as “not comprehending what ‘no’ means, something that is likely covered in your middle and high school curricula.” But Mr. Most has it backwards. It is to GE that the townspeople are saying “no.” And so should Mr. Most. Another academic subject that Mr. Most should know that is “covered in your middle and high school curricula” is geology—something Dr. DeSimone covered pretty extensively in explaining why the Lee PCB dump is a horrible idea.
Like Mr. Most, I am an attorney. Unlike Mr. Most, I do not represent corporations or “Fortune 500 and private companies” as Mr. Most’s webpage states he does. Indeed, Mr. Most’s lawyer webpage explicitly states that he represents “energy companies, hedge funds, and manufacturers across all sectors of the economy.” One should ask, in all seriousness: Is GE one of these companies that you have represented, Mr. Most?
I represent people. Human beings. The people of Lee and Lenox Dale have spoken loud and clear. And they are right. Instead of condescendingly dismissing their concerns, I suggest Mr. Most actually listen. Unlike Mr. Most, with all due respect, I was born and raised here in Berkshire County. My grandfather was born in a shack on the Housatonic River just feet away from where GE is trying to build their latest toxic monstrosity. There are real people involved here. This is wrong. Plain and simple.
Thomas E. Bosworth, attorney with Bosworth Law
Philadelphia, Penn.
