Will you chip in to support our nonprofit newsroom with a donation today? Yes, I want to support My Edmonds News!
Editor:
Out of an original list of six alternatives for the Unocal site cleanup, the Washington State Department of Ecology narrowed the list to two: Alternative 4 would call for the most thorough cleanup by excavation and removal of contaminated soil that still remains on the site. Alternative 6 leaves the remaining contaminated soil in place. Chevron, the parent company of Unocal, has selected Alternative 6 as the preferred option.
We are urging Ecology not to accept that recommendation. The reason: Alternative 6 leaves contaminants on site, increases the cost of building a water connection between the Edmonds Marsh and Puget Sound, shifts the contamination burden to future landowners and future generations, and doesn’t account for the potential future use of the site as an estuary habitat. Why has Alternative 6 been chosen over Alternative 4? Alternative 4 is much more expensive for Chevron.
A public meeting will be held Monday, Sept. 16 in the Brackett Room, third floor Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Ave. N. 5:30 p.m. open house and 6:30 pm Department of Ecology presentation followed by Q&A. If you support a more thorough cleanup of the Unocal site or would like to hear the complete explanation of why the Department of Ecology is recommending Alternative 6 over Alternative 4, come to the meeting so that Ecology is made aware of your views.
To access the meeting by Zoom, register here. The period for public comment runs through Oct. 24, 11:59 p.m., 2024. Send your written opinions to: go.ecology.wa.gov/UnocalEdmondsComments.
Respectfully submitted
Georgina Armstrong on behalf of
Edmonds Marsh Estuary Advocates
Edmonds Climate Advisory Board
There may be an issue just like the gas works contamination where it is worse to disrupt the contamination that it is to cap it.
One of the “wouldn’t it be nice” to have projects on our financially broken city’s book of future plans is to purchase the Unocal property with the hope to re-establish an open salmon stream to the marsh. This is certainly a good dream to have and a great goal for the environment but can never be accomplished without huge private, state or federal grants for the purpose. The city has no spare money for this and probably won’t ever have it. One of the other possible pit falls of a city purchase is the high probability that we would also be buying the obligation to pay for more cleanup if digging up the stream bed released asphalt residue that the oil industry polluters were allowed to leave behind. Careful what we wish for and what we accept from Dept. of Ecology on this delicate issue.
“Clean” means clean. Chevron has a responsibility to do the work now and not kick the can down the road for the future to do so. They should do it right the first time. No to Alternative 6!!!
No to alternative 6.
Citizens, please write and comment to create a NEW scenario or #7 and have DOE segregate the 22 hot spots that Chevron is responsible for as if it remains bundled with the WSDOT pipe the restrictive covenant will include both.
Requesting a new scenario will FORCE Chevron (profits about $2bb last year) to PAY for the hot spots since they created them.
Requesting a new scenario and having Chevron clean those hot spots WILL save the City of Edmond future costs as designs can create the channel in the path of some of the hot spots so complete soil replacement will be unnecessary and the channel and lagoon can be south of the WSDOT pipe.
Requesting a new scenario will drop the price considerable as the cost to remove WSDOT pipe was the most expensive.
Requesting a new scenario will allow the City to only address the WSDOT pipe with WSDOT ferries when the restrictive covenant is put in the decree and could be a negotiating piece necessary to request a transfer of property since taxpayers have already paid (gas taxes) for that property.
So, please comment on CREATING a new scenario that bifurcates the WSDOT pipe from the Chevron Hot Spots. Chevron MUST pay their fair share and DOE should not be scared of threat of lawsuit! The comment period was extended.
Ok I did it. It’s easy this one. And if ya want you get emails about what is going on with this situation and ecology in general I suspect. Thank you Diane. We all need to toughen up and not worry about lawsuits all of the time. Anyone can sue anyone but remember they don’t always win when they sue. I am tired of hearing about and reading about so many things that we need, to stand up for ourselves. It feels and sounds like blackmail all of the time. I say once in a while we should say bring it on!