Feeling that Wednesday's meeting regarding the proposed cleanup plan for the Liberty Site may be the community's last chance to voice their concerns regarding the contaminants surrounding the site, Concerned Citizens Association of Farmingdale (CCAF) President Michael Grello recently spoke to the Farmingdale Observer about his concerns and hopes regarding the cleanup process, particularly the goal to reach as many local residents as possible and get them to attend the meeting.

"A lot of people are so turned off because this started so long ago," Grello said regarding the long cleanup process since investigations began nearly 60 years ago. "They never did a full, comprehensive clean up," he added, saying that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) number one goal has always been to remove the immediate health hazardous material from the site. "No attention has ever been given to contaminants in the soil source aquifer," he said, "and that leads us to the problems we have today."

Grello explained that the plumes on the site travel southwest, directly under Woodward Parkway Elementary School, and to the Massapequa Creek and Preserve. He noted that all six bodies of water have made their way down to Merrick Road and questioned why the EPA is planning to place its last treatment facility under 7th Avenue.

"The water goes right in between our wells," he said. "They (the EPA) feel this will break down the contaminants naturally. It's not breaking them down, just the mobility of it is stopping."

Grello added that while the EPA is planning to clean up Pond A of the Massapequa Preserve, the most contaminated, they are supposed to clean up a superfund site to predisposed conditions.

"They say it's not cost efficient," he said. "If that's the case, they should do the next best thing and do as much as possible."

Grello explained that under the EPA's guidelines, they should clean up as much of the site as possible with the long term goal being complete remediation, and he feels that are not taking the right actions to reach that goal.

"Capping 8.75 acres does not coincide with their long term goals," he said. "They're covering over 46,000 cubic yards."

Grello added that the EPA conducted a health assessment at both Woodward Parkway and in off-site residential areas, which they were supposed to do, but did not conduct them for the proper amount of time. Their health assessment study monitored exposure that children would experience for 182 days, six hours a day. In addition, exposure school workers would experience was monitored for 250 days, eight hours per day. Grello said that at the last EPA meeting, it was recorded that representatives stated that the school had been monitored 24 hours a day, while their study stated that they were not done for that length of time. He further added that the six and eight hour studies showed an increase in cancer risk but at an acceptable range.

"Would more assessment warrant immediate action and/or removal?" Grello asked. "If they did that over a 24 hour period, would it still be acceptable?"

Grello added that in the 1994 Remedial Investigation Report, the EPA stated that openings in the pavement cover exist under a few of the buildings, but the EPA did not test under the buildings, only around them. "If there's anything under those buildings, it won't be found by testing around them," Grello said, "you have to test under those buildings."

Grello further added that in a report released by the EPA, investigations found stained soil in several leaching fields around buildings at Liberty, and that is all their cleanup is based upon.

Citing different newspaper articles regarding the EPA's involvement in other matters around the country, Grello pointed out that the EPA did not always warn the federal government or residents about contaminated areas. For example, Grello noted one article regarding a contaminated well in Suffolk County. The article stated that a family who moved into their home and used the well for their drinking water supply were not made aware that the ground surrounding the well was contaminated. The article argued that the EPA knew of this, and after further investigating confirmed that the family's drinking water was in fact contaminated.

"This is why I don't trust these people," Grello said of the EPA. "This whole thing seems to be driven by money." He noted a recent article that stated the EPA was spending $30 million for a treatment plant in Mexico.

"They have the money to spend $30 million in Mexico, but they don't have $8 to $10 million to do the right thing here? How can I trust these people?"

Looking over the EPA's most recent document, their preferred cleanup plan for Liberty, Grello questioned how EPA representatives came to the conclusion that the SL-2 plan, which the EPA wants to enforce to clean up the property, could possibly be the most favorable. The SL-2 plan would include the capping of several acres on the property, not the full removal of underground contaminants.

"They're not meeting their long term goal," Grello said, "which is full remediation. The SL-3 proves to be the most efficient plan."

He noted that when comparing all the alternatives the EPA considers when decided which course of action to take, the SL-3 plan is clearly most favorable in all aspects with the exception of cost.

"The bottom line is cost," Grello said, arguing that this is the only reason the EPA is choosing to go with the SL-2 plan. "But we have to keep fighting. When they wanted to leave all the contaminants at the site, the people fought, and they stopped the capping of the property. They came back to us with a proposal to clean the site up to 143 parts per million of cadmium and 43 parts per million of chromium, and the record of decision was halted due to insufficient testing. We have to keep fighting them to get the proper cleanup we deserve," he said.

Grello noted that concern regarding the drinking water wells, with over 44,000 people drinking out of the South Farmingdale Water District and over 46,000 drinking out of the Massapequa Water District's wells, recently caused the EPA to install sediment wells at the site, which cost approximately $5 million.

"If they weren't in jeopardy," he argued, "they wouldn't have spent $5 million. As you look back and see what has happened over the years, it's a total joke. Nothing could be trusted."

He added that the more people that come forward and fight for a better cleanup, which the community deserves, the more likely the EPA will have to adhere to residents' requests. He added that the CCAF stands as a voice of the community and its residents, and that the more members who join the better and stronger that voice will be. "We basically really want to get people to turn out," he said. "We have to keep fighting this to get this blight out of our community."