|
|

|
Detailed Background
Case: LCP Chemical Georgia, GA
In 1994, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a Unilateral
Administrative Order for Removal, instructing the facility owners to undertake
cleanup operations. The LCP site was placed on the National Priorities List in
1996 (EPA Facility ID GAD09903182). The most recent removal actions were
completed in 1999. A majority of the most contaminated onsite soils and waste
piles have been removed from the site and placed in authorized waste disposal
facilities. In addition, excavation and filling of waste basins, including
brine pits adjacent to the marsh, and excavation and removal of approximately
13 acres of some of the more heavily contaminated marsh areas have been
completed. The latter areas subsequently have been refilled with clean sediment
and replanted with marsh grass. A contaminated groundwater aquifer located
under a portion of the upland area of the site is being monitored by the EPA
and the responsible parties (RPs).
In 2002, the trustees entered into a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) to facilitate the coordination and cooperation of
the trustees in assessing damages for injuries to natural resources. The MOU's
purpose is to ensure that the trustees coordinate the natural resource damage
assessment (NRDA), avoid duplication of assessment activities, coordinate
development of restoration options, and recover damages from the RPs to
implement restoration projects sufficient to compensate the public for harm.
Subsequently, in December 2003, the trustees and Honeywell International entered
into a cooperative NRDA agreement to facilitate
development of a cost-effective and efficient process for determining and
quantifying injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural resources and/or
services, and for determining and implementing the most appropriate approach to
restore, replace, rehabilitate, or acquire the equivalent of those natural
resources and/or services. The trustees and Honeywell are working together to
evaluate such factors as the magnitude and extent of contamination, the
toxicity of the contaminants and their effects on the natural resources of
concern, and the recovery rates from the identified injuries. They will
eventually evaluate and implement appropriate compensatory restoration
projects.
|
|

|