EPA released its first cleanup plan for the General Motors site in December of 1990. Because the site is so large, two Records of Decision (RODs) have been issued regarding remediation. The first covered excavation of contaminated soils on Mohawk lands, at the North Disposal Area and the unlined industrial lagoons; dredging the rivers; pumping and treating contaminated groundwater; and treating contaminated sludge and soils. Any materials with levels of PCBs greater than 10 ppm would be excavated and permanently treated. The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe concurred with 1st ROD because it provided for excavation and dredging consistent with tribal standards and because it was a permanent remedy based on treatment of soils, sediments and sludges.
In 1990, however, the decision making power and involvement of the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (SRMT) and New York State (NYS) was taken away by the USEPA when consent decree negotiations with General Motors were occurring. In the era of Dan Quayle and his competitiveness council, EPA had written a guidance document that was released in August of 1990 in which they considered containment rather than treatment of PCBs between 10 and 500 ppm to be adequate for "typical" industrial sites. The Tribe, New York State and EPA were negotiating with General Motors at that time to achieve a protective clean up of the entire site. The negotiations became difficult when General Motors did not want to treat the contaminated material to the levels that New York State and the Tribe wanted. The 2nd ROD which was signed in April of 1992 and covered the industrial landfill and East Disposal Area and is much less stringent than the first. The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe refused to sign the consent decree for the 2nd ROD.
EPA produced a unilateral administrative enforcement order which gave the decision making power solely to EPA and put the Tribe and NYS in an advisory role only. This move by EPA critically impacted the entire cleanup process because it effectively limited the role of both the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and New York State in any future decisions. The Tribe, now relegated to an advisory role, legally has very little right to determine the future of Akwesasne as it relates to this Superfund site. In order to make it administratively more convenient for them, EPA dismissed the rights of the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe as a sovereign government to protect its environment, a decision which runs contrary to EPA's own Indian Policy and requirements under Superfund law (CERCLA and SARA). At the time, environmental injustice was not a term in common use, but it was occurring at Akwesasne.
To add insult to injury, EPA now proposes to change the 1st ROD to make it consistent with the 2nd. In this Post-Decision Proposed Plan, GM will have to treat all sludge and dredged material contaminated with PCBs above 500 ppm but will be allowed to store materials between 10 ppm and 500 ppm PCBs in an unlined landfill on the banks of the St. Lawrence River directly bordering Akwesasne. EPA has argued that this change is beneficial because it will save GM $15 million.
Complaining that they could not meet the required cleanup standards, General Motors has heavily lobbied EPA to get cleanup standards relaxed. Remediation of the heavily contaminated industrial landfill, for example, can not even be considered a cleanup. The 12 acre landfill (better defined as a dump, since the it is unlined and can not be considered a landfill in the true meaning of the word) is located within 500 yards of homes and businesses in Akwesasne and is situated on the banks of the St. Lawrence River near an important wetland area. Mohawks have strongly argued that contaminated material in the landfill must be excavated and moved but they have been ignored. EPA has chosen a remedy that includes capping rather than the more costly option of excavating and permanently treating the contaminated material. Mohawks have complained that this is not a cleanup at all but a cover-up and certainly not a permanent solution. EPA has countered that they considered the Mohawk's position on the landfill but decided to go with capping rather than excavation and treatment, which although a permanent solution, would have doubled the cost of the remedy. With the proposed changes in the 1st ROD, the volume of contaminated materials stored on site will only get larger.
In spite of the new Environmental Justice policies of President Clinton, the Indian Policy of EPA and the Internationally acknowledged importance of Native peoples by the United Nations, environmental protection for Mohawk lands and culture continues to erode. Reopening the 1st ROD and relaxing treatment standards has run completely counter to the environmental justice mandate of President Clinton. EPA's unilateral decision to change an agreement runs counter to their pronouncement to work with Tribes on a government-to-government basis. Mohawk governments are not citizens groups giving advice and input to EPA during public comment periods. The Executive Branch of the United States government has committed to treat Mohawk governments with the respect they deserve, but their actions speak louder than their words.
Many would cite this case as another example where the Federal government has not respected the decisions of Native governments and as a result, has failed in its responsibility to protect Native communities from damages inflicted upon it by citizens of the US. EPA's proposal to store materials contaminated with up to 500 ppm PCBs directly on the border of Mohawk lands frustrates Tribal environmental standards and enforcement power which are applicable within the same ecosystem only a few feet away. EPA's proposal also undercuts New York state's PCB cleanup standards for the Reynolds and ALCOA sites directly upstream from GM, endangering all remediation. As a result, restoration of the ecosystem that Mohawk people depend upon is threatened. Ken Jock, the Director of the Environment Division for the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe summarized the feelings of many Mohawk people when he said "this is a perfect example of environmental injustice. The environmental justice movement is just lip service."
Return to Top of Page
Return to ATFE Home Page