Commentary
FormInformed policymaking and remediation practices should seriously consider the potential migration of PAHs and TPH to the Providence River.
FormIf PAHs are suspected of having migrated to the Dynamo House property from offsite, the potential for future migration should be pursued further, as should further movement of offsite contaminants to Dynamo House. What explains the decreased level of TPH found on the northern parcel? Can we track the movement of contamination through the sites? How deep should we search the ground when conducting sampling, and what does this mean for redevelopment options? At present, the focus is on a soil cap for Dynamo House. While this decision is based on informed assessments, how can we know that it is truly adequate if we are unsure about the migration of contamination?
FormIf waterfront redevelopment in the Jewelry District is but one effort to reduce contamination in the Narragansett Bay system – as it indeed can be considered – then regular monitoring may indicate whether remediation efforts have been successful in the future. NOAA’s Mussel Watch program {Link:} , which monitors a series of chemicals in sites throughout Narragansett Bay, has data on PAH levels beyond the mouth of the Providence River . It would be interesting as well as practical to have data on PAH and TPH levels in the river system, so that it will be possible to monitor changes in PAH levels over time as a result of cleanup efforts.
Recommendations on Ecosystem Analysis
Recommendations on a Holistic Approach
|