8 ms·

The most radioactive spot in New York City can also fix your muffler

130 points by jaboutboul 4y ago

teruakohatu 4y ago
As much as I like Atlas Obscura, this short article is quite close to blog spam. The references are much more interesting. The amount of extra radiation the workers receive seems quite low compared to the rest of the population [1], maybe about the same as living in Denver, CO? From 2012: https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121113/bushwick/epa-starts-radiation-abatement-at-former-atomic-bomb-project-site/ https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121113/bushwick/epa-start... > The level of radiation for a worker would fall at 120 millirem (the unit used to measure radiation's effect on the human body) per year, 20 percent more than the recommended 100 millirem per year for an average person. > “A cleanup is clearly warranted,” Brenner said. "But I can see why it might not be considered a super-high priority situation.” > A worker at Primo Auto Body, for instance, would raise his chance of contracting fatal cancer by 1 in 25,000, according to the information available. From 2013 https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131022/bushwick/businesses-at-former-atomic-bomb-site-hurt-by-work-limit-radiation/ https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131022/bushwick/businesse...: > The agency is finishing construction of thick raised concrete and lead floors in both Terra Nova and its neighbor, Primo Auto Body Shop, to protect workers from the radiation. > "It's been a nightmare," said Silvio Hernandez, the owner of Terra Nova, which has a storage facility and office at the site. "We were out of business for three weeks." > The owner of Primo Auto Body said the construction had cost him significant business since only part of his space was functional. > ... > The shielding, which Daly said should be completed in December, has been to guard against gamma radiation, levels of which Daly said were not high enough to spur immediate health problems but were "high enough to do something" at the two businesses. > The EPA also tested a nearby daycare center and school but found no heightened radiation at those sites, Daly said. [1] https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses
- djmips 4y ago
  Thanks!
- porphyra 4y ago
  I need the XKCD radiation chart to put this in context
  - teddyh 4y ago
    https://xkcd.com/radiation/ https://xkcd.com/radiation/
    - ghayes 4y ago
      For context, at 1.2 mSv (120 millirem), it puts it about the same as the normal annual radiation number for the public (1.0 mSv) and less than a head CT scan (2.0 mSv). Direct risk of cancer or radiation poisoning in the comic is listed starting at 100-400 mSv.
      - QuarterReptile 4y ago
        For context on your context, the concern here is not acute dosage, but rather chronic low levels that can lead to significant accumulated dose. Occupational standards are done on a linear-no-threshold basis that assumes all radiation exposure increases the risk of cancer, despite areas of high background radiation often having comparable or even lower cancer incidence. It makes sense that you don't let employers say 'no, we made him cancer resistant with that exposure!' But, it leads to stuff like this. 1mSv is the limit for annual non-radiation worker occupational exposure, but that's because it's pretty feasible to set a really low number threshold, have almost no one reach those levels, and deal with exceptions as they come. Easy, from OSHA/EPA standards, but obviously not for these guys. Also, EPA figures suggest 6mSv annually, and I remember learning 3mSv. In any case, it's significantly less radiation than you get from smoking, which I find not to be too uncommon where I take my cars. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses
  - praptak 4y ago
    When it comes to radiation I only understand banana per day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
acidburnNSA 4y ago
> One of the byproducts of their operation was a highly radioactive substance known as Thorium. As a nuclear engineer, I find the use of "highly radioactive" to be an overstatement. Thorium and other TENORM [1] (and their secular equilibrium products) are among the lowest activity kind of radioactive thing there is. Otherwise, it would have all decayed away billions of years ago. More radioactive = less stable = short half-life Less radioactive = more stable = longer half-life [1] https://www.epa.gov/radiation/technologically-enhanced-naturally-occurring-radioactive-materials-tenorm https://www.epa.gov/radiation/technologically-enhanced-natur...
- HarryHirsch 4y ago
  It sounds like typical sloppy journalism, CHinese whispers if you will. What might have happened is this: monazite contains rare earth elements, thorium, small amounts of uranium and trace radium from radioactive decay. Once you have separated the rare earths and thorium you are left with the really good stuff, especially Ra-226. It's an alpha emitter with a halflife of 1600 years, it's no joke at all. An establishment unaware of the radiation risks contamination at Marie Curie level.
  - acidburnNSA 4y ago
    These dose rates are many orders of magnitude less than "Marie Curie level"
    - HarryHirsch 4y ago
      It's stuff from undergraduate chemistry. I don't remember which fraction the radium ends up in, but the activity gets concentrated by many orders of magnitude. The problem with alpha emitters is always fine dust that settles in the lungs.
- nubinetwork 4y ago
  What are your thoughts on thorium gas mantles?
theflyingelvis 4y ago
I hear they receive glowing reviews
ReactiveJelly 4y ago
BLUF: It can fix your muffler because it's an auto repair shop, unrelated to the radioactivity
- maxbond 4y ago
  Saved you a search: Bottom Line Up Front https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication)
IIAOPSW 4y ago
Old legend I heard is that the most radioactive public place (re: not a literal university radiation lab) is none other than Grand Central. Something about the natural levels in granite and the consequences of making literally the whole building from this one rock source. No idea how true and how badly I am mis remembering
- lazide 4y ago
  Granite does tend to have higher than typical amounts of uranium in it, and does leech radon from it’s decay.
  - dylan604 4y ago
    maybe that's why it's popular for kitchen counter tops? it'll help keep your food warm!
    - acidburnNSA 4y ago
      My granite countertop registers roughly twice background dose rates with my Geiger counter. Hardly enough to raise any eyebrows, let alone temperature. I know you're joking but just wanted to add that I measured it.
    - whoopdedo 4y ago
      Not that, but what if it has an effect on bacterial and fungal growth? Being resistant to contamination is an excellent quality for a food surface.
  - njarboe 4y ago
    It also has high levels of potassium (especially pink granite), which has one naturally occurring radioactive isotope.
eternalban 4y ago
It's a Superfund site: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0206479 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... Fun fact: right behind that garage is Nowadays. Local lore has it that EPA layed down metal plates and dirt over that and kids party over that. https://twitter.com/nowadaysnyc https://twitter.com/nowadaysnyc -- epa background -- The Wolff-Alport Chemical Company Superfund site is located 1125 to 1139 Irving Avenue and 1514 Cooper Avenue in Ridgewood, Queens, New York, which borders Bushwick, Brooklyn New York. The adjacent streets, sidewalks, sewers, and commercial and residential properties where radiological contaminants have migrated or have the potential to migrate in the future are also included as part of this site. This nearly triangular area covers approximately 0.75 acres and is bound by Irving Avenue to the southwest, Cooper Avenue to the northwest, and a former cabinet manufacturing facility to the east. At present, the property is covered, primarily, with connecting structures, except for a former rail spur along its edge, which is an unpaved area where tracks are no longer present and is currently used for automobile storage. The on-site buildings contain a delicatessen/grocery, office space, residential apartments, several auto-repair shops, and warehousing space. The Wolff-Alport Chemical Company operated at the site from the early 1920s until 1954, importing monazite sand from the then so-called Belgian Congo and extracting rare earth metals from the material. Monazite contains approximately 6-8% thorium. Until 1947, the Wolff-Alport Chemical Company disposed of the thorium waste from monazite sand processing in the sewer and possibly by burying the waste on the property. Recent EPA investigations have confirmed that residual contamination still exists on-site and in or around the sewer lines downstream of the facility. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) first notified the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYC DOHMH), New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the potential for radiological contamination at the site in September 1987. EPA and NYC DOHMH conducted a preliminary radiological survey in February 1988, which confirmed the presence of radiological contamination, but concluded that the levels were below the regulatory limits at the time and, therefore, did not pose a risk to human health. The New York City Department of Design and Construction (NYC DDC) conducted a multi-phased investigation of the site between July 2009 and March 2010, using funds from EPA’s Brownfields program. This investigation confirmed the presence of radiological contamination both on-site and in the sewer system adjacent to the site. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) completed a health consultation in February 2012 and concluded there were potential health risks to on-site workers and pedestrians who frequently use the sidewalks of Irving Avenue near the site due to the radiological contamination. EPA added the site to the National Priorities List (NPL) in May 2014. Top of Page What Has Been Done to Clean Up the Site? EPA completed gamma radiation surveys, conducted a shielding pilot study, and, as a temporary protective measure, installed concrete, lead, and steel shielding inside three of the on-site businesses and over the adjacent Irving Avenue sidewalk between October 2012 and April 2014. A layer of crushed rock was also placed as shielding over the former railroad spur portion of the site. EPA also installed a radon mitigation system, which is used to reduce radon in buildings, within one of the on-site businesses where radon concentrations exceeded EPA’s standard. Through a gamma radiation survey of the area surrounding the site within a one-half mile radius, EPA, New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH), and NYCDOHMH found that there was no exposure to the surrounding community from radiation located on-site. After listing the site on the NPL, EPA investigated the site to determine the nature and extent of contamination and identify and evaluate cleanup alternatives. EPA collected soil samples, conducted gamma radiation surveys, installed groundwater monitoring wells, investigated a sewer system, sampled sediment from Newtown Creek, and tested for radon at a nearby school and daycare center. EPA repaired the damaged steel shielding on the sidewalk along Irving Avenue in November 2021 to prevent the risk of a slip and fall and limit radiation exposure. Top of Page What Is the Current Site Status? EPA finalized a cleanup plan, documented in a Record of Decision (ROD) in September 2017. The plan calls for relocating all tenants on the site, demolishing all buildings, digging up and removing contaminated soil and sewer sediment, jet cleaning, and disposing all contaminated soil, sediment, and building materials at an off-site facility. EPA completed the engineering design for the building demolition in September 2018 and is currently working on tenant relocation and building demolition activities. Although EPA took immediate actions at the Wolff-Alport Chemical Company Superfund site to protect commercial and residential tenants in the short term, based upon the results of a risk assessment, the only viable way to protect people in the long term is to vacate certain buildings permanently. This is the only option that will allow EPA to proceed with the demolition of the radiologically-contaminated buildings and the cleanup of the radiologically-contaminated soil underlying the buildings as called for in EPA’s Record of Decision from September 2017. Since 2017, EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), who will be relocating the tenants on behalf of EPA, have, on many occasions, engaged with property owners and tenants at the site. EPA and USACE have encouraged tenants to complete the forms necessary to determine their eligibility for relocation assistance benefits. Additionally, EPA has requested that property owners keep their space vacant following tenant relocations and grant EPA access to begin building demolition work. The engineering design for the soil removal portion of the cleanup is currently underway. A pre-design investigation (PDI) to further identify the extent of soil contamination is anticipated to begin in summer 2022. New York City, which owns the sewers, streets, and sidewalks, agreed to perform the engineering design for the soil removal beneath the streets and sidewalks and the cleanup of the impacted portions of the sewer system. It is anticipated that a PDI will begin in summer 2022.
johnnyApplePRNG 4y ago
Is there any safe way to work in a building environment like this one? Or is it permanently (at least for our lifetime) best to avoid it completely?
- userbinator 4y ago
  I suspect the risks are quite small in comparison to other things. There may even be a slight hormetic effect. Other places on Earth have much higher background radiation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran#Radioactivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran#Radioactivi...
weinzierl 4y ago
Does anyone know if there is a map of sites in New York that were uses by or in connection with the Manhattan Project?
dark-star 4y ago
Typical American solution: Hey, instead of actually removing the waste, let's just cover it up with lead shielding.
- euroderf 4y ago
  Maybe then we can charge admission too !
- kasey_junk 4y ago
  I don’t know about this specific situation but there are lots of others where the effort to clean up a hazard makes it worse, so capping it makes more sense. This is the best practice with asbestos for instance.
- DuskStar 4y ago
  As opposed to the European solution, where you know there's explosives in that field over there but you only deal with the stuff that floats to the surface each year.
  - dark-star 4y ago
    Europeans know that there are a couple thousand unexploded bombs "somewhere" under their cities. Too bad the allies didn't leave GPS traces for each of them, because if they did, I'm quite sure they would all be removed by now. If you don't know where the bomb is, you can't remove it. However, if you know where soil/ground/earth is polluted, it is getting cleaned up. At least in my part of Europe. Yes, it might take a few years but it happens.
MisterTea 4y ago
I thought it was this facility that was more radioactive but it appears to have been cleaned up: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0202850 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... The address is wrong though it is along the BQE in Woodside by St. Michael's Cemetery.
Havoc 4y ago
Surprised gov doesn't just buy it and adjacent buildings out and close it. If even one worker gets cancer from it then the math likely works out (nvm the suffering).
- DuskStar 4y ago
  It's less radioactive than Denver. Like, all of Denver.

130 points by jaboutboul 4y ago

As much as I like Atlas Obscura, this short article is quite close to blog spam. The references are much more interesting. The amount of extra radiation the workers receive seems quite low compared to the rest of the population [1], maybe about the same as living in Denver, CO? From 2012: https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121113/bushwick/epa-starts-radiation-abatement-at-former-atomic-bomb-project-site/ https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20121113/bushwick/epa-start... > The level of radiation for a worker would fall at 120 millirem (the unit used to measure radiation's effect on the human body) per year, 20 percent more than the recommended 100 millirem per year for an average person. > “A cleanup is clearly warranted,” Brenner said. "But I can see why it might not be considered a super-high priority situation.” > A worker at Primo Auto Body, for instance, would raise his chance of contracting fatal cancer by 1 in 25,000, according to the information available. From 2013 https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131022/bushwick/businesses-at-former-atomic-bomb-site-hurt-by-work-limit-radiation/ https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131022/bushwick/businesse...: > The agency is finishing construction of thick raised concrete and lead floors in both Terra Nova and its neighbor, Primo Auto Body Shop, to protect workers from the radiation. > "It's been a nightmare," said Silvio Hernandez, the owner of Terra Nova, which has a storage facility and office at the site. "We were out of business for three weeks." > The owner of Primo Auto Body said the construction had cost him significant business since only part of his space was functional. > ... > The shielding, which Daly said should be completed in December, has been to guard against gamma radiation, levels of which Daly said were not high enough to spur immediate health problems but were "high enough to do something" at the two businesses. > The EPA also tested a nearby daycare center and school but found no heightened radiation at those sites, Daly said. [1] https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses

djmips 4y ago
Thanks!
porphyra 4y ago
I need the XKCD radiation chart to put this in context
- teddyh 4y ago
  https://xkcd.com/radiation/ https://xkcd.com/radiation/
  - ghayes 4y ago
    For context, at 1.2 mSv (120 millirem), it puts it about the same as the normal annual radiation number for the public (1.0 mSv) and less than a head CT scan (2.0 mSv). Direct risk of cancer or radiation poisoning in the comic is listed starting at 100-400 mSv.
    - QuarterReptile 4y ago
      For context on your context, the concern here is not acute dosage, but rather chronic low levels that can lead to significant accumulated dose. Occupational standards are done on a linear-no-threshold basis that assumes all radiation exposure increases the risk of cancer, despite areas of high background radiation often having comparable or even lower cancer incidence. It makes sense that you don't let employers say 'no, we made him cancer resistant with that exposure!' But, it leads to stuff like this. 1mSv is the limit for annual non-radiation worker occupational exposure, but that's because it's pretty feasible to set a really low number threshold, have almost no one reach those levels, and deal with exceptions as they come. Easy, from OSHA/EPA standards, but obviously not for these guys. Also, EPA figures suggest 6mSv annually, and I remember learning 3mSv. In any case, it's significantly less radiation than you get from smoking, which I find not to be too uncommon where I take my cars. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-sources-and-doses
- praptak 4y ago
  When it comes to radiation I only understand banana per day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

acidburnNSA 4y ago

> One of the byproducts of their operation was a highly radioactive substance known as Thorium. As a nuclear engineer, I find the use of "highly radioactive" to be an overstatement. Thorium and other TENORM [1] (and their secular equilibrium products) are among the lowest activity kind of radioactive thing there is. Otherwise, it would have all decayed away billions of years ago. More radioactive = less stable = short half-life Less radioactive = more stable = longer half-life [1] https://www.epa.gov/radiation/technologically-enhanced-naturally-occurring-radioactive-materials-tenorm https://www.epa.gov/radiation/technologically-enhanced-natur...

HarryHirsch 4y ago
It sounds like typical sloppy journalism, CHinese whispers if you will. What might have happened is this: monazite contains rare earth elements, thorium, small amounts of uranium and trace radium from radioactive decay. Once you have separated the rare earths and thorium you are left with the really good stuff, especially Ra-226. It's an alpha emitter with a halflife of 1600 years, it's no joke at all. An establishment unaware of the radiation risks contamination at Marie Curie level.
- acidburnNSA 4y ago
  These dose rates are many orders of magnitude less than "Marie Curie level"
  - HarryHirsch 4y ago
    It's stuff from undergraduate chemistry. I don't remember which fraction the radium ends up in, but the activity gets concentrated by many orders of magnitude. The problem with alpha emitters is always fine dust that settles in the lungs.
nubinetwork 4y ago
What are your thoughts on thorium gas mantles?

theflyingelvis 4y ago

I hear they receive glowing reviews

ReactiveJelly 4y ago

BLUF: It can fix your muffler because it's an auto repair shop, unrelated to the radioactivity

maxbond 4y ago
Saved you a search: Bottom Line Up Front https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication)

IIAOPSW 4y ago

Old legend I heard is that the most radioactive public place (re: not a literal university radiation lab) is none other than Grand Central. Something about the natural levels in granite and the consequences of making literally the whole building from this one rock source. No idea how true and how badly I am mis remembering

lazide 4y ago
Granite does tend to have higher than typical amounts of uranium in it, and does leech radon from it’s decay.
- dylan604 4y ago
  maybe that's why it's popular for kitchen counter tops? it'll help keep your food warm!
  - acidburnNSA 4y ago
    My granite countertop registers roughly twice background dose rates with my Geiger counter. Hardly enough to raise any eyebrows, let alone temperature. I know you're joking but just wanted to add that I measured it.
  - whoopdedo 4y ago
    Not that, but what if it has an effect on bacterial and fungal growth? Being resistant to contamination is an excellent quality for a food surface.
- njarboe 4y ago
  It also has high levels of potassium (especially pink granite), which has one naturally occurring radioactive isotope.

eternalban 4y ago

It's a Superfund site: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0206479 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... Fun fact: right behind that garage is Nowadays. Local lore has it that EPA layed down metal plates and dirt over that and kids party over that. https://twitter.com/nowadaysnyc https://twitter.com/nowadaysnyc -- epa background -- The Wolff-Alport Chemical Company Superfund site is located 1125 to 1139 Irving Avenue and 1514 Cooper Avenue in Ridgewood, Queens, New York, which borders Bushwick, Brooklyn New York. The adjacent streets, sidewalks, sewers, and commercial and residential properties where radiological contaminants have migrated or have the potential to migrate in the future are also included as part of this site. This nearly triangular area covers approximately 0.75 acres and is bound by Irving Avenue to the southwest, Cooper Avenue to the northwest, and a former cabinet manufacturing facility to the east. At present, the property is covered, primarily, with connecting structures, except for a former rail spur along its edge, which is an unpaved area where tracks are no longer present and is currently used for automobile storage. The on-site buildings contain a delicatessen/grocery, office space, residential apartments, several auto-repair shops, and warehousing space. The Wolff-Alport Chemical Company operated at the site from the early 1920s until 1954, importing monazite sand from the then so-called Belgian Congo and extracting rare earth metals from the material. Monazite contains approximately 6-8% thorium. Until 1947, the Wolff-Alport Chemical Company disposed of the thorium waste from monazite sand processing in the sewer and possibly by burying the waste on the property. Recent EPA investigations have confirmed that residual contamination still exists on-site and in or around the sewer lines downstream of the facility. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) first notified the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYC DOHMH), New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the potential for radiological contamination at the site in September 1987. EPA and NYC DOHMH conducted a preliminary radiological survey in February 1988, which confirmed the presence of radiological contamination, but concluded that the levels were below the regulatory limits at the time and, therefore, did not pose a risk to human health. The New York City Department of Design and Construction (NYC DDC) conducted a multi-phased investigation of the site between July 2009 and March 2010, using funds from EPA’s Brownfields program. This investigation confirmed the presence of radiological contamination both on-site and in the sewer system adjacent to the site. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) completed a health consultation in February 2012 and concluded there were potential health risks to on-site workers and pedestrians who frequently use the sidewalks of Irving Avenue near the site due to the radiological contamination. EPA added the site to the National Priorities List (NPL) in May 2014. Top of Page What Has Been Done to Clean Up the Site? EPA completed gamma radiation surveys, conducted a shielding pilot study, and, as a temporary protective measure, installed concrete, lead, and steel shielding inside three of the on-site businesses and over the adjacent Irving Avenue sidewalk between October 2012 and April 2014. A layer of crushed rock was also placed as shielding over the former railroad spur portion of the site. EPA also installed a radon mitigation system, which is used to reduce radon in buildings, within one of the on-site businesses where radon concentrations exceeded EPA’s standard. Through a gamma radiation survey of the area surrounding the site within a one-half mile radius, EPA, New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH), and NYCDOHMH found that there was no exposure to the surrounding community from radiation located on-site. After listing the site on the NPL, EPA investigated the site to determine the nature and extent of contamination and identify and evaluate cleanup alternatives. EPA collected soil samples, conducted gamma radiation surveys, installed groundwater monitoring wells, investigated a sewer system, sampled sediment from Newtown Creek, and tested for radon at a nearby school and daycare center. EPA repaired the damaged steel shielding on the sidewalk along Irving Avenue in November 2021 to prevent the risk of a slip and fall and limit radiation exposure. Top of Page What Is the Current Site Status? EPA finalized a cleanup plan, documented in a Record of Decision (ROD) in September 2017. The plan calls for relocating all tenants on the site, demolishing all buildings, digging up and removing contaminated soil and sewer sediment, jet cleaning, and disposing all contaminated soil, sediment, and building materials at an off-site facility. EPA completed the engineering design for the building demolition in September 2018 and is currently working on tenant relocation and building demolition activities. Although EPA took immediate actions at the Wolff-Alport Chemical Company Superfund site to protect commercial and residential tenants in the short term, based upon the results of a risk assessment, the only viable way to protect people in the long term is to vacate certain buildings permanently. This is the only option that will allow EPA to proceed with the demolition of the radiologically-contaminated buildings and the cleanup of the radiologically-contaminated soil underlying the buildings as called for in EPA’s Record of Decision from September 2017. Since 2017, EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), who will be relocating the tenants on behalf of EPA, have, on many occasions, engaged with property owners and tenants at the site. EPA and USACE have encouraged tenants to complete the forms necessary to determine their eligibility for relocation assistance benefits. Additionally, EPA has requested that property owners keep their space vacant following tenant relocations and grant EPA access to begin building demolition work. The engineering design for the soil removal portion of the cleanup is currently underway. A pre-design investigation (PDI) to further identify the extent of soil contamination is anticipated to begin in summer 2022. New York City, which owns the sewers, streets, and sidewalks, agreed to perform the engineering design for the soil removal beneath the streets and sidewalks and the cleanup of the impacted portions of the sewer system. It is anticipated that a PDI will begin in summer 2022.

johnnyApplePRNG 4y ago

Is there any safe way to work in a building environment like this one? Or is it permanently (at least for our lifetime) best to avoid it completely?

userbinator 4y ago
I suspect the risks are quite small in comparison to other things. There may even be a slight hormetic effect. Other places on Earth have much higher background radiation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran#Radioactivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar,_Mazandaran#Radioactivi...

weinzierl 4y ago

Does anyone know if there is a map of sites in New York that were uses by or in connection with the Manhattan Project?

dark-star 4y ago

Typical American solution: Hey, instead of actually removing the waste, let's just cover it up with lead shielding.

euroderf 4y ago
Maybe then we can charge admission too !
kasey_junk 4y ago
I don’t know about this specific situation but there are lots of others where the effort to clean up a hazard makes it worse, so capping it makes more sense. This is the best practice with asbestos for instance.
DuskStar 4y ago
As opposed to the European solution, where you know there's explosives in that field over there but you only deal with the stuff that floats to the surface each year.
- dark-star 4y ago
  Europeans know that there are a couple thousand unexploded bombs "somewhere" under their cities. Too bad the allies didn't leave GPS traces for each of them, because if they did, I'm quite sure they would all be removed by now. If you don't know where the bomb is, you can't remove it. However, if you know where soil/ground/earth is polluted, it is getting cleaned up. At least in my part of Europe. Yes, it might take a few years but it happens.

MisterTea 4y ago

I thought it was this facility that was more radioactive but it appears to have been cleaned up: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0202850 https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0... The address is wrong though it is along the BQE in Woodside by St. Michael's Cemetery.

Havoc 4y ago

Surprised gov doesn't just buy it and adjacent buildings out and close it. If even one worker gets cancer from it then the math likely works out (nvm the suffering).

DuskStar 4y ago
It's less radioactive than Denver. Like, all of Denver.