NORWICH — A bridge in town is leaking toxic chemicals into a section of Blood Brook popular for swimming, and the town’s latest attempt to mitigate the leak is being met with skepticism from concerned residents.
Norwich Town Manager Rod Francis said in a phone interview that the town is moving forward with the installation of a “temporary containment system” on the Moore Lane Bridge to curb the asphalt emulsion leaching through paved-over wooden planks and into the brook. The lane, which connects Turnpike Road and Beaver Meadow Road, is near Huntley Meadow.
The Selectboard, during its Oct. 12 meeting, approved the $62,000 construction of the containment system. Winterset Incorporated, a Lyndonville, Vt.-based construction company, won the bid for the project. Work is expected to begin later this month, with a projected completion date of mid-November.
“There’s concern about whether this containment structure that we’re proposing now is going to work or not but we’re in a situation where you feel compelled to try,” Francis said. The town aims “to demonstrate to the state that we’re making good faith efforts to prevent the hazardous material (from) making its way into the water.”
Meanwhile, some town residents are concerned the containment structure is just the latest in a series of temporary fixes that haven’t stopped the leak of the emulsion, which Francis said was used to “elongate the life” of the wooden planks that form the bridge’s deck below the blacktop. The leak is suspected to have been occurring for the bridge’s 30 years of existence and the residents say that the only right answer is to remove the bridge entirely.
Norwich residents Peter Orner and Kate White spoke out against the containment structure during the Oct. 12 meeting, asking the Selectboard to delay their decision. In a phone interview, Orner called the containment structure an act of “kicking the can down the road.”
“Eventually, this bridge has to come down and everyone knows it,” Orner said.
Orner and White’s pleas caught the attention of other Norwich residents, too. In a Norwich Listserv message on Oct. 17, town resident William Scavone said he stopped by the bridge to take a look for himself at the leakage and was appalled by what he saw.
“Seeing in-person the incredibly inadequate way of dealing with a known issue was shocking,” Scavone wrote. “The smell was evident, the chemicals palpable, and the flimsy plastic sheeting was bulging with rainwater and contaminants from the recent rain.”
Orner, who lives a short walk from the bridge near Huntley Meadow, said he first contacted Norwich officials in August 2019, about a chemical smell and discharge pouring from it into the brook. He was and remains concerned about the potential health hazards the leakage could cause to people who swim beneath the bridge and to children who play in the water and on the brook’s banks. That includes his own child.
“I have a kindergartener, and we had a big party for the whole kindergarten (at the start of the school year) and right by the play structures, there’s an opening (down to the river) where everyone goes down to the water and plays in the water,” Orner said. “That’s right near this.”
He said he didn’t hear anything back from town officials following his outreach in 2019 and so, last year, he reached out to the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation about it.
James Donaldson, an official with VDEC’s Spill Program, said he reached out to the town in June 2021, with a directive to stop the discharge and advised them to do an analysis of the leakage to determine exactly what hazardous chemicals were being leaked into the brook.
Subsequently, the Vermont-based environmental-consultant firm Murray & Masterson collected samples from the asphalt emulsion that covers the wooden planks of the bridge, the streambed and water surface and published an official report for the town on June 17, 2022.
Murray & Masterson’s report found that the emulsion leakage is “significantly hazardous” but that the streambed and surface water samples indicated it was “not significantly impacting Bloody Brook.” The report determined that corrective actions were needed to prevent the leakage.
Despite the report’s findings, Donaldson said the discharge has a “visible and tangible” impact on the brook. The samples Murray & Masterson took only reflected a “snapshot in time” of the brook on that day and don’t represent the leakage’s potential impacts over the last 30 years, he said.
“This bridge has been in place for over 30 years, and presumably it’s been leaking for over 30 years,” Donaldson said, noting that the state didn’t require the town to do repeated testing of the brook. “…We recognize that their remedy costs are excessive and we know that the sheen itself and the materials present in the brook (shows) an impact that must be addressed.”
The chemical naphthalene, which the Environmental Protection Agency classifies as “possibly carcinogenic” to humans and can, with acute exposure, cause hemolytic anemia, damage to the liver and neurological damage, was the only volatile organic compound (VOC) reported above detection limits in the sampling. The American Lung Association defines VOCs as “gases that are emitted into the air from products or processes” and can be potentially harmful and cancer-causing to humans.
Two semi-volatile organic compounds, fluoranthene and benzo(a)pyrene, were also reported in the sample. Both of those chemicals, along with naphthalene, are considered “priority pollutants” by the EPA, which means the agency regulates them and has developed testing methods to detect them.
The discharge is indeed a violation of the Clean Water Act, Donaldson said. He said the EPA is aware of it, but that it’s not likely the agency would get involved as long as the state doesn’t require assistance.
“They understand that we have a responsible party that is being compliant with the state’s requests, (that the) discharge is certainly unpermitted and it impacts the brook,” Donaldson said.
Francis said state officials told him that the town had to act to “prevent as far as we humanly could” the seeping of the emulsion product, which was part of the bridge’s assembly in 1989, into the water. He said the containment system is a temporary fix for the winter months while the town plans further action.
Norwich’s Public Works Department previously attempted to use a plastic tarp on the underside of the bridge to contain any chemical leakages, but that plan ultimately failed, Francis said, and cost the town about $10,000.
Francis said he understands the containment structure is most likely not a “perfect solution” for the problem but said that state regulations compel the town to act quickly. He said conversations will continue in the future on if the town might remove the bridge entirely, but that that comes with its own challenges.
He called the bridge a “little street” that connects to “more important roads” in Norwich, including Beaver Meadow Road, which Francis said commuters use as a through road to Sharon, and Turnpike Road, which connects to Main Street just a mile past the bridge. Discussions with town road crews and emergency services on how a change to the town’s road network might affect them also need to happen, Francis said.
“In a reasonable world, that would be a calm conversation and those issues would get worked through and then the community would be presented with (different) options ahead of the Town Meeting vote in 2023,” Francis said.
On Oct. 22, Orner, White, and several other concerned Norwich citizens emailed a list of questions to the Selectboard pertaining to how the town was handling the investigation, the findings from the Murray & Masterson report, and exactly how the containment structure will prevent further leakage of the hazardous emulsion substance.
“Because we don’t know enough about these chemicals and their potential impact on human health, is containing them so they become even more concentrated the best way to go?” Orner said via email.
In addition to the containment structure’s installation, state officials also have recommended the town install signs near the bridge warning people of the hazardous chemicals.
Sarah Vose, a toxicologist with the Vermont Department of Health, sent an email to the Selectboard last week recommending the town post signs. Vose said limiting contact between people and the chemicals is the best way to mitigate any likelihood of health risks.
“This bridge is releasing hazardous material to the environment,” the suggested sign would read. “Please avoid direct contact with the material leaking from the bridge.”
Francis said the town “doesn’t have a problem” with posting signs and is taking it into consideration.
Ray Couture can be reached at 1994rbc@gmail.com.
CORRECTION: The bridge that spans the Bloody Brook on Moore Lane in Norwich was built in 1989. An earlier version of this story gave an incorrect date of the bridge’s construction.