Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 3 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
By MICHELE STUDEBAKER
Arundel Newspapers Staff Writer
BERR\ VILLE — Fisherman are angry over the Shenandoah’s newest pollution episode, and visiting fisherman are frustrated at an apparent lapse of communication about the problem.
But, says the U.S. Enviommental Protection Agency, the river’s PCB contamination may simply be something local residents wdll have to live with, for years.
EPA spokesman Ken Potts could offer little encouragement to residents trying to glean information on a possible cleanup program. The problem, he said, is something that will haunt the Shenandoah for years to come.
The Virginia Department of Health has issued a warning against eating fish taken from the Shenandoah below the Town of Front Royal. The warning came after high levels of PCBs were detected in fish samples. The highest concentrations, according to the report, were in fish taken near the Route 340 bridge, about one mile downstream from the Avtex rayon plant.
Although fishermen wrere warned against eating their catch, state health officials assured the public that the river water is still safe to drink. PCBs, they explained, are an oily substance which quickly sinks to the river bottom rather than staying in suspension.
Potts said that, according to his information on PCBs, approximately one-third of a PCB contamination on land, and one-half of a water contamination would naturally degrade “over a period of time.” However, he could not designate a precise time frame for the breakdown.
"My estimate is, quite a long time . . . probably more than 50 years (for half of it to degrade),” he said.
Potts said that dispersal agents, or chemicals that can lift the PCB off of the river bottom, would not solve the problem, and in fact, could aggravate it.
“It wouldn’t dissolve the stuff,” he said. “It would just spread it out more.”
The only other method that Potts said he was aware of would be dredging the river bottom and properly disposing of the sediment, once removed.
“But,” he asked, “is that economically feasible, or even reasonable?”
He also pointed out that dredging a contaminated area would re
84.5%