The Environmental Protection Agency is attempting to either delay, or unravel, the long-sought plan to clean up a contaminated 10-mile stretch of the Willamette River in Portland, according to state and local officials and environmental advocates.

Gov. Kate Brown and Portland elected officials say the EPA took the unusual step last week of carving out a separate and confidential process to test certain areas of the river for a baseline level of contamination. The agency is doing so without including the state Department of Environmental Quality or the city of Portland, which have been involved in the cleanup process since its beginning.

They fear that means the federal government is revisiting decisions that were already made and agreed upon after a nearly two-decade process. The EPA did not respond to a call or email requesting comment.

Local leaders say they are stunned by the new direction, which comes nine months after the EPA released its $1.05 billion cleanup plan. That blueprint was the culmination of 17 years of research and collaboration with some 150 businesses and entities that share responsibility for polluting the river over the past century.

The next step in the cleanup always called for collecting more pollution samples to "establish baseline conditions" and guide the more than $1 billion river project. But without warning, federal officials are going beyond sampling, the city says. The federal agency is reopening and reanalyzing some of the same decisions made during the extensive public process, but this time without the city's participation, according to a letter of objection the city sent the EPA.

"We spent 17 years doing this and over $100 million to get to the place we are now," Annie Von Burg, Portland's Superfund project manager, said in an interview. "To start over now is simply unacceptable."

Brown issued a statement saying the EPA's new direction could pose a significant setback for the state's economy "as well as the long-term health of the species and habitats the Willamette River supports."

"I urge the EPA to honor its commitment to work collaboratively and transparently with the state, city, and all responsible parties that have long worked toward a thorough and cost-effective cleanup of the Portland Harbor," she said.

Travis Williams, executive director of the Willamette Riverkeeper nonprofit group, said he's worried the EPA is working with companies that were "adversarial to this process" for nearly 20 years.

"It could allow them to go back to square one," Williams said of the EPA's monitoring plan.

By keeping the process confidential, the group could cherry pick locations on the river that are not as polluted, Williams said, setting an inaccurate baseline measurement for how clean the river is currently and should be in the future.

It's unclear which of the responsible polluters are working with the EPA.

The Port of Portland, which decried the January cleanup plan and its "staggering" cost, said it was not part of the current negotiations with EPA.

"We've been in discussions with EPA on moving forward with a cleanup at Terminal 4 now because of what Terminal 4 represents to the Port and to the region," spokesman Steve Johnson said in a statement. "Progress at Terminal 4 can be made independently of the harbor-wide sampling, in large part because of the early action work the Port has already completed. "

Kevin Parrett, who manages DEQ's cleanup projects, said the DEQ knows who is working with EPA – but the EPA insisted the list is confidential.

"I can't tell you what's in the document," he said.

When asked who is driving the new direction, Parrett said "it's being handled by [Washington] DC."

The state agency has a "very collaborative working relationship" with EPA officials in the regional office, but it becomes "clearer on a weekly basis" the decisions are being made out of Administrator Scott Pruitt's office or the Trump administration in Washington, Parrett said.

On Jan. 6, two weeks before Donald Trump's Inauguration Day, the government released its much-ballyhooed plan for how to clean up the contaminated soil and toxic materials lining the Portland Harbor. The 2,535-page document called for a 13 year cleanup period and included a potpourri of treatment options, which included dredging 248-acres of soil from the river bottom and capping another 89.6 acres of toxic land in the water. Another 1,774 acres would be expected to recover naturally.

At the time, the then-EPA Regional Administrator for the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, Dennis McLerran, said it was important to get the report out before the Trump administration came to office.

"We wanted to create certainty," he said. "We wanted to not have delays as an administration changes."

Portland and the state said they are evaluating how to proceed, but they said the EPA's actions may violate a 2001 agreement signed by the state and various tribes.

The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, one of those parties, sent a letter

to the EPA on Oct. 6, saying the process was rushed through and "appears manipulative and frankly raises substantial suspicions of bad faith on EPA's part."

The tribe called for the monitoring to be suspended and cited a provision of the 2001 agreement that requires formal "dispute resolution."

According to the 2001 memorandum of understanding, the dispute resolution elevates the issue to either the regional administrator or EPA Administator Pruitt, "who will resolve the matter or decide the appropriate forum or means of ultimate resolution."



-- Andrew Theen

atheen@oregonian.com

503-294-4026

@andrewtheen