Wesleyan plan would consolidate pesticide‑impacted soils into Long Lane pond; neighbors urge more data and safeguards

Wesleyan University representatives told the Middletown Inland Wetland and Watercourse Agency on March 5 that the school plans to consolidate pesticide‑contaminated soils into an existing 1.13‑acre pond at 170 Long Lane, place a four‑foot engineered soil cap over the material, remove the dam and restore a natural stream channel through the site.

Alan Rubaha, Wesleyan's associate vice president for facilities, said the work is the final step in a long remediation process that began after the university purchased the property in 1999 under state Transfer Act oversight. "At the completion of the work ... the site will then be released from the Transfer Act and we will be able to finally make some beneficial use of the site," Rubaha said.

The university's consultant, Lisa Ali Echo, project manager with HRP Associates, told commissioners the remaining contaminants are primarily legacy pesticides (including lead arsenate from historical orchard use) concentrated in the upper foot to 18 inches of soil. Her firm proposes excavating those soils from several locations on campus and consolidating about 5,800 cubic yards into the pond footprint, installing a separation fabric, and placing a four‑foot clean soil cap that meets Connecticut remediation standards before regrading and vegetating a new stream channel.

Kevin McNally of HRP described construction sequencing: a cofferdam at the pond inlet, a temporary bypass pipe sized to pass a 100‑year storm to keep work areas dry, dewatering through sediment controls, and stone armoring and native seed mixes for bank stabilization. "That pipe has been sized to pass a 100‑year storm," McNally said, describing the bypass and scour‑hole discharge approach.

Residents at the meeting pressed for more documentation and safeguards. "We're going to put more pollution in the pond and then we're going to cap it with four feet of sediment," said Suzanne O'Connell of Pine Street, voicing concern that erosion or grading changes could release contaminants downstream toward Marion Banks Nature Preserve. Jackie Gardell read a longer list of questions and asked the commission to table the item until more neighbors could be present, calling the planned approach "a capped contaminated landfill" and requesting sampling reports, groundwater analyses and contingency plans.

HRP responded that groundwater sampling near the pond has not shown detectable pesticides and that the pesticide compounds on site are largely insoluble and bound to soil. "Pesticides are very insoluble in water," Ali Echo said, saying historical testing showed limited groundwater impact. She added that materials from the Science Center were tested and the clean fill stockpiles cited for the cap were not found to be contaminated.

Commissioners repeatedly asked the applicant to provide supporting documents. Staff and members requested drainage calculations, Natural Diversity Database (NDDB) correspondence and the Army Corps pre‑application determinations. Several commissioners raised questions about ecological impacts — including possible amphibian/vernal pool species that could be affected during dewatering — and asked for clearer limits of clearing and a plan for relocating any species encountered during dewatering.

Wesleyan representatives said alternatives were considered — including hauling soils off‑site or blending soils in place — but said DEEP favored consolidation and capping as the most practical remedy because contaminant levels are slightly above criteria and off‑site disposal would require shipping material out of state. The panel noted that full off‑site removal was estimated by one speaker during the meeting to be on the order of tens of millions of dollars.

The commission voted to continue the public hearing to its April 2 meeting and leave the record open so staff can receive requested documents and follow up with DEEP and the Army Corps. The agency asked the applicant and staff to provide drainage calculations, NDDB/technical correspondence and the remedial action plan documents before the continued hearing.

The hearing remains open; the commission directed staff to collect submitted letters and additional reports for commission review ahead of the April 2 meeting.