At Tuesday Night's Gowanus Canal Community Advisory Group Meeting

Jeff Edelstein, Gowanus CAG Facilitator

Tracy Bell And Terry Thompson representing National Grid

The Environmental Protection Agency's  Community Advisory Group for the Gowanus Canal met on Tuesday night at the Brooklyn Historical Society.
Natalie Loney, EPA's Community Involvement Co-Ordinator gave a brief overview of the Superfund schedule. She explained that Christos Tsiamis, Remedial Project Manager for the Gowanus Canal,
and Walter Mugdan, EPA District 2 Director,  will be presenting the Proposed Remedy for the Gowanus Canal Clean-Up to the National Remedy Review Board in Washington, D.C. the week of June 18th.

The National Remedy Review Board is "a peer review group that understands both the EPA regional and headquarters perspectives in the remedy selection process."

Generally, the Board reviews Superfund remedies that meet a certain financial threshold.  Natalie Loney explained:  "The Board wants to insure that there is consistency throughout the region.  They are looking at this project because of its size and its scope. They may ask questions or clarification, but they will not approve or disapprove the remedy.  That is not their function."   

She added: "The remedy that Region Two is presenting is technically sound.  We are very comfortable with it.  We are fully behind this proposed plan."
After the presentation to the Board, Christos Tsiamis, will have time to respond in writing to any questions raised during the meeting. Once this process is completed, Region 2 will be able to move forward with putting out the Gowanus Superfund  Remediation Plan and will most likely present it to the community at a public meeting by September.


The CAG has written its own letter to the National Review Boards.  It reads:

Dear Mr. Tsiamis and Members of the National Remedy Review Board,

A. BackgroundThe Gowanus Canal is located approximately 2 miles from Manhattan. Its watershed covers approximately 1700 acres (2.65 square miles). Based on the 2010 census, almost 150,000 people of all levels of economic stature live within the watershed. Of these, an estimated 44,000 people live within a 10 minute walk of the Canal. Further, there are many underserved families living in close proximity to the Gowanus Canal. Recent planning initiatives, including the City’s New Waterfront Revitalization Program and the Hudson-Raritan Estuary Restoration Plan support the community’s vision for increased public access, ecological restoration, and recreational use of the public waterways.

The Gowanus Canal community uses this waterway for many recreational, commercial, industrial, artistic, educational, and scientific purposes. These activities may result in ingestion of Canal water and direct and indirect contact with Canal water and sediments by adults, children, and pets. Existing on-water recreational uses such as sustenance-based fishing, canoeing, kayaking, boating, and diving may result in primary and secondary contact. There are 2 public access points located along the Gowanus Canal and Bay and a total of 19 locations at which public streets either cross or terminate at the canal. These street-ends are routinely flooded by canal water during rain showers under high-tide conditions. Commercial activities including barging and scientific research may also result in secondary contact.

Gowanus is emerging as a creative district that is home to many artists and artisans and is a cultural and entertainment destination for City and non-City residents and tourists. The Gowanus landscape attracts artists from around the world to use as subject matter. It is because the canal is so intensely used in such a variety of ways that it is important to ensure that public health be protected under these circumstances. As awareness is raised about the Canal, public access both to, and into, the Canal improves, and redevelopment pressures increase, more and more people will continue to take advantage of the unique on-water recreational and explorational opportunities it presents.

B. Comments
The CAG supports the selection of a comprehensive remedy that protects human and ecological health and improves water quality consistent with the current and projected future use of the Gowanus Canal. To that end, the CAG has passed the following resolution:April 2012 Sediment Resolution to EPA

The Gowanus Superfund Community Advisory Group fully supports the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in its finding that New York City’s Combined Sewer Overflows are a significant contributor of harmful sediment and Superfund regulated PAHs and metals to the canal. The CAG takes the position that the total elimination of CSOs into the Gowanus Canal is the only acceptable solution to the problem.

The CAG asks that the EPA, under their Superfund authority, take the necessary measures that will ensure protection of the proposed remedy from ongoing CSO sediment solids deposits and the release of PAHs and other toxins.

In summary, the CAG believes that the Superfund cleanup represents a unique opportunity to conduct a comprehensive cleanup of the Gowanus Canal and that it would be a waste of time, money, and energy to select a remedy that does not completely prevent recontamination by CSOs.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.

Sincerely,The Gowanus Canal Superfund Site Community Advisory Group

On Tuesday night, the CAG also passed the following resolution:

"The Gowanus CAG asks that the cleanup of the Canal, including the Superfund Remedy, should be consistent with and advance current and future possibilities for ecological restoration, shoreline softening, riparian buffers, expanded wetlands, habitat restoration, and public access pursuant to the goals of the Hudson-Raritan Estuary Restoration Plan and the community's emerging vision for the waterway.We understand that some steel bulkheads may be necessary but that contiguous steel or new wooden bulkheads would not be compatible with the above stated goal."

Finally, the CAG voted and welcomed Rich Kampf and Jennivere Kenlon as full members.

Read More

Of "Pink Pond" And "Lavender Lake": Environmental Delegation From India Visits Gowanus Canal

Christos Tsiamis and Natalie Loney of EPA Region Two with members of the Indian Delegation

Proving once again that the Gowanus Canal , the first US Environental Protection Agency's Superfund site in New York City, is of global interest, a delegation from India toured the waterway this past Friday morning to learn not only about its industrial history, the level of pollution and of clean-up options, but to also gain further understanding of the Superfund program.

Some of the Indian visitors represented the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) , others represented various State Pollution Control Boards.

Much like the US EPA, India's MoES has implemented various policies and programs relating to conservation of the country's natural resources, its biodiversity and "ensuring the welfare of animals, and the prevention and abatement of pollution."

The World Bank has recently announced that it will fund four environmental remediation projects in India, amongst them Noor Mohammad Kunla in Andhra Pradesh. "Also known as "Pink Pond," the small surface water body has been polluted by the textile industry, particularly from dyes used in production, which give the water its bright pink tint.

As part of this trip, the delegation had visited Washington, DC, Chicago and Seattle, accompanied by Ruma Tavorath, Senior Environmental Specialist for the World Bank.

On Friday morning, they were joined on the shores of the Gowanus by US EPA Region 2's Christos Tsiamis, project manager of the Gowanus Superfund, as well as by Natalie Loney, EPA Region 2 Community Involvement Coordinator.  Tsiamis gave an extensive presentation on the history of the polluted waterway, his work on the canal, the EPA's findings and clean-up options..
On hand were also several residents who spoke to the delegates about the need for community involvement.

Just like the visit by a Russian delegation in 2010, this visit underlines the need for global outreach within the scientific community. Through such exchanges of informations and findings, we may hopefully be able to clean up more hazardous sites, be it in our own back yard, Russia, India or other places in the world.

Read More

EPA Region 2 Presents Gowanus Canal Feasibility Study To Community

Walter Mugdan, EPA Region 2's, 
Director of the Division of Environmental Planning and Protection

Christos Tsiamis, EPA Region 2 project manager for the Gowanus Canal

Patty White, geologist for CH2MHill

Natalie Loney ,EPA Region 2 Community Involvement Coordinator

Brian Carr, EPA Region 2 lawyer

The Environmental Protection Agency's Region 2 team responsible for the Gowanus Canal Superfund clean-up hosted a public information meeting last night at PS 58 to present the Feasibility Study, which was released in late December 2011.

Walter Mugdan, Director of the Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, started the meeting by pointing out that his agency is on schedule. "This job is being done 2 or 3 times faster than it was plausible to expect, but the heavy lifting is yet to come, of course." he told the audience.

Mugdan praised the tremendous effort of the site's manager, Christos Tsiamis, who "is a stern task master. "  The audience gave Tsiamis a rousing round of applause.
Mugdan also acknowledged the very engaged members of the Community Advisory Group (CAG) for the Gowanus, the largest such group in the country.

Patricia White, geologist for CH2MHill, an independent contracting firm hired by the EPA, started off the presentation by reviewing background information about the site. She also explained the Feasibility Study process, which includes:
-Develop remedial action objectives
-develop preliminary remediation goals
-define remediation target areas
-identify and screen remedial technologies
-develop and screen remedial alternatives
-evaluate remedial alternatives in detail
White also pointed out that one of the key Feasibility Study consideration is re-contamination of the canal after the cl were source control from the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSOs) and storm water discharges, discharges from the three former MGP sites, contaminated groundwater discharge, street runoff and discharges from unpermitted pipes.
Christos Tsiamis took over the presentation to speak about the various technologies that were retained and combined into seven remedial alternatives and screened according to effectiveness, implementability and cost.
The sediment dredging and capping alternatives all include dredging of the highly polluted soft sediment at the bottom of the canal, but while some alternatives call for solidifying the top of the native sediment, and capping either with a two-layer cap or a three layer cap.
So far, alternatives 5 and 7 have been retained for further detailed evaluation.
The EPA is also currently evaluating the best treatment and disposal alternatives for the dredged sediment.
The alternatives include offsite disposal, offsite or onsite stabilization with beneficial use, thermal desorption, offsite cogeneration or offsite or onsite stabilization and disposal in a constructed Confined Disposal Facility (CDF)
Of course, Tsiamis pointed out, the Gowanus Canal cannot be cleaned effectively without eliminating the CSO discharges from New York City's sewer system as well as the coal tar oozing from the three National Grid MGP sites lining the canal. The CSO discharges "cannot go on from our perspective" Tsiamis stated.
New York City's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has been given a schedule by DEP. Tsiamis will meet with the City to discuss this matter further in February.  ***It is important to note her that the City, one of the major Potentially Responsible Parties (PRP) has not yet signed a consent order to take responsibility of their part of the clean-up.
As for the former MGP sites, EPA is coordinating and prioritizing with National Grid, which is responsible for the clean-up and NYS Department Of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the agency in charge of overseeing the remediation of those sites. According to Walter Mugdan, DEC has been very aggressive in moving forward.

Walter Mugdan diplomatically added: "In due course, we hope that all the involved agencies will recognize what needs to be done."
The next step? A proposed remedy will be presented to the public in 6 to 8 months, and a remedy will be selected by the end of 2012.
Last night's EPA presentation can be viewed online here.


**In one final note, it was announced last night that the EPA Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) for the Gowanus Canal Superfund was awarded to Friends And Residents Of Greater Gowanus.Congratulations to Marlene Donnelly, Bette Stoltz, Linda Mariano, Margaret Maugenest and Diane Buxbaum and all the members of FROGG for their hard work on behalf of the community.

Read More

EPA's Tsiamis Talks Clean-Up Feasibility At Last Night's Gowanus Canal CAG Meeting

Natalie Loney ,Community Involvement Coordinator

and Christos Tsiamis, Gowanus Superfund Project Manager for EPA

Christos Tsiamis

EPA's Christos Tsiamis and Brian Carr

As promised when they declared the Gowanus Canal a Superfund site, the Environmental Protection Agency is keeping the community informed every step of the way about the agency's work on the heavily polluted waterway.

Earlier this year, and after many months of testing and field work, Christos Tsiamis, Chief Engineer of the EPA's Gowanus Canal Superfund, came in front of the Community Advisory Committee (CAG) to present the Risk Assessment study he had prepared . Last night, at the CAG's general meeting, he presented the Feasibility Study, that is currently in progress and will be issued at the end of the year. Previous to last night's presentation, Tsiamis had engaged and shared the information with some of the other players involved in the clean-up: The NYS Department of Environmental Conservancy, The NYC Department Of Environmental Protection, The Army Corps of Engineers, National Grid, as well as architects from DLandStudio, a firm that was awarded a grant to design a sponge park on the banks of the Gowanus.

Based on the findings of the Risk Assessment, the EPA evaluated different approaches that will enable the agency to eliminate or reduce health risks to humans and wildlife. Tsiamis re-iterated once again that any action taken by the EPA is determined by the CERCLA Superfund Laws and that there are certain criteria that need to be followed. "When we find contaminants, the Superfund Law tells us we need to clean and threat them. That's what we do."

Last night's presentation focused on the best and safest methods that can be employed in this very complex case.

If treatment of the toxic material is not possible at the site itself, the agency can creates conditions that keep contaminants in place and removes the risk of contact with the pathogens. If containment of contaminants is nor feasible, they are removed and disposed of in licensed facilities.

The simplest clean-up available would be to treat the material biologically in place by introducing bacteria. However, in regards to the Gowanus, that hardly will be enough. "Experience tells me that it will not be possible to use bio-remediation in this case because more complex chemicals and metals can not be broken down with bacteria" Tsiamis explained.

The second solution could be to remove the matter and to treat it thermally by heating up the soil contaminants and thereby rendering them non-toxic. Another solution is a physical treatment that would encapsule the toxic material in a solid or rendering it into a non-toxic block.

Capping the material in place is also being considered. A layer of sand could provide a barrier between the material and the water above it. However, in the case of the Gowanus, sand could be displaced by the turbulence caused by the flushing tunnel.

The material could also be capped using a layer of cement to immobilize contaminants, especially metals. New "augmented" caps are now available that are made of less than six inches of clay material that not only creates a barrier, but can also absorb chemicals.

One problem in relation to the Gowanus is that the soft Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (NAPL) contaminated sludge at the bottom of the Gowanus is too soft and lacks the structural integrity to support such a cap.

According to Tsiamis, "the wisest thing to do is to remove the toxic material and to cap the remaining native sediment with a different buffer." He spoke of adding an' armored cap' with an additional layer of pebbles on top of the native sediment.

It is clear that there will be various approaches and treatments used in different portions of the canal according to their characteristics. It is Tsiamis' intention to take advantage of the newest technology as it becomes available.

Whatever method is used, the EPA is going to make sure that what the canal doesn't get re-contaminated from New York City's Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO's), storm water run-off, and most importantly, free moving toxic product from about 10 to 12 sites along the canal, including Public Place and the Lowe's site.

Christos Tsiamis is committed to continue to engage the other agencies. "This is a golden opportunity to get this right" he told the CAG. "We need the expertise of everyone' and that he 'wants to make sure we are looking at everything." He added: "If we succeed, this will be a crown on everyone's head."

No doubt, this is a historic opportunity to get it right.

Read More

Spence Students Visit Gowanus Area and Get Lesson On Canal

Students and teachers of the Spence School looking at the Gowanus

Natalie Loney of EPA Region 2

A group of students from Spence, a private school on the Upper East Side, visited the Gowanus Canal area yesterday morning as part of a school-wide field day to get to know the city better. As their classmates visited other neighborhoods, these seventh to twelfth graders toured Proteus Gowanus, the Old Stone House, the Lyceum, met with the Gowanus Dredgers and stopped at One Girl Cookies on Dean Street where they tried some of the bakery's famous whoopie pies.

Of course, a tour of the Gowanus area would not be complete without a lesson on the canal, its history and its recent listing by the Environmental Protection Agency as a Superfund site. For this part of the tour, the students were joined by Natalie Loney, EPA Region 2's Community Involvement Coordinator for the Gowanus Canal.

Ms. Loney spoke of the waterway's historic significance, its industrial past, the resulting contaminants and their impact on the environmental. She explained how the Superfund program works, what lead to the canal's nomination and the findings of the recently released Risk Assessment Report. She touched on the complexity of a clean-up that involves toxic sludge at the bottom of the canal, coal tar that leaks into the waterway from upland sites and the sewage that gets released into the Gowanus from the city's antiquated sewer system after heavy rains.

When she told the students that some in the community referred to the Gowanus Canal as "Brooklyn's Venice", the girls chuckled.

°°°°°°°°°°°

Read More

EPA To Community At Last Night's Meeting: "Your Canal Is In Good Hands!"

EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck

Walter Mugdan, EPA Region 2's

Director of the Division of Environmental Planning and Protection

Christos Tsiamis, EPA Region 2 Project Manager for the Gowanus Canal

Natalie Loney, EPA's Region 2 community involvement coordinator

Since the Environmental Protection Agency placed the Gowanus Canal on the National Priorities List in March 2010, Christos Tsiamis, EPA Region 2 Project Manager, and his team have been extremely busy conducting investigative field work. Ahead of schedule, they have released their Remedial Investigation Report (R.I.) and the Risk Assessment this last January.

"Your canal is in good hands" EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck assured the community last night in P32's auditorium for a presentation of the findings. "You have the best and brightest EPA talent working on this." After introducing the team of engineers, scientists and lawyers, Enck noted the active involvement of the community, "which is a vitally important component" of the Superfund process. So far, according to Enck, there has been a good level of co-operation with the polluters as well.

Walter Mugdan, EPA's Director of the Superfund Program for Region 2, credited Christos Tsiamis for getting the Remedial Investigation Report done at an accelerated pace. "We considered this a high priority" he told the community. He noted that the Feasability Study will most likely be done by the end of this calendar year. Mugdan expects the remedial work on the canal to be completed by 2020-2022. "It took 150 years to get the canal to the contaminated state it is in now. Taking 10 to 12 years to clean it up does not seem unreasonable." The work would be done "as quickly as it can be done, properly."

Christos Tsiamis then presented the findings of the R.I. as well as the Risk Assessment. During the study, samplings were collected from:

-the top 6 inches of the canal's surface sediment

-deep sediment

-surface water

-fish and crab tissue

-air

-Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO's) and other outfalls

-soil and groundwater on adjacent properties.

The samples revealed just how polluted the Gowanus Canal is. The primary contaminants found were:

-Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

-Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)

-Metals (barium, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver)

-Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylnes (BTEX)

-Non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL)

Concentrations of PAHs, PCB's, and eight metals were found to be significantly higher in the canal sediment than in the Gowanus Bay/Upper Harbor.

What does all of this mean as far as health risks to the community? Living, working and inhaling the air along the canal is within the acceptable carcinogen and non-carcinogen hazard range. However, re-creational use of the canal, which increases the risk of exposure to the polluted water and to the sediment, is not advisable. Neither is ingesting of fish and crabs from the canal.

During a question-and-answer period, two important issues were brought up again. The first issue involved the Combined Sewer Overflow. Though the Superfund clean-up only involves the bottom of the canal, the community has repeatedly asked the EPA to insist that New York City stop dumping raw sewage into the Gowanus. According to the NYC's Department Of Environmental Protection, 300 million gallons of Combined Sewer Owerflow (CSO's), made up of 30% storm water and 70% combined sewer waste, currently flows into the canal every year. Work currently done by DEP to upgrade the Gowanus flushing tunnel system will only reduce CSOs by 34 %. That means that a lot of raw sewage will find its way into the canal, even after the Superfund clean-up. Walter Mugdan acknowledged that fact. "It was always understood that this will not get us tothe finish line. In all likelihood, there will come a time when more work will have to be done.

The second issue was the toxicity of the uplands, specifically of Public Place, one of the most polluted sites along the Gowanus, which was once used by Brooklyn Union Gas for coal liquefication. The site has been slated by New York City for development. The Gowanus Green project, as it is ironically named, would bring 770 units of affordable housing to the shores of the Gowanus. Many in the community are sceptical that even after the NYS Department of Environmental Conservancy's remediation, the site will ever be safe for human habitation.

When asked about it, Christos Tsiamis stated: "As the engineer in charge of cleaning the Gowanus Canal, I am seriously concerned. This is something we have to look at closely." DEC's Engineering Geologist Gardiner Cross, who was on hand last night, did not seem worried, but acknowledged the fact that the site is continually leaking coal tar.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Read More

From Russia With Hope: Delegation Visits The Gowanus Canal

Russian Delegation visiting the Gowanus Canal 

with members of the US EPA Washington and New York Region 2  offices

as part of the United States-Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission's 

Environmental Working Group

(4th from left is Christos Tsiamis, EPA Gowanus Project Manager, then me,  second from right is Marlene Donnelly of FROGG, and first from the right is Natalie Loney, EPA Community Involvement Coordinator)

Proteus Gowanus

A sample of Gowanus Water at Proteus

The Old American Can Factory

Aerial view of the Gowanus Canal area from the rooftop of the Old American Can Factory

Photo-op

On Friday, December 3rd, a delegation of Russian Federal and Regional administrators toured the Gowanus Canal as part of the United States-Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission.  The Commission was created in July 2009 by President Obama and President Medvedev of the  Russian Federation to recognize common national interests and to coordinate relations amongst various agencies of both countries.  This particular delegation was part of the Working Environmental Group and was here for technical exchange and training on the US Environmental Protection Agency's  experience in management of hazardous waste.


The delegation first spent a few days in EPA's Washington office to learn about the Superfund program and then traveled to New York where Christos Tsiamis, EPA's Gowanus Canal Project Manager gave a presentation on his work. The presentation was followed by a visit to the polluted waterway.


Marlene Donnelly of FROGG and I had been invited to join the tour by Christos Tsiamis and Natalie Loney, EPA Community Involvement Coordinator, to speak about community involvement.


Currently, the Russian Federation is in the process of creating its own environmental program to address past environmental damage.  Therefore, understanding the complexities and decision-making process of the Superfund program as it relates to the Gowanus Canal was of particular interest to the delegation.


The tour started on DeGraw Street, then proceeded to the Union Street Bridge. The next stop was Proteus Gowanus at 543 Union Street where  Sasha Chavchavadze, the founder and director, welcomed the delegates in Russian and talked about Gowanus' vibrant artist community.  The group toured the gallery's Hall Of The Gowanus and its display of art, artifacts, books and maps pertaining to the canal's history. 


The tour continued on to the the Old American Can Factory at the corner of Third Avenue and Third Street. The old manufacturing building is home to over 200 people who work in the creative industry. Nathan Elbogen, its founder, accompanied the group to the building's rooftop to give them an aerial overview of the Gowanus Canal.  Christos Tsiamis
took the opportunity to point out the Whole Food site and the cement companies along the waterway.
I would like to thank Christos Tsiamis and Natalie Loney for inviting me to join the group on its tour.  As always, it was fascinating to hear about the EPA's work on the canal.
It was a great pleasure to meet members of the Russian delegation.

Members Of The Russian Delegation

1. Vygon, Grigory Vladimirovich, Director, Office of Economics and Finances, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

2. Nefediev, Nikolai Borisovich, Deputy Director, Deputy Director, Office of State Politics and Regulations in Environmental Protection and Environmental Security, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

3. Burkanova, Olga Anatolievna, Office Director, Department of State Politics and Regulations in Environmental Protection and Environmental Security, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

4. Sahno, Elena Vladimirovna, Referent, Referent, Office of Control and Execution, Department of Business and Human Resources, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

5. Krivov, Ravil Alexeevich, Referent, Office of Economics and Finances, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

6. Shpinkov, Viachslav Igorevich, Senior Specialinst/Expert, Office of International Cooperation, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

7. Sergeeva, Daria Alexandrovna, Assistant Director, Office of Economics and Finances, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation

8. Ishutin, Vadim Borisovich, Deputy Chairman of Committee on Property and Duty of Voronezh Duma, Voronezh Regional Duma

9. Berlin, Jan Ernestovich, Deputy Head Administration of Nenetz Autonomous District on Infrastructure Development

10. Kungurtsev, Sergei Stanislavovich, Lead Consultant, Department of International and Inter-regional Relations, Information, and Mass-communications, Administration of Nenetz Autonomous District

11. Barsukov, Vladislav Valerievich, Director, Office of International Relations, “Ecobezopasnost” Institute

12. Kuznetsov, Dmitry Alexandrovich, Deputy Director, Office of International Relations, “Ecobezopasnost” Institute

13. Chernov, Alexander Efimovich, Minister, Ministry of Environment and Urban Planning of Kaluga Region

14. Vasutin, Alexander Sergeevich, Deputy Head of Representation of the Government of Kaluga Region in the Government of the Russian Federation, Representation of Government of Kaluga Region in the Government of the Russian Federation, Office of Representative of the Government of Kaluga Region in the Government of the Russian Federation

15. Sychev,Yury Fedorovich, Advisor to Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for International Cooperation in the Arctic and Antarctic, State Duma

16. Nicolaev Venedict Venedictovich, Director, “Ecobezopasnost” Institute

17. Agranovsky, Alexander, Director General, “GreenTeam” Ltd

18. Bratchikov, Alexander, Embassy of the Russian Federation

19. Shamrai, Pavel, Embassy of the Russian Federation

Interpreters:
Svetlana Guggenheim, RussianWorks, Inc.
Anna Mazurova, RussianWorks, Inc.

Read More