The US EPA Assigned a Superfund Site Assessment Manager to My South Bay Petition

8/26/2026

In February 2026, I filed a petition asking EPA to evaluate the South Bay in Boston for the Superfund program — the federal program for the country's most contaminated sites. The South Bay is the filled-in tidal bay under the South End, Fort Point Channel, and surrounding neighborhoods, where Boston spent two centuries dumping sewage, incinerator ash, industrial waste, radioactive waste, and more -- then built housing on top. There has never been a Superfund site in the City of Boston. My petition argues there should have been one decades ago.

The petition works through a specific legal mechanism. CERCLA — the Superfund toxic waste dump clean-up law — includes a provision, § 105(d), that lets any person petition EPA to assess a site for the National Priorities List. And here's the important part: once you file, EPA must respond. The statute gives the Agency twelve months to either complete a "preliminary assessment" of the site, or send the petitioner a written explanation of why it won't. EPA doesn't get to shrug. Congress built this provision specifically so ordinary people could force the government to look at contaminated sites it was ignoring.

So in February 2026, I started that twelve-month clock. We're now around the six-month mark so I sent EPA Region 1 a formal status inquiry asking where things stand. Within a day, I got two written answers — one from the Superfund program, one from EPA's enforcement lawyers.

The Superfund program answered first. EPA has assigned a Site Assessment Manager to my petition: Mandy Liao of Region 1's Superfund and Emergency Management Division. A Site Assessment Manager is the EPA staffer who shepherds a site through the Superfund evaluation pipeline.

Ms. Liao's response confirmed that:

EPA is actively reviewing the petition. In her words, EPA is "reviewing the Petition for Preliminary Assessment" and "currently evaluating the Site...".
EPA acknowledged the deadline, in writing. The twelve-month statutory clock runs out on February 13, 2027. If EPA decides an assessment is warranted, that's the completion date. If EPA decides it isn't, the Agency committed to sending me its reasons in writing by that same date.
No decision yet, either way. The site hasn't been entered into EPA's Superfund database (called SEMS) and the formal assessment hasn't started. EPA is at the threshold stage and promised to notify me once it decides what to do next.

The EPA has now confirmed in writing that it's bound to this process and this deadline. By February 13, 2027, one of two things happens: EPA assesses the site, or EPA explains itself. Both are formal agency actions. Both give Boston an answer it has never had. And if the explanation doesn't hold up, I can take it to a federal judge.

When I filed the CERCLA petition, I also served a Notice of Intent to File a Citizen Suit under the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act lets private citizens sue polluters directly in federal court — but first you have to send a notice and give the government a window to bring its own enforcement case. If the government steps up and "diligently prosecutes" the violations, the citizen suit is off. If it doesn't, the courthouse doors open.

So my status inquiry also asked: has EPA brought any enforcement action on the violations in my notice? The Superfund team kicked that question to EPA's Office of Regional Counsel, and Jeff Kopf, Senior Enforcement Counsel for Region 1, answered in writing:

No. EPA has not commenced any enforcement action under the Clean Water Act with respect to my notice. For citizen-suit purposes, that's the answer that matters — there is no government prosecution standing in the way.
I also asked whether EPA had referred the matter to the Department of Justice or the Army Corps of Engineers. On that one, EPA declined to answer, citing its "long-standing policy" of not disclosing the existence of ongoing referrals.

Notice what that second answer isn't. It isn't "no." EPA could have simply said no referral exists. Instead it invoked the policy it uses to protect referrals that do. Draw your own conclusions.

When I served my citizen suit notice, I voluntarily extended the standard sixty-day waiting period to a full year to accommodate the year-long CERCLA process. If I have to take this matter to court myself, I'll likely bundle the claims.

Now the petition has a named Site Assessment Manager, an active review, and a written deadline. That's the process I extended the clock for, and it's happening.

Between now and February 13, 2027, I'll post updates here as things move. If EPA completes the assessment and the site scores the way I expect, the South Bay heads toward the National Priorities List — the first Superfund site in Boston's history. If EPA declines, I get a written explanation, and I already have the citizen suit noticed, preserved, and ready to file.

Either way, this is now on the record, on a clock, and in writing — which is exactly where I want it.

- Ashley

Read the emails with US EPA Region 1: