Town of Gorham had taken warehouse owner to court over flammable chemicals stored there – Finger Lakes Times

Report on Industrial Fire in Gorham and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Incident Overview

• A 50,000-square-foot warehouse in Gorham, Ontario County, operated by Eco Operations LLC, was destroyed by a major fire.
• The facility was utilized for the storage of hazardous and flammable materials, including what town officials described as “enormous” quantities of expired hand sanitizer and beer.
• The incident occurred following a period of escalating regulatory disputes between the company owner, Eduard Zaydman, and local and state authorities regarding unsafe storage practices and unpermitted operations.

Failure in Responsible Production and Waste Management (SDG 12)

• The crisis originates from a failure to adhere to principles of SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, specifically concerning the environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes.
• The company was storing approximately 1,000 pallets of flammable materials, an amount that “far exceeded” New York State fire code, demonstrating a severe lapse in responsible corporate practice.
• Prior to the fire, the company had already been cited for improper waste management:
  1. In January, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) issued a notice of violation to Mr. Zaydman for the illegal disposal of hand sanitizer at the Ontario County Landfill.
  2. The company’s plan to process expired hand sanitizer into drinkable alcohol, while ostensibly a form of recycling, was undermined by the hazardous and non-compliant nature of its storage operations.

Institutional Response and Rule of Law (SDG 16)

• The events leading to the fire highlight challenges in the enforcement of environmental laws and regulations, a key component of SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions.
• Multiple institutions took action to address the non-compliance:
  1. January: The DEC ordered Eco Operations to cease all activities until required permits were obtained.
  2. February: The Town of Gorham’s code enforcement officer issued a cease and desist order for operating without necessary zoning approvals from the Planning Board.
  3. Legal Action: The town pursued an injunction in Ontario County State Supreme Court to compel the removal of the hazardous materials after the owner allegedly ignored previous orders.
• The company’s alleged failure to respond to legal filings and comply with official orders represents a breakdown in corporate accountability. Post-incident investigations by the Ontario County Sheriff’s Office and a call for an inquiry by the State Attorney General’s Office aim to reinforce the rule of law.

Impacts on Community Health, Safety, and Sustainability (SDG 3 & SDG 11)

• The fire and the preceding hazardous conditions posed a direct threat to SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being and SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities.
• The facility’s operations threatened the safety of nearby homes and properties, undermining community resilience.
• In an effort to mitigate disaster risk (a target of SDG 11), the Town of Gorham worked with the Ontario County Emergency Management Office to create a response plan in advance of the fire.
• To address ongoing public health concerns, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is on-site conducting air-quality sampling to assess potential airborne contaminants.

Environmental Contamination and Ecosystem Protection (SDG 6 & SDG 15)

• The fire and subsequent runoff have created significant risks for local ecosystems, impacting progress toward SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation and SDG 15: Life on Land.
• DEC Spill Response experts are closely monitoring runoff from firefighting efforts into Flint Creek to assess and mitigate potential environmental impacts.
• Actions being taken to protect freshwater ecosystems include:
  1. The strategic placement and replacement of containment booms within Flint Creek.
  2. The removal of contaminated soil that was used to create berms during the fire response.
• The full extent of the environmental damage is undetermined, with investigations by the DEC and EPA ongoing to ensure the protection of public health and the environment during the cleanup phase.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article highlights significant health risks posed by the storage and subsequent fire of hazardous materials. The mention of “expired hand sanitizer,” a “potential fire hazard,” and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducting “air-quality samples” points to concerns about human health being affected by chemical and air pollution.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  The environmental fallout from the fire directly threatens local water sources. The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is “monitor[ing] runoff to Flint Creek” and has placed “booms in the creek” to contain contamination, indicating a direct impact on water quality and the health of freshwater ecosystems.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The incident occurred within the town of Gorham, and the fire “threatened the homes and properties near the building.” This relates to urban safety, disaster risk reduction, and the management of hazardous materials within communities. The town’s pre-emptive work with the Ontario County Emergency Management Office to create a response plan also falls under this goal.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  The core issue is the improper management of waste products, specifically “enormous” quantities of “expired hand sanitizer and expired beer.” The company’s failure to safely store, process, or dispose of these materials represents a breakdown in achieving environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes.

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  The pollution of Flint Creek with runoff from the fire poses a direct threat to inland freshwater ecosystems. The DEC’s response efforts are aimed at mitigating damage to the creek and its surrounding environment, which is central to protecting life on land.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article details a failure of governance and law enforcement. The company owner, Eduard Zaydman, ignored a “notice of violation” from the DEC, a “cease and desist” order from the town’s code enforcement officer, and court filings. This highlights a breakdown in the rule of law and the challenge faced by institutions in enforcing regulations.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  1. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination. The fire released pollutants from “hazardous materials” into the air and water, creating a direct risk of illness for the community.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  1. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials. The article describes the illegal disposal of hand sanitizer and the runoff of contaminants into Flint Creek, which are direct failures to meet this target.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  1. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses… caused by disasters. The fire is a man-made disaster that destroyed a 50,000-square-foot building and threatened nearby homes, causing significant economic and social disruption.
  2. Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management. The incident is a clear example of negative environmental impact due to failed waste management and resulting air pollution within the town of Gorham.

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

  1. Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil. The company’s failure to manage its stored chemicals and waste, leading to a massive fire and environmental contamination, is a direct violation of this target.
  2. Target 12.5: By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse. The company was allegedly processing waste into a new product, but its improper storage practices highlight the risks associated with the waste management and recycling chain.

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  1. Target 15.1: By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems. The contamination of Flint Creek directly threatens a local freshwater ecosystem, requiring intervention to prevent long-term damage.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  1. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The article states that the owner ignored a DEC notice of violation, a town order to cease and desist, and court documents, demonstrating a clear disregard for the rule of law.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicators for SDG 3 & 11 (Health & Air Quality)

  The article explicitly mentions that the “U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is in Gorham conducting air-quality samples.” The results of these samples would serve as a direct indicator of air pollution levels (Indicator 11.6.2) and the presence of hazardous substances affecting health (related to Target 3.9).

• Indicators for SDG 6 & 15 (Water Quality & Ecosystems)

  The DEC’s actions to “closely monitor runoff to Flint Creek” and place “booms in the creek” imply the measurement of water quality. The level of contaminants found in the creek would be an indicator of pollution and the extent of the damage to the freshwater ecosystem (related to Indicator 6.3.2).

• Indicators for SDG 12 (Responsible Waste Management)

  The article provides several indicators of failed waste management. The “notice of violation” issued by the DEC for illegal disposal is a formal indicator of non-compliance. The quantity of improperly stored material, described as “enormous” and “far exceed[ing]” state fire code, is a quantitative indicator of hazardous waste not being managed in an environmentally sound manner (related to Target 12.4).

• Indicators for SDG 16 (Justice and Rule of Law)

  The number of official actions ignored by the company owner serves as an indicator of the breakdown of the rule of law. The article cites the DEC’s notice of violation, the town’s cease and desist order, and the court case to which Zaydman “never replied.” These instances measure the ineffectiveness of institutional enforcement in this specific case (related to Target 16.3).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: fltimes.com