Due to our heritage Americans have been instilled with the attitude that the land
is a renewable and infinite resource. Europeans have a somewhat different history
and a much greater appreciation for the limited space upon which they live. In the
sixties several European countries decided that disposal of toxic waste on or into the ground
was neither safe nor economical. They developed governmental policies regarding hazardous
waste designed to restrict both its production and its disposal. They have created innovative chemical technologies and methods of high-temperature incineration. One
such example is the Kommunekemi facility in Nyborg, Denmark, which simultaneously
incinerates 70% of the country's toxic waste and produces 35% of the city's electrical
power (Piasecki 1-2).
It is difficult to specify exactly when hazardous waste contamination became a recognized
problem in America. Like many pertinent issues, it has fallen in and out of public
attention in the past, and on no occasion had enough immediate impact to necessitate the drastic governmental legislation needed to solve the problem. Two important
catalysts in the creation of federal hazardous waste laws were Rachel Carson and
the Nixon administration, but it was not until the public outcry of a suffering populace
in Niagara Falls, New York that any effective federal legislation was passed.
In 1962 the book "Silent Spring" was published by marine biologist Rachel Carson.
Her investigation into the dangers of pesticides and other chemicals was the first
of its kind to be brought into the public spotlight. "Silent Spring" sold over a
half-million copies upon initial publication and inspired an hour-long CBS report. Shortly thereafter,
president Kennedy held an investigation that validated Carson's findings. The result
was a ban on DDT and the formation of the first environmental government agencies (Gore ?).
Several years later in 1970, the Nixon administration formed the Environmental Protection
Agency, which was meant to have authority over all matters of pollution whether air,
water, or land-based. However, the EPA was primarily concerned with the more publicly-hyped problems of air and water pollution and it gave its Solid Waste Management
Program almost zero attention (Epstein 186). Despite the uncertainty of the federal
government's responsibilities in the area of hazardous waste, if it were not for
the Nixon administration's creation of the EPA the important legislation that protects
America today might not exist.
Unfortunately, neither the protection of the EPA or the earlier warnings by Carson
about hazardous chemicals were enough to secure the safety of America from more serious
land poisoning. It was the Love Canal disaster at Niagara Falls that finally brought
the American public to the breaking point. From 1942-1953 the Hooker Chemical Company
dumped 20,000 tons of hazardous waste into the canal, after which the property was
covered and sold to the Niagara Falls school district for a token dollar. A year
later the 99th Street School was built over it and a residential area soon followed (Matthews
1-3). Visible problems in the area were not immediately forthcoming, but by the mid
70's it was clearly too late for many residents. The rates for cancer, miscarriage,
and birth defects were all catastrophically high. People noticed strange odors in
their water and air. When they dug in their backyards the holes immediately gushed
with oily liquids that ranged in all colors and reeked of toxic fumes. Their basements
oozed with these same liquids. Children suffered from allergy-like symptoms in the school.
People broke out in rashes, pets went bald and trees lost their leaves in early March
(Brown 10, 16-17, 18-21). In order to appreciate the scope of the problem it is important to understand that the horrible conditions played out at Love Canal were repeated
all over the country, and that a great number of them were also the fault of the
Hooker Chemical Company. There were many other organizations also at fault however,
and one of these was the United States Army Chemical Corps itself.
By August 1978 the pressure waged by the Love Canal Homeowners Association had convinced
the governor of New York to announce that the state's Urban Development Corporation
would purchase approximately 240 of the homes on the streets nearest to the canal
(Brown 37). This did not however take care of the hundreds of other homes located farther
away from the canal that were nonetheless contaminated by dangerous benzene gas and
other chemicals. Dissatisfaction remained and in May of 1980 local residents of Love Canal had finally reached their limit. Nearly five years since the realization of
their troubles and fed up with the government's failure to respond to the situation,
they took two EPA officials hostage. They had the government's attention at last
and what soon followed was called the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), better known as Superfund. It is still in effect
today.
Superfund Program
Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Superfund Program's
main goal is to protect human health and the environment. Common hazardous waste
sites include abandoned warehouses, manufacturing facilities, processing plants and
landfills. Consequently some of these sites developed levels of contamination which posed
human health threats. Superfund established prohibitions and requirements for abandoned
hazardous waste sites, administers liability for the contamination, and created a
trust fund to provide for cleanup when the responsible persons cannot be identified.
(1)
"One out of four Americans lives within four miles of a hazardous waste site." (2)
Hazardous waste removal does not happen without extreme costs. When balancing health
and environmental values against monetary costs it becomes an issue of what is important to society. When established in 1980, Superfund was delegated $1.6 billion over
a five year period. In 1986, Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization act supplied
$8.5 billion for the program. (3) These dollar amounts can be overwhelming, but
when understanding the complexity of the selection and cleanup process suddenly the costs
seem more justified. Consider the Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Site, which
will require approximately $90 million over a 30 year period. (4)
The Superfund Trust was established to remove the hazardous chemicals that pose human
health and environmental threats at selected Superfund sites. The funds are generated
mainly from taxes on the chemical and petroleum industry. The Trust Fund is primarily used when the EPA cannot identify the people responsible for the contamination.
When the EPA can identify the polluter, they will negotiate the cost for planning
and cleanup process. If the responsible parties refuse to pay, Superfund will pay
for the costs and then attempt to get the money back through legal action. (2)
For a hazardous wastes location to become a Superfund site several steps must take
place. The site first has to be discovered and then reported to the EPA. Next,
the site must be placed on EPA's computerized inventory, assessed of its hazards,
and ranked according to its possible effects. It is then listed on the National Priority List.
The site then goes through a remedial Investigation / feasibility study where a
decision is recorded, and finally remedial action is taken. The selection process
may take years to complete before any cleanup activities take place. This ensures that
resources and safety have been allocated correctly. However if a chemical emergency
occurs Superfund employees are on call to respond at a moment's notice and cleanup
may then begin within days. (5)
Hazardous waste sites are not always easy to discover. Usually the sites are found
when they start impacting other peoples health and environment. For example, drums
of chemicals dumped in a backyard may not be detected for years depending on the
nature of the chemical. Unless the chemical's vapor can be detected it will probably go
unnoticed and seep into the ground slowly. A neighbor next to the site may even
have a well and pump water from the contaminated aquifer and never recognize the
level of contamination. Like most people they might believe that groundwater is clean and never
have their water analyzed. Since the EPA doesn't have the resources to place ground
water monitors on every block, it could even take decades before the chemical reaches
a monitor or has noticeable effects on someone else's health. However local and state
agencies, businesses, the EPA, US Coast Guard, and citizens like you can report potential
hazardous waste sites. A National Responses Center Hotline is operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week at, #1-800-424-8802. (2)
Once a site is reported to the EPA as a hazardous waste site, the EPA places it on
the computer database called Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Information System (CERCLIS). The database allows the EPA to keep
track of activities conducted under the Superfund Program. Currently the CERCLIS inventory contains
1,676 sites in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Only 73 of these sites are
considered Superfund Programs. Even if the site turns out not
to be of potential hazard, it is left in the database as a means of reporting Superfund
accomplishments to Congress. (6)
A preliminary assessment is performed on every CERCLIS site. The EPA reviews existing
data, inspects the site, and may interview nearby residents to determine the history
and possible effects of the site on population and the environment. If the information collected warrants more data, then a thorough site inspection and hazard ranking
are implemented. If the site does not require any action, then according to the
Superfund requirements the site will still remain on CERCLIS. (5)
That America did not follow the European trend is far more than just regrettable.
We are still suffering the consequences of legal corporate policies that permitted
them to dispose of the toxic residue from their chemical manufacturing plants while
encased only in quickly-eroding metal drums. These drums were dumped into the oceans, lakes,
and rivers, or shallow holes dug into the ground, and even municipal landfills. Some
were just left sitting outdoors behind the manufacturing plants where weather processes rapidly disintegrated them (Piasecki 1). It's likely that there were yet other
dubious historical methods of disposal that remain elusive, but what is certain is
that they were all dangerous .
When did hazardous waste contamination become a recognizable problem?
Further assessment includes the soil, water, and air to be tested determining the
hazardous substances and risks involved. The owner of the property may have these
tests conducted under the EPA's supervision. Results of the tests are complied in
a mathematically based screening system called the Hazard Ranking System (HRS). This score
will decide if the site is declared a Superfund Site due to threat to human health
or the environment. The HRS takes into account toxicity, mobility, persistence,
bioaccumulation, etc., and compares them to an environmental and health-related benchmark.
Additional weight is factored to areas where humans and sensitive environments are
effected. If the HRS value is high enough, the site is registered as a Superfund
Site and the location is proposed for the National Priorities List. If the HRS score is
not sufficient itself to determine the allocation of funds nor appropriate response
for the site. A complete investigation must be launched. (7)
The Remedial Investigation Detailed Study (RIDS) determines the nature and extent
of the contamination, possible threats to the environment, and alternatives for site
cleanup. Once this information has been established the report is released to the
public for a 30 day response period before the final decision regarding the cleanup procedure.
(5)
After the remedial action has taken place the site may be deleted from the NPL if
it is not longer a threat. The NPL sites will always be eligible for Superfund
remedial action even after they are taken off the list. (2) However, some of the
sites will most likely never be "clean" even after the remediation action and may remain on
the list indefinitely. Due to the extreme levels of contamination at some sites,
the best possible scenario after cleanup may be just to keep people away and monitor
the site continually.
The Bunker Hill Superfund/NRDA Site
Coeur D'alene, Idaho |
The Bunker Hill National Priority List Superfund Site is located in the Coeur D'alene Basin. It is the historic location of the Bunkerhill Mine, Mill, and Smelter Complex. The complex began operations in the 1880's. Another Mill was established in 1912 followed by a blast furnace for smelting lead in 1917 and a zinc plant in 1928. Tailing piles began to developed and a tailing pond was constructed in the vicinity of the existing Central Impoundment Area. This area was later used to store waste (slag) from the lead smelter. In 1938 a froth flotation was installed at the mill and in 1960 a phosphoric acid and fertilizer plant was constructed. Sulfuric acid plants that converted sulfur dioxide were installed at the zinc plant in 1954 and 1966 and at the lead smelter in 1968. At the closure of the mine, backfill was used to refill the maze of tunnels and main shaft. The entire plant closed in 1980. The mine and mill reopen in 1988 and went bankrupt in 1991. Remaining on the site are many of the buildings and all of the associated wastes (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).
Setting up duck traps |
Early studies of the area began in 1964. During this period of study, highly contaminated
wastes were entering the river daily from the afore mentioned facilities plus the
Sunshine Mining Company's antimony plant on Big Creek, a tributary of the South Fork, the Star, Lucky Friday, Day Rock, Galena, and the Silver Summit were also contributing
daily discharges (CH2M, 1964).
Metal residue form these sources contaminate the Coeur d'alene Basin today. According to Gulf Resources Chemical Corporation.
Taking a blood sample |
Throughout the 1970's hazardous discharges were released as an aerosol by the smelting
plants and mining associated facilities (point source) and as dust from wind swept
areas throughout the basin (non-point source) (Johnson et. al., 1977).
Ducks are restrained in panty-hose. |
According to 42 U.S.C. S 9067 CRECLA/ Superfund are responsible for remediation of substance to a level less than deemed chronic for humans. The remainder of the clean up responsibility falls under the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).
A handheld scanner is used to detect lead shot in a duck's gizzard. |
Currently several studies are being completed. Human impacts have been assessed and was concluded that urban soil be tested and were significantly contaminated, removed and replaced with uncontaminated soil. Although we were unable to located any official health record of the perennial population of towns located along the South Fork of the Coeur d'alene River, USFWS employees working on the damage assessment say that the town of Wallace (watch the movie Daunte's Peak) has one of the highest rates of mental retardation in the nation. This is a diagnosed side affect of lead contamination .
Data on the fish and wildlife is not subject to the privacy act. The effect of contamination on the waterfowl population has been a concern since the early 1900's (Chupp and Drake 1964). Studies conducted by the aforementioned indicate that the mortality of swans and other waterfowl was specifically a result of mining operations. Contamination to migratory waterfowl is also quite significant. Idaho Fish and Game records show that an estimated 70 tundra swans die annually directly from lead contamination. As a field biologist one team member witnessed this first hand. Swans would fly in to the basin and spend several days feeding. Ingested along with the roots and tubers of the various plants in their diet was a fair amount of sediment. Evidence of lead poisoning begins showing itself as an emaciation problem where the individual becomes thin and weak as a result. Generally, after three days of feeding the swans are too weak to leave, are poisoned more and expire (IDFG).
In rare cases, ducks are X-rayed. ($22 a picture!) |
There is an immense amount of wildlife mortality data linked to this mining contamination.
The problem now is how the contamination should be diminished and the basin restored
to a safe level for both people and wildlife. In a conversation with an environmental chemist associated with the project (who I may not be cited due to the current
court proceedings between the USFWS and the mining companies involved), stated "even
with all the money in the world, the actual actively restoring the basin may disturb sediments to such an extent that further significant damage will be incurred with
out a real hope of solving the problem."