Sections
You are here: Home Mining Mine Cleanup Berkeley Pit (Butte)
Document Actions

Berkeley Pit (Butte)

The federal Superfund site at the Asarco mine in Butte, Montana.

The Last Butte Superfund Decision

by John W. Ray

On September 28th, 2006, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced its record of decision for a federal Superfund site in Butte known as the Priority Soils. The decision is the last Superfund-related one to be made for Butte, and the last major decision for the Clark Fork River.

The Priority Soils area encompasses what is know as the Butte Hill, or uptown Butte. The soil in the area, and the attic dust in many of the buildings, is contaminated with mercury, lead, cadmium, copper, and arsenic. Not only is the site important in itself, but also because Silver Bow Creek, into which the contaminants flow, is the headwaters of the Clark Fork River. A bad Butte cleanup will be bad for the whole river.

Butte-018.jpg

Unfortunately for Butte and the Clark Fork River, EPA has made a bad decision. Environmentalists may hope for the best, but should always prepare for the worst. While a disappointing Priority Soils decision was expected, EPA’s decision is nonetheless still very discouraging. The remedy will not clean up the site. It is a waste-in-place—i.e., a threat-in-place—remedy.

EPA does not plan to remove any of the soils or dust. Instead, it plans to rely on caps, vegetation, and institutional controls (i.e., fences and warning signs). This is despite the fact that studies have shown those measures don’t work and don’t provide any permanent remedy. Contrary to its Superfund mandate to clean up toxic sites, EPA has made a decision that leaves in place a permanent threat to human health, the environment, and economic prosperity in Butte. EPA has ignored its obligation to make the Butte Hill free of contamination by reducing the toxicity, mobility, and volume of toxics in a permanent manner. After all this time, and after all the public money that has been spent, the result is a waste cover-up.

The EPA plan will not remove the Parrott Tailings, whose plume of contamination is spreading into precious water resources. This failure will allow for the gradual degradation of one of Butte’s few remaining groundwater resources and for perpetual pollution of the Clark Fork River.

Contrary to EPA policy mandates, the decision also ignored environmental justice concerns. The poor, who live disproportionately in uptown Butte, will still continue to endure a greater toxics burden than the non-poor. The harm to future economic development of the Butte Hill will affect low-income citizens more than the rest of the community. Studies have convincingly demonstrated that the toxics on the Butte Hill detrimentally affect the health of the poor more than the health of the non-poor because of living conditions, diet, and generally poorer health.

EPA also completely ignored the input from its own Citizen Advisory Group, as well as that given at a public meeting at Montana Tech and in the verbal and written input of citizens during the draft plan comment period. What EPA appears to have offered the citizens of Butte was sham environmental theatre. EPA provided a stage, various characters, and players who spoke their lines—but the outcome of the play was foreordained. No wonder people feel that there is no point trying to be involved in EPA policy making. A close reading of the Record of Decision for Priority Soils reveals that citizen comments had no impact. EPA had clearly made up its bureaucratic mind before the first public hearing was ever held.

Not only is EPA to blame for this sham cleanup, but so also is the State of Montana (the Department of Environmental Quality) and Butte’s local government. The State ignored its Constitutional mandate warranting the removal and/or treatment of contamination. Local government failed in its mission to protect the public health by failing to insist on a real cleanup and instead trading the future for some present monetary concessions. Both state and local governments failed in their obligation to protect and promote the public good. The real winner in this decision is the responsible party—the Atlantic Richfield Co.

 

See also:

 
powered by Plone | site by Groundwire