Government’S Efforts Focusing On Reducing Metals Exposure Epa Issued Draft Report On Cleanup Of Waste From Century Of Silver Valley Mining

Terry Sawyer worries about his safety when he goes kayaking on the Upper Spokane River.

The Spokane attorney wonders if mine waste taints the water. Researchers this year announced arsenic hot spots at two beaches popular with boaters.

“I’m not a very good boatman,” Sawyer said during a recent Spokane hearing. “I’m upside down a fair amount in the water.”

Reducing people’s exposure to metals pollution is the focus of government efforts toward cleaning up the legacy of a century’s mining and smelting in the Silver Valley.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last month issued draft cleanup alternatives to protect human health. The state of Idaho is expected to release its strategy to protect people early next month.

The actual risk from lead and other metals is hotly debated.

People today face minimal dangers from lead compared to the early 1970s, when the Bunker Hill smelter spewed unfiltered lead emissions, said Bret Bowers, executive director of Community Leaders for EPA Accountability Now.

Bowers also testified at last week’s hearing, which was called by the EPA’s ombudsman to review government cleanup of mine waste.

“Here in Spokane, we don’t have the health problems that may once have existed in the basin,” Bowers said.

EPA officials say they hope to give all sides the time to comment on possible cleanup alternatives, which were released in October.

Both human and environmental risks will be factored into a “feasibility study” of alternatives due out in January. A final decision on cleanup is expected next summer.

“We wanted to bring out the human health alternatives because those will be affecting communities more than a lot of the ecological alternatives will,” said Sean Sheldrake, one of EPA’s Seattle-based cleanup coordinators for the Coeur d’Alene River Basin.

The EPA memo evaluates different ways to prevent public exposure to lead and other toxic metals in soil, drinking water, house dust, fish and vegetables.

Each area comes with a set of proposed alternatives - and a wide range of costs.

For example, soil cleanup alternatives range from taking no action to total removal of contaminated soil. In between: public education and health intervention, blocking public access to contaminated sites or partial removal of contaminated soil.

Potential cleanup costs - for soil contamination only - range from $6 million for education and intervention to $194 million for completely removing all contaminated yard, recreational area and other hot spots down to a lead level of 500 parts per million.

Cleanup at yards in the Bunker Hill Superfund site starts at 1,000 parts per million.

If partial removal cleans soil to 1,000 ppm, EPA estimates it will cost $87 million.

Three Silver Valley mining companies have offered up to $250 million for cleanup over 30 years. The only comments EPA has so far received on the memo are draft comments from the Shoshone Natural Resources Coalition, Sheldrake said.

The coalition criticizes EPA for basing cleanup on arbitrary models not based on Silver Valley conditions. The group backs flexible cleanup that prioritizes cleanup for kids with elevated blood lead levels and recognizes lead paint as a problem.

Meanwhile, Idaho’s “risk management strategy” is still being reviewed by DEQ officials.

The strategy will focus more than EPA did on health risks from lead paint in addition to metals from pollution, according to Rob Hanson, mine waste program manager for the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality.

Generally, Hanson said, the state’s human health strategy will combine a “Kids First” program with information about actual lead and other metals levels in the Coeur d’Alene River Basin. Kids First - backed by mining companies - advocates cleanup linked to elevated blood lead levels in children. EPA uses environmental data to guide its cleanups.

“We tried to get the best of both,” he said.

This sidebar appeared with the story: SPEAK UP Public comment

The public can comment on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s draft technical memo on human health alternatives. The EPA will factor state, tribal and public comment into a preferred alternative early next year. Send comments to Sean Sheldrake, EPA, 1200 6th Avenue, Mail Stop ECL-111, Seattle WA 98101. For more information, call EPA’s Dick Martindale at (208) 664-4588.

Zaz Hollander can be reached at (208) 765-7129 or by e-mail at zazh@spokesman.com.