Transmitted via email to:
NMED Hearing Clerk Sally
Worthington
Room S2103
1190 St. Francis Drive
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502
Candace moved to Murray
Acres in 1975 and lived in a home less than a mile from the
Homestake/Barrick Gold Superfund site. She lived in the community
for two years, moved away, and then we moved back with two young
children in 1987, again residing less than a mile from the site. We
are members of the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment
(MASE) and the Bluewater Valley Downstream Alliance (BVDA). Steve
lives next to the Homestake Barrick Gold site year round. Candace
lives there during school breaks but works as a university professor
in Wisconsin during the school year. Our children are now grown and
living elsewhere, thank goodness.
The history of the
Homestake/Barrick Gold Uranium Mill Tailings Superfund Site is an
object lesson in regulatory agency failure. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC), the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), and the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) have never
adequately responded to the massive contamination that has destroyed
our community�s groundwater, ruined our property value, and has
likely affected our family�s health and the health of our
neighbors, including causing the deaths of several. These agencies
bow to political pressure and that is why we have, once again, been
given inadequate time to prepare for this hearing. It is also why the
entire community knows the result of this hearing is a foregone
conclusion. The money and power of Homestake-Barrick Gold guarantees
that the company will be given whatever they ask for in this permit.
We write this statement knowing democratic and regulatory processes
have failed at this site. We write so that our statement regarding
this travesty exists in the record of this hearing; so that
generations to come will know who tried to stop this egregious
assault on our community�who tried to protect New Mexico�s
waters. Other names will also being recorded here. We hope everyone
associated with this hearing understands that his or her name will be
linked with either those who tried to protect the health,
environment, and welfare of New Mexico citizens, or linked with those
who believed the almighty dollar was more important than the water we
will so desperately need in the future.
Once again,
Homestake-Barrick Gold refuses to commit the resources needed to
fully clean the contaminated water and once again NMED will find that
acceptable. In the last discharge permit hearing (DP-725), we asked
NMED to require Homestake-Barrick Gold commit to operating a reverse
osmosis plant that could actually clean all the water from the site.
It is the right thing to do, but Homestake-Barrick Gold will not
spend the money required and NMED does not want to get on the wrong
side of this powerful company. So, instead, Homestake-Barrick Gold
proposes experimental methods that are unproven and likely dangerous,
proposes an insignificant increase in reverse osmosis, and NMED will
approve this proposal and claim they are supporting �progress�
and �innovation� rather than colluding with a company that is too
rich and powerful for them to regulate.
To make our community
whole, all the tailings must be relocated to an appropriate site for
safe and permanent storage. When that is accomplished, then we will
have a chance to restore lost groundwater. Otherwise, the Large
Tailings Pile (LTP) continues to leak into our groundwater, and
nearby residents continue to be exposed to dangerous radon. In fact,
the United States Environmental Protection Agency�s Draft Human
Health Risk Assessment shows our community has been exposed to
ambient radon emanating from the Homestake-Barrick Gold Uranium Mill
Tailings Pile that is 5.5 times the EPA�s acceptable limit,
resulting in an increased lifetime cancer risk 18 times what the EPA
deems acceptable. What the report fails to mention is that some
residents have suffered this exposure for over forty years now.
By not removing the
existing waste piles to safe and permanent long-term storage, NMED
and Homestake/Barrick Gold subject our community to radon that may
eventually kill us and which has likely already contributed to the
deaths of several community members. BVDA has surveyed 71 families
in the area and we were surprised by the number of people in the
community who reported serious health issues, from thyroid and lung
disease to various forms of cancer. This preliminary information
suggests the community needs a rigorous epidemiology study. Since no
official health survey has been conducted, despite more than 40 years
of exposure for some residents, there is no way to know for sure what
the health effects have been.
In the same way they have
failed to set appropriate groundwater backgrounds, NMED and the other
regulatory agencies are also allowing Homestake/Barrick Gold to use
inappropriate background levels for air monitoring, even though NMED
established radon background for our area in 1979 and 1980.
Natural background in the community has not changed in the ensuing
years. The only thing that has changed has been the addition of
evaporation ponds, and more contamination deposited above ground.
In the case of ambient
radon, NMED�s failure to set adequate background cannot be blamed
on upstream polluters. Air sampling in 1979 and 1980 by NMED
(previously the NMEID) established radon levels to the west of the
site that should be used as background. Only political pressure or a
blatant disregard for the community�s health would support using
the background Homestake/Barrick Gold currently uses. To add insult
to injury, Homestake-Barrick Gold now proposes to the Nuclear
Regulatory Agency to use a different radon monitoring site that would
be even less protective than the current monitoring stations, and,
like NMED, the NRC will allow this rich and powerful company to do so
because United States regulatory agencies have been underfunded and
know that if they go against the companies with money, any political
backing they do have will dry up and the regulatory agencies will
lose even more money and resources as a result. It is a game the
companies, politicians and regulators play to the detriment of
communities like ours. When the correct background radon levels are
applied, it becomes clear that our community has been dosed with
radon levels that exceed both USEPA and NRC standards. To ignore
appropriate background levels allows NMED to ignore�or pretend to
have no evidence�that people in our community may be affected by
past and continuing radon exposure.
For DP-725,
Homestake/Barrick Gold proposed a double liner with leak detection
�ports� which could miss leaks and did not provide adequate leak
monitoring. Better liner systems are available and our community
understands now how important it is to demand better protections
since our situation is caused, in part, by missing and inadequate
liners. However, that inferior liner was approved by NMED. The
current proposal for detection is inadequate as well. We have no
doubt it will also be approved.
In addition, soils in the
community need to be sampled to see what deposits have been left from
windblown tailings and evaporation spray mists, and from the tailings
pile breach that crossed Thunderbird Road into Murray Acres and
Broadview Acres almost thirty years ago. As was the case with DP-725
this has not been done and will not be required.
We believe
Homestake/Barrick Gold plans to spend as little money as possible on
this remediation effort and wait until our community dies off or
until we are left with property so valueless we will not have the
resources to oppose them. Far from protecting our community�s
health and environment, NMED support for proposals like DP-200 show
us that NMED is squarely in the company�s corner and clearly
opposed to a thoughtful, scientifically engineered solution to this
environmental nightmare.
With the federal
government paying for half this remediation effort and
Homestake/Barrick Gold as one of the wealthiest companies in the
world, NMED should be able to work with USEPA and NRC to devise a
solution that would move the pile for safe and permanent storage,
clean the water, and provide residents some future relief, even if it
cannot give us back our health.
Here are additional
problems we have identified:
-
Alternative
contaminant levels (ACLs) for the alluvial and Chinle aquifers are
inappropriate. The Chinle aquifers show good, clean water upstream.
There is no way to support the use of ACLs for these aquifers. No
opportunity for public input by the affected communities was
provided when these standards were adopted. It is a basic tenet of
environmental law and justice that communities should be afforded an
opportunity to review and participate in the adoption of regulations
that affect them. National Environmental
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (1969), Executive Order 12898 on
Environmental Justice (1994)
-
All the regulatory
agencies with jurisdictional authority over the Homestake-Barrick
Gold Superfund site are required to consider all applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) when a polluting
entity is unable to comply with existing environmental regulations.
In addition, the Homestake�s corrective action plan for
groundwater was never subjected to the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study process that is required for all
Superfund sites on the National Priorities List. This means that the
Homestake site has never undergone a comprehensive evaluation to
determine the best methods for remediation and ultimate final
closure.
-
The DP-200 does not
detail methods, nor does it provide adequate information regarding:
-
Reports that provide
the basis for proposed increased pumping rates; reports on the
effectiveness of and need for continued flushing of the tailings
pile
-
Reports on the
performance of pilot tests for the full range of alternate
technologies in operation or proposed for use or expansion in the
future
-
Reports on the
likelihood of long-term geochemical rebound of contaminant
concentrations after the end of flushing
-
Reports on the
evaluation of San Andres Glorieta Aquifers wells and possibility
that faulty well construction has spread contamination into the San
Andres aquifer
-
Reports providing
detailed information regarding operational flows, methods, and
techniques for the life of the proposed Discharge Plan and other
monitoring well data
-
Procedures for
detecting failure of Homestake�s discharge systems
-
Emergency plans and
public notification in event of a contingency, such as tailings
instability, pipeline breaks, RO facility shutdowns, evaporation
pond leakage, or other system failures
-
Underground
Injection Control compliance history
-
Applicable or
appropriate and relevant requirements (ARARs) for all contaminated
aquifers at the Superfund site
-
Evaluation of all
monitoring well construction
-
Evaluation of
current evaporative pond capacity
-
The DP-200 fails to
take the USEPA�s Human Health Risk Assessment findings into
consideration. EPA recently assessed the cancer risk to area
residents at 5.6 times higher than the generally acceptable risk for
combined exposures to soil, air and produce grown in the area.
Excess cancer risks for radionuclides in water beneath the nearby
subdivisions, primarily from radon-222 is 22 times higher than the
generally acceptable risk, and is 18 times higher than the generally
acceptable risk for radionuclides in ambient air. Radon-222 is one
decay product of uranium. EPA 2013 Draft
Human Health Risk Assessment. Although EPA
has not yet finalized its draft assessment, the risk to our
communities is ongoing. NMED�s draft DP-200 does not address how
Homestake-Barrick Gold�s alternate ground water restoration
methods will reduce the human health risks our working class
community faces on a daily basis. NMED�s draft DP-200 should
detail the measures that Homestake-Barrick will take to reduce the
combined radiological dangers to nearby residents from its Superfund
site property.
-
Property values in
the five subdivisions next to the Homestake-Barrick Gold site have
been negatively impacted by these known dangers. Residents who are
unable to sell their homes and leave the area are involuntarily
subjected to increased risks from continuing exposure to radon-222
via multiple pathways, in effect sacrificing their health and that
of their families. We have had our home for sale for over two years
now and not one person has expressed an interest in viewing the
property.
-
The New Mexico State
Engineer is supposed to require Homestake-Barrick Gold�s temporary
water diversions �utilize the highest and best technology to
assure conservation of water to the maximum extent practical.� OSE
Permit No. 1605 & B-28 POD 1338. A
determination that Homestake-Barrick Gold is using the best
available technology for its groundwater remediation program cannot
be made without a comprehensive analysis of the site�s
geohydrology, or an evaluation of Homestake�s reverse osmosis
treatment capacity, wellhead integrity, and mass capture of
contaminants. USEPA�s report by the US Army Corps of Engineers
concludes that the current system is NOT the most effective. USEPA
Remedial System Evaluation.
-
In fact, it is very
likely that contamination from both the large and small tailing
piles will eventually migrate from the unlined piles into the
alluvial aquifer beneath them once the flushing program ends. The
likelihood of this eventual �rebound� effect is one of the
reasons that ACOE has recommended discontinuation of Homestake�s
flushing program. ACOE Addendum Remediation
System Evaluation Report (December 23, 2010), Executive Summary
-
Besides recommending
an end to Homestake�s flushing program, ACOE�s 2010 Final
Addendum Report recommended that a rebound study should be initiated
at the Homestake-Barrick Gold Superfund site. Executive
Summary, ACOE Final Addendum Report
-
NMED, on the other
hand, is proposing to allow Homestake to increase the rate and
volume of injection and dilution without a quantity limit on the use
of freshwater. DP-200, Paragraph 9 This constitutes an unprecedented expansion
of Homestake�s flushing program into the last remaining public
water supply for the Bluewater Basin without supporting data, and
prior to completion of the required studies. Homestake has provided no evidence that its
current RO capacity, or evaporative capacity, can accommodate such
an unlimited expansion based on flow rates and discharge volumes at
its treatment facilities. NMED�s proposal to allow this expansion
is not supported by existing data or technical justification.
-
The San Andres
aquifer is the last remaining uncontaminated source of public water
supply for the Villages of Bluewater, Milan, and the City of Grants.
In addition, it is the aquifer from which we draw water to irrigate
crops and support livestock. Without this vital source of water,
our community is doomed. The San Andres-Glorieta aquifer also
provides most of the recharge for the Rio San Jose, a critical
agricultural resource for Acoma and Laguna.
-
MASE has included in
its comments a memo from Laura Petronis, OSE Hydrology Bureau, that
states additional information is needed from Homestake in order to
evaluate the effectiveness of its multiple restoration programs, due
in part to Homestake�s own uncertain plans for site restoration,
well locations and pumping/injection rates. Although Ms. Petronis
did not anticipate any overall increase
in Homestake�s consumptive water use, she did not independently
evaluate Homestake�s claims that its alternate treatments will
consume less than 1% of the total water pumped. She also assumed
that all of Homestake�s new pumping and injection wells were in
close proximity to existing wells. She did not conduct a surface
water depletion analysis based on her determination that there would
be no increase in Homestake�s diversion or depletion. It should be
noted, however, that Homestake used less than half of its total
diversionary right of 4,500 afy from 2001- 2010.
-
In addition, there is
no oversight of the system Homestake-Barrick Gold is currently
using. All waters are not metered. The company has been cited once
by NMED for illegal discharging water in our community but only
because a community member caught them doing it. There is no one to
monitor activities on the site and no way to tell if what they claim
they are doing is actually done. Untold abuses may be occurring and
the public has no way of knowing because none of the regulatory
agencies involved is on the ground overseeing this critical
remediation effort.
-
A partial, rather
than a complete, hydrologic evaluation was performed due to
Homestake-Barrick Gold�s use of alternate treatment methods.
Despite the hydrogeological complexity of the Homestake-Barrick Gold
site the NMED does not require adequate modeling and the OSE simply
refuses to get involved allowing anything the NMED approves.
-
A complete inventory
and investigation of all well construction, including monitor wells,
meters, and corresponding locations on the Superfund site property
is required in order for NMED and other regulators to adequately
evaluate the effectiveness of Homestake�s flushing program.
Information outlining a specific pumping schedule for Homestake�s
extraction and injection wells, metered flow rates and the purpose
of each well is needed for NMED and other regulators to evaluate the
effectiveness of each restoration method to be used by Homestake.
This evaluation must take place prior
to the renewal and modification of DP-200.
-
DP-200 does not
enable NMED and other regulators to track and assess the removal of
mass contaminants from the site and to evaluate the effectiveness of
the flushing program, in combination with alternative treatment
methods.
-
Homestake-Barrick
Gold�s reports are sloppy and inaccurate. 50,000 kg of dissolved
uranium mysteriously disappeared from the plume in Homestake�s
mass removal analysis.
-
NMED�s draft DP-200
does not address Homestake�s use of 194 infiltration lines,
consisting of 400� segments of buried slotted pipe, to raise the
water table and change the hydraulic gradient using fresh water or
treated water. NMED should evaluate whether the use of fresh water
in the infiltration lines could constitute dilution, or whether use
of the infiltration lines could lead to enlargement of the alluvial
aquifer contamination plume. Also, how will the company or NMED know
for sure what happens in these slotted pipes? Could they become
another way for the company to dispose of contaminated water without
anyone knowing and no way to hold them accountable? In this case,
the soils would absorb contamination in the short term, making it
seem like water contamination had been reduced, but would eventually
release this contamination many years later.
-
NMED does not have
enough information from Homestake-Barrick Gold on how much water
will be treated by each of its ground water treatment methods, and
the mass of contaminants that will be removed by each method and
within each aquifer, so that it can impose appropriate conditions
for each treatment method.
-
The
US Army Corps of Engineers ACOE also noted that Homestake�s
flushing program is unlikely to be completed by December 31, 2017,
the date that its current temporary license to divert water from the
San Andres formation will end. OSE Permit
No.1605
-
Homestake�s
groundwater remediation program does not adequately address the
small tailings pile.
-
MASE technical
advisor George Rice has outlined the need to address the long-term
effectiveness of Homestake-Barrick Gold�s flushing program and the
possibility that contaminants from the Homestake-Barrick Gold site
are migrating towards the San Andres/Glorieta subcrop, located
approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the site.
-
Mr. Jim Kuiper�s
review of Homestake�s CAP for ground water (submitted by MASE)
noted the need for inter-agency ARARs (applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements) to be considered by EPA and NMED, along
with long-term monitoring and water-management activities at the
site. Rice and Kuipers both agree that flushing appears to prolong,
rather than alleviate draindown from the large tailings pile by
keeping the tailings in a saturated condition.
-
To date, the NRC has
not yet approved HMC�s revised CAP, issued an environmental impact
evaluation for the CAP, or provided the public with an opportunity
to comment on the proposed revisions. Nor has the Homestake-Barrick
Gold site ever been subjected to a full Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) process under the National
Contingency Plan since it was placed on the National Priorities List
(NPL) in 1983. Homestake began its ground water remediation
activities in 1977, prior to its placement on the NPL.
-
Kuipers &
Associates LLC recommends that a full RI/FS should be performed by
EPA to determine the best methods for site remediation and ultimate
final closure, and to build the record necessary to support site
deletion. Kuipers & Associates believe the existing remedial
actions described in the CAP are not consistent with recognized best
practice and agency approaches at other similar sites. Significant
additional response actions and long-term institutional controls
beyond those described in the CAP will most likely be necessary.
(See MASE submittals)
-
Permanent storage of
the radioactive mill tailings and other recovered contaminants
on-site will subject nearby resident communities and their property
to continuing and unacceptable risks from radiological contaminants
in ambient air and soil.
-
Suggesting
experimental rather than proven methods after forty plus years of
failure demonstrates how little value is placed on a real cleanup of
this site. Homestake�s zeolite pilot study test results exceeded
the uranium site standard for the alluvial aquifer (0.16 mg/L)
without further analysis of how the treatment could be used to
achieve the site standard. Molybdenum and chloride levels exceeded
the site standards goal in the electrocoagulation pilot study. None
of the methods proposed are proven. We have moved from being
ignored to being the subject of experimentation. Also, the results
of Homestake�s rebound evaluation indicate that the large tailing
pile will continue to remain a source of groundwater contaminants
into the foreseeable future. Mr. Rice points out that no explanation
was provided for the target uranium concentration goal of 2 mg/L.
-
For years our
community has maintained that Homestake-Barrick Gold does not play
by the rules. It violates the NPDES (federal Clean Water Act) NMAC
20.6.2.2001, has no compliance history for
Underground Injection Control permit at the Homestake site NMAC
20.6.2.3106C(8), and no surface water
quality management plan for the San Mateo Creek basin to assure
compliance with New Mexico water quality standards NMAC
20.6.2.3109H. An anti-degradation analysis
for the San Mateo Creek where the tailings piles are located should
also be performed by NMED�s Surface Water Branch.
-
Environmental
Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people in the development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The
failure to make real progress at this site speaks for itself. Our
community has not had meaningful or even regular involvement in this
site. We have been treated like second-class citizens who must be
tolerated at public meetings but whose opinions and information
about the site is ignored, or worse.
-
We were told in the
early 1980s that our water would be fully restored in 10 years. We
trusted this statement by Homestake because we thought the NMED,
USEPA, and NRC would protect our interests and insist on a full
cleanup. Instead, these agencies have failed miserably in their
charge to protect our environment and our health. Unfortunately,
none of these agencies will ever be brought to task for their
failures because Homestake-Barrick Gold�s money and power protects
them.
-
Not mentioned in the
DP-200 is the fact that contamination from another �reclaimed�
uranium mill tailings site (Anaconda/ARCO, now overseen by the
Department of Energy) is migrating towards our community. It may be
that Homestake-Barrick Gold�s activities are drawing that
contamination to our community. That possibility is not discussed
in this permit. The combined cumulative adverse impacts to our
communities from all uranium legacy sources of pollution must be
considered by NMED and other state and federal regulators in order
to achieve environmental justice for our communities.
-
Also not discussed in
this permit is the fact that the background for the Upper Chinle,
Middle Chinle, and Lower Chinle aquifers is entirely inappropriate.
These aquifers dip in a different direction than the alluvial
aquifer at the site. While there is still no proof that even the
alluvial aquifer has been impacted by activities upstream in the
Ambrosia Lake area, there is certainly no reason to set Chinle
aquifer background based on alluvial calculations. In fact,
upstream wells are available for showing what the background of the
Chinle aquifers should be. It is outrageous that the community must
point this out to NMED. The background for these aquifers MUST be
reset and should be addressed before DP-200 is approved.
Steve and I know we have
just wasted important hours of our life in writing these nine pages
of comments. However, once more, we ask the NMED to reject this
permit until Homestake-Barrick Gold addresses the deficiencies noted
above. We also ask that NMED require Homestake-Barrick Gold to:
-
Halt the flushing and
moving the tailings piles to a safe, permanent repository.
-
Build and operate
enough reverse osmosis that while the piles are being removed and
after they are gone, the remaining water can be cleaned to safe
drinking water standards.
-
Restore our water
fully and compensate our community for what they have taken from us,
not only in terms of water but also lost property value and past and
future health effects that remain unacknowledged, unmeasured, and
can never be recovered.
Sincerely,
Steve Dylla
Candace Head-Dylla
#6 Ridgerunner Rd., Murray
Acres
Grants, NM 87020
Cc: Scott Verhines, NM
Office of the State Engineer
Ron Curry, EPA
Administrator, Region 6
Mark Purcell, EPA
Superfund Division (6SF-TR)
John T. Buckley,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
David Schafer,
Department of Energy/Legacy Management Report to U.S. Congress
Senator Martin
Heinrich
Senator Tom Udall
Representative
Steven Pearce
Representative Ray
Ben Lujan, Jr.
Representative Ken
Martinez
|
