Visual of Superfund sites in the US |
Sometimes part of the final decisions
related to contaminated sites is to simply declare the land, or the water
beneath the land as unusable. That saves spending even more money on the
cleanup especially when the land is unlikely to be acceptable for any other
use.
Superfund Site Case Study in Michigan.
That is what is being proposed for the
Holland Lagoons Superfund site at Holland, Michigan. According to a report
in the HollandSentinel online, the Environmental Protection Agency is seeking
public comments on the proposal to no longer monitor the site. One reason that
will be possible is because the county, with the approval of the state's
environmental agency, passed an area wide groundwater use restriction in 2009.
EPA's recommended alternative for the site is to take no further action other
than ongoing monitoring by Ottawa County of the plume of contamination beneath
the site.
The site had its own contamination
problems for years but in the end, contamination from a neighboring landfill,
the Southwest Ontario County Landfill, or SWOCLF, continuously seeps below it
and taints the ground water. Since the Holland Lagoons site was also a landfill
and dumping ground, part of the long term plan is to simply restrict
groundwater use. The contaminants in the water include "benzene, ethyl
benzene, xylene, chlorobenzene, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane,
methylene chloride, diisopropyl ether, tetrahydrafuran and total iron."
Residents in the area have been connected to a municipal water supply and have
abandoned their water wells.
The Holland Lagoons site was home to a
business involved in collecting and disposing of waste. From the 1940s to 1977
the Jacobusse Refuse Service Company dewatered liquid waste on the land and
used it as a garbage dump. In 1972, Refuse Services bought Jacobusse and
renamed the site Holland Lagoons. Then, just the next year, Refuse Services
merged with Michigan Waste Systems and became WMI. Initially, food waste was
processed at the site but then a portion of it was also used to dewater
industrial wastes such as aluminum and metal hydroxide and sludge from
wastewater treatment plants. These metal and wastewater wastes were placed into
nine lagoons for the dewatering process but by 1977 they were no longer being
used. Then, the sludge from the lagoons was removed, mixed with lime and dumped
at the SWOCLF.
There were also 43 drums, 55 gallons
each, filled with chloral hydrate, a once-widely-used sedative that also found
a place in laboratory work and as a cleaner of fibrous waste, buried on the
Holland Lagoons site.
In its recommendation to stop remediation
and leave the monitoring to the county, the EPA cited the supervision of the
site by the county and state over the previous 10 years as evidence the cleanup
could be safely stopped and monitored by them. It also concluded that the
previous remediation efforts at the site had removed or eliminated the threat
from the contaminants that originated there.
1 comment:
Why do we stop cleanup before we've cleaned up a site. Environmental professionals should always strive to actively cleanup every contaminant at every site to below standard cleanup levels or we risk having these decisions made by people less informed then we are. The responsible party(s) at the subject site did not set out to contaminate their soil and groundwater. They simply made a cost based risk assessment and determined prevention or cleanup were not cost effective alternatives. That is the same thing we are doing now at this site and countless others like it. If you only partially cleanup a site then why cleanup a site at all. If Environmental Professionals allow accountants to make cleanup decisions, then the accountants will soon decide they don't need Environmental Professionals.
Post a Comment