Challenges for Protecting Public Health and the Environment in New Mexico From the Colorado Gold King Mine Spill

Transcription

1 Challenges for Protecting Public Health and the Environment in New Mexico From the Colorado Gold King Mine Spill Dennis McQuillan New Mexico Environment Department May 20,

2 Animas River Watershed System 2

3 New Mexico s Team Multi-jurisdictional agencies appointed by Governor Martinez, along with top science and engineering experts recruited from within the state, are working together to monitor the effects of the GKM spill. San Juan Soil and Water Conservation District

4 Response Summary The spill began on August 5, NMED was notified of the spill by the Southern Ute Indian Tribe on August 6. NMED was onsite, began testing water, and issued public advisories before the plume arrived in New Mexico. NMED was in daily contact with public drinking water systems and conducted extensive testing. No consumers drank contaminated water or ran out of water. NMED tested ~580 private domestic wells; no evidence of impacts from the spill. Groundwater monitoring continues. Contaminated irrigation ditches were flushed into the river. No evidence of unusual fish, livestock or wildlife mortality 4

5 Spring Runoff Preparedness Plan March 24,

6 Challenges EPA is not providing a consistent, technically sound and unbiased response to the spill Multiple jurisdictions 3 EPA regions + EPA headquarters 3 States 3 Tribes Counties and municipalities Communication Differing field and laboratory methods 6

7 Misleading EPA Data Presentation (Provided by EPA to NMED on August 7, 2015) Graph gives visual impression that lead concentrations are very low or zero.

8 Total Metals in Surface Water Plume Arrived in NM µg/l Drinking Water Standard 8/5/15 Cement Creek 8/5/15 Animas in CO 8/7/15 Animas in N.M. 8/8/15 Animas in N.M. Arsenic 10 8,230 1,080 ND 21 Cadmium ND ND Lead ,000 25, Total (unfiltered) metals in micrograms per liter (µg/l) 8

9 Unsubstantiated EPA Assertion EPA statement regarding the Animas and San Juan Rivers, November 13, 2015: metals including arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury in surface water and sediment have returned to pre-event conditions The Animas and San Juan watersheds contain 880,000 pounds of metals that were not there on Aug. 4, EPA has not defined background conditions. EPA s monitoring data strongly suggest that metals in surface water and sediment have not returned to pre-event conditions. 9

10 Storm Events and High River Flow EPA Drinking Water Action Level 10

11 Transport and Fate of GKM Metals Animas River sediment near Cedar Hill, NM September, 2015 Animas River sediment near Durango, CO February 2016 Metals stored in sediment can be resuspended in high flow Contaminated sediment can release dissolved metals into surface water Metals may sequester into groundwater Some sediment contains metals exceeding residential risk levels 3,100 mg/kg lead 11

12 EPA Risk Screening Levels for Lead in Soil mg/kg (parts per million) GKM Spill (recreational exposure) Residential Soil Plants Soil Invertebrates Birds Mammals EPA Superfund Cleanup Level (Dallas, TX site) 20, , It is profoundly hypocritical that EPA would propose a screening level for lead in soil for the GKM spill that grossly exceeds numerous other levels that EPA has developed for the United States. NMED is not going to allow children in New Mexico to be exposed to 20,000 mg/kg of lead in soil in their back yards. 12

13 Many Families Live Along the Animas River Residents have the river in their back yard, and drink groundwater from alluvial wells. 13

14 EPA Error We are certain that crops are safe for consumption. When the plume came through, irrigation ditches that impacted crops and livestock were shut down. Willett Irrigation Ditch Farmington, NM August 8,

15 Comparison of NMED and EPA Monitoring Plans EPA has spent $17 million on a deficient response action and monitoring program NMED has requested $6 million for two years of comprehensive monitoring EPA has made $465,000 available to NMED Parameter New Mexico Plan EPA Plan Background definition Partial Public drinking water quality EPA funds NMED Metals accumulation in public water system treatment infrastructure Surface water quality Base flow Spring runoff Storm events Real-time stream field parameters Communication/alert system for SW users Nutrients and E. coli 2 total in Stream sediment Lake and reservoir sediment Irrigation ditch sediment Soil in irrigated fields Riverbed and alluvial aquifer interactions Solids characterization and reactivity Regional water table mapping Private domestic well quality Radium in solids and groundwater Airborne dust To be determined Aquatic algae Nutrient processing Aquatic invertebrate population one event in Fall 2016 Aquatic invertebrate tissue Fish population one event in Fall 2016 Fish tissue one event in Fall 2016 Riparian plants Riparian invertebrates Wildlife Livestock Crops Human biomonitoring CDC funds NM DOH Ongoing and future discharges Citizen Advisory Committee 15

16 EPA Credibility Problem The examples discussed above are consistent with an agenda to deny and downplay the seriousness of the GKM spill. EPA is not holding itself to the same high standards for site investigation and cleanup that it routinely imposes on the regulated community. EPA has a severe credibility problem with regard to its response to the spill that it created. An independent, holistic and watershed-scale monitoring program is needed. 16