News
Sports
ENLARGE
MINTURN — A massive state and federal cleanup effort has dramatically improved toxic conditions at the abandoned Eagle Mine, according to a new federal review.
When cleanup crews entered the site 20 years ago, they were dealing with an environmental monster left behind by turn-of-the-century miners, with piles of zinc, cadmium, copper and other types of metal waste covering much of the mine’s 235 acres.
“I mean, in huge piles, like millions of tons,” said Wendy Naugle, a site manager for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
The cleanup effort under the federal Superfund law haven’t quite brought contamination levels in the Eagle River to a point safe for most fish and the environment, but it no longer poses a threat to people, according to a five-year review published by the U.S. Environmental Protection agency.
“For the most part, the cleanup has been highly successful,” Naugle said. “The next step is to go to (the site’s owner) CBS and say, ‘You have got to do more.’ And that’s not done yet, but they know.”
The site is deserted and hasn’t been inhabited for years. If plans for residential development proposed by the Ginn Co. are to be realized, then there’s some work to be done, Naugle said, which would include removing arsenic contamination from the soil.
“It’s a very quick, easy thing to do to remove that contaminated dirt to make it safe,” Naugle said, “which is very different than to try and improve the water quality.”
Raising the water quality to a level that is safe for people and fish — including rainbow trout and sculpin — seems to be the biggest task ahead.
In June, the state Water Quality Control Commission adopted new, stricter limits on how much toxic metal is allowed to flow through the Eagle River, which runs through the minesite.
Two different seasonal limits were set forth to make the river cleaner for other fish besides the resilient brown trout in the river now.
The state Hazardous Waste Materials Division wanted one set of year-round standards, but the Eagle River Watershed Council wanted stricter standards at certain points in the year and more lenient ones when the river’s flow is lower, according to Keith Kepler, president of the citizens’ group.
“We wanted to set a standard that would reflect a higher quality of water during the wetter months when the river comes up higher,” Kepler said. “Much of the year, the standards are met. But in the drier months, the standards aren’t met. They approved something in between.”
The next step is uncertain right now, Naugle said.
“We’re to the point now where everything is difficult,” she said. “It’s going to take a while to have success.”
Any plans for the site — which should be one last big push to declare the site clean and safe — will be well-thought out and publicized, said Jennifer Chergo of the EPA.
“Wherever we go forward and do next in order to make the biggest impact, that’s all going to be determined by a process that will be very public,” she said.
But, she said, it’s going to be a long process, and neither she nor Naugle wanted to set any targets for when they want to make any declarations of success.
“This was never the kind of site where it’s like, ‘Oh, you’re done,’” Chergo said. “The real message is that we are going to initiate a process that will take us further.”
When cleanup crews entered the site 20 years ago, they were dealing with an environmental monster left behind by turn-of-the-century miners, with piles of zinc, cadmium, copper and other types of metal waste covering much of the mine’s 235 acres.
“I mean, in huge piles, like millions of tons,” said Wendy Naugle, a site manager for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
The cleanup effort under the federal Superfund law haven’t quite brought contamination levels in the Eagle River to a point safe for most fish and the environment, but it no longer poses a threat to people, according to a five-year review published by the U.S. Environmental Protection agency.
“For the most part, the cleanup has been highly successful,” Naugle said. “The next step is to go to (the site’s owner) CBS and say, ‘You have got to do more.’ And that’s not done yet, but they know.”
The site is deserted and hasn’t been inhabited for years. If plans for residential development proposed by the Ginn Co. are to be realized, then there’s some work to be done, Naugle said, which would include removing arsenic contamination from the soil.
“It’s a very quick, easy thing to do to remove that contaminated dirt to make it safe,” Naugle said, “which is very different than to try and improve the water quality.”
Raising the water quality to a level that is safe for people and fish — including rainbow trout and sculpin — seems to be the biggest task ahead.
In June, the state Water Quality Control Commission adopted new, stricter limits on how much toxic metal is allowed to flow through the Eagle River, which runs through the minesite.
Two different seasonal limits were set forth to make the river cleaner for other fish besides the resilient brown trout in the river now.
The state Hazardous Waste Materials Division wanted one set of year-round standards, but the Eagle River Watershed Council wanted stricter standards at certain points in the year and more lenient ones when the river’s flow is lower, according to Keith Kepler, president of the citizens’ group.
“We wanted to set a standard that would reflect a higher quality of water during the wetter months when the river comes up higher,” Kepler said. “Much of the year, the standards are met. But in the drier months, the standards aren’t met. They approved something in between.”
The next step is uncertain right now, Naugle said.
“We’re to the point now where everything is difficult,” she said. “It’s going to take a while to have success.”
Any plans for the site — which should be one last big push to declare the site clean and safe — will be well-thought out and publicized, said Jennifer Chergo of the EPA.
“Wherever we go forward and do next in order to make the biggest impact, that’s all going to be determined by a process that will be very public,” she said.
But, she said, it’s going to be a long process, and neither she nor Naugle wanted to set any targets for when they want to make any declarations of success.
“This was never the kind of site where it’s like, ‘Oh, you’re done,’” Chergo said. “The real message is that we are going to initiate a process that will take us further.”
