@EPA: “…abolishing the agency…I personally think it’s a good idea” — Myron Ebell

From ColoradoPolitics.com (Peter Marcus) via The Colorado Springs Gazette:

The man who led transition efforts for President Trump at the EPA said the administration’s proposed budget signals a commitment to abolish the agency.

But Myron Ebell, a Colorado College graduate and an outspoken climate change skeptic who leads energy and environment policy at the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, said it is not an overnight effort.

The administration’s preliminary 2018 budget proposal released Thursday charts a course that could lead to the end of the federal environmental agency, Ebell said, speaking to a conservative group at the libertarian-leaning Independence Institute in Denver on Thursday.

Ebell had proposed Trump make a 10 percent cut to the EPA in his first budget request. The proposal unveiled Thursday would cut the agency by significantly more, up to 31 percent. It represents about a $2.6 billion cut to the agency’s relatively small, when compared to other federal agencies, $8.2 billion budget.

The cuts would result in about 3,200 employees being laid off in the initial wave, which could include many regional staff. Denver is home to Region 8 headquarters, a multi-state jurisdiction that covers much of the Intermountain West, which employs about 500 people.

“I think there’s a serious commitment here to draining the swamp,” Ebell, calling upon a popular Trump campaign mantra, said to applause.

The preliminary budget request would eliminate as much as a fifth of the agency’s workforce, which stands at around 15,000. More than 50 programs would be eliminated, including energy grants that help to fight air pollution. Scientific research would also face massive cuts.

Environmental interests had feared Trump’s budget proposal would start to chip away at the EPA, ultimately leading to closure. News of the preliminary budget sent many into a tailspin, as it potentially signals a much faster outcome.

Trump also proposed a 12 percent cut to the Interior Department and a 5.6 percent cut to the Department of Energy.

“The president’s budget is a moral document, and President Trump has shown us exactly where he stands. These unprecedented cuts will hamper the ability of our park rangers, scientists, those who enforce the law against polluters, and other Coloradans from doing their important work,” said Jessica Goad, spokeswoman for Conservation Colorado.

“This is not just cutting the fat, this is a complete butchering of programs and jobs that are critical to Colorado.”

The move leaves specific uncertainty in Colorado, where the EPA has promised to cleanup toxic leaking mines that are spilling into the Animas River in Durango. The Gold King Mine spill in August 2015 was triggered by an EPA engineering error, causing about 3 million gallons of mustard yellow sludge to pour into the river.

In the aftermath of the spill, the EPA declared the area a Superfund site, which allows it to spend significant resources to implement a long-term water quality cleanup effort. Some worry those efforts would be diminished by reductions at the EPA.

But Ebell said a pushback to the EPA’s “regulatory rampage” does not mean that environmental controls would go away. He said regulations would still be enforced – especially on the state level – including around Superfund sites and clean drinking water.

“The question is, why do we need 15,000 people working for the EPA?” asked Ebell. “I understand why we need some … Maybe abolishing the agency is something that President Trump … would want to have a discussion about … I personally think it’s a good idea.”

Busting up the EPA is not a good idea, Myron.

Whit Gibbons: ‘Why do we need the Environmental Protection Agency?’


From the Tuscaloosa News (Whit Gibbons). Click through and read the whole article. Here’s an excerpt:

Want to have cancer-causing, bird-killing DDT sprayed in your neighborhood? How about having high levels of brain- damaging mercury dumped into your favorite fishing spot? What about paper mill wastes clogging up rivers and fouling the air people breathe?

These health hazards were once commonplace in communities throughout our country. That they are no longer the hazards they once were is due in no small part to the Environmental Protection Agency, which protects us from these and other environmental abuses. Without EPA oversight, the United States would be a much less healthy place to live.

Those who believe we do not need federal regulation of activities that can turn the country into a toxic waste dump are likely unaware of the far-reaching environmental and human health consequences of such actions. They may also not want to accept the fact that some individuals and many corporations will put profit ahead of all other considerations–including the health and well-being of the general populace.

More Environmental Protection Agency coverage here.

After a five year review the EPA has approved the remediation plan for the Standard Mine superfund site


From The Crested Butte News (Alissa Johnson):

The two-phase plan would control the flow of water through the mine to reduce contamination, and if needed, use passive water treatment to further treat runoff.

The record of decision, signed in September, has the support of the local nonprofit Standard Mine Technical Advisory Group but still needs to be selected for federal funding. It could take until 2013 before the plan is implemented, complementing remediation work already done from 2007 through 2009.

The Standard Mine, which is about five miles west of Crested Butte and drains into Elk Creek, was added to the National Priority List in 2005 because of elevated levels of metals in the soil and the creek. Elk Creek flows into Coal Creek, which is the site of the municipal water intake for Crested Butte.

“We were really fortunate that when the EPA first came in 2006, they had the funding to do some surface cleanup first,” said Anthony Poponi, executive director of Coal Creek Watershed Coalition and grant administrator for the advisory group. That work included building a repository for mine tailings that included waste rock and tailings rich in pyrite, a metal that creates acid mine drainage when exposed to air. After removing waste rock and tailings from Elk Creek, the EPA also reconfigured the creek.

“The miners had produced a creek channel around and through the mill site, which was not the natural orientation, so once we took the tailings out, we dropped the creek back to its natural alignment,” explained EPA superfund project manager Christina Progess. That alignment includes small wetlands and riparian areas and has led to a measureable reduction in metals in Coal Creek and Elk Creek…

“There are three connected mine levels,” said Poponi, “and the EPA knew water coming in at the highest level was in pretty good condition and by the time it came out at level 1 [at the bottom] it was really bad, so they did some investigations and what they came up with was the proposed plan.” The first phase of the remediation plan proposes filling the entrance at level 3, toward the top of the mine, with a flowable fill and foam. That fill, a concrete mixture, would seal off the entrance to the mine so that clean water could be prevented from entering mine workings and would reduce the amount of water coming out of level 1…

A flowthrough bulkhead would be installed at level 1 to control the water flowing out of the bottom of the mine. The bulkhead would allow for what Progess calls the “metered release” of water from the mine…

Residents interested in learning more about the plan are invited to attend an EPA-hosted community meeting on November 30, at 1 p.m. in Town Hall.

More Standard Mine coverage here and here.

Gunnison County: Standard Mine cleanup heading into second phase

A picture named miningequipcreede.jpg

From The Crested Butte News (Seth Mensing):

Three representatives from the EPA visited the Crested Butte Town Council and the Gunnison Board of County Commissioners last month to tell them that the second round of remediation work at the site is set to begin this summer.
Gina Andrews, the EPA’s on-scene coordinator for the removal of the mining debris, told both groups that her group’s “task was to remove the waste rock and tailings pond and relocate the pond to a consolidated land fill and cap it off. We finished our portion of that work last fall.”

The council members and commissioners were shown photos of the site before and after the remediation work, which contrasted an abandoned mine—complete with mining cart trestle, a bridge and scattered debris—with a nearly natural high mountain valley.
The 10-acre Standard Mine is located in the Gunnison National Forest and on four patented mining claims on the backside of Mt. Emmons. Mining operations for zinc, lead, silver and gold began on the property in 1931 and continued until 1966, when the mine was abandoned.

In 2005, the property was placed on the National Priorities List for Superfund status, which initiated the EPA to take a series of steps to reclaim the land and treat contaminated water running from the mine into Elk Creek and eventually into the town and county’s watershed. In addition to removing about 50,000 cubic yards of rock waste and pumping the contents of the tailings pond through a filter, Andrews said a fisheries biologist from the U.S. Forest Service helped the team in the relocation of a stream that had been moved to serve the mine…

Andrews said her group would visit the site throughout the summer months to see how the newly constructed streambed holds up to the spring runoff and to monitor the other improvements while making repairs when and where they are needed. Remedial project manager Christina Progess said the next step for the EPA is to do a remedial investigation and feasibility study to get more information about the condition of the site and its effect on human health. The EPA will also be looking at different methods to treat water coming from the mine. One water purification method being tested at the site is a bioreactor that uses microorganisms to “eat” the contaminating heavy metals in the water. The result is water with 96 percent to 99 percent of the heavy metals removed. “The bioreactor is a step in the right direction,” said Progess. “It still doesn’t get us to the state’s stream water standard [for contaminants] but it could be one of several ways we approach the treatment of water coming out of the mine.”

Ground and surface water flows into the mine, where it is contaminated with arsenic, barium, lead, zinc, cadmium, copper and chromium, according to an EPA report that showed those metals at three times their natural level in Elk Creek below the mine site.
The water then flows out of the mine at a rate ranging from ten gallons per minute to 70 gallons per minute during peak runoff. The 40 square foot bioreactor that is now at the site is capable of treating only one gallon of contaminated water per minute. “If water treatment were needed, this system would be scaled out to treat whatever amount of water is coming out of the adit [mine opening],” said Progess. Progess conceded that expanding the bioreactor to treat 70 gallons of water per minute might not be feasible and because the technology is so new there isn’t a lot of data to show the long-term costs of operating and maintaining the reactor on a large scale…

Progess said the EPA would be able to calculate water flows to prepare for all eventualities.The remediation investigation and feasibility study will be done in March 2010, according to Progess, when the EPA will select a final preferred remedy and send out a proposed plan for public review and comment. The process continues with a Record of Decision, published in the federal register; the remedial design and action taking place; and finally completion of construction at the site. Progess said the EPA should hand the project over to the state in 2012. The EPA will then revisit the site every five years to monitor the condition and performance of site improvements. Funding for the project shifts from the EPA to the state, which entered the process early with a 10 percent cost-sharing arrangement. Local governments will not ever be responsible for paying to improve the mine site, said Progess.