Drinking water supplies for tens of thousands of people near three active Superfund sites in the Bountiful and Woods Cross areas have been at risk or even polluted because of groundwater contamination.
The pollution is so bad that the federal government decided to join state regulators in directing long-term cleanup efforts of those sites.
Business owners who bought property in the affected areas, but were unaware that sources of contamination within the Superfund sites were beneath them, are expected to pay for removal of tainted soil and old polluting underground tanks that were put in long before they came along. Federal funds for cleanup are available for Superfund sites if they are active on the Environmental Protection Agency's National Priorities List, but some property owners still pay.
Utah Division of Drinking Water director Ken Bousfield said last week that water suppliers in Bountiful and Woods Cross are, based on the most recent tests, providing clean drinking water. Bousfield also is aware of the plumes of contaminated groundwater in those areas and how test results can change.
"That's why you monitor," he said.
The EPA lists at least 14 active Superfund sites in Utah that are among the worst hazardous waste sites in the country. Two sites in the Woods Cross and Bountiful areas are active due to three plumes of groundwater polluted by chemicals used in the past by dry cleaners, automotive garages and other industry.(more)
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Tuesday, September 6, 2005
State environmental officials refuse to sign off on a high-adventure recreation center for the downtown mall site until the city has more soil and groundwater tests completed.Presumably clearing up questions about whether the contaminants of concer included TCE (Trichloroethylene) or PCE (Tetrachloroethylene), the paper continues:
Meanwhile, Ogden Mayor Matthew Godfrey said the city plans to seek a special designation that would make the 20-acre parcel eligible for federal funds to pay for additional environmental tests.
[...]
To avoid similar delays when it comes to other projects at the mall site — where officials hope the rec center will be a catalyst for retail and residential development — Godfrey said the city will pursue a "brownfield" designation.
Such a designation makes contaminated land eligible for federal funding that would allow DEQ to conduct environmental tests and research the land's historic use, said Brent Everett, an environmental program manager for DEQ.
Then, any necessary cleanup can be paid for by previous property owners, developers or other parties.
[T]he city's second round of soil and groundwater tests showed petroleum concentrations as high as 520 parts per million. The regulatory limit is 10 parts per million. Concentrations of tetrachloroethylene, a solvent used in dry-cleaning and metal degreasing, were as high as 13 parts per billion, more than twice the limit.Finally, we've discovered a local Utah Blog, The Weber County Forum, which has offered some insight and analysis to readers, while making clear that many questions still remain (they've also kindly linked to us.)
As always, we'll keep you posted. Meantime, to any readers of the Weber County Forum: Welcome.
Related Posts (on one page):
- TETRAchloroethylene in Ogden; Mayor wants site designated as brownfield
- Ogden recreation center stalled by solvents in groundwater (UT)
Thursday, September 1, 2005
Petroleum and solvents in the soil and groundwater beneath what was once a downtown mall are stalling Ogden's effort to build a high-adventure recreation center.Read more.
The concentration of the solvent tetrachloroethylene (TCE) in the groundwater of one test hole was at 13 parts per billion, more than twice the contaminant level the state allows for drinking water, Thiriot said.
Thiriot, who is manager of site assessment for the state's Superfund program, said the TCE concentration found so far is not a grave concern.
But TCE is heavier than water, so more tests are needed to determine whether the groundwater underlying the future recreation center is seriously polluted.
"If they increase in concentration as we go deeper, then we've got a problem," Thiriot said.
Related Posts (on one page):
- TETRAchloroethylene in Ogden; Mayor wants site designated as brownfield
- Ogden recreation center stalled by solvents in groundwater (UT)
Thursday, June 16, 2005
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
- Final list of reps and letter to the EPA
- Representative Pallone joins the Kelly gang (NJ)
- If your state representative wants to support better protections...
- Congresswoman Katherine Harris makes it a bi-partisan appeal for protection (FL)...
- Senator Boxer writes to National Academy regarding TCE concerns (CA)
- Congresswoman to EPA: We need better protection against TCE, now; invites colleagues to join
- Congressman acts to protect the public from TCE dangers (NY)
Monday, April 11, 2005
The study is the second done on the issue of whether contamination from Hill Air Force Base has affected cancer rates in surrounding communities. In 2003, the same office did a study on 1973-1999 cancer rates in Sunset and Clinton, but the results were inconclusive.Read the full story.
...The 2003 study showed elevated rates of cancer during several periods, but said there was no evidence suggesting it was related to the groundwater contamination.
That study found elevated rates of gallbladder cancer from 1988-92 and cumulatively for the 16-year period. It also showed higher rates of testicular cancer from 1988-92 and high rates of kidney and renal pelvis cancer from 1973-77 and 1998-99.
"In addition, this investigation found no evidence suggesting that cancer (of any type) was significantly increasing in the communities of Sunset and Clinton during the periods evaluated as compared to the remainder of Utah. The cause of the significantly elevated cancers could not be determined by this investigation," the 2003 study said in its findings.
Related Posts (on one page):
- Reader question: Lawsuits re: TCE poisoning from Hill AFB?
- Hill AFB cancer study near completion (UT)
Saturday, March 26, 2005
· 85% of the sites below were discovered 15 yrs ago or more---
· over 60% of the potentially eligible sites and over 35% of all sites below report no clean-up activities
Table IV.1: Sites Classified as Awaiting an NPL Decision in Each State, by Eligibility for Listing and Status of Cleanup Progress
+
Table VI.1: State Officials’ Assessments of States’ Financial Capabilities to Clean Up Potentially Eligible Sites
| State | Number of sites classified as awaiting an NPL decision | Number of sites unlikely to become eligible for the NPL | Number of potentially eligible sites with some cleanup activities | Number of potentially eligible sites with no reported cleanup activities | Number of sites for which no surveys were received | State officials’ assessment of state’s financial capability to clean up potentially eligible sites |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 25 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 0 | Very poor |
| Alaska | 28 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 0 | Excellent |
| Arizona | 34 | 16 | 10 | 8 | 0 | Excellent |
| Arkansas | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Good |
| California | a 189 | 64 | 51 | 74 | 0 | Fair |
| Colorado | 30 | 12 | 10 | 6 | 2 | Very poor |
| Connecticut | 290 | 74 | 98 | 118 | 0 | Poor |
| Delaware | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Excellent |
| District of Columbia | a 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Florida | 269 | 74 | 85 | 110 | 0 | Fair |
| Georgia | 74 | 39 | 8 | 27 | 0 | Poor |
| Guam | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Hawaii | 17 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 0 | Fair |
| Idaho | 16 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 0 | * |
| Illinois | 207 | 95 | 43 | 69 | 0 | Fair |
| Indiana | 54 | 21 | 15 | 18 | 0 | Very poor |
| Iowa | 33 | 29 | 4 | 0 | 0 | Very poor |
| Kansas | 37 | 28 | 4 | 5 | 0 | Very poor |
| Kentucky | 20 | 15 | 2 | 3 | 0 | Good |
| Louisiana | 10 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 0 | Poor |
| Maine | 56 | 28 | 17 | 11 | 0 | Poor |
| Maryland | 20 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 0 | Other b |
| Massachusetts | a 201 | 11 | 19 | 171 | 0 | Fair |
| Michigan | 50 | 22 | 18 | 10 | 0 | Excellent |
| Midway Island | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Minnesota | 17 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 0 | Good |
| Mississippi | 9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | Very poor |
| Missouri | 91 | 73 | 7 | 11 | 0 | * |
| Montana | 11 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 0 | Very poor |
| Navajo Nation | 14 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | |
| Nebraska | a 36 | 16 | 4 | 15 | 1 | Very poor |
| Nevada | 12 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 0 | Poor |
| New Hampshire | 42 | 24 | 9 | 9 | 0 | Poor |
| New Jersey | 172 | 60 | 49 | 63 | 0 | Good |
| New Mexico | 15 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 0 | Very poor |
| New York | a 192 | 135 | 15 | 41 | 1 | * |
| North Carolina | 57 | 18 | 21 | 18 | 0 | Poor |
| North Dakota | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | Poor |
| Northern Mariana Islands | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ohio | 79 | 25 | 23 | 31 | 0 | Very poor |
| Oklahoma | 7 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | Very poor |
| Oregon | 29 | 7 | 6 | 16 | 0 | Fair |
| Pennsylvania | 73 | 35 | 18 | 20 | 0 | Excellent |
| Puerto Rico | 16 | 3 | 4 | 9 | 0 | |
| Rhode Island | 121 | 14 | 23 | 84 | 0 | Poor |
| South Carolina | 45 | 32 | 8 | 5 | 0 | Good |
| South Dakota | 8 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | Other b |
| Tennessee | 102 | 51 | 19 | 32 | 0 | Poor |
| Texas | 21 | 18 | 1 | 2 | 0 | Poor |
| Utah | 48 | 17 | 8 | 16 | 7 | * |
| Vermont | 30 | 16 | 5 | 9 | 0 | Poor |
| Virginia | 22 | 8 | 2 | 12 | 0 | * |
| Washington | 28 | 11 | 8 | 9 | 0 | Fair |
| West Virginia | 11 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | Other b |
| Wisconsin | 53 | 34 | 8 | 11 | 0 | Excellent |
| Wyoming | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | 3,036 | 1,234 | 686 | 1,103 | 13 |
a California, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, and Nebraska did not respond to surveys. For these states, the data in table IV.1 are based on EPA’s survey responses alone and, for that reason, may be less reliable than for states having responses from both EPA and states. New York provided responses to only a few questions in our survey.
b “Other” indicates that the respondent was uncertain about the state’s financial capability.
* State officials in Idaho, New York, Missouri, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming declined to participate in [the] telephone survey.
Related Posts (on one page):
- State by state: Contaminated sites awaiting an EPA decision, not on Superfund list
- Waiting for clean-up: Unaddressed risks at potential Superfund sites
Friday, March 25, 2005
The purpose of this document is to provide a synopsis of trichloroethylene (TCE) inhalation toxicity values and provide the corresponding risk-based indoor air concentrations for use in vapor intrusion assessment. Table 1 summarizes the toxicity values and risk-based concentrations. Figure 1 provides a graphic comparison of the ranges of concentrations corresponding to each of the toxicity values.
All Related Posts (on one page) | Some Related Posts:
- EPA Region 8: TCE inhalation toxicity values and risk based indoor air concentrations
- EPA Region 9's air standards for TCE
- On the appeal for stricter standards (NY)...
- Guide to Indoor Air Sampling in Massachusetts (MA)
- Regulation standards for TCE (WI)
- Guidance for Evaluating Soil Vapor Intrusion in the State of New York (NY)
