It is difficult to specify exactly when hazardous waste contamination became a recognized problem in America. Like many pertinent issues, it has fallen in and out of public attention in the past, and on no occasion had enough immediate impact to necessitate the drastic governmental legislation needed to solve the problem. Two important catalysts in the creation of federal hazardous waste laws were Rachel Carson and the Nixon administration, but it was not until the public outcry of a suffering populace in Niagara Falls, New York that any effective federal legislation was passed.

In 1962 the book "Silent Spring" was published by marine biologist Rachel Carson. Her investigation into the dangers of pesticides and other chemicals was the first of its kind to be brought into the public spotlight. "Silent Spring" sold over a half-million copies upon initial publication and inspired an hour-long CBS report. Shortly thereafter, president Kennedy held an investigation that validated Carson's findings. The result was a ban on DDT and the formation of the first environmental government agencies (Gore ?).

Several years later in 1970, the Nixon administration formed the Environmental Protection Agency, which was meant to have authority over all matters of pollution whether air, water, or land-based. However, the EPA was primarily concerned with the more publicly-hyped problems of air and water pollution and it gave its Solid Waste Management Program almost zero attention (Epstein 186). Despite the uncertainty of the federal government's responsibilities in the area of hazardous waste, if it were not for the Nixon administration's creation of the EPA the important legislation that protects America today might not exist.

Unfortunately, neither the protection of the EPA or the earlier warnings by Carson about hazardous chemicals were enough to secure the safety of America from more serious land poisoning. It was the Love Canal disaster at Niagara Falls that finally brought the American public to the breaking point. From 1942-1953 the Hooker Chemical Company dumped 20,000 tons of hazardous waste into the canal, after which the property was covered and sold to the Niagara Falls school district for a token dollar. A year later the 99th Street School was built over it and a residential area soon followed (Matthews 1-3). Visible problems in the area were not immediately forthcoming, but by the mid 70's it was clearly too late for many residents. The rates for cancer, miscarriage, and birth defects were all catastrophically high. People noticed strange odors in their water and air. When they dug in their backyards the holes immediately gushed with oily liquids that ranged in all colors and reeked of toxic fumes. Their basements oozed with these same liquids. Children suffered from allergy-like symptoms in the school. People broke out in rashes, pets went bald and trees lost their leaves in early March (Brown 10, 16-17, 18-21). In order to appreciate the scope of the problem it is important to understand that the horrible conditions played out at Love Canal were repeated all over the country, and that a great number of them were also the fault of the Hooker Chemical Company. There were many other organizations also at fault however, and one of these was the United States Army Chemical Corps itself.

By August 1978 the pressure waged by the Love Canal Homeowners Association had convinced the governor of New York to announce that the state's Urban Development Corporation would purchase approximately 240 of the homes on the streets nearest to the canal (Brown 37). This did not however take care of the hundreds of other homes located farther away from the canal that were nonetheless contaminated by dangerous benzene gas and other chemicals. Dissatisfaction remained and in May of 1980 local residents of Love Canal had finally reached their limit. Nearly five years since the realization of their troubles and fed up with the government's failure to respond to the situation, they took two EPA officials hostage. They had the government's attention at last and what soon followed was called the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), better known as Superfund. It is still in effect today.

Administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Superfund Program's main goal is to protect human health and the environment. Common hazardous waste sites include abandoned warehouses, manufacturing facilities, processing plants and landfills. Consequently some of these sites developed levels of contamination which posed human health threats. Superfund established prohibitions and requirements for abandoned hazardous waste sites, administers liability for the contamination, and created a trust fund to provide for cleanup when the responsible persons cannot be identified. (1)

"One out of four Americans lives within four miles of a hazardous waste site." (2) Hazardous waste removal does not happen without extreme costs. When balancing health and environmental values against monetary costs it becomes an issue of what is important to society. When established in 1980, Superfund was delegated $1.6 billion over a five year period. In 1986, Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization act supplied $8.5 billion for the program. (3) These dollar amounts can be overwhelming, but when understanding the complexity of the selection and cleanup process suddenly the costs seem more justified. Consider the Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Site, which will require approximately $90 million over a 30 year period. (4)

The Superfund Trust was established to remove the hazardous chemicals that pose human health and environmental threats at selected Superfund sites. The funds are generated mainly from taxes on the chemical and petroleum industry. The Trust Fund is primarily used when the EPA cannot identify the people responsible for the contamination. When the EPA can identify the polluter, they will negotiate the cost for planning and cleanup process. If the responsible parties refuse to pay, Superfund will pay for the costs and then attempt to get the money back through legal action. (2)

For a hazardous wastes location to become a Superfund site several steps must take place. The site first has to be discovered and then reported to the EPA. Next, the site must be placed on EPA's computerized inventory, assessed of its hazards, and ranked according to its possible effects. It is then listed on the National Priority List. The site then goes through a remedial Investigation / feasibility study where a decision is recorded, and finally remedial action is taken. The selection process may take years to complete before any cleanup activities take place. This ensures that resources and safety have been allocated correctly. However if a chemical emergency occurs Superfund employees are on call to respond at a moment's notice and cleanup may then begin within days. (5)

Hazardous waste sites are not always easy to discover. Usually the sites are found when they start impacting other peoples health and environment. For example, drums of chemicals dumped in a backyard may not be detected for years depending on the nature of the chemical. Unless the chemical's vapor can be detected it will probably go unnoticed and seep into the ground slowly. A neighbor next to the site may even have a well and pump water from the contaminated aquifer and never recognize the level of contamination. Like most people they might believe that groundwater is clean and never have their water analyzed. Since the EPA doesn't have the resources to place ground water monitors on every block, it could even take decades before the chemical reaches a monitor or has noticeable effects on someone else's health. However local and state agencies, businesses, the EPA, US Coast Guard, and citizens like you can report potential hazardous waste sites. A National Responses Center Hotline is operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week at, #1-800-424-8802. (2)

Once a site is reported to the EPA as a hazardous waste site, the EPA places it on the computer database called Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS). The database allows the EPA to keep track of activities conducted under the Superfund Program. Currently the CERCLIS inventory contains 1,676 sites in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Only 73 of these sites are considered Superfund Programs. Even if the site turns out not to be of potential hazard, it is left in the database as a means of reporting Superfund accomplishments to Congress. (6)

Coeur D'alene, Idaho

Coeur D'alene Idaho is located 25 miles east of Spokane Washington. Known for its resort atmosphere and its plethora of recreational activities few people know that behind this beautiful facade lies a highly contaminated area that warrants both a Superfund listing and Natural Resource Damage Assessment remediation.

The Bunker Hill National Priority List Superfund Site is located in the Coeur D'alene Basin. It is the historic location of the Bunkerhill Mine, Mill, and Smelter Complex. The complex began operations in the 1880's. Another Mill was established in 1912 followed by a blast furnace for smelting lead in 1917 and a zinc plant in 1928. Tailing piles began to developed and a tailing pond was constructed in the vicinity of the existing Central Impoundment Area. This area was later used to store waste (slag) from the lead smelter. In 1938 a froth flotation was installed at the mill and in 1960 a phosphoric acid and fertilizer plant was constructed. Sulfuric acid plants that converted sulfur dioxide were installed at the zinc plant in 1954 and 1966 and at the lead smelter in 1968. At the closure of the mine, backfill was used to refill the maze of tunnels and main shaft. The entire plant closed in 1980. The mine and mill reopen in 1988 and went bankrupt in 1991. Remaining on the site are many of the buildings and all of the associated wastes (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).

Setting up duck traps

During the mine, mill, and various plants 100 plus years tenure, all solid and liquid wastes were discharged into the South Fork of the Coeur d'alene River. As of 1987, an estimated 72 million tons of contaminated tailings had been dumped into the South fork of the Coeur d'alene River (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).

Early studies of the area began in 1964. During this period of study, highly contaminated wastes were entering the river daily from the afore mentioned facilities plus the Sunshine Mining Company's antimony plant on Big Creek, a tributary of the South Fork, the Star, Lucky Friday, Day Rock, Galena, and the Silver Summit were also contributing daily discharges (CH2M, 1964).

Metal residue form these sources contaminate the Coeur d'alene Basin today. According to Gulf Resources Chemical Corporation.

Taking a blood sample

These sources include but may not be limited to surface water runoff, and soil erosion, ground water inflow, NPDES permitted discharges and unconfined tailings deposits within the basin (1987).

Throughout the 1970's hazardous discharges were released as an aerosol by the smelting plants and mining associated facilities (point source) and as dust from wind swept areas throughout the basin (non-point source) (Johnson et. al., 1977).

Ducks are restrained in panty-hose.

There are several specific contaminants associated with this particular Super fund/NRDA area. The following is a list that have been documented in critical levels: antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, sulfur dioxide, and zinc. There is also a list of substances known to have been used and could possibly be found at critical levels. These include: asbestos, beryllium, creosote, iron, phosphoric acid, polynuclear aromatic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls, radionucleotides, selenium, sulfuric acid, thallium, vanadium, K065 - surface impound solids, K066 - sludge from treatment of process water, and K100 - waste leaching solution from acid leaching of emission control dust/sludge for secondary lead smelting (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991). .

According to 42 U.S.C. S 9067 CRECLA/ Superfund are responsible for remediation of substance to a level less than deemed chronic for humans. The remainder of the clean up responsibility falls under the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).

A handheld scanner is used to detect lead shot in a duck's gizzard.

Under CERCLA/ Superfunds Act, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in conjunction with the Coeur d'alene Indian Tribe are currently compiling data to establish a current level of contamination in the Coeur D'alene Basin. Currently the data is indicating fairly severe contamination that is damaging to both people of the area and the natural resources. For example, average lead and zinc contaminants in the main stem of the Coeur d'alene River are 3,000 PPM. Currently, levels higher than 40 PPM are considered hazardous. Please see table. 2 for specific levels. Realize that the levels displayed for the St. Joe River are reference points in an allegedly uncontaminated stream.
The immediate end to the discharge of these contaminants is Lake Coeur D'Alene (NRDA Preassessment Screening, 1991).

Currently several studies are being completed. Human impacts have been assessed and was concluded that urban soil be tested and were significantly contaminated, removed and replaced with uncontaminated soil. Although we were unable to located any official health record of the perennial population of towns located along the South Fork of the Coeur d'alene River, USFWS employees working on the damage assessment say that the town of Wallace (watch the movie Daunte's Peak) has one of the highest rates of mental retardation in the nation. This is a diagnosed side affect of lead contamination .

Data on the fish and wildlife is not subject to the privacy act. The effect of contamination on the waterfowl population has been a concern since the early 1900's (Chupp and Drake 1964). Studies conducted by the aforementioned indicate that the mortality of swans and other waterfowl was specifically a result of mining operations. Contamination to migratory waterfowl is also quite significant. Idaho Fish and Game records show that an estimated 70 tundra swans die annually directly from lead contamination. As a field biologist one team member witnessed this first hand. Swans would fly in to the basin and spend several days feeding. Ingested along with the roots and tubers of the various plants in their diet was a fair amount of sediment. Evidence of lead poisoning begins showing itself as an emaciation problem where the individual becomes thin and weak as a result. Generally, after three days of feeding the swans are too weak to leave, are poisoned more and expire (IDFG).

In rare cases, ducks are X-rayed. ($22 a picture!)

In a 1987 study of 109 ducks conducted by the Idaho Fish and Game, lead levels in 49% of the livers were shown to have five micrograms of lead per gram of liver. Nineteen percent of these exceeded 10 micrograms lead per gram liver weight (Larry Blus, Patuxant National Wildlife Refuge, personal communication). Apparently, lead is not the only chronic/acute issue. Migratory birds collected within the site and analyzed for metals by the USFWS in 1985 showed elevated levels of cadmium ( in one case greater than 12 times the background level) (USDI 1986).

There is an immense amount of wildlife mortality data linked to this mining contamination. The problem now is how the contamination should be diminished and the basin restored to a safe level for both people and wildlife. In a conversation with an environmental chemist associated with the project (who I may not be cited due to the current court proceedings between the USFWS and the mining companies involved), stated "even with all the money in the world, the actual actively restoring the basin may disturb sediments to such an extent that further significant damage will be incurred with out a real hope of solving the problem."