Saturday, December 30, 2023
2009 Sierra Club scrapbook asarco to close for good.
Comment in response to
https://blogs.sierraclub.org/scrapbook/2009/02/polluting-el-paso-smelter-to-close-for-good.html
I treasure the Thank you card from Ms Chew's mom for the years of research i did, uncovering the 73 page USDOJ EPA Asarco confidential for settlement purposes only document. A TCEQ manager referred to this document in an interview and it cost him his job. It became public domain with his comment and I was able to get it. That document was covered in a 2006 front page New York Times story, and a subsequent national press conference at base of the Asarco stack, on Paisano el paso texas. I wrote and paid $300 for the electronic prnewswire press release that caught attention of the nytimes, but only Ms Chew backed me at press conference, not local sierra club. In order to gain national news story I could not release the document locally to groups until that day. Only Bill Addington, Mariana Chew, the sunland park environmental group (taylor moore esq and kids from anapra) backed me with full confidence, along with community members and an Asarco ex-worker. Asarco was there, counter-releasing news of nerve quench water rocky mt arsenal for gov, and an activist whom i mistakenly trusted with the document (he printed and distributed many copies of it at event, without holding my address confidential (was on top page), potentially endangering me as that had not been public, and indeed I was removed from my teaching job and fully blacklisted, and never worked again). If you are an activist reading this, understand that many working on an issue will use it to advance their own standing with others, usually to gain money or work. By the time i found out, he had already distributed many copies. Mariana went on the help me fight the re-permitting of Asarco's wastewater permit, which I wrote &filed given how Mr. Moore esq had taught, and she worked to get binational signatures and personally fax for me. She would later receive a Sierra Club Nat. Award in CA for her work on Asarco. My research was over 8 yrs, Taylor Moore esq and others (see legal suit over installing new contops, @ 1990) also had gathered huge amounts. It culminated in a regional epa director being fired after he released over 5 dvds of searchable asarco related documents to me that Sen. Shapleigh (he was given one box) was never given because EPA had stored the nearly dozen boxes in a different region (which contained the encycle whistleblower report). The attorney for the ex workers was trying to negotiate for release of three boxes. For some reason in response to my foia, all were released. Currently, EPA has erased all my asarco foias and one remains, but is listed as "no response" when actually it had a response (a set of those over 5 dvds). Presently the Wa DC federal register foia attorney I talked with (who had appeared to be helpful) will not open my email with photograph showing the response letter, envelope and discs.
It is also nigh impossible to find this blog unless you go to it directly, now.
Had I not followed Sierra blanca nuclear waste activist, Bill Addington's advice after getting that 73 page document, it would not have gone national. He explained it was a national story, told me what to do. He said if I released it locally, Asarco would bury it. To this day, that news story can be found when so much other information is now lost. This region owed a lot to his mom Gloria and him for their fight, because it ended in 1998 and was the cause of asarco idling the el pado plant by 2/99. Had they not fought the good fight with a great team, many losing everything doing it, it is my belief that EPA and ASARCO would have overlooked EPA's 1998 finding that el paso had the highest beta radiation air and soil in the entire USA in 1998.
- mrs mcmurray ms biological sciences, dual certification biology science grades 8-12, 2023
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/october242011/border-smelter-kp.php
Oct-24-2011 Lingering Questions Haunt Old Border SmelterThe legacy of lead, arsenic and other metals contamination in a tri-state region traced to Asarco has long been documented, but questions linger over the complete nature and extent of the pollution.
(LAS CRUCES, N.M.) - In a few months, the skyline of El Paso and Ciudad Juarez is set for a dramatic transformation. For generations the smokestacks of the American Smelting and Refining Company (Asarco) have towered hundreds of feet over the Rio Grande, first exemplifying and then symbolizing a bygone industrial economy powered by mineral and metals production. Still flashing into the night, the big stack’s red lights serve as a reminder to borderlanders of a history that goes back to the late 19th century. But according to US and Mexican authorities, as well as citizen activists in the two nations, Asarco left behind a legacy of pollution and sick residents in El Paso, Ciudad Juarez and Anapra/ Sunland Park, New Mexico. Shut down since 1999, the old smelter is due for final demolition in early 2012. Project Navigator, the California-based company in charge of demolishing the facility and cleaning it up of environmental contamination, has announced a November 3 public meeting in El Paso to update the community on the project’s progress. According to Project Navigator’s Roberto Puga, custodial trustee for the demolition/remediation project, work is progressing on various fronts. A Texas bankruptcy court approved a $52 million budget for the project, but sales of Asarco’s on-site inventories are expected to net at least $10 million in additional funds that will be used to help Project Navigator complete its mission, Puga told Frontera NorteSur. Rezoning the Asarco site earlier this year, the El Paso City Council paved the way for re-development of land that is located only minutes from the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), downtown El Paso and a possible future border crossing in Sunland Park. In short, the old Asarco property is a potentially hot piece of real estate. The legacy of lead, arsenic and other metals contamination in a tri-state region traced to Asarco has long been documented, but questions linger over the complete nature and extent of the pollution. For example, a group of former Asarco workers has contended that oil containing highly-polluting PCBs was burned in a company furnace. A local attorney working with the ex-Asarco employees, Veronica Carbajal of Rio Grande Legal Aid, raised the possibility that dioxins and furans could also have been released into the environment, in a letter sent to Puga this year. In remarks to Frontera NorteSur, Heather McMurray, member of the Sunland Park Environmental Grassroots Group, was critical of the planned demolition’s timetable. McMurray said fundamental questions remain unanswered about the identity of other substances illegally incinerated at the Asarco plant from about 1991 to 1998, a practice which resulted in an EPA consent decree against the big mining and mineral company. McMurray has been urging the EPA to speed up responses to Freedom of Information Act requests on the 90s’ hazardous waste operation. Based on existing evidence, she insisted that radioactive materials were among the waste shipments that went to El Paso Asarco. “(Asarco) is not going to be safe, even if it is paved over,” McMurray said. “Asarco disposed of man-made and naturally-occurring radioactive material.” The smelter site where the hazardous waste was incinerated is very close to UTEP and its surrounding neighborhoods and just across the Rio Grande from low-income colonias in Ciudad Juarez. Both Carbajal and McMurray have also cited the Asarco site’s potential impact on groundwater and the adjacent Rio Grande, which supplies both El Paso and Ciudad Juarez with drinking water. Sam Coleman, director of EPA Region Six’s Superfund division, said his agency is reviewing documents related to the waste incineration operation but is negotiating with what remains of Asarco over the issue of confidential business information. According to Coleman, current law provides penalties including fines and jail time for federal officials who release proprietary business information. “We’re not going to do that,” Coleman stressed. The EPA official said the environmental agency is “trying to make public as many as the documents as possible” but that the “process takes time.” For perhaps the last times, the Paso de Norte community will have a pair of upcoming opportunities to publicly question and discuss the future of the old Asarco smelter. The first date is Project Navigator’s meeting on November 3, between 5-7 p.m. in the El Paso Downtown Public Library at 501 N. Oregon St. According to Puga, engineers from his company will give presentations to an audience that is expected to consist of representatives of local elected officials, environmental regulatory agencies and the public-at-large. A similar meeting last year drew about 100 people, Puga said. The EPA’s Sam Coleman also welcomed the public to bring their issues to a November 9 Border 2020 meeting also scheduled for El Paso. Although Border 2020 is designed as a general, cooperative environmental improvement program between the US and Mexico, Coleman said all relevant issues were “fair game” for public airing. Frontera NorteSur: on-line, U.S.-Mexico border news |
Asarco comment see #3
PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING #2 COMMENT AND RESPONSE REPORT
Loop 375 Border Highway West Extension Project
December 8, 2011
Page 1 of 19
The following are the six questions asked in the Comment Form (please see Appendix E to view the full form).
1. For each of the recommended reasonable alternative segments listed below, please indicate your preference by checking a box and stating any specific comments.
2. Do you own/lease property within the study area?
3. Are you aware of any areas that we should be avoid that are not shown on any of the exhibits? (i.e. cemeteries, hazmat sites, historic structures, etc.)
4. Do you have any comments on the Need and Purpose for this project?
5. Do you have any comments on the Project Coordination Plan?
6. Use this space to provide any additional input or concerns. Be sure to identify if your comment is related to a specific alternative.
# Name Verbal/ Written Comments TxDOT Response
1 Michael O.
Herrera,
CNU‐A
The only statement that I have is that I want to make sure that all
consideration is being given to transit to avail itself of the loop
that is going to be created This will help us to move the
population expeditiously and be able to keep them off the road
so therefore improving the function of the highway that’s going
to be developed, helping congestion by moving people through
mass transit.
Comment noted. The transit alternative solution was
considered in the previous major investment study conducted
in 1999 and was not recommended as the appropriate
solution to handle the need for a controlled‐access facility and
parallel alternate to I‐10 to alleviate current congestion.
Transit has been carried forward by others such as the city of
El Paso as separate projects.
2 Osvaldo Velez Well, my comment is that to do a side street on 375 coming in
from the – from the east and opening the – if it’s possible, Coles
Street and –we, Park Street is already open but leaving Park
Street, Campbell, Kansas, Mesa, Oregon and Santa Fe open so we
can have access to Segundo Barrio and we can have access going
3 Heather
McMurray
I've been researching ASARCO for seven years now. I have a
master's in biology, I'm a certified high school science teacher. I
was a member of Get the Lead Out when we went to the air
hearing for ASARCO's permit in 2005, and kept researching
ASARCO working with the group in Sunland Park called the
Sunland Park Grassroots Environmental Group.
We discovered that people weren't being told everything about
Verbal/ Written Comments TxDOT Response
the contamination at ASARCO. And in 2006 I was able to get a 73‐
page confidential for settlement purposes only EPA/federal
Department of Justice/ASARCO document from the ‐‐ someone in
the Department of Justice under a Texas Public Information Act
request.
The document told us that in no uncertain terms that ASARCO
had been running a multistate illegal, unpermitted hazardous
waste incinerator for almost ten years, maybe longer. We know
that they ran it between 1991 pre‐ConTop ‐‐ the ConTop
furnaces, spelled C‐0‐N‐T‐0‐P. They had the world's two largest
ConTop furnaces from ‐‐ so from 1991 to 1998.
Representative Reyes went on record with the El Paso Times
after I got this document in 2006. He said that ASARCO had paid
millions on the condition that the details of what it had done
would never become public. We've been after the details now
since I got that document in 2006. It's been five years. We've
dealt with two different EPA administrations, the recent one for
two years, and we still don't have the details of what they did.
We are still asking for the manifests that were listed by number ‐‐
ID number in that confidential 1998 document.
If TxDOT, the EPA, TCEQ and other companies and agencies ‐‐ for
instance, Grupo Mexico who bought ASARCO in 1999 ‐‐ if all of
them had to deal with the facts publicly, the details of what
ASARCO had done, none of this would be possible. None of this
highway development by or through ASARCO could happen
without the proper cleanup. In other words, they're getting away
with ignoring some pretty toxic material, and this happened
because the federal Department of Justice allowed the ASARCO
bankruptcy court to skip, go ‐‐ to skip or ignore the ASARCO
liability from the materials it handled between 1991 and 1998.
They were never discussed during the bankruptcy, never brought
up in the bankruptcy and they were never assigned any damage,
you know, the payment that they had to make to remediate
these materials.
It was, as Representative Reyes said, that they had made a deal
to keep the details secret. And we believe that it's because we
now know ASARCO was disposing of Department of Energy
wastes and so were several of the companies caught sending
materials here to El Paso for illegal incineration. So every time
they move dirt in this area, every time anyone works in this area,
anytime anyone drinks water taken from this area we run a risk
of encountering one of those hazardous wastes that nobody
wants to talk about and that they refuse to test for.
What's happening is that they want this land development so bad
and they want the port of entries developed so badly and the
railroads to go through and all this development to happen that
everyone is willing to just ignore the fact that ASARCO burned
the stuff for nearly ten years, it's here and that ignoring it isn't
going to make it go away. And if they want to construct these
highways properly, if the EPA wants to deliver honest science,
then they will tell us what these materials are instead of
spending over‐‐ almost $500,000 on testing and not finding
anything is what's happening with the cleanup. They would
spend 20,000 to get a complete list of the metals present at the
site like at least one resident has done here, and they haven't
done it.
They refuse to let us get samples of a distillation unit that
handled the water for the entire plant that was removing low
level radioactive waste from the plant's process water. And then
when they demolished it, got rid of it, sold off the metal,
whatever, then they said to us, Tell us where to test to find this
stuff. So what they're doing is getting rid of the stuff and making
it harder for the average citizen to ever be able to prove the stuff
is floating around down there.
And we rely on our government to deliver honest services, to
provide honest science, to disclose what hazardous materials are
present, and I was really sad to see on one of these charts that
some of the options going through or near the ASARCO site claim
that there weren't hazardous materials present. And I'm like,
How can they say that? Everything within nine miles of the
smelter is contaminated.
And if you look at the ASARCO Tacoma, Washington, smelter,
their contamination went out 30 miles. So it's a bad situation. We
do need transportation options, but we should be planning these
with the knowledge of what we're actually dealing with, not just
ignoring the problem that is there.
They're going to end up putting these roads in that they've
shown here, they've discussed it with city council. Representative
Pickett said that he would hold ASARCO's feet to the fire and he
never did. They claim that voters get to vote on these options,
they claim that this is a public hearing when it's a series of charts
and you get to make comments and the comments are never
really ‐‐ never really make any impact on these designs. They' do
what they want to do.
The area along Executive drive, west of Executive drive, has
already been platted and building has started there. All that the
city will recognize it's contaminated with is lead and it goes on
like that. I don't see how they can build here and protect the
workers building the highway and protect the residents' children
who will move into the area and protect the drivers driving
through from being exposed to this stuff for the next hundred
years unless they spend the money that they want to spend
making this highway on remediation of the site instead.
I heard that it will cost over 600 million to build all this. Well, why
aren't they spending the 600 million to clean up the ASARCO site
correctly and to protect our river from the plume that's
underneath ASARCO that's impinging upon the canal in the Rio
Grande as we speak? Why aren't they spending the money that
way? Why are they bringing more people in, creating a traffic jam
at this spot by building all these other parts of the outer circle
around El Paso and leaving this to last so that people ‐‐ there's
this ‐‐ going to be a traffic jam. And people will want it built
simply out of desperation because they can't get anywhere.
I think that the engineers involved aren't chemical engineers. I
think that the people in our government who have worked for
previous administrations and now this one don't care and I think
that it's wrong to build roads through this, disturb it, have
railroads going through it, have people living on it. And some day,
it may take a hundred years but ‐‐ you know, it's wrong to disturb
it. It should be left alone and made into a no man's land until it
has proper cleanup.
The EPA wants it demolished ‐‐ ASARCO demolished as fast as
possible, to have it paved over to reduce the chances of our
exposure, but they won't say exposure to what. They're being
gagged by what Representative Reyes described, the millions that
ASARCO paid on that deal to keep the details secret. And yet
we're being exposed to this stuff and the people who build this
highway are too and the workers presently cleaning up ASARCO
are also. And it's a real shame. Why can't we down here along
the border get the same kind of expertise, the same kind of
access to science, the same kind of access to well thought out
projects that consider all their actual information, not just what
contractors want us to hear? Why on the border is it always this
way?
It's extremely frustrating to me. This is an environmental sacrifice
zone, environmental justice zone. It is being ignored by the EPA,
it's being ignored by the TCEQ and now it's being ignored by
TxDOT, and it's not being ignored by the community. Some day
someone's going to be accountable for the children who grow up
here who will be able to say they've only lived here and they're
neighbor only lived here and they grew up and they have all
these horrible things happening to them. And it ‐‐ it's just a
legacy that we don't deserve down here. We don't ‐‐ we
shouldn't have to live with.
They should be getting this ‐‐ the kind ‐‐ they should be getting
public comment before they start to design all this intricate stuff,
and they're not. It's all about people making money instead of
spending the money on our future generations, wisely growing
children who are healthy and removing the costs that we have to
deal with for children who have behavioral disorders, learning
disabilities, the social costs that go with that. It's wrong to pass
those costs on to families just so that contractors can make more
money planning all this.
10 Heather Mcmurray
No‐Build Alternative: Yes. Google ASARCO secret document.
Why doesn’t Texas spend the more than ½ billion dollars on
correct‐remediation of ASARCO site (see 73 page 1998‐Federal
DOJ Confidential for settlement purposes only ASARCO
document NY Times 10/06).
3) ASARCO and Trust not disclosing all HAZMAT materials.
4) The need and purpose are being created by building more
roads up to this project areas and ignoring the hazmat materials.
5) Not enough public input.
6) TxDOT EIS contractor testing for hazmat materials should 1)
Run a full metals panel (over 100 metals) and test pond sludge (at
ponding areas) down at least 3 ft with a core (not an auger), attic
dusts and/or slag (from 1991‐1998)
Protect workers with Hazmat gear.
-------------------
*****Comments noted.
a) To the extent the project would affect the ASARCO site,
TxDOT will investigate and document in the EIS any
relevant issues related to contamination. TxDOT has not
concealed and will not conceal any relevant information
regarding contamination that it may discover. TxDOT has
been proactive in engaging the public on relevant issues
related to the ASARCO site. A second Public Scoping******
Encycle asarco facility epa superfund
Encycle/ASARCO Facility
Bankruptcy Board of Trustees Encycle/ASARCO Facility - Corpus Christi, Texas
https://www.energyrenewalpartners.com/encycle-asarco
Key Features
Oversight of hazardous waste characterization and disposal at a Superfund Site
Air quality monitoring to protect nearby neighborhood
Stakeholder engagement
Encycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund Demolition
Encycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund DemolitionEncycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund DemolitionEncycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund DemolitionEncycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund DemolitionEncycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund DemolitionEncycle/ASARCO Facility - Superfund Waste Characterization
The former ASARCO/Encycle Facility was originally a zinc smelter and later a recycling plant. The facility also included its own power plant, 52 buildings, a 315-foot smoke stack, a water tower, 11 metal silos, cooling towers, and numerous ASTs, The demolition of this EPA designated Superfund site required resourceful and innovative ways of razing structures containing hazardous materials while situated across the street from a residential neighborhood.
ERP, in coordination with the EPA, TCEQ and the Bankruptcy Court, oversaw the removal of more than 35,000 tons of material from the site. ERP implemented a sophisticated air monitoring and reporting system to ensure dust from demolition did not leave the state boundary.
The site also included the removal of a large stack that was filled with hazardous materials and coated with asbestos and lead paint. Mast climbers were used to abate and demo the stack in a manner that was safe and protective of the environment.
ERP Provided:
Compliance Inspections and management
WMU Closure
Asset recovery
Waste minimization
Asbestos abatement
Extensive air monitoring
identification/profiling of historic waste
Media interactions
Texas
4330 Gaines Ranch Loop, Suite 110
Austin, TX 78735
Phone: (512) 222-1125
Customer Support
Principal and CEO:
Trisha Elizondo
Phone: (512) 684-1971
Transparency in Coverage Information
UnitedHealthcare creates and publishes the
Machine-Readable Files on behalf of Energy Renewal
Partners
To link to the Machine-Readable Files,
please click on the URL provided:
transparency-in-coverage.uhc.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)