GTLO will use governmental and industry information to expose the
environmental damage from ASARCO.

Shapleigh to TCEQ: IBWC Claim Begs Asarco Question

By: Shapleigh to TCEQ: IBWC Claim Begs Asarco Question

December 07, 2007 -- The IBWC filing points to potential contamination of El Paso's drinking water, which led to the demand letter sent by state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh to TCEQ Executive Director Glenn Shankle for information and accountability.

Posted on December 7, 2007

State Sen. Eliot Shapleigh is asking the Texas Commissioner for Environmental Quality for information, and an accounting, following a $27 million IBWC claim against Asarco in which the federal agency asserts contamination to ground and water adjacent to the Rio Grande, which supplies much of El Paso's water supply.

The IBWC claim has revealed information regarding Asarco's impact on the ground and water that apparently was known by state regulators for several years. The claim cites arsenic and lead contamination of the water that goes into the American Canal. [ibwc nov. 29 claim] [asarco nov. 29] In a counter claim filed Dec. 3, Asarco lawyers argue that the IBWC overstated the contamination issue, and IBWC replied. [asarco dec. 3] [ibwc dec. 3]

And, although the IWBC cites contamination in the American Canal roughly between Executive Center and Old Fort Bliss slightly upriver from Downtown, officials from the El Paso Water Utilities say they have not found unsafe levels of metals in the water they treat and distribute from the two plants that treat river water. Those plants are Downtown and in the Lower Valley.

Still, the IBWC filing points to potential contamination of El Paso's drinking water, which led to the demand letter sent by Shapleigh to TCEQ Executive Director Glenn Shankle. [shapleigh dec. 3]

"I want to know what contaminants migrated to what water sources in what time frame," Shapleigh wrote to Shankle. "Please provide me a short report detailing your knowledge of water content in the region, including ground water and Rio Grande water, and provide me any backup reports that illustrate the nature, scope, and extent of such contamination.

"I am concerned that TCEQ has failed the people of El Paso in protecting us from the toxic contamination of Asarco. With each letter, I find more revelations about what TCEQ has not done," Shapleigh wrote.

TCEQ officials were not available for comment.

Archie Clouse, head of the local TCEQ, who has been working on Asarco compliance issues for years, deferred comment to officials in Austin.

A spokesman reached in Austin said he would pass on an interview request, and hung up.

The TCEQ is considering an air pollution permit renewal filed by Asarco. The long public process -- which has generated intense opposition by the City of El Paso and many residents, but also support from those who consider Asarco a viable employer -- is not expected to conclude until next year.

In the process, revelations about Asarco's past activities, which include disposing of hazardous waste from a subsidiary, have become part of the public discussion. Asarco, without admitting to any wrongdoing, entered into an agreement with federal regulators to pay fines and undertake cleanup activities in El Paso and elsewhere in 1999. [npt background, oct. 16, 2006]

Asarco has called those violations an issue of paperwork, and TCEQ officials -- notably, Clouse -- have said that there is no indication the public health was at risk.

In the IBWC claim, the agency, which oversees distribution of water from the Rio Grande to the United States and Mexico, states that contaminants from Asarco could impact the public health.

"While the Asarco Smelter closed in 1999, the continuing contamination migrating from the facility to the adjacent properties remains a serious concern. For example, data from a 1997 Asarco oil spill indicate a diesel plume extending from the Asarco Smelter down the Rio Grande flood plain.

"Additional diesel spills from the Asarco property into the American Canal have occurred in the past, and Debtor is still conducting recovery efforts in 2007. In July 2000, TCEQ notified Debtor that data indicated arsenic concentrations in the groundwater had migrated from the Asarco Smelter onto adjacent properties," stated the Nov. 29 claim.

"Data collected by USIBWC and Debtor have identified contaminated groundwater along the American Canal’s three sections (upper, middle and lower). Concentrations of arsenic and lead exceeded the MCLs in the upper, middle and lower sections … Concentrations of contaminants exceeding the MCLs along the American Canal are a serious concern due to at least one documented example of contaminated groundwater entering the American Canal," stated the claim.

However, Asarco responded that the IBWC claims were speculative and not reflective of the true risk.

"Presumably EPA and TCEQ would not stand idly by if contaminated groundwater were seeping through the IBWC's canal and poisoning El Paso's drinking supply," states the Dec. 3 Asarco brief. "The IBWC claims about drinking water are also contradicted by the IBWC's own June 2004 report on the Rio Grande River around El Paso, Texas, which concluded in the 'Significant Findings' section that "Arsenic levels in water did not exceed the water quality criteria for either the protection of aquatic life or human health.'"

The issue is important not only because of what has occurred, but also what might occur as the IBWC begins the process of rebuilding portions of the American Canal adjacent to Asarco.

"The proposed American Canal project addresses the potential threat to the Rio Grande by precluding the migration of contaminated water and fines through the currently deteriorated American Canal concrete lining. The proposed soil excavation along the canal during the project construction and the excavation and replacement of soils in the
Office and Island areas address potential threats to the groundwater and to current USIBWC employees and construction workers in the area," states the IBWC Dec. 3 filing.

Sally Spener, spokeswoman at the IBWC, said the agency had no comment as the matter still was under litigation.

"I think the documents speak for themselves," she said.

John Balliew, vice president of operations and technical services for the El Paso Water Utilities, said the area of contamination was localized and unlikely to affect El Paso's surface or ground water drinking supplies.

He said that the Asarco area is surrounded by rock and separated from bolsons that serve El Paso by impermeable layers, making it unlikely that the groundwater could be affected.

"The groundwater movement from Point A to Point B in the normal course of events is quite slow," Balliew said. "In the case of this, we're talking about wells that are miles away, and in a different strata of the aquifer altogether."

El Paso has the most extensive arsenic removal program in the country, and recently spent $76 million on water treatment projects.

EPWU spokeswoman Carol Parker said that treatment is unrelated to river water, however, and that naturally occurring arsenic in the groundwater spurred the program.

The U.S. EPA recently changed its arsenic standards.

Surface water, from the Rio Grande, is treated at two plants -- the Robertson-Umbenhauer Plant Downtown, and the Jonathan Rogers Treatment Plant in the Lower Valley -- and has not shown any signs of contamination, she said.

"The issue near Asarco is localized and not polluting the water going into the plants," Parker said, pointing out that Rio Grande water picks up pesticide runoff from New Mexico farmers, and everything the city throws at it from the Upper Valley to the Lower Valley. "When that water comes into the plant and comes out the other side it's safe to drink."