More answers needed on new Stauffer plan

By Times editorial
Published June 19, 2007

One thing was clear from last week's meeting between representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and residents concerned about the planned cleanup of a Superfund site: Everyone is tired of talking about it.

Residents are exhausted from battling the government for more than a decade over the heavily contaminated Stauffer Superfund site on Anclote Road, just south of the Pasco County border.

And EPA officials appear sick of dealing with the community's complaints. At a June 12 community meeting, they could scarcely conceal their frustration and defensiveness.

It doesn't matter how tired the EPA is of talking about the Stauffer site. The fact is, the EPA is proposing a change to the cleanup plan that involves a new approach, and the community has little information about it. The EPA owes residents detailed answers to their questions and ought to listen to what the locals have to say. After all, local residents had told the EPA that its original proposal wouldn't work.

The EPA had planned to use a cement mixture to solidify, in the ground, the worst of the contaminated soil and then cover the property with a waterproof "cap" of dirt and special fabrics.

A phosphorus processing plant that operated for years on the property left the soil laden with heavy metals, phosphorus, radioactive elements and other chemicals potentially hazardous to health.

Now the EPA wants to change the plan. The agency still intends to cover the site with the water-tight cap. But when crews ran tests to see what would happen when the cement mix was combined with a small amount of the contaminated dirt, the mixture began bubbling, hazardous phosphine gas was produced, and the dirt caught on fire.

Phosphorus easily ignites when exposed to air, and the cement made the contaminated soil more reactive. Officials decided that solidifying the contaminated dirt wouldn't work; the resulting fires would endanger site workers and residents.

The new idea is to partly encircle the most heavily contaminated section of the property with a containment wall driven into the ground. The wall would extend from the surface of the ground to an underground clay layer that helps to protect the Floridan Aquifer.

The wall would be open on the side next to the Anclote River because, officials said, a closed wall "could potentially increase the downward vertical movement of groundwater and contaminants" to the aquifer.

Residents had lots of good questions about the approach, including whether leaving the wall open on the river side might increase contamination of the river (no, officials said), whether the underground wall method has been used anywhere else (130 sites, they said, though they didn't have a list) and what the wall would be made of (steel or plastic).

There is much to wonder about with this new approach. What would happen to the dirt and groundwater in the containment area if the water level of the river rose or fell dramatically?

The depth and thickness of the underground clay layer varies. How will officials know when they have driven the wall down far enough, but not so far that it pierces the clay layer?

How long would the wall last, how would it be checked, and who would replace it before it failed?

What residents really want is for the EPA to dig up all of the contaminated dirt and haul it away. Officials were emphatic last week that residents will not get their wish. The contaminated dirt is too volatile to dig up and truck through communities, they said, and there is no "end user" who wants the toxic dirt.

Clearly, despite its Superfund designation, there will be no true "cleanup" at Stauffer.

The area may be stuck with the enormous contamination Stauffer left behind, but residents need to ask probing questions and demand answers until they are satisfied they have learned all they can about the EPA's new plan.

[Last modified June 18, 2007, 23:10:50]