Officials at the federal Environmental Protection Agency apparently made up their minds long ago to simply cap the mill tailings in place at the old Sharon Steel mill in Midvale instead of removing them. It was the wrong choice to start with and it remains wrong now.
Unfortunately, there does not appear much chance of changing the EPA's mind before the Sept. 30 deadline for a decision despite vehement protests from Gov. Mike Leavitt, Midvale citizens and the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.There are 10 million cubic yards of tailings contaminated by arsenic and lead at the 270-acre former steel mill. The EPA wants to cover the tailings with an earthen cap instead of removing the tailings to a remote site.
EPA officials warned that they would move ahead with plans to cap the tailings unless Utah came up with new information by Aug. 16. Though that date has passed without new data from the state, the old arguments still make sense and ought to be per-sua-sive.
However, the EPA seems to have looked at the price tag and ignored other considerations. Yet even the cost is open to dispute.
The EPA estimates it would cost $224 million to move the tailings, a figure the state says is exaggerated while the $54 million price tag for capping is "critically under-es-ti-mated."
Utah has considerable experience in cleaning up tailings, moving 4.3 million tons of uranium mill tailings from 150 acres at the old Vitro mill in South Salt Lake to a site in Tooele County at a cost of $60 million.
The objective in dealing with toxic waste is to eliminate the danger - a factor that capping does not entirely solve. For example, the tailings at the Sharon Steel site pose a threat to groundwater. The metals may already be leaching into the aquifer and could contaminate drinking water in Salt Lake County.
In most respects, capping a toxic site is like sweeping dirt under a rug rather than cleaning it up - hardly the best or safest housekeeping practice.
EPA officials will meet with Utah officials early next week for one final re-examination of the issue. The challenge is to get the EPA to review the data clearly and objectively without having its mind made up in advance.