LAB PROJECT 4

LAB PROJECT: IRON KING MINE/HUMBOLDT SMELTER SUPERFUND SITES (IKMHSSS)

            For this lab, I browsed through the EPA website and gained some information as to what their job is, and how they work to maintain a clean, healthy and safe environment. I also examined the Superfund sites in the Southwest region, as well as the IKMHSSS superfund site. Below are the results of my findings.

General Superfund Site Questions

1. What does the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) do?

            The EPA is responsible for implementing federal laws that are designed to promote public health by protecting the nation’s air, water, and soil from harmful pollution. They also coordinate and support research, as well as anti-pollution activities and monitor the operations of other federal agencies for their impact on the environment.

2. Why was the EPA established?

            With growing concern by the public about environmental pollution, the EPA was established in 1970 to create one agency responsible for conducting federal research, monitoring actions by agencies, and enforcing environmentally safe activities to ensure protection of the environment.  Since they were first established, the EPA remains adamant about working towards a cleaner, healthier environment for the public.

3. What is a superfund site?

            A superfund site is a program established by the federal government to clean up the nation’s uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Superfund ensures that any remaining hazardous waste sites are cleaned up in order to protect the environment as well as the public’s health. 

 

Hassayampa Landfill-Phoenix, AZ

The first superfund site I examined was the Hassayampa Landfill in Phoenix, Arizona. This site is categorized in the Superfund Region 9: Pacific Southwest. It was established in 1961 by Maricopa County and is still functioning today. It’s contaminants include groundwater, air, and soil/sludges and the parties responsible for cleanup at the site is the EPA and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. Cleanup has continued for the Hassayampa Landfill, but the EPA has determined that the site does not pose an immediate threat to the environment; however, cleanup activities are being implemented at the site. The Preliminary Close-out Report was completed in September 1997 and EPA certification of remedial action was issued to the responsible parties in April 1998. There was no phytostabilization used on this site.

Pacific Coast Pipeline-Ventura, CA

       The second superfund site I examined was the Pacific Coast Pipeline in the county of Ventura, California in the city of Fillmore. It belongs to the Superfund Region 9: Pacific Southwest and was established in 1920 and operated by Texaco as an oil refinery site. The contaminants noted on this superfund site are groundwater and soil/sludges and the party responsible for cleanup is the Chevron Corporation. In regard to cleanup of this site, construction of all cleanup activities has been completed and treatments of groundwater/soil vapors continue so that contamination will be reduced until the established cleanup goals have been met at the Pacific Coast Pipeline. There was no phytostabilization used at this site. 

Williams Air Force Base- Mesa, AZ

       The third superfund site I examined was the Williams Air Force Base in Maricopa County, Arizona in the city of Mesa. It was established in 1941 by the Williams Air Force Base, and as many as 13 sub-sites have been identified as potentially harmful and contaminated. The contaminants exposed at this site are groundwater and soil/sludges and parties responsible for cleanup include the United States Air Force along with the EPA, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and the Arizona Department of Water Resources. The cleanup of this site has seen the cleaning of the Southwest Drainage System and the removal of pesticide drums, radiological materials, and underground storage tanks. All of these cleanups has reduced the potential for exposure to harmful and contaminated materials on the Williams Air Force Base. There was no phytostabilization used on this site.

 

Specific IKMHSSS Questions

5. How were the specific plant species chosen for phytostabilization of IKMHSSS?

            The specific plan species chosen for phytostabilization of IKMHSSS depended on the plants that accumulated the most metals in the root zone, rather than extracting them into above-ground biomass to prevent the metals from entering the food chain. These specific plants chosen aid as a vegetative cover to the soil and promote biogeochemical weathering of metal contaminants.

6. Why would composting increase the pH of the soil?

            Because compost is a buffering agent, it is useful to add to all soil regardless of whether its pH is acidic or alkaline; it can increase or decrease a soil’s pH depending on how it is used. When compost is added to the soil, the pH will increase because the acidity is rising due to the addition of slightly neutral alkaline compost; however, this only happens when it is added in the appropriate quantities.

7. Interpret the tables in the O’Sullivan Field Study Paper

a. In figure 1, the approximate grams dry weight for each species with 10% compost is as follows:

·        Buffalo Grass: 4g

·        Mesquite: 1g

·        Quailbush: 1.5g

·        Catclaw Acacia: 0.5g

·        Mountain Mahogany: 0.6g

·        Arizona Fescue: 0.25g

The species that grew the most with the least amount of compost was the Buffalo Grass.

b. In figure 3, there was no bacterial count for the planted control at time zero; however, there was a bacterial count for the unplanted control at time zero, which was 10^3.

c. In figure 3, the average bacterial count for the planted treatment area on Day 60 with 15% compost was about 10^8.