Posted on 08/14/2015 9:02:47 AM PDT by conservativejoy
The Environmental Protection Agency may have been trying to hide the identity of the contracting company responsible for causing a major wastewater spill in southern Colorado, but the Wall Street Journal has revealed that information.
Environmental Restoration, LLC (ER), a Missouri-based firm, was the “contractor whose work caused a mine spill in Colorado that released an estimated 3 million gallons of toxic sludge into a major river system,” the Journal was told by a source familiar with the matter. The paper also found government documents that corroborate the contractor’s identity.
So far, the EPA has refused publicly to name the company hired to plug abandoned mines in southern Colorado, despite numerous attempts by the Daily Caller News Foundation and other media outlets to learn its identity. It is unclear why the agency chose not to reveal the contractor’s name.
What is clear, however, is that ER received $381 million in government contracts since October 2007, according to a Journal review of data from USAspending.gov. About $364 million of that funding came from the EPA, but only $37 million was given to ER for work they had done in Colorado.
When contacted by phone, ER informed theDCNF that its offices had closed for the day. The EPA did not return a request for comment on the Journal’s story revealing the identity of the agency’s contractor.
ER contractors reportedly caused a massive wastewater spill from the Gold King Mine in southern Colorado last week. EPA-supervised workers breached a debris dam while using heavy equipment and unleashed 3 million gallons of toxic wastewater into Cement Creek. The toxic plume eventually reached the Animas River where it’s been able to spread even further, forcing Colorado and New Mexico to declare a state of emergency.
The EPA has taken responsibility for the spill and has officials on the ground working with local officials to remedy the situation. Still, local officials and members of the Navajo Nation are furious with the EPA over the spill and have not ruled out legal action to make sure the agency remains accountable.
“No agency could be more upset about the incident happening, and more dedicated in doing our job to get this right,” EPA Chief Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a press conference in Durango, Colorado Wednesday. “We couldn’t be more sorry. Our mission is to protect human health and the environment. We will hold ourselves to a higher standard than anyone else.
I’m sure the contractor did what is really important— contributed massively to the DNC and its candidates.
Too late to stop payment on that check?
ping
The company admits that they were on-site at the time of the release, but is otherwise stonewalling:
http://www.erllc.com/pdfs/Gold-King-Press-Release.pdf
He states:
Based on my 47 years of experience as a professional geologist, it appears to me that the EPA is setting your town and the area up for a possible Superfund blitzkrieg. . . .
Here’s the scenario that will occur based on my experience:
Following the plugging, the exfiltrating water will be retained behind the bulkheads, accumulating at a rate of approximately 500 gallons per minute. As the water backs up, it will begin filling all connected mine workings and bedrock voids and fractures. As the water level inside the workings continues to rise, it will accumulate head pressure at a rate of 1 PSI per each 2.31 feet of vertical rise. As the water continues to migrate through and fill interconnected workings, the pressure will increase. Eventually, without a doubt. The water will find a way out and will exfiltrate uncontrollably through connected abandoned shafts, drifts, raises, factures and possibly talus on the hillsides. Initially it will appear that the miracle fix is working.
“Hallelujah!”
But make no mistake, with in seven to 120 days all of the 500 gpm flow will return to Cement Creek. Contamination may actually increase due to the disturbance and flushing action within the workings.
The “grand experiment” in my opinion will fail. And guess what [the EPA] will say then?
Gee, “Plan A” didn’t work so I guess we will have to build a treatment plant at a cost to taxpayers of $100 million to $500 million (who knows). . . .
God bless America! God bless Silverton, Colorado. And God protect us from the EPA.
Thanks for that additional information. I hope our next President abolishes EPA.
Obama bundlers at Solyndra got even more than that.
The Solyndra mess was the first thing I thought of. Time to get rid of the EPA!
See this link: Geologist said a week before the visit: You better get your water tested!"
This was a guy who wrote a letter to the editor of a local paper out there, decrying the visit in advance (on July 30th).
From his use of terminology and discussion and that, by the way, he has worked as a geologist for 47 years, he sounded to me like he knew EXACTLY what he was talking about.
He said they were going to do just what he described, and oh, it will be a terrible accident, but money will be made available to "clean up the site" because of it.
The whole thing stinks. If it was an accident, nobody loses their job? Nobody gets reprimanded? Not contracts are re-evaluated?
"Oh, they would NEVER, ever, put the environment a risk intentionally, for no reason. That is a right-wing conspiracy theory because she is a woman in a male-dominated field, and works for Obama."
Is it, now?
The EPA was hiding the name of the contractor because it does not want it to get out that what happened was:
Accidentally On Purpose!
The Obama administration creating another crisis.
Environmental Restoration LLC was working at the direction at EPA .. awarded $381 million in federal contracts.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3324340/posts
Corruption is rampant. Thanks.
wasnt that about the same amount the developers of the obamacare website got?
He was absolutely right as I heard on the top of the hour news yesterday the EPA’s Gina McCarthy say the area needs to be designated a Superfund site, exactly as he predicted. The spill was without a doubt intentionally perpetrated by the EPA.
Why would EPA try to keep the contractor secret? They would be liable for the damages and EPA would normally want to hang the offender out to dry, no?
“like a rotten mackerel in the moonlight, this shines and stinks”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.