Montana town gets needed clean-up aid

[DougTravels]

If Sen Baucus's claim is true, it is truly sad.

EPA declares health emergency in Montana town
By MATTHEW DALY, AP


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Wednesday it will pump more than $130 million into a Montana town where asbestos contamination has been blamed for more than 200 deaths.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the agency for the first time has determined there is a public health emergency in a contaminated community, targeting Libby, Mont., for immediate federal attention.

Jackson's announcement will not result in an evacuation of Libby's 2,600 residents, but will require an extensive, home-by-home cleanup and better health protections for those with asbestos-related illnesses.

The EPA will invest at least $125 million over the next five years in the ongoing clean up of Libby and Troy, Mont., a nearby town of about 1,000. The Health and Human Services Department will spend an additional $6 million on medical assistance for area residents suffering from asbestos-related illnesses.

The money is in addition to hundreds of millions of dollars the government and Maryland-based W.R. Grace & Co. have spent to clean up Libby, where asbestos contamination from a now-closed vermiculite mine has been cited in the deaths of more than 200 people and illnesses of thousands more.

Before the vermiculite mine was closed in 1990, miners carried asbestos home on their clothes. Vermiculite once covered school running tracks in Libby and some residents used vermiculite as mulch in their home gardens.

Jackson called Libby a "tragic public health situation" that has not received the recognition it deserves from the federal government for far too long.

"We're making a long-delayed commitment to the people of Libby and Troy," Jackson said. "Based on a rigorous re-evaluation of the situation on the ground, we will continue to move aggressively on the cleanup efforts and protect the health of the people. We're here to help create a long and prosperous future for this town."

Jackson said the announcement was the first time the EPA has made such a determination under authority of the 1980 Superfund law that requires the clean up of contaminated sites.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., called the emergency declaration a great day for Libby, which he said "had to wait year after year as the last administration failed to determine that a public health emergency exists."

The EPA had previously declared the area a Superfund site, but had not determined there was a public health emergency until Wednesday.

Last fall, Baucus accused the Bush administration of orchestrating a "conspiracy" for not declaring an emergency in Libby. He charged that former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman was prepared to declare an emergency in 2002 but was overruled by the Bush White House.

Baucus called the health announcement especially welcome, given what he called a disappointing verdict last month in a criminal case related to the asbestos contamination. W.R. Grace & Co. and three former executives were acquitted of federal charges that they knowingly allowed residents of the northwestern Montana town to be exposed to asbestos from its vermiculite mine.

A Grace spokesman did not return a telephone call Wednesday. The company has not denied that asbestos came from its mine, but has said it acted responsibly to clean up the contamination. It paid millions in medical bills for residents of Libby and Troy and agreed last year to pay $250 million to reimburse the EPA for cleanup efforts.

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., called the emergency declaration long-overdue.

"We still have a long way to do right by the folks in Libby. Working together with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency, we're making very good progress," Tester said.

Gayla Benefield of Libby, who suffers health effects from asbestos exposure and lost both parents to asbestos-related lung diseases, called the declaration a "a giant step forward" for improved medical care and clean up of the town.

"Right now the amount of money is relatively minimal, but overall the biggest thing is that it opens the door for future money to be available for medical care, research — the things we've needed, independent of W.R. Grace in terms of health care," she said.

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer hailed the declaration and said the designated funds will be used to make communities in northwestern Montana healthier.

___

Associated Press writer Len Iwanski in Helena, Mont., contributed to this report

 

[Turtle]

Vermiculite was first discovered in Libby in 1881, and the mining of it began in 1919 when the Zonolite Company began manufacturing the Zonolite branded products made from the vermiculite. The connection between asbestos and illness, including death, became apparent very early on in the early 1900's. Over the decades companies lied and deliberately altered published studies that showed the dangers of asbestos. Finally by the mid-1980's asbestos was banned in most countries around the world (China and India both continue widespread use of asbestos products in construction).

Vermiculite is a hydrated laminar magnesium-aluminum-iron silicate. Asbestos is a naturally occurring silicate mineral made of long crystal fibers. It is often found in trace amounts within vermiculite. It was found in very large quantities in Libby, Montana vermiculite.

In 1989 the EPA issued the Asbestos Ban and Phase Out Rule which was the beginning of the end for asbestos (the EPA Rule was subsequently overturned in court, leaving some products out there free to be loaded with asbestos, tho). The Libby mine was closed in 1990, and in 1999 the EPA began collecting data from Libby, and has been removing materials and contaminated soils in an ongoing basis since 2000 as part of it's Superfund money cleanup program. The site was declared a Superfund Site in 2000, but an official Health Emergency was not declared at that time.

In 2005 the government brought a conspiracy case against the Grace company and 5 of its executives for trying to hide the fact that asbestos was being released into the environment and the dangers it entailed.

Baucus accuses the Bush administration from allowing the EPA to issue an Emergency Declaration in 2002. That's probably true. If the EPA would have issued the Emergency Declaration, it would have immediately suspended any and all Grace company obligations to pay for medical bills of former workers and residents, as well as any funding of the cleanup. The battle would have been won, but the war would have been lost right there. A Declaration would have also made the eventual $60 million settlement in 2008 with a number of homeowners and businesses across the US in their Zonolite lawsuit an impossible one, as it would have made the lawsuit null and void.

The EPA declaring an actual, official Health Emergency would have also had an impact on the conspiracy trial of the Grace company and its executives, as a guilty verdict would have almost certainly been overturned on appeal due to the impossibility of getting a fair trail - the government is both the prosecutor and the judge at that point.

As it turned out, the charges were withdrawn against two executives and the remaining three executives and the Grace company were found not guilty in May of 2009. Three weeks later the EPA issued and official declaration of a Health Emergency.

The ruling does not release Grace from it's medical and cleanup obligations of about $25 million annually, for which they have paid out more than $250 million. The Superfund money that has been spend so far by the government is more than $120 million. If the Bush administration had let the EPA officially rule back in 2002, that would have eliminated Grace payments of $25 million a year in exchange for $6 million of Superfund money. Instead, the $25 million kept rolling in, and now they have an additional $6 million on top of that.

It was a calculated risk by the Bush administration, as if the ruling would have been made in 2002 and then the case would have been brought against the company and its executives (which was in the early stages at that point), and the executives were found not guilty (as they were), then Grace money would not have started flowing in again. On the other hand, if the Health Emergency Declaration had been allowed in 2002 and the executives were found guilty, then money would have resumed flowing, plus an additional amount that would have been determined by a judge. It was a case of keeping the money rolling in, versus stop it and gamble on even more coming in later, or gambling on zero coming in later.

If the 2002 ruling would have been allowed, the battle would have been won, but the eventual war would have been lost.

It's a tragedy regardless, especially when you consider how long the problems related to asbestos have been known. But good or bad, this one can't be laid at the feet of the Bush administration. If anything, they were the good guys in this one.

 

[greg334]

I noticed that both senators from Montana are democrat and they couldn't push anything through the senate and house or push for the state to do something to help?

Um.... yea the EPA superfund....

 

[DougTravels]

A calculated risk? This is shameful to say the least.
For 1- Potential litigation should take a back seat to peoples health and well being.
and 2nd- I do not understand why an Emergency Declaration would let them off the hook. If a Corp, causes a health emergency then the EPA declares it an emergency, the Corp. is then off the hook for cleanup costs? The gov't can't get reimbursed?

Below is from Turtles post:

Baucus accuses the Bush administration from allowing the EPA to issue an Emergency Declaration in 2002. That's probably true. If the EPA would have issued the Emergency Declaration, it would have immediately suspended any and all Grace company obligations to pay for medical bills of former workers and residents, as well as any funding of the cleanup. The battle would have been won, but the war would have been lost right there. A Declaration would have also made the eventual $60 million settlement in 2008 with a number of homeowners and businesses across the US in their Zonolite lawsuit an impossible one, as it would have made the lawsuit null and void.

The EPA declaring an actual, official Health Emergency would have also had an impact on the conspiracy trial of the Grace company and its executives, as a guilty verdict would have almost certainly been overturned on appeal due to the impossibility of getting a fair trail - the government is both the prosecutor and the judge at that point.

As it turned out, the charges were withdrawn against two executives and the remaining three executives and the Grace company were found not guilty in May of 2009. Three weeks later the EPA issued and official declaration of a Health Emergency.

The ruling does not release Grace from it's medical and cleanup obligations of about $25 million annually, for which they have paid out more than $250 million. The Superfund money that has been spend so far by the government is more than $120 million. If the Bush administration had let the EPA officially rule back in 2002, that would have eliminated Grace payments of $25 million a year in exchange for $6 million of Superfund money. Instead, the $25 million kept rolling in, and now they have an additional $6 million on top of that.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

A calculated risk? This is shameful to say the least.
For 1- Potential litigation should take a back seat to peoples health and well being.
and 2nd- I do not understand why an Emergency Declaration would let them off the hook. If a Corp, causes a health emergency then the EPA declares it an emergency, the Corp. is then off the hook for cleanup costs? The gov't can't get reimbursed?

If you weren't reading, money was already pumping in from the company to help the town. If there was any chance for it to stop, why take that chance? Just because the government didn't immediately start throwing money doesn't mean things weren't working effectively without them.

President Cleveland's response to his famous veto of $10,000 for grain seed to drought-stricken Texas farmers:

" ...I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people..."

 

[Turtle]

Yeah, the money was pumping in from the company on the company's own volition, not because the government or a judge told them to. Basically, it was to thwart a snotload of individual lawsuits, actually. The government (EPA mainly) and the company were working together to get things cleaned up and pay for people's medical bills, but if the company had been sued too early on they would have stopped all payments out of fear of admitting guilt, cited pending litigation, and then ongoing litigation, and there would have been no money for perhaps decades, if ever.

I guarantee you there was some backroom politics there, where the government said if you keep up the payments now, if we do win later then what you have paid in will count towards any settlement, but if you stop payments then we'll come after you with everything we've got, and we'll win.


"For 1- Potential litigation should take a back seat to peoples health and well being."

That's exactly what happened.


"and 2nd- I do not understand why an Emergency Declaration would let them off the hook. If a Corp, causes a health emergency then the EPA declares it an emergency, the Corp. is then off the hook for cleanup costs? The gov't can't get reimbursed?"

Correct. If the EPA declares a Health Emergency, that does not give the EPA the right to demand that the company pay a dime without it going to court first. All the Health Emergency does is free up EPA and Superfund money. But in this case, it would have almost certainly resulted in a fraction of the government and company money that's actually been applied to this mess.

I know you hate Bush, but seriously, this ain't one to go nuts over. The gamble provided far more money for these people at the beginning, and it continues, that it would have had it gone the other way. They might have gotten more in the end, but would anyone be alive to enjoy it when it finally got out of court 20 years from now? Look at Love Canal. Those people are still waiting for their money. Lawyers have eaten most of it up, anyway.

 

[greg334]

What is puzzling is why are these people even there?

Going back to the 1910's when this issue first came up, then in the 20's then the medical term asbestosis was created, then in '32 when the US Bureau of Mines issued its warning letter about the dust dangers and then again in '33 with the law suites over the sickness from manufacturing it, why is there a concern with the 200 people now who must have known the dangers of working in such a place?

I find the EPA ban should have taken place earlier, not in '89 but maybe after the inception of the EPA in '70. With the documented evidence starting in '10's and going through the 50's, it would have been a no brainer that this ban took place to save lives in the 70's regardless who was in office.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

What is puzzling is why are these people even there?

Going back to the 1910's when this issue first came up, then in the 20's then the medical term asbestosis was created, then in '32 when the US Bureau of Mines issued its warning letter about the dust dangers and then again in '33 with the law suites over the sickness from manufacturing it, why is there a concern with the 200 people now who must have known the dangers of working in such a place?

I find the EPA ban should have taken place earlier, not in '89 but maybe after the inception of the EPA in '70. With the documented evidence starting in '10's and going through the 50's, it would have been a no brainer that this ban took place to save lives in the 70's regardless who was in office.

All of that don't matter! It was STILL Bush's fault!

 

[DougTravels]

All of that don't matter! It was STILL Bush's fault!

Agreed Hawk

 

[LDB]

And if they had set up the proclamation and the money had cut off we'd hear the very same ones complaining just as loudly that the horrible Bush administration caused all that money flowing in to stop.

 

[greg334]

I am going back to there are two senators of the state who are democrats, what have they done for their state?

 

[layoutshooter]

Nothing new here. The town of Centrelia in PA had a mine buring under it for years and for years the Federal government did NOTHING. It really is NOT the Federal governments job. OH I FORGOT, EVERYTHING is now the Feds business. I guess we can just sit back and let the "Overlords" handle everything.

 

[greg334]

Nothing new here. The town of Centrelia in PA had a mine buring under it for years and for years the Federal government did NOTHING.

Yes I am very aware of that situation but do you know that the mine will burn for something like 250 years and the government can harness all that energy to produce electricity and nothing is being done. You do know that there is a very large amount of co2 that is being produced and ALGORE should be screaming about it.

 

[layoutshooter]

Yes I am very aware of that situation but do you know that the mine will burn for something like 250 years and the government can harness all that energy to produce electricity and nothing is being done. You do know that there is a very large amount of co2 that is being produced and ALGORE should be screaming about it.

They COULD but as far as I know no one has as yet. Seems strange that no one has. It can't be put out and it will continue to burn. Might as well use it.