EPA v. CLEVELAND MILL SUPERFUND SITE

Case summary

THE CLEVELAND MILL SUPERFUND SITE OCCUPIES ABOUT 18 ACRES APPROXIMATELY 5.5 MILES NORTH OF SILVER CITY IN GRANT COUNTY, NEW MEXICO. A MINE AND MILL WERE OPERATED AT THE SIT E DURING THE PERIOD FROM ABOUT 1910 TO 1949. ONLY FOUNDATION S OF THE MILL REMAIN. THERE ARE NO LONGER ANY BUILDINGS AT THE SITE. GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE SOURCE OF THE HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ST THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 30,000 CUBIC YARDS OF TAILINGS FROM MILLING OPERATIONS AT THE SITE, AND 15,000 YARDS OF WASTE ORE. THE TAILINGS AND WASTE ORE ARE LOCATED AT THE HEADWATERS OF AN INTERMITTENT STREAM KNOWN AS LITTLE WALNUT CREEK. THE MILL FOUNDATIONS AND MAIN TAILINGS PILES COVER AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY FOUR ACRES. PRECIPATATION RUNOFF FROM THE SITE INTO LITTLE WALNUT CREEK IS HIGHLY ACIDIC, AND CONTRIBUTES TO THE EXTENSIVE LEACHING OF METALS FROM THE TAILINGS AND WASTE ORE. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES OF PRIMARY CONCERN INCLUDE ARESNIC, COPPER, LEAD, ZINC,AND OTHER METALS. THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILTY STUDY (RI/FS) FOR THE SITE WAS COMPLETED BY THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO'S ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT UNDER A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT DATED OCTOBER 1, 1990. EPA ISSUED THE PROPOSED PLAN, IDENTIFYING EPA'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE SITE ON APRIL 9, 1993. THE PREFERRED REMEDY, OFF-SITE REPROCESSING, RECYCLING, AND DISPOSAL OF RESIDUALS IDENTIFIED BY EPA IN THE PROPOSED PLAN, INCLUDES EXCAVATION OF THE CONTAMINATED SOILS AND TAILINGS AND THE CONTAMINATED STREAM SEDIMENT, OFF-SITE REPROCESSING AND RECYCLING OF THE METALS IN THE CONTAMINATED MATERIAL, OFF-SITE SOLIDIFICATION/STABLIZATION AND DISPOSAL OF ANY RESIDUALS THAT ARE ABOVE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND BENEFICIAL REUSE OF THE NON-HAZARDOUS RESIDUALS, AND ON- SITE GROUNDWATER MONITORING. THE ESTIMATED PRESENT WORTH OF THIS PREFERRED REMEDY IS $7,999,370. NO REMOVAL ORDERS HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO ANY PARTIES REGARDING THE SITE. PAST RESPONSE COSTS, INCURRED BY EPA, THE NEW MEXICO ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT (NMED), AND CONTRACTORS, COME TO $979,718.89 AS OF JANUARY 31, 1993. PROPOSED DEFENDANTS INCLUDE MINING REMEDIAL RECOVERY COMPANY (MRRC), THE PRESENT OWNER OF THE SITE, AND PARAMOUNT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY INC., PARAMOUNT COMMUNICATI ONS INC. IS A FORMER OWNER OF THE SITE AND ALSO A PARENT COMPANY OF A FORMER OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THE SITE. EVIDENCE IS BEING DEVELOPED AND OTHER PARTIES MAY BE PROPOSED AS DEFENDANTS. EPA SEEKS A CONSENT DECREE UNDER WHICH THE DEFENDANTS AGREE TO DEVELOP THE REMEDIAL DESIGN (RD) FOR THE SELECTED REMEDIAL ACTION (RA), TO IMPLEMENT THE SELECTED RA AT THE SITE, AND TO PAY PAST AND FUTURE COSTS. EPA ALSO SEEKS AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT (AOC) UNDER WHICH DEFENDANTS SHALL DEVELOP THE RD. THE AOCWILL ALLOW DESIGN ACTIVITIES TO PROCEED WHILE THE CONSENT DECREE FOR THE RD/RA IS LODGED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. A PRIMARY GOAL OF EPA'S ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM IS TO OBTAIN VOLUNTARY SETTLEMENT, OR IF NECESSARY, TO COMPEL POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES (PRPS) TO IMPLEMENT SITE CLEANUPS. THE PRIMARY TOOLS USED TO MEET THIS GOAL ARE THE ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER AND JUDICIAL ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES OF SECTIONS 106 AND 107 OFR CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. SECTIONS 9606 AND 9607, AND THE SETTLEMENT PROVISIONS OF CERCLA SECTION 122, 42 U.S.C. SECTION 9622. **** AUTHORITY TO FILE THIS ACTION IS CONTAINED IN CERCLA SECTIONS 106(A), 107(A), 113(B) AND 122; 42 U.S.C. SECTIONS 9606(A), 9607(A), 9613(B), AND 9622.

Defendants (3)

• BAYARD MINING CORP.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• MINING REMEDIAL RECOVERY COMPANYNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• PARAMOUNT COMMUNICATIONS INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• CLEVELAND MILL

  FOREST ROUTE 804, 1.5 MI, SILVER CITY, NM, 88062

  Registry ID: 110009301237

Statutes cited

• CERCLA 107A — Cost Recovery
• CERCLA 106A — Imminent & Substantial Endangerment Order

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• BAYARD MINING CORP.entered 1995-06-12

  Primary law: CERCLA

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1993-04-01Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1993-04-30PRN Sent
• 1993-09-22Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1995-03-16Complaint Filed With Court
• 1995-06-12Final Order Lodged
• 1995-06-12Final Order Entered
• 1995-06-12Concluded