EPA, USFS prepare for potential fires at mine site

Interagency action plan calls for 10-person fire team to be stationed near Libby

The Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday released an action plan outlining the interagency measures to be taken if a forest fire erupts through the former vermiculite mine site, where a high concentration of Libby amphibole asbestos still exists and could recontaminate the immediate area if mobilized by smoke and ash.

The action memorandum published on Tuesday announces the plan as a joint effort between the EPA and the U.S. Forest Service.

“We wanted the public to understand that the agencies are prepared and they understand the need for added resources to fight fire in OU3 because of the concerns,” Christina Progess, remedial project manager for Operable Unit 3, known also as the former W.R. Grace mine site, said on Wednesday. “The agencies are working together. It’s a serious concern for us and we want to be prepared to fight fire and respond to it as quickly as possible.”

The plan calls for a 10-person, specially trained firefighting team; a dozer and other heavy equipment. These resources would be stationed in the Libby area with the sole purpose of containing a fire in the former mine area if a forest fire were to begin, rather than being part of a stand-by crew prepared to travel the region to support other fire fighting efforts. Asbestos is a fireproof material that the memo states could be mobilized in the smoke and ash from a fire, as well as the surface water runoff and travel to areas either not contaminated before or previously cleaned by the EPA.

As part of a previous agreement, the Forest Service is responsible for fire containment and cleanup in the mine area. Libby District Ranger Nate Gassmann said having a team located in the area is critical to containing the threat of airborne asbestos if that case were to happen.

“Both agencies understand that importance if the community of Libby and the surrounding area is affected by fire in someway,” Gassmann said. “We do not take this as a light consideration for the Forest Service.

“When you boil down to that raw essence, the agencies have to work together.”

Progess said that the EPA worked hand-in-hand with the Forest Service to develop the action plan, while state agencies like the Department of Environmental Quality and Department of Natural Resources and Conservation took support roles, providing input while the plan was under development. Progess said the plan released on Tuesday has been in the works since spring of 2016.

The team would be composed of Forest Service firefighters, according to the plan, but filling that roster has already proven difficult. According to the memo, Forest Service Fire Managers have discussed firefighting within OU3 with Forest Service firefighters and “most have indicated that they would refuse to work in OU3 due to the presence of (Libby Amphibole asbestos) in forest duff and tree bark.”

Gassmann said while efforts to build the team has been met with hurdles, some support positions have already been filled and the Forest Service may begin looking to outside sources to compose the 10-person squad.

“We’ve got a lot of support already for providing that overhead to the crews,” he said. “We’ve got a long-standing history with local contractors, those folks that have provided some of the firefighting in the past.”

Gassman also said the Forest Service has provided forest fire containment in the mining area before, including two incidences in 2015, although those fires totaled a .75-acre area.

“On average, we receive four fires a year” in the former mine area, Gassman said. “Sometimes you get more, sometimes you don’t.”

Gassman said fire conditions this year have been dramatically better than last year, by measurements of both temperature and precipitation. Albeit that does not necessarily mean the action plan can be taken with lighter concern, he said.

“Every day we get into July and August that we don’t have those conditions is a good day,” he said. “We’re just actively pursuing to meet the intent of that action memo.”

The memorandum expects the action plan to cost $2,105,000 to put these measures in place. The EPA will contribute $300,000 to that cost while the Forest Service funds the remaining bill. Progess said that after each year, the EPA will complete a cost assessment to determine whether the plan needs more or less funding from both agencies.

“In the future, we do plan to continue to work with the Forest Service,” she said. “We’ll continue to have those discussions and evaluate the support but the bottom line is we know we still have the responsibility to provide for the wildfire response for OU3.”

Progess said the EPA and Forest Service conducted a test burn earlier this year to determine the exposure levels found in the smoke and ash of a fire in the former mine area. The test burn was a small fire, she said, but the exposure levels were great.

“We had the test burn and had firefighters do some mop up in the area. We found that their exposures were well above the risk target set by the EPA,” she said.

“Exposures were significant and of concern.”

Progess said that if a large forest fire were to tear through the former mine site, the EPA is currently unable to quantify how far or how concentrated the mobilized asbestos would travel through smoke and ash.

“There’s so many variables that would factor into it, from wind to topography to the relative humidity,” she said. “We don’t have any way of understanding what the concentrations would be to residents in Libby but the best way to minimize exposure is to prepare to stop a fire.”

Gassmann said while the primary objective is to keep area residents safe from such asbestos exposure levels, there’s plenty of concern for the safety of the firefighting team, once that crew is assembled.

“We have a requirement to provide health and safety for our fire fighters. That’s above and beyond what you would consider a normal fire fighting activity,” he said.

“We hope we don’t have a fire this year, but we’ve got to be prepared. That’s what the action memo is for; to make sure we’re able to respond appropriately.”

Reporter Seaborn Larson may be reached at 758-4441 or by email at slarson@dailyinterlake.com.