Plans for new hazardous waste landfill near Yukon suspended after EPA report

MAX Environmental Technologies has halted its plan to reapply for a permit to add a new hazardous waste landfill at its site near Yukon.

The Upper St. Clair-based company is instead focusing on compliance issues federal regulatory officials identified following an inspection of the facility in March.

A report issued after a March 20-24 visit to the South Huntingdon site by the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Enforcement Investigations Center found MAX wasn’t properly containing hazardous waste stored there or properly sampling batches of the material for laboratory testing.

MAX is supposed to treat the waste to meet concentration standards for various metals before it places the material in its Landfill No. 6 near Yukon. But, the EPA reported taking samples of treated waste from the landfill that exceeded standard levels for lead, cadmium and thallium.

According to the EPA, one sample showed cadmium present at a concentration of 147 milligrams per liter — more than 1,300 times higher than the standard for land disposal. Excessive lead and cadmium levels also were found in samples of treated waste stored in roll-off containers at the site, the EPA reported.

Studies indicate ingesting cadmium-contaminated food or water creates a low health risk, but breathing 0.01 milligram per cubic meter of cadmium-contaminated air for more than 14 days can result in chronic lung and kidney disease, the EPA has indicated.

“Our priority is to fully address the findings in EPA’s report,” said MAX President Bob Shawver. “We have indefinitely suspended our plans to resubmit an application for a new landfill and will re- evaluate the project after we meet these obligations.”

Shawver informed local residents in a similarly worded letter that the company has “suspended near-term plans to resubmit an application for new Hazardous Waste Landfill No. 7.”

According to Shawver, the EPA’s concerns “have either been handled, are in the process of being addressed, or are being clarified in discussions with the agency.”

MAX general manager Carl Spadaro has disagreed with some of the findings in the EPA report. He contends the samples of metallurgical waste in question were at required treatment levels, based on test results from MAX’s state-accredited lab. He was unable to explain why the EPA test results were so different.

Although Spadaro said he doesn’t think it would have made any difference in the lab results, he said MAX is altering its testing procedures in response to the EPA findings.

“We’ve adjusted our post-treatment testing process to give (treated waste) more time to cure, so we can double-check and triple-check it,” Spadaro said. “It’s an extra measure to make sure we’re meeting the required standards.”

The EPA said it observed rain entering through holes in the roof of a containment building and falling on hazardous waste stored inside. Federal inspectors also cited “significant damage and deterioration to exterior walls surrounding the door frames” of two of the building’s bays and said the building was missing a section of exterior wall on another of its four bays. The EPA also found that MAX was lax on its own weekend inspections at the site.

Spadaro said MAX is beefing up its inspections while a contractor is slated to begin repairs to the containment building before the end of the year and is expected to complete the work in the spring. He said the building was never designed to have a wall where the EPA has cited a missing section and noted it has been operating according to that design for 14 years without drawing previous concern from inspectors.

Earlier this year, MAX notified the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection that it was withdrawing its application to develop the No. 7 waste disposal area at the Yukon site in order to address issues raised by that state agency. The company has said Landfill No. 6 is nearing the end of its lifespan.

The company withdrew the permit application after the DEP indicated the proposed site for the new landfill was too close to Sewickley Creek’s 100-year flood plain zone and that it does not have control over Millbell Road, a township road MAX proposed to use in hauling waste to the site.

At the time, Spadaro said the landfill would be built outside the designated flood plain zone. The DEP had informed MAX it does not follow the flood zone boundaries set by a federal flood plain insurance program.

The Melcroft-based Mountain Watershed Association conservation group has joined local residents in opposing MAX’s plan for a new landfill while registering concerns about the company’s existing operations near Yukon.

Citing concerns about waste containment, Mountain Watershed representative Stacey Magda said the EPA’s March compliance findings were “no surprise at all. It’s a formal validation of what the community and our organization have long understood to be the norm at MAX Environmental.”

Based on the March inspection, she called for state and federal officials to deny any renewed attempt by MAX to expand operations at the Yukon site.

She said the topic will be part of the discussion at a community meeting the watershed group will hold at 6 p.m. Tuesday at the Yukon fire hall.

“We’ve been working with the EPA and DEP to resolve any issues as quickly as possible,” Spadaro said. “We take their observations seriously.”