Bingham Creek: Successful Cleanup or Inspection Oversight?

Abstract
The purpose of my research was to see if cleanup in the Bingham Creek
area continues to work as it was originally intended to in terms of
lead content. I tested soil samples collected from areas of human
interaction with the creek to determine their lead content. Lead
levels were found to be below the cleanup standards for residential
areas which was set at 1100ppm. Levels of other potentially toxic
metals were also found to be below screening levels. My findings show
that the remediation is still working as it was designed to, despite
the lack of proper inspection by the EPA and for the Second Five Year
Review. Based on the results of my testing, the public is not
currently being affected by the high levels of lead that were present
before remediation took place.

Background
Kennecott South Zone OU1, a superfund which was cleaned up by
Kennecott from 1991-1998 to prevent inclusion on the National
Priorities List includes the Bingham Creek channel from the
Kennecott tailings ponds to nearly the Jordan River, with one
section being classified as Bingham Creek Residential Soils. Bingham
Creek is an intermittent stream most of the way, only flowing in
large storms or in times of high runoff. The creek was originally
contaminated by unmonitored dumping of tailings, slag, waste rock
and other mining wastes in the early days of mining straight into
the creek, with flood periods and heavy runoff pushing the
contamination downstream. Mining in the area began in the mid-1800s,
and continues to this day at the Kennecott Bingham Canyon open pit
mine. Levels of lead in residential areas before cleanup averaged
5661ppm with hotspots over 30000ppm.
Cleanup levels in residential areas were set at 1100ppm of lead,
with contaminated soils removed down to 18 inches. Remediation in
the channel itself involved removing 3 feet of soil, with remedial
action level at 2000ppm. A total of approximately 125 residences
were involved in the removal of soils along with the entirety of the
creek channel.

Data Analysis
Lead content, though slightly higher than California
screening levels is well below maximum levels for cleanup
which was set at 1100 ppm in residential areas.
Strontium and Barium were found in concentrations higher
than background levels, but below screening levels, and
not in levels that would affect health or the
environment.
The most surprising finding was relatively high levels of
copper, not higher than California screening levels, but
still elevated. There are currently no federal screening
levels for copper, so Utah has no regulations regarding
its levels.

Path of Creek

Research Question

Research Methods

Are the remedial actions taken to

cleanup Kennecott South Zone OU1:
Bingham Creek Channel and Bingham
Creek Residential Soils still
effective in protecting the
health and safety of residents
living along the creek, or have
erosion, time, and human activity
rendered the former remediation
ineffective?

11 soil samples were collected by taking small amounts

of soil to a maximum depth of 4 inches in a 2 foot
area, depositing them in a plastic container and
homogenizing them. The samples were collected in areas
along a paved trail, with sample locations chosen to
correspond with areas where human interaction with the
creek and its channel are apparent. The majority of
sites sampled at the time of the remediation performed
were not considered residential areas, but now are
zoned residential on both sides of the creek. The soil
samples were both air-dried and some were dried using
an oven to expedite the process. Dry samples were
analyzed for metal content using a Niton XRF Analyzer.

Interpretation
Legend
Sample Location

Bingham Creek
Channel
Remediated to
2000ppm of Lead
Bingham Creek
Residential
Soils
Remediated to
1100ppm of Lead

Surprisingly, even though proper inspection has not been

continuously done, from my testing it does appear that
the remediation done to mitigate the levels of lead in
the soil continues to be effective, even in areas of high
residential use and erosional features. More extensive
sampling would be necessary to further support and
confirm these findings.
In conclusion, however, I hypothesize that moving forward
the time will come when, if the proper inspections are
not done, the remediation that has been done will begin
to erode away and deteriorate and will again begin to be
an environmental problem and a health risk.

Remediation areas are approximated

References:

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (1998). Record of Decision:

Kennecott South Zone Site, Operable Unites 1, 4, 5, 10, portions
of 11, and 17 Bingham Creek and Bingham Canyon Area. Obtained
from DEQ Superfund Records

Campbell, Carol (Approver)(2010). Second Five

Year Review Report: Kennecott South Zone, OU1,
OU4, OU5, OU10, OU11. Obtained from DEQ
Superfund Records

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (2014). EPA Region 8

Superfund Site: Kennecott South Zone / Bingham. Last Updated
March 2014. Actual URL: http://www2.epa.gov/region8/kennecottsouth-zone-bingham#main-content

California OEHHA (2010) Soil Screening Numbers,

Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, Last Updated September 2010, Actual
URL: http://oehha.ca.gov/risk/chhsltable.html

Kennecott South Zone Superfund Site

(2010). Issues and Recommendations OUs 1,
4, 5, 10, 11, and 17 Update December
2010. Obtained from EPA Superfund Records