(OR) Gun club fined for illegal lead dumping

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Gun club fined for illegal lead dumping
By SARAH LEMON
Mail Tribune

CENTRAL POINT — A local gun club faces more than $17,000 in fines for illegally dumping about 17 tons of lead-contaminated debris on its East Vilas Road property.

The extent of contamination around Medford Rifle and Pistol Club remains unknown after the group removed sand piles containing bullet debris, said Jeff Bachman, spokesman for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. The club exhibited a "reckless lack of regard" for the threat to groundwater, wildlife and other environmental elements, DEQ officials said.

The two samples analyzed by DEQ indicated concentrations of lead at 1,240 parts per million and 33.8 parts per million. Waste containing five or more parts per million is considered toxic and hazardous, the agency reported.

"That's pretty hot waste," Bachman said, adding that DEQ had too little information Monday to assess the harm.

Inspectors, however, found no evidence of impact to groundwater, Bachman said.

The club intends to oppose the fine and won't pay the state until its appeals process has been exhausted, said President Jim Rice. But members will work with DEQ, he said, on any further cleanup around their facility at 1253 E. Vilas Rd.

Sand from bullet traps in the club's indoor shooting gallery was dumped on the ground behind the club in September, inspectors said. Club members removed large pieces of lead that could be recast as new bullets, but the remaining, small fragments contained hazardous levels of "leachable lead" that could harm the environment.

Club members were aware of the dangers of lead poisoning and had even posted articles to that effect, DEQ officials said. Yet when the club obtained a bid from an environmental consultant on proper disposal of the contaminated sand, members decided it was too expensive, DEQ officials said.

DEQ inspected the site in January. Nearly 17 cubic yards of waste were hauled away about two months later, Bachman said. The club removed a small amount of remaining sand and soil May 1 for disposal at Arlington Chemical Waste Facility, an approved site in northeastern Oregon, he added.

DEQ issued Medford Rifle and Pistol Club a $7,600 fine for failing to determine that the waste was hazardous. Another $10,000 was levied for illegal disposal "on the ground, exposed to the elements, humans and wildlife," DEQ officials said.

DEQ still is awaiting proper documentation on the clean-up, said Rai Peterson, natural resource specialist with DEQ's Medford office. Medford Rifle and Pistol Club likely will be entered into a state database of contaminated sites, Peterson said.

Oregon law requires individuals or businesses generating waste to determine if the waste is hazardous and to safely manage it. Proper disposal includes placing hazardous waste in appropriate containers that are clearly dated and labeled.

Lead can accumulate in the human body when ingested, causing brain and kidney damage. When released into the environment, lead can pose a long-term threat to humans and wildlife.

http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2006/0606/local/stories/fined-sl.htm
 
Last I knew, metallic lead was pretty much insoluble in water. Therefore, dumping bullet fragments in the soil poses pretty much no threat to the groundwater quality.

I am pretty sure that the Army Corps of Engineers has been involved in investigating ground water contamination (or lack thereof) at outdoor shooting ranges in the past, and found no hazard presented by spent projectiles in the soil.
 
What they did was dumb.

Lead is worth money these days. They might have been able to work a deal that would break even, or even net some money for them. It might have taken a bit of effort, but it could have been fun, too.

I believe that sluicing and gold panning could remove lead from sand, though I may be wrong.
 
AZjeff is on the right path. Lead in soil usually only impacts the local soils, requiring direct contact with the soil to pose a health problem.

In industrial sites where you often see multiple types of contamination you can see co-location of heavy metals and other chemicals like solvents or low pH conditions that can make lead more likely to mix with ground water.

A shooting range that has literally thousands of pounds of lead in the top 1 foot of soil could still pose an issue. The lead standards for drinking water or waste remediation, especially if the area isn't fenced off, are very low. It would take way less than 1% of that lead to solubilize and travel to cause a huge problem.

I have heard of a few closed military bases in my area that are costing millions to remediate because of the lead and EOD issues.

Unexploded land mines make the lead cleanup look like nothing:what:
 
Our club has someone pick up the lead from the shotgun ranges once a year. It gets trucked to Oregon, where a company separates it from the dirt and rocks and makes shot out of it. We get some of that shot in return. AFAIK we come out ahead on the deal.

Like I said, what they did was dumb. They are already in the vicinity of the place that reclaims the lead.:rolleyes:

Anyone reload shotshells? If you do, you know that lead prices are rising. That's good for anyone who has lead they want to get rid of, since the price of removing the lead is not rising.
 
Ah, Oregon DEQ. I miss those guys I really really do :D

Realize, of course, that 95% of those Oregon gobment employees are anti-gun.
 
Kind of funny that they are that concerned with lead in groundwater when every city and municipality in America, according to the EPA safety guidelines, has an allowable amount of benzine that can be present in your drinking water. Even more funny, is when they allow more parts per million of chlorine in drinking water, than they will allow kids to swim in, in the same city swimming pools? 2.5 parts per million in pools, they tell people to stay out, but if you go to the fountain, you can drink it.

I think they just want to jack with a shooting range myself.
 
it is odd that they felt the need to do so. As said, I know we have been contacted several times and had the top few inches of the trap and skeet lanes "mined off" and reclaimed. They pay money and replace the top few inches with soil that has been cleaned and reclaimed by the metals recovery company, last time they were out at the club, I believe they got over 40 tons of lead. Every round of trap (or one box of 1 1/8 oz shells) drops nearly 1 3/4 pounds of lead on the range. I belive the break point is around 50,000 rounds of trap&skeet or about every six or seven years.
 
The July issue of Guns & Ammo has a story on this very issue.

http://www.gunsandammomag.com

The abuse of environmental protection laws is but part of efforts to close down shooting ranges. No different from airports or livestock feedlots. People move in nearby, and then start whining about noise or smell, even though the "problems" had been there for years or decades.

Art
 
It seems to me that I read (last year, I think) about a college on the east coast that did a lot of measurements regarding lead in the soil at gun ranges. I believe it was in conection to some sort of class project or something. Much of this is kinda fuzzy in my memory now, but what I do remember is that they found that the lead made almost no impact on the groundwater. It had penetrated only a few inches into the soil and then stopped. It might be worthwhile to see if the results of this project could be dredged up and introduced as evidence.
 
These claims of environmental harm generally don't hold up, but what really hurts is the cost of fighting the wrongful accusations. Legal fees. As with most nonsense, only the lawyers come out ahead. The complainants and the accused both spend money for nothing worthwhile.

Art
 
lead contamination?

I just have one question... Where does Lead come from? If it isn't contaminating the ground in its natural state, how can it contaminate the ground where it lies after exiting a gun barrel?

Just thinkin out loud.
 
As far as the USEPA regulations are concerned, lead in place at shooting ranges is not considered a hazardous waste because you are not disposing of the lead when shooting. It is being used for its designed purpose.

Where you can get in trouble is when you start to clean up the lead on the range. At that point you are saying that the lead is a waste and you intend to dispose of it. It is then a hazardous waste according to the EPA and is subject to the land disposal restrictions in 40 CFR. That's when you need professional advice in order to do it legally. Actually, advice should be sought before attempting a cleanup.
 
Club members were aware of the dangers of lead poisoning and had even posted articles to that effect, DEQ officials said. Yet when the club obtained a bid from an environmental consultant on proper disposal of the contaminated sand, members decided it was too expensive, DEQ officials said.

Well this line is very damning for the range. If it's true they knew the right thing to do and deliberately choose to not do it.
 
Last I knew, metallic lead was pretty much insoluble in water.
The article clearly stated, "two samples ... at 1,240 parts per million and 33.8 parts per million." Folks, we're talking parts per thousand. This is acid-mine runoff magnitude. Enough to do major damage if it gets into a drinking water source or to surface water.

Lead is worth money these days. They might have been able to work a deal that would break even, or even net some money for them. It might have taken a bit of effort, but it could have been fun, too.

I believe that sluicing and gold panning could remove lead from sand, though I may be wrong.
You're on the right track; it is economical to recover the lead from highly contaminated soil. However, it would require a more complex process than sluicing and panning. The lead that is causing the problem is in very small particles, and probably in an oxidated state.
That may be more than the state would have charged them for a permit to do the exact same thing except then it would have been legal.
I highly doubt they could have gotten a permit to "do the exact same thing." It looks to me like an operational problem they have with disposing of material from their indoor ranges.

Kind of funny that they are that concerned with lead in groundwater when every city and municipality in America, according to the EPA safety guidelines, has an allowable amount of benzine that can be present in your drinking water. Even more funny, is when they allow more parts per million of chlorine in drinking water, than they will allow kids to swim in, in the same city swimming pools? 2.5 parts per million in pools, they tell people to stay out, but if you go to the fountain, you can drink it.
The key concept here is (as you put it), "allowable amount."

The abuse of environmental protection laws is but part of efforts to close down shooting ranges. No different from airports or livestock feedlots. People move in nearby, and then start whining about noise or smell, even though the "problems" had been there for years or decades.
There might be some truth to this in some places. But from what we read here, there is no connection between this issue and anyone living nearby. And the kneejerk assumption that it's all part of a plot to close ranges makes us all look like a bunch of paranoiacs. If we're going to live in this country, we need to be willing to do our part to keep it livable. No special group gets to foul the nest for everyone else.

what I do remember is that they found that the lead made almost no impact on the groundwater
I'd be interested in seeing the study. It would probably take 100s of years for a low-solubility metal like lead to reach groundwater. By then, it would have irreversably contaminated up to 100s of feet of overburden above the water table, and be an essentially permanent source of contamination to the water. You really don't want it to reach that point.

These claims of environmental harm generally don't hold up
The threshold of proof in environmental cases is very high. Also, these cases are often argued by very expensive lawyers with political connections. I doubt that a small gun range will have those resources.

I just have one question... Where does Lead come from? If it isn't contaminating the ground in its natural state, how can it contaminate the ground where it lies after exiting a gun barrel?
It's all about chemical state and concentration.

As far as the USEPA regulations are concerned, lead in place at shooting ranges is not considered a hazardous waste because you are not disposing of the lead when shooting. It is being used for its designed purpose.
This might be more or less true in practical terms; the EPA usually doesn't enter in the picture until a clean-up begins or a site is abandoned. However, as I read the article, the issue here is that the range dumped contaminated sand after maintennance on their indoor ranges. This would be regulated as a case of nonpoint-source pollution, under the Clean Water Act, and would be under the jurisdiction of a number of state and federal agencies.

Well this line is very damning for the range. If it's true they knew the right thing to do and deliberately choose to not do it.
Yeah, that doesn't make it look very good.
 
Malone, what commonly happens is first, a complaint about noise. That generally doesn't hold water. Then, safety issues and/or environmental issues.

The G&A article stated that in a very few cases, protesters had shot into their own homes, claiming "fliers" from a range.

Many people are aware of lead as a hazardous material, from publicity about lead in paint and the hazard to children therefrom. This view of lead as a hazard gets extended to shooting ranges. E.g., there was an effort to shut down Camp Perry because bullets went into the lake (Lake Erie?).

Art
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top