Critics rap coal-slurry storage

MORGANTOWN, W.Va. (AP) | Regulators in a handful of Appalachian states that let coal companies inject slurry into abandoned mines say they are confident the practice is safe, but an Associated Press survey shows they lack scientific data to answer citizens who believe aquifers, water wells and their own health are at risk.

None of the five states contacted by the AP has studied the chemical composition of slurry, a byproduct left when clay, sulfur and other impurities are removed from coal to make it burn more efficiently.

For decades, slurry has been injected into abandoned underground mines in Appalachia as a cheap alternative to building massive dams or filtration and drying systems.

But hundreds of West Virginians are suing coal companies in two cases, claiming chemicals and metals in the slurry leaked into aquifers, contaminated well water and caused health problems ranging from kidney disease to cancer.

An e-mail survey of environmental regulators in West Virginia, Kentucky, Alabama, Pennsylvania and Ohio found none of the states tracks exactly how much slurry is pumped underground.

“There’s just a complete lack of oversight by any of the agencies that are supposed to be regulating this,” activist Vivian Stockman of the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition charges. “In our opinion, this is hazardous waste and it should be regulated and monitored.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has allowed states for decades to use old underground mines as “backfill wells” for waste, documenting at least 5,000 sites in 17 states at last count in 1999. But the EPA figures include sites for storing sludge, ash, sand and other materials, making it impossible to know how many contain liquid coal slurry.

The AP’s review suggests the injection of coal slurry is rare in Pennsylvania and Ohio, which reported two injection sites each. Alabama operators reported 11 active sites, Kentucky 14, and West Virginia permits 15 companies to inject slurry.

The industry insists the wells are safer than dams, which can fail and flood communities.

Jason Bostic, vice president of the West Virginia Coal Association, says injection sites are chosen with health and safety — not just geology — as primary concerns. If the practice weren’t safe, he adds, EPA wouldn’t allow it.

Neither EPA nor the state regulatory agencies contacted by the AP have ever confirmed a link between a slurry injection site and contaminated drinking water.

But Stephen Lester, science director at the Center for Health, Environment and Justice in Falls Church, Va., argues that’s because scientists lack sufficient tools to track materials injected deep underground. A pollution link that may seem obvious to someone with black or orange water streaming from the tap, he says, cannot be easily proven.

“So you end up with an engineer declaring what he believes is the case and a community saying, ‘Well, here’s what we have,’ ” Mr. Lester says. “Almost invariably, the regulator is going to side with the person who has the degrees.”