1



               CITIZENS INFORMATION COMMITTEE
              MINUTES OF JUNE 13, 1995 MEETING

Attendees

Deb Backhus, IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Mike Baker, Coalition Opposed to PCB Ash
Resa Ramsey, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Marti Crouch, Near Westside Neighborhood Association
George Hegeman, Monroe County Board of Health
Sally Hegeman, League of Women Voters
Diane Henshel, IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Dawn Hewitt, The Audubon Society
Dan Hopkins, U.S. EPA Remedial Project Manager
Iris Kiesling, Bloomington City Council
John Langley, Bloomington PCB Coordinator
Michael List, Private Citizen, CIC Chair
Dave Novak, U.S. EPA Community Involvement Coordinator
Brian Pence, People Against the Incinerator
Alex Tzallas, U.S. EPA Assistant RPM

Observers

Patricia Cole, City Council
Dan Cortes,
Rodger DiVincenzo, Westinghouse
Kyle Dreyfuss, IU SPEA
Bill Hayden, Sierra Club
Joe McMahan, Westinghouse
Greg Moore, APACHE
Jim Patrick, Westinghouse
Dave Porter, Citizen
John Rose, IDEM
Louis Schwitzer, COPA
Robin Gnagni

Approval of Minutes

The minutes were approved with the following changes. Ramsey
said that on page 10, line 9 that Carrasquero meant to say
"The deadline for completion of the study is July 1st."  She
said that where Carrasquero said yes on page 10, line 12,
that she meant to say that "this is being considered." On
page 10, paragraph 7, Carrasquero meant to also say "What
will be released for public comment will be a completed
feasibility study report." Also, on page 4, paragraph 9,
piece mill should be "piece meal".

Update on the Indiana Woodtreating Plant

EPA's Steve Faryan said that EPA completed the removal
action at the Indiana Woodtreating Plant.  He said that EPA
was able to get the contaminant levels to below any health

                                                            2


based standards.  He met with the city and county to discuss
their interest in taking over the property but those two
parties are not interested. There is a private party also
interested in the property but EPA wants to make sure that
whoever goes in there will not cause any further releases.
Faryan said that the EPA is open to other ideas from the
community regarding the future land use of that site.
Faryan said that there is still some groundwater
contamination even though EPA cleaned the soils, removed the
drums, and paint wastes.  He said that there is residual
contamination underneath the building, west of Clear Creek.
He handed out some additional informational and the sampling
data.  He said that there are about 42 acres of good land
that could be used and that the land could not be used for
residential purposes because it is in a flood plain.

Porter wanted to know what the future liability would be for
the new landowner.

Faryan said that the new owner would have to continue the
operations and maintenance of the collection system on the
site and collect the creosote and run it through a carbon
filter.

Porter suggested that "the land trust", an entity may be
interested in the property.

Faryan said that he would talk to them about it.

Pence wanted to know if the groundwater was contaminated.

Faryan said that EPA sampled some wells downgradient of the
site and found one well that was used for horses with some
naphthalene in it. It was about a 1/2 mile from the site.
They spoke to the owner and suggested that he refrain from
using it. All of the homes in the area are on city water.

Porter said that just because the homes are on city water
does not mean that it is okay to screw up the groundwater.

List said that no one was saying that it is okay for the
groundwater to be contaminated, "rather it is used as a
point of reference".

Faryan said that what that means under the Superfund Removal
program is that if it is below the drinking water standard,
then he cannot address it.

Faryan said that EPA plans to continue operating the
collection sump around the building.

Schwitzer asked who would underwrite the cost of continuing
that collection system.


                                                            3


Faryan said that they are trying to work with who ever
purchases the land and the county to continue the operations
and maintenance of the property.

Schwitzer said that it sounds like the facility has not been
cleaned up.

Faryan said that the site has been cleaned up to below the
health based standards.  He said, however, there is some
residual contamination around the building on the site.  The
Superfund Removal program cannot work on that site
indefinitely under the law, so EPA will pass that
responsibility along to the county or the new property
owner.

Pence said that we do not have a cleanup if contamination is
leaching into a well one-half mile away.

George Hegeman said that there is a history of 25-30 years
of contamination at the site. He said that the leaching into
the groundwater is not a result of the cleanup but of the
long term insult to the land from the operation there.

Faryan said that the last sampling results at the site
showed 28 ppm total creosote contamination.  He has
discussed this with several other remediation scientists and
all agree that they would do more environmental harm to
remove the sediments from the creek bed than good,
especially since they have gotten below the health based
standards.

Moore suggested that before EPA makes a theme park out of a
Superfund site, that they cleanup the entire site including
the creek bed and soil before they expose our children and
animals to the contamination.  Moore said that he did not
want EPA people from Chicago and D.C. to come into his
community and tell them to make a rails to trails park out
of their creek.

Valentin asked if EPA had done any testing related to
groundwater flow.

Faryan said that EPA put in some monitoring wells and met
with a local hydrogeologist that Hopkins uses, (Dick Powell)
and the recommendation was to sample a deep well that was
used on site that was sampled,  a shallow aquifer was also
monitored for surface water and any wells downgradient of
the site were sampled.

Valentin asked if EPA could demolish the building. If they
could would they be able to come back in and do a removal if
additional contamination was found.


                                                            4


Faryan said that he could not demolish the building but they
could come back and do a removal action if additional
contamination was found when the building was demolished.
Faryan said that the building was made of iron and had an
asphalt base and limestone chips scattered on top of the
asphalt. Faryan said the removal program's standards are 500
ppm polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 100 ppm
carcinogenic.  He said that the remedial programs standards
are 100 ppm PAHs and 10 ppm carcinogenic.

List reiterated that the cleanup is below the health based
standards that EPA must meet.  List asked what happens to
the water once it is collected.

Faryan said that the water is treated using a carbon filter
and recharged upgradient to help flush the material out.

Remedial Activities

Hopkins said that 133 rail cars had been taken away from the
ABB site, about 12,500 tons of material.  Hopkins said that
the operation looks good.  Regarding the Fell site,
Westinghouse proposed shipping the material from Fell to
USPCI in Utah and EPA held a public meeting to receive
public comment related to that proposal. EPA is reviewing
those comments and may reach a decision by the end of the
month.  That public comment period and its extension ended
two days ago.

Quality Assurance Plan for Monitoring Well, Residential
Well, and Spring Sampling

Hopkins said that EPA received several comments regarding
the quality assurance plan (QAP). EPA has a quality
assurance organization in EPA's Region 5 office that reviews
and approves or disapproves of the QAPs.  In April,
Westinghouse submitted a QAP for groundwater monitoring of
PCBs.  Earth Tech's QAP addressed other contaminants like
volatiles, semi-volatiles, PCBs, pesticides, dioxins, and
furans.  EPA submitted Earth Tech's QAP to their regional
quality assurance organization and Earth Tech updated the
document.  The first section was rewritten because it was
closely correlated to what Westinghouse wrote. EPA also
integrated the concerns related to quality assurance.  Earth
Tech made these revisions and submitted it as the final.
This was approved by the EPA quality assurance organization.

Backhus asked what was revised.

Hopkins said that much of the beginning text was written
like Westinghouse's QAP and there were several objections to
that. EPA is ready to begin the Lemon Lane well and spring
sampling.


                                                            5


Valentin asked what the extent of radius would be for the
residential well sampling.

Hopkins said that he thinks it will be 5000 feet.  Hopkins
said that they still need to come to an agreement about
specifically which wells get sampled.

Porter asked if this was the first time that EPA did quality
control at the site. He did not think that Westinghouse used
a high level of quality control during the dye trace.

Hopkins said that you are restricted physically by what a
dye can do sometimes.

Porter said not having quality control during a dye trace is
sloppy work. Porter said that you have one well where dye
did not get out of on any of the tests.

Hopkins said he was aware of that. Hopkins said that there
are tradeoffs.  He said that this is a case of where a well
was used that was tight. The test was repeated three times
and they continued using the tight well.  Hopkins said that
switching between tests will draw criticism about
compatibility between tests.

Porter asked if EPA would compare future results with those
dye trace results.

Hopkins said that the trace data are very useful. It helps
to establish a pathway from the landfill to a potential
receptor.

Porter said that our level of not knowing is a lot higher
than people are willing to admit.

Valentin said that the dye trace shows that in certain flow
conditions that the dye went in several directions. She said
that she would not spend any additional money on dye trace
but on dioxin sampling.

Hopkins said he would agree that chemical testing should be
the emphasis.

Schwitzer said that in lieu of scarce EPA dollars that EPA
has very selective utilization of the consent decree. He
said that there is a 150 million dollar bond according to
the consent decree but EPA will not do anything to get that
money.  He said that it is ridiculous for EPA to be watching
pennies when they have millions set aside to be used for
this project.

Hopkins said that he is not saying that they have to do an
inferior job but that EPA must spend its money carefully.


                                                            6


List said that the concept of the consent decree is to spend
that money within the framework of the consent decree. He
said now that the parties are going in an alternate path,
this may or may not be true.

Schwitzer said if that is the case, then scrap the consent
decree and start over. He suggested starting with an RI/FS.

Hopkins said that the level of effort today is much more
extensive than many RI/FSs.  Hopkins said that the remedy
for many landfills is a cap, pump and treat, or a limited
excavation.

Valentin said not if you are being protective when it is in
karst. Valentin said that some landfills can be capped and
left in place and collect the water. She said that in this
case, it is not appropriate.

Hopkins said that you need a thoughtful and reasoned
approach so that you can get to a reasonable remedy.

Valentin said that she thinks that it needs to be a phased
approach and she has not seen the conceptual sampling plan
presented in this way. Her impression is that no more will
be done than what is in the plan.  She thinks that this plan
is a good first step, but much more is needed.

Moore said that he would like the government parties to
enforce article 19 paragraph 96 of the consent decree. He
said that if one of the parties would intervene and object
to this financial condition then the money would be there so
that the sites could be cleaned up. He said that the
situation at Winston-Thomas and the Illinois Springs was not
brought on by eco-terrorism but by bureaucratic mamby pamby.

Baker said that the problems COPA found with the mini-QAP,
the new directions paper, etc. is that EPA says that they do
not agree with certain aspects of these papers, yet EPA and
the other government parties' names are on them.  COPA's
comments are that EPA should be providing oversight and
setting some parameters for Westinghouse to follow rather
than taking a Westinghouse prepared document and telling
Westinghouse to follow what Westinghouse has prepared.

Hopkins said that the two QAPs are work products of numerous
meetings of all of the parties and what they have come to
agreement on.

Porter asked if the minutes of those meetings are available
for the public to see so that they can see what some of the
disagreements are.

Hopkins said that they do not have minutes of the technical
discussions but the public is welcome to see the work

                                                            7


products that come out of those meetings, like the field
sampling plan.

Porter asked how the community is supposed to have
confidence in the credibility of this process.

Hopkins answered that the efforts can be judged by looking
at the work product. Hopkins said that all of the parties
are working extremely hard.  The parties are cognizant that
all of the work is not showing tangible results. He said
they may not be satisfied with that but they have to go
through it.  EPA is recognizing that through the effort that
the parties are resolving some of their key differences. He
said that EPA is criticized for being too slow and
criticized if they overlook something in their effort to
move at a faster pace.

Porter asked if Hopkins remembers that the goal is to
destroy PCBs.

Hopkins said that destroying PCBs is not the goal. He said
that EPA's goal is to be protective of human health and the
environment.

Porter said to not destroy the contamination is pushing into
the future to be dealt with later.

List said that if there is not a way to destroy it then you
may have to sequester it until you have a way of destroying
it. List said that for a number of years that the community
worked to delay or halt the remedy selected. List said that
the parties are now discussing amongst themselves a way to
look at the problem without the past remedy.

Baker said that COPA's major concern is that EPA stands up
at public meetings as a partner with Westinghouse which
provides for little oversight of the responsible party. He
said that two recent events give EPA a tremendous
opportunity to flex their muscles and pursue some stronger
avenues for cleaning up the situation. You have Winston-
Thomas, a site that could be easily remediated, pushed
750,000 gallons of water off the site into one of our
creeks. You have springs running through Lemon Lane that
have 1400 ppm PCBs. It's a good example of what can continue
to happen if you do not clean up the landfill. Hopkins has
said that it is not what is presently coming out of Lemon
Lane that worries him, but what could come out of there in
the future. Baker said that what Westinghouse wants and what
the community wants is completely different but if the
community does not push it, there will not be a cleanup.  He
said that there are groups all over the country meeting with
PRPs and governmental agencies asking them to find common
ground and then make a proposal.  No where in this process
is the community involved.  Is that what is happening here

                                                            8


... a charade of a done deal.  COPA found a document written
by Westinghouse that asked EPA if the incinerator were not
built and they were still held liable then they thought that
was absurd. COPA has not found EPA's response to that
letter.  When you see things in writing like this letter, it
makes you question what is motivating this process. Baker
said that he would like to see the PCB sites cleaned up like
the creosote site.  It is not 100% but it is a cleanup and
it is below health based standards.

Hopkins said that he appreciates what Baker says and from
his seat it is not always comfortable listening to what
Baker says, but he feels that it is healthy. He says that
the community is involved and do have input into the
process.  He gives the community draft work plans to comment
on so if they find a problem before the document becomes
final, then they think the document is a problem. He said
that is frustrating but something that is necessary if the
public is going to be involved.

Baker said that they would like to be assured that the path
we are moving in is not a done deal.  Baker said that many
people are trying to get over their inherent mistrust of
government even though they did not come to the table with
mistrust.

Novak said that Hopkins is not sitting back in Chicago
sleeping.

Baker said he believes that Hopkins is working in the best
interest of the public but then they get frustrated when
they hear EPA say one thing and then Westinghouse something
entirely different.  No one ever comes back and says no this
is the way it will be. Baker said that Winston Thomas
flooding into the community was preventable and he would
like EPA to enforce some measures at these sites.

Pence said that part of the frustration is that he asked
Hopkins at a meeting a few months ago if Westinghouse could
drain the pond at Winston-Thomas and treat the water and
scoop up the sludge.  Hopkins said that they could not do
that because it was not posing an immediate threat to health
and the environment. He said that it has been predicted for
a long time. He asked how many stupid things were going to
happen before EPA would act on them? Pence said that
regarding Illinois Central Springs that the community has
been asking for a fence there for years.

Hopkins said that the numbers have been too low to put up a
fence in the past.  Hopkins said that as this process moves
forward that EPA may find changes in the way they looked at
things before.


                                                            9


Pence asked if Winston-Thomas has poked a big enough hole to
warrant action now.

Hopkins said he thinks that it has.

Conceptual Plan to Examine the Fill Material at the Lemon
Lane Landfill

Hopkins said that they had to postpone the work out there
for a week because the geophysical equipment did not arrive.
They are going to do a geophysical survey looking for
metallic material so that will help them with the next phase
of the survey which is placing the borings so that they can
find areas with capacitors and sample that area. It will
also help them in locating refrigerators and car bodies, so
that they do not drill into those type items. He said that
they will be out there the week of the 19th doing the work.
Hopkins said that the procedure uses electromagnetic
radiation and is the best machine to do it.

Dioxin Detection Limits in Parts Per Quadrillion

Hopkins said that EPA is using the parts per trillion as the
detection limit and that is a special analytical laboratory
service and there are no plans to detect to the parts per
quadrillion level on EPA's part, at this time.

Baker said that there is a company named Millipore that will
have a test kit on the market within 6 months that will
detect 2, 3, 7, 8 TCDD in parts per trillion to parts per
quadrillion for about $120 per test.

Hopkins said even so what about the dioxin-like compounds,
other dioxins and other furans and co-planar PCBs.  Hopkins
said that he is not saying no but he would like to move
forward with the current plan to test in parts per trillion.

Update on IDEM Feasibility Study

Baker said that he would like to say something about the New
Directions brochure rather than the new directions of
Winston-Thomas to Clear Creek. He said that there was a lot
of good information in it but that the focus of the New
Directions is supposed to be about alternatives to
incineration and the only alternative pointed to in this
brochure is landfilling.  He said that the chart in the
ATSDR section was based on data in 1992 and it all points to
landfilling.  He said that some of the technologies that
they listed as not viable have since become commercially
available.

Hopkins said that when he read this and it said that ATSDR
said something, he wanted to make sure that ATSDR was okay
with what the parties were saying that they said. He said

                                                            10


that ATSDR received a copy and submitted comments. I do not
know if the comments were reflected.

Baker asked if the community read this would they not think
that it was endorsed by the parties.

Hopkins said that they might.

Baker said that he thought it was a shame that EPA was
letting Westinghouse dig a hole for them and the good work
that EPA does makes other get bogged down in the bad stuff
that others have done for you.

Hopkins said that unfortunately reviewing the newsletter was
not a priority for him but he would be more vigilante about
it in the future.

Crouch said that she thought the format of the Fell meeting
did not lend itself to getting the most comments from the
public.  She thought that if you let people ask questions
and comment at the same time then it might allow more people
to  be  able to comment. By having all of the questions
first and the comments last, several people have left before
the comment period begins.

Hopkins said that there were good comments and that he also
noticed that several people left before they made their
comments. He said that he thought people would want to ask
questions  to get clarification before making their
comments.

Crouch said that there is a great deal of difference in
technical tolerance.  Some people are willing to sit through
more than others.

Novak said that it is the comment that derives EPA's
decision and it is not EPA policy to respond to the comments
on the spot.  In a formal public comment period, EPA
responds to the comments in a responsiveness summary. He
said that the only way that the format could be changed is
if the person asking the question or making the comment
identifies which they are doing.

Novak said that if anyone would like the transcript of the
Fell meeting that they are available at the PIC.

Winston Thomas Treatment Plant Spillage Issue

Langley said that he does not think that there is a good
excuse for what happened at Winston-Thomas.   Langley said
that the City's utilities department keeps rainfall data in
several areas of the city.  Bloomington had a great deal of
rainfall during the week of the Winston-Thomas overflow. On
the east side of the lagoon, there is a 39 inch sewer that

                                                            11


serves the area south of 13th street in the center of town.
He showed a map of the area and where the equipment failed.
Langley showed where there was a  bypass structure at the SE
corner.  He said they  installed  pumps that were sized by
an engineer.  Langley showed with visuals how the bypass
system worked.  Langley said that on a normal day at Dillman
Road, the pumping is about 9.9 million gallons per day but
during this week it soared to about 40 million gallons per
day.  Unbeknownst to the City, a baffle broke  allowing
access of this influent water to a 12 inch bypass into the
lagoon eventually exceeding the volume of the lagoon.  This
bypass structure was installed in the 60's because the
facility was undersized for a large storm event.  They would
cap the plant at  an  8 million gallon capacity, allow the
water to build up and bypass to the lagoon and treat it
later.

Henshel asked at what level is the sewer?

Langley said that the discharge looked like drinking water.
He said that you can tell if you are passing sludge. Langley
showed a chart showing the drinking water action level and
the Winston-Thomas Lagoon sampling results. Langley said
that IDEM was invited to participate and in fact directed
the sampling event. He said that sample 1 and 5 were surface
samples.  He said that surface water was roughly .28
micrograms per Liter.  He said that sample 2 had .12 ppb.
IDEM wanted a sample below the lagoon and that result was
below a quantifiable level. Sample 4 was .12 ppb and Sample
6 showed .11 ppb. The city has permanently sealed that 12
inch bypass structure. They are also going to drop the level
of water about 12 inches.

Valentin asked how often the city tests for PCBs.

Langley said that they test for PCBs in the water and sludge
monthly per the NPDES permit. Langley said that the city is
putting in a fail safe alarm which means that if the
electricity goes off then the alarm goes off.  He said that
if this becomes a problem again then they will know about
well in advance. He  said that IDEM noticed a problem with
deteriorating grout in the 39" interceptor and that is being
repaired this week.   Langley said that they thought what
happened was impossible but found out it could happen. He
said that the city would like to the community for what
happened and they hope they are prepared for something like
this in the future.

Valentin asked if the city sampled Clear Creek.

Langley said yes.

Henshel asked why it took so long to report it to the
newspaper.

                                                            12



Langley said that he was working on getting the water
stopped.

Pence asked if he could have taken 5 minutes and called IDEM
as required by law.

Langley said in retrospect, he would have done it in the
first five minutes. Langley said that the reason he did more
extensive sampling was because one of his samples were
frozen and could not be used.

Henshel said that it is possible that some of that .12 that
is being seen downstream is dilution from the .23

Langley said that he does not think that is possible.

Henshel said that these numbers are not surprising given
Fish and Wildlife data.


Illinois Central Springs

Hopkins refers to a storm sampling done between may 15 and
23. Westinghouse mobilized before to get storm data. once
they got the quality assurance plan passed they tried to get
storm data.  On may 8th they went there to sample but there
was no storm.  They took some samples and they got 1400 at
Illinois Central and 1100 (dry weight) from the swallow hole
area samples and several other samples were higher than what
has been seen before. A  few days later there was a storm
and the samplers recorded a large amount of data. Including
hourly composite PCB data. as well as flow rates that went
through that system and the concentrations. At peak flows
samples were taken every fifteen minutes. They were
surprised that the highest concentrations came at the
highest flow rates. They thought that there would be a lower
concentration at peek flow rates.

It was found that data had truncated after the range of the
instrument was exceeded. The Westinghouse Geologist was told
by the people he got the equipment from that the instrument
would keep taken measures but less accurate. We have well
data but we don't know how high it went.

Porter said that this is really not encouraging, I am sorry
but some things are going to happen like that.

Hegeman asked if those wells were the piezometer wells that
showed the actual water height at the landfill.

Hopkins answered that those were the perimeter monitoring
wells.


                                                            13


Henshel asked if the total suspended solids peaked at the
same time.

Hopkins answered that he did not know that, but his
understanding was that they did not correlate. There may be
other phases, there are people working on it.

Henshel commented that if there is pure oil coming out it is
not only solids and there is really something we have to be
concerned about because kids will be playing down the stream
and they will get it on their skin.

Hopkins said that the best estimate is that six pounds came
through with this storm.

Valentin asked if other springs were monitored on the day of
the high concentration.

Hopkins answered that Slaughter House was and that no PCBs
where detected.

Valentin asked about the other directions.

Hopkins answered that those were the only two springs that
were investigated during the storm. He also said that there
is a problem at Illinois Central, maybe the chief problem.

Valentin asked which well was the one that had the
transducer that stopped

Hopkins answered that there were all of them, four.

Valentin asked if in any springs, the level rose above the
level of the bottom of the landfill.

Hopkins said no.

Hegeman asked what the bottom of the landfill meant if the
landfill is in a sinkhole that was used for over thirty
years.

Hopkins answered that one of the things he had been
concerned about was that if there is a situation over time
where you can get an estimate of how many times the water
rises to the bottom of the landfill, within the bottom the
landfill or some distance up, you can get an estimate of a
frequency that the landfill bottom has been wetted and
dried. The mechanism for spauling is there and if you can
make a correlation with  storm rainfall frequency with
elevation of monitoring wells at the site, perhaps you can
determine if the sinkholes at the landfill are relatively
stable or not. He also said that in the future such an event
would be captured.


                                                            14


Patrick added that the vendor offered to replace all the
instrumentation that will  give higher readings.

Hopkins said that this was rather crucial information, and
bears out the value of the sampling events, some problems
are obvious some not. Before it seemed that if some part of
the spring water could be treated it may solve the problem,
but it does not look like that anymore. Also that cleaning
up contaminated sediments at Illinois Central may not make
much difference at this time.

Patrick said it was to early to give a statement about the
correlation between suspended solids and concentrations, and
that four people were working on it, that the university was
there doing natural chemistry and to get that data it is
going to take time.

Hopkins agreed that it would take some time to process the
information.

Hopkins said that when they recognized what they were
seeing, the city and the county informed the neighboring
residents that there was a problem. This to prevent the kids
from getting into the area near the contaminated area. He
also said that kids at the elementary school would be
informed.

Hopkins explained the Westinghouse map showing the area, the
sampling and the planned fencing.


Corrections to the Fell Meeting Transcripts

Novak offered copies of the minutes and corrections could be
made and that the copies should be returned to Sona so that
the transcriber could retype it.

Additional Comments

Mr. Schwitzer asked that given the level of contamination
set by Congress, has anyone bothered to see what happened in
the vicinity of Neals Landfill.

Hopkins answered that at Neals landfill they have treated
spring water, however it is not necessarily the same
physical situation as Illinois Central. Springs near Meals
Landfill would be investigated later.


Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned by Michael List at 9:55 pm.  The
next meeting will be held Tuesday, July 25th, 1995 at 7:00
p.m. at the PCB Public Information Center, Suite 322

                                                            15


Fountain Square Mall.  Free Parking is available in the 4th
street parking garage and off-street parking is available in
front of Fountain Square Mall.

Adapted minutes recorded by Sona Chambers, Bloomington PCB
Public Information Center, staffed by Earth Tech.