CALL (812) 333-8888 FOR MORE INFORMATION OR E-MAIL info@copa.org
| |||||||||||||||
CALL (812) 333-8888 FOR MORE INFORMATION OR E-MAIL info@copa.org | |||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||
Meetings: CIC |
|||||||||||||||
Citizens Information CommitteeUnapproved MinutesMay 20, 1998
Attendes: Tom Alcamo, EPA Michael List Tom you brought some people with you, could you please introduce them. Tom Alcamo Sure. Jeff Chan, U.S. EPA Office of Regional Council, Stephen
Ellis, Department of Justice, who is also working on the CBS sites, and
Dr. Milton Clark, who is our Senior Health and Risk Adviser. Thanks. Let's move on. Tom. Tom Alcamo Winston Thomas. We're signing action memorandum; Which includes
starting work and the response of the summary; signed last week. A stipulation
which was a requirement within the consent decree, with a change in the
remedy, was also signed last Friday. It's in Judge Foster's hands now.
I imagine he'll be signing it soon. The mobilization began at Winston
Thomas. There was an issue associated with the sludge drain vents from
the last removal action that took place last year. In which we found some
additional contamination. And that is being excavated this week. They
will finish that up before they start work on the other phases of the
teriarry lagoon . Mike Baker Three work plans, action memo, statement of work, and summary response. We're scanning all of those. Comment about the Minutes: Mitch has been doing the minutes for us, but he is tied up and out of town. So we are going to take care of that. Tom Alcamo They re-sampled fish, probably three weeks ago. Results should be back soon and I'll get that to you. It was for Richland Creek, _____ Branch, and Stouts Creek. It includes sediments and tissue studies too. Jim Cartmell Is there any other testing in any other areas? Tom Alcamo The only areas that we are proposing to test is near the grit chamber. I'll give you guys a map. Nothing has been finalized. We worked with the City and all the other parties on where they thought additional areas were that could be contaminated. And that's what we came up with. You mention culverts. We didn't find culverts. There were some pipes. And we are looking at that data also. In terms of Langley, it's clear, the whole area. We are looking into Clear Creek. Jim Cartmell There is some material here, and here. Tom Alcamo In terms of _____ lagoon, the berms and all of that are being sampled. Jim Cartmell It's way outside the berms. Tom Alcamo I'm going to depend on the city. You aren't the only one who is saying this stuff. Jim Cartmell I've talked to the city for hours about this stuff. They are ignoring it. Tom Alcamo They are not ignoring anything. It's not to their best interest to ignore anything. Jim Cartmell How did we get this far without this area being tested? Tom Alcamo Jim, I'll bring it up with John in terms of these issues. Jim Cartmell I'm trying to say that there are areas that haven't been investigated that need to be investigated. There is information here that was intentionally kept from the public. Tom Alcamo They wrote the document. They aren't going to write something and then not sample it. David Porter Did they sample in the places where the map shows sludge was spread? Tom Alcamo EPA has not sampled in those locations. David Porter Do you know if there are existing samples? Tom Alcamo No
Okay. Then don't be so damn arrogant about it. Michael List The question is has it been done. And it hasn't. That's simple enough. Tom Alcamo I'm using the ________. In terms of telling us where the areas have been based on site history on where we should sample. We are negotiating right now with CBS on where to sample. The only place they came up with - EarthTec and the City, was the grit chamber area. Jim Cartmell So see these sink holes too? These haven't been investigated. This is the east side of clear creek. Tom Alcamo I'll give these concerns to the City. Michael List This is a question that Tom can't answer right now. But we do need to find out if they were sampled. If not, why not. And we can recommend that they be done. Michael List Can we hold questions until Tom gets through the agenda items. We only have until 9:00 tonight. Tom Alcamo What we have done is the area has been cleared. The city has blocked the area. In terms of any culverts, pipes, whatever, we will investigate them. Jim Cartmell John said they were all blocked off in 1983. In 1985 I visited the site and there was water flowing out of them. Michael List Jim, this is not your presentation. It's Tom's. Tom needs to continue. Tom Alcamo The actual removal will start at Winston Thomas sometime next week. They will start with the tertiary lagoon. They will use a dredge. It actually cuts the material and vacuums it through a hose. And it will be pumped to the interim storage facility building where their filters are. They are going to be mixing. There is no air release. The process is done under water. When they think they have most of the material, they will drain the rest of the water and do sampling. And then trickling investigation. The trickling filter will be washed. It's a specialized piece of equipment they've come up with where they wash the rock. So that hopefully we can reuse it. And then we have testing on that rock to make sure it will meet the requirements of 100 micrograms per 100 cm. squared standard. For the rock. The tertiary lagoon is going to be a typically excavation. That's the plan right now. Information is on the Web site and the Library. If things go well, they should be done by Thanksgiving with Winston Thomas. In the mean time, in the Summer and Fall, they will be developing a ground water monitoring plan. That governmental parties will be reviewing. From there, we'll see what it details. But we will do an extensive monitoring. David Porter Where does the water go? It's going through a treatment system. And it will be dumped on Dillman Road. It all depends on what it contains. But they have a strict sampling scheme set up by the city. And depending upon what the results show, there is certain standards that allows for it to go to Dillman Road. But they do have a carbon absorption system in place that will treat the water if need be. In terms of the process operating, it's going to be a 24 hour a day operation. The excavation will be happening during the day. And at night it's getting pumped. During the day it goes to tanks in the storage building and will be pressed at night. Jim Cartmell Do you know where the air monitors are? Tom Alcamo There is four air monitors surrounding the place. There is
personal monitoring and dust monitoring as well. Mike Baker You have two major areas that you are identifying. One is the blue, which is greater than 50 ppm and wet. And you have the red with is greater than 500 ppm. Tom Alcamo The standard we are looking at anything wet greater than 50 has got to go. Or dry greater than 500. We have done some primary calculations so far in the rimes. And it's substantial excavation going on. We haven't finalized yet. CBS hasn't agreed to do anything yet either. We did find some interesting areas. The highest hit was 34,000 ppm. In addition, we put in a number of (pizometers) in Neal's Landfill to determine if that area is wet or not. We also have proposed to CBS sampling in some of the areas and farther out for sampling. CBS only agreed to test these borings. We are going to do it. Not sure who will pay for it. We bored right to bed rock. We logged all the borings. We are very concerned about punching the holes through the bed rock. Because of the possibility of it being wet and forming additional sink holes. When you see the report. It's a very detailed study. Larime Could you clarify wet verses dry. Is this wet, wet related to the wettest period known in this area? Tom Alcamo No. It's based on the information we have now. We only did
this a few months ago. We have had a dry spring. Tom Alcamo I will have to look at the rain gage data. It's judged on the data we have now. They just started doing storm water monitoring. During this last storm a few weeks ago. We haven't seen the data yet. Larime These are mild storms. David Porter We had 13 inches rain one July. In 1993, I think. Larime Can you get together with weather people? Tom Alcamo We have data back from the 50's. Yes we will be doing that. Larime Tom can certainly do better in terms of volumes. David Porter Wet verses dry is not right if you don't know wet verses dry. Michael List We have an order that the sampling has to be done by June 1st. David Porter If your choices are to remove everything, testing as you go. Then you know what you've done. Or, to do this sort of thing, to be based on completely unreliable and inaccurate data. Then the thing to do is the former. Tom Alcamo No. We don't dig up landfills and just dump it in someone's back yard. The consent decree said build an incinerator. Larime Tom, I hate to do this to you, but, are there other sites that you leave 500 ppm in an area that could be flooding? Tom Alcamo In terms of if we've had water treatment, yes. We are planning on having water treatment here. David Porter Then why clean any of it up, Tom? Tom Alcamo Because it's a continuing source. David Porter But you are going to have water treatment. So just put the water treatment in and quit screwing around. You are not solving any problems. Tom Alcamo Yes we are. You don't think removing any material from there is not going to be helpful? David Porter If you are not going to remove all of it, then you are going to have to do complete water treatment, right? Tom Alcamo Right. David Porter Then why remove any of it? Tom Alcamo Because of the hot spot. So maybe the hot spot removal is going to work. To stop the PCBs from being released. Larime So you think in karst is stable? It's not going to change? Tom Alcamo You can say that about anything in karst. Jim Cartmell That's right. That's why we want to take it all out. That is exactly why you decided to take it out originally. Tom Alcamo No. We decided to build a incinerator also. David Porter The incinerator is a side issue. The point was you were going to destroy all of the toxic materials. You have now changed your mind. You are not destroying any toxic materials. You are sequestering them. You are not removing all of them to your sequester. But you are having some in Utah, some somewhere else. And bits and pieces scattered around here. Now, for the pieces you leave here, you have to build water treatment plants. Just build adequate water treatment plants. Treat them for all eternity. And quit kidding us that you have accomplished some goal. Unknown Man I think part of the issue is that the sites at the treatment plant depends on what is left behind. If we have to treat all of the water. It may become physically impossible. What you want to do is to reduce or lower the risk of PCBs getting into the water. David Porter You have no basis for your assumption that you have lowered that risk sufficiently or even at all. So you must build a full size treatment plant to handle our worse case water events. Your lousy sampling has wasted 20 years. You are complaining that suddenly you are up against a wall. And you don't have the data. And now you are telling us that you are going to faze it. And you are avoiding dealing with the real issues. Tom Alcamo That is totally false. How can you say we are not dealing with the issues? We have sampled the landfill. David Porter I not impressed. You are doing a half-assed job. Why sample? Mike Baker Dave, you have very valid arguments, but I don't think we need to be yelling at each other. And I want to make one comment. That the incinerator would not reduce the toxins. It would just spread it in other form all over the community. David Porter It would destroy the PCBs. Mike Baker Except maybe have something else come out worse. David Porter But that's not the fault of destroying the PCBs. It was a bad technological choice. Mike Baker I agree. David Porter The goal of actually destroying the PCBs is a worthy goal. To fail to destroy them actually accomplishes no long term good. But we don't have the technology to destroy them when they are co-mingled with everything in those dumps. Tom Alcamo But the PCBs we excavate are going to be put in a compliant landfill. David Porter I'm not impressed with a compliant landfill. Unknown man Well, a compliant landfill beats the dickens out of karst. David Porter It does, I agree with you. But it is not as good as actually detoxifying the toxic. Michael List No, it's not. The question is not really whether all the PCBs are being destroyed. The question is whether all the PCBs are being dealt with in a away that they can't escape into the community. And I don't think that is being done adequately. But that is really the question. Larime Now, if, just by the basic factor that we chose land filling instead of destruction alternatives, means that we would have to keep it all here. That's right back to your point of that we've still got it here in our community. We call these a landfill, but they are really dumps on top of karst concrete. We're back to where we are not taking it all out. We are not doing it at Lemon Lane. We're not doing it here, at Neal's. And it wasn't just three months ago we were talking about high flow, low flow water treatment. At both here and Lemon Lane. And now we have lost it at Lemon Lane and we are losing it at Neal's. We are accepting a step that planned that we are going to let Westinghouse screw around until they see if they can reduce the flow. And take a little bit out, move a little bit. Tom Alcamo What happens if they build a huge plant and they are able to catch the conduits. Coming right from Lemon Lane. And be able to treat right there. Larime For the time being, it might do something. But the conduits are shifting. Michael List If there is a change there. If it actually occurs then we can go back. Jim Cartmell How are you going to tell. You aren't going to monitor.... David Porter What percentage of the PCBs do you believe you will have removed when you do your hot spot clean up? Tom Alcamo I have no idea. David Porter Now that makes us feel secure in your knowledge. Tom Alcamo It's about preventing risk. It's about being exposed to those......It's not about 20% or 90%. It's not about a mass balance of removing material. David Porter What I'm telling you is dig it all up and then you still have to build treatment plants. And maybe then you will come close to a 100%. I'm not as dumb as you think, Tom. Tom Alcamo I think you are pretty smart. Because your idea you gave us last time concerning an interim period in terms of the storm events we're using. I mean, if we don't get a storm event by this interim period, we are going to proposed an extended time. I don't think you are dumb at all. David Porter Then stop coming at me with this idea that I am expecting something that is unreasonable. I expect you to do your utmost to keep it out of the environment. Michael List I would like to ask Mr. Kahn a question. Something that puzzles me. Why when the consent decree was negotiated, and it was determined that all of this stuff should be removed from Lemon Lane. Lemon Lane should be completely excavated. When it was going to be incinerated. Has technology improved that much. That now that it is not going to be incinerated. Now that Westinghouse doesn't stand to make money from it. Suddenly it's not necessary to excavate everything in Lemon Lane. Why is that? How does that work? Mr. Chan I wasn't involved in the negotiation back in the early 80's. I can't give you an explanation of what people were thinking. All I can do is give you my perspective from today looking back. And my guess is that it wasn't an agreement to excavate everything. It was an agreement to excavate down to a certain level. Jim Cartmell If you read your own EDD it says this. This agreement was agreed to accomplish a 1 ppm clean up. Mr. Chan That may be what the EDD says, but the decree says something else. It was my understanding that the decree didn't require excavation of everything. It required excavation down to a certain year. With the assumption that we would be accomplishing a certain level. Second, it was a package. It was a balance that was achieved. The understanding that this material would be removed provided that it went to this technology. With the City throwing in their municipal solid waste to off-set some of the cost clean up. Michael List Did the fundamental reason for removing the material change? Mr. Chan No. Let's go back that sampling wasn't done to the extent that's it's been done today. We've done additional sampling. We've identified the hot spots. Unknown Man No, you haven't. You've identified the hot spots you've identified. Until you characterize an entire landfill you have not identified all the hot spots. Mr. Chan Based on historical information that was available. Including aerial photography. Unknown Man Last meeting we saw aerial photography that said otherwise. Jim Cartmell And the site reports written by EPA that said it was dumped in other locations other than where you are excavating. Mr. Chan It is my understanding talking with the technical folks that they are comfortable with identification of the hot spots. Sampling has been done to figure our where those areas are. It makes more sense today to target those areas that pose the most risk. Jim Cartmell This is their thought process. Due to the fracture nature of the underline bed rock. Containment was not feasible. This is the motion of the United States to have a consent decree. .... ...... Due to the nature of these formation ground water does not flow in an established pattern. There may be major channels at some points, but those channels carry only a portion of the ground water which flows in the system. Certain types of land disposal facilities are not capable of assuring long term containment of certain hazardous waste. And the consent decree for Lemon Lane. This is it. It says that you have to wait until the 58 level, and then you start doing testing. And then you excavate a bunch more. And then you do a 3 foot buffer. Mr. Chan With respect to Lemon Lane specifically the decree did not require water treatment. So one of the assumptions, I think, was if we take everything out, we won't have to deal with the water issue. It will take care of itself. Instead of digging everything out today, we are going to be looking at treating the water and targeting at what could be causing the problem. Larime Wilson The assumption about the water at the time was that there was none escaping. As far as these parties of concern weren't there. And we all know they do exist now. Mr. Chan Actually we looked at those springs back in the period of time when the consent decree was being created. But at that time we could not find a connection. Nor could we find a consistent pattern of PCB contamination. We've learned it came from 1990. I wasn't involved back then. We found a consistent pattern at that particular spring. And we know that is a problem and it needs to be dealt with. George Hegeman Is it fair to say that the more PCBs that are removed from the Lemon Lane site, the less elaborate the water monitoring will need to be. Tom Alcamo Water monitoring would stay the same. Water treatment may change. George Hegeman If that is the case, then why is it EPA can't or won't prevail upon CBS or themselves simply for the entire place on some sort of grid that will be.........(interrupted) Mr. Chan At the end of all of this, let's say that the contamination
levels don't drop off as we anticipated they should. And let's say at
that point we determine that we need a huge treatment plant. CBS would
at that point make the determination that everything is more economic
to take everything up after all. Do you understand that? I understand that. But there is also an area that the assumption is that you really do know where it's all going. Tom Alcamo We're coming from _______ that we think the material should be excavated from that facility. CBS still truly believes that they don't need to remove one gram of material out of there and it would not change what was happening with the water. David Porter I agree with them. Then you have to build a very big treatment plant. So build it. What happens to the community the next 10 years while you are looking? Tom Alcamo Our goal is to try and get rid of the fish advisory for all the creeks. Larime Is it two years you are going to allow Westinghouse to sample or mess around with......... And then they are going to have two years after the removal to document. Tom Alcamo If were not getting the data, we'll open it up for longer. We're concerned about the storm events as well. Larime Look at this community the past few years you would realize that the lakes and the water table reached levels that everybody said why did we have this 100 year flood with Lake Monroe. We'll we learned. But we only learned in the past few years. And it's that kind of water condition that we are more concerned about. We are worried about the high flow that really happens in this part of the country. We have had many floods. Mr. Chan Your point is a very good one. Which we will take to heart. We want to make sure that we have enough of a sample that we can rely on before any decision is final. In the meantime, we have a situation that really cries out for immediate attention. And that the existing contamination at Illinois Central Springs. So we are insisting on treatment for this two year period while we look the situation through. And if it requires more time later, we certainly have the ability to take that time. Tom Alcamo EPA isn't perfect in this process. I'm not perfect. But I can say this, we need to get something on Illinois Central Spring immediately. Larime Why don't you just go in and order a water treatment plan right now? David Porter With zero discharge. Jim Cartmell Surely this just didn't occur to you. David Porter We have been telling you for 10 years that it's coming out of Illinois Central Springs and you ridiculed. Your agency ridiculed. The state ridiculed. Your sampling was inept. And when you finally got a hint, you finally realized that we weren't spoofing. Jim Cartmell Well, they tested the creek that crosses 3rd street in 1981 and got 5 ppm. The state tested. The reason it was tested was because a member of the environmental commission said these springs come from Lemon Lane. It took months to get the city to test. And when they did, they lied. Tom Alcamo So what does it prove? Jim Cartmell That they've known forever and they have never gotten around to doing anything about it until now. Unknown Man I think it's perfectly appropriate and necessary for you to put a water treatment system on Illinois Springs. And it should have been done a long time ago. What I do have a problem with is that your thinking of a water treatment and monitoring system is being somehow the functional equivalent of a true characterization of what's in the landfill. And the problem with that is that you don't know all the places that stuff comes out of the landfill. Now you could characterized everything that's in the landfill. If you did a boring every 20 feet or whatever. On a grid throughout the whole thing. Which would contribute a lot to continuing release. But you don't want to do that. You want to use the water treatment and the water monitoring as a way of some sort of function equivalent of that. I don't think that makes sense because it's not a closed system. Tom Alcamo I certainly............guidance in terms of landfill investigation. In terms of you, read this guidance. Jim Cartmell I read. You are not following it. Right at the start it says long lived highly toxic material are not appropriate for contaminates. Tom Alcamo Read the guidance. It talks about nature of landfills, ...... Jim Cartmell I don't think so. Unknown Man Try to focus. All of you are making comments which we also share. We want to remove a lot of the PCBs out of the landfill. Because what you then do is reduce the potential risk in the geological study. You reduce then the amount that has to be ultimately treated. Look, we are trying to reduce the mass out of there. Does it get all of it out? No. That's why then, we agree with you, you've got to have a water treatment system. That water system is likely going to be there likely forever. And the third goal is to eliminate the fish advisories. There is a fourth part of this: There is always going to be long term monitoring. On anything coming out of that landfill area. And maybe I will say a fifth issue here that may be of some value. We want to make sure that the long term water system does in fact capture the PCBs. David Porter I don't hear you talking about the size of the water treatment plant. I don't understand your rational that if we take half of it away, the plan gets to be smaller. George Hegeman It gets smaller in the sense of for instance how much activated carbon that you would be using and expending. In other words you will have a certain mass of PCBs that will come out of that landfill. The volume may be the same, in terms of water in the future. But the mass will be reduced. And David, it gets right to the point of treating with activated carbon and how those units operate. David Porter Okay. But you are still going to have to pass the same number of gallons through that filter. Then let Westinghouse make the decision of how much they want to change the carbon. Why do you care, provided there is no discharge? You still get the clean creek. Unknown Man It seems to me that the size of the water treatment plan should be a function clearly of flow. Unknown man All the crud coming out. It's got to stop all of it. Unknown man Actually, there is a difference. _____________ Between flow and PCB concentrations. That we are able to get, for example, the two hundred thousands ppm areas and the one thousand ppm areas. All of the bad stuff out of there. And all of the areas we believe get wet. And it may be possible that as flow increases we end up with insignificant concentration. David Porter That hasn't been what your data has showed. Tom Alcamo We haven't done removal yet. Unknown Man That is part of the thing that we are going to look at after the excavation is complete. David Porter Why are you waiting to build the treatment plants? Everyone tells me about the urgency. And Tom knew it when he took the job. Unknown man There is one going in at Lemon Lane. Unknown Man How big? Tom Alcamo We don't know. We have to negotiate it. David Porter How could you not know that? There is one going in it and you don't know how big. Larime You did call it low flow? Tom Alcamo Right Unknown Man You figure for two years what happens. And if you don't meet certain criteria, then they have to go into building the mega........ Larime The big problem is here is that it's high flow when you are talking PCBs. It's low flow when ....... Unknown Man But what that is also assuming is that, right, there is absolutely no change in result in the action of pulling huge amount of PCBs out of there in the wet areas and putting a cap on it. What you are saying is that there will not be any change. We think we want to see if, in fact, there is a significant change. If there is not a significant change, then we have to go to the full scale. And we'll have the leverage to do that. David Porter Why don't you think that there's going to be a huge pulse coming out while your doing a remedy? Unknown Man When we get a massive rain. David Porter And you don't have a bucket there to catch it. Cause you just wanted to go in with a teacup. Unknown Man And their still going to be responsible to have to deal with it. If they have that release. David Porter How are you going to pick it up out of Clear Creek? Unknown Man When you see what is negotiated during the clean up. Thou shall collect run off waste. Thou shall do this. It will be a whole laundry list they have to try to prevent this from occurring. And if there are releases, they are still going to have to be responsible. We still have to line out the items here. Jim Cartmell You know this isn't the first time these things were discussed. Westinghouse brought up all the same things. U.S. said you can identify where a portion of the ground water goes, but you can't identify it all .And it's still the same. More than a ton a day of non capacitor waste, not counting capacitor waste is dumped in these landfills. And you haven't identified where those are. Tom Alcamo We determined the PCBs in Clear Creek that is causing the problems with the fish. Jim Cartmell Where you monitor, and how long you monitor. After you dig this up you are going to change the flow. Water goes someplace. And it might be coming out some of these other places. Unknown Man And the other side of that. It could work too. You are laying out all the possibilities of everything that could go wrong. But the other side to this is, that undertaking what we are doing, plus the water treatment. Plus the monitoring. Plus the goal of eliminating the fish advisories in the Creek. All of this could work. David Porter So then if you look backwards, how many pounds of PCBs have been discharged since 1956 through Lemon Lane? Did anybody bother to do these kinds of calculations? Jim Cartmell No. You are claiming that they didn't know they were connected until then. They were testing the water before then. They claimed the amounts that were coming out weren't significant enough to do anything about it. That's what they claim. They said that over and over again. Unknown Man The thing is that we have to look to the future. We recognize there is a problem. Tom Alcamo Jim you are going to be able to review the monitoring tables. Unknown Man I still don't know what you are going from a to b via p and q. Why don't you just go from a to b and fully characterize the landfill. And then you'll know what's there. And then you can remove a whole bunch more than you otherwise might. And then all the uncertainties involved in having this on karst. Which is unique. And pretending that you know where all of this is going. It would be hugely diminished. Tom Alcamo Based upon the size of this site, the size of this Lemon Lane and Neal's landfill. In terms of what has been done it fits exactly from what we view hot spots. We don't dig up these sites. Unknown Man How many of these sites do you have on karst? Tom Alcamo There is a number. I don't know a site across the country where they have dug up a complete landfill and moved it. David Porter Then maybe you ought to review your policies. Tom Alcamo Come on. There is a point where we have to have a national consistency. It's about being exposed. It's about preventing exposure. It's about removing fish advisories .That's our goals. We think what we are proposing is proper and correct. David Porter You are saying water treatment is going to go on for a hundred years? Tom Alcamo There are many sites across the country where the same thing is happening. I can't make it all disappear. I would love to have it out of Bloomington. David Porter You need to be concerned more about our problem not your policies. Tom Alcamo I am interested in your problems. Why do you think we are trying to prevent risk? David Porter You aren't if you don't build a full size treatment plant. You are just dodging the issue. Tom Alcamo We aren't saying we aren't building one. David Porter You haven't said you are. You are planning to start an investigation without a plant in place that will capture all discharge after all storm events. True. Then you aren't. You aren't protecting me if you start digging in that Lemon Lane without the ability to capture all the discharge while you dig. Tom Alcamo So you are happy with the interim period. There should be a high flow system on there right now, immediately. David Porter I think it should have been there 10 years ago. Unknown Man That was one of the weaknesses of the original consent decree. We are hoping that with a water treatment system that is able to isolate itself with the problem of migration of that water. Then in that sense we are going to be able to conclude this aspect of the original consent decree. Unknown Man It seems of your scale of the water treatment plant, that you are doing it backwards. It seems to me that you should build it big and then scale it down. Tom Alcamo As much as you don't want to hear it, I have to take cost analysis. George Hegeman What would characterize it. We believe you have found hot spots. But there are other spots. How does that figure in with cost analysis? Tom Alcamo If there is PCBs in 4 feet in depth. And there's nothing underneath. And there is 6 feet of cap on top of it. 2 feet of clay, a liner, and 2 feet of vegetated soil. Who is getting exposed to that material? Something is going to come out of the bottom of the landfill? Larime Tom, let's talk about excavation. You know when you start digging and dislodging. Things start falling through the holes. And the holes are there. And the holes get washed out by the next water of high rain. That's what they are talking about. Their talking about the dislodging of stuff down adding to what is in the sink holes. That is not going to get caught by a low flow water treatment. It's not what is coming out on top of the cap. It's everything else. Tom Alcamo For now. Just to get something on there for now. You have valid points. We have not done the engineering. Yes, that is a valid concern. But it is not like we are walking away. In terms of sediment sampling, fish sampling, throughout this. Larime I'm very pleased. But what are you going to do with the stuff that washes out? Unknown man They have to go in there and look at the creek at the completion. We are then going to lay out a whole sampling area. Unknown Woman She's asking about dislodgment during excavation. Tom Alcamo I don't think we have an answer today on that one. Mike Baker Part of the argument that Westinghouse has made is that they
don't feel they need to make any excavation because the feel the landfill
is dry. Down to the level. But what is escaping and has escaped was the
material that migrated before the cap was on down below that level. Which
is still there, which will still migrate. Regardless of the excavation.
Because if the excavation is dry, and what is escaping is wet, then regardless
of what you excavate it won't affect, other than negatively. Because you
have disrupted some things - what is wet. So that is their argument. Your
argument is we're going to dig out what is dry to reduce what is coming
out. When most people are saying if it's dry and what's coming out is
wet. So what difference does it make what you excavate that's dry. Because
what's really coming out is not what is in the landfill proper, it's what's
below that. And nothing you excavate is going to affect that. By digging
up anything you are liable to increase the PCBs, the channels, the flows,
the protection, everything. So, why not not dig up any of it and build
a treatment plant to correct the present flow. Taking in the conditions
of high flow, low flow, or whatever. Through all the mistakes that human beings are likely to make from all parties, during all those years. Which have significant legal ramifications for all parties. And now have to answer to a judge. But maybe doesn't understand all of those issues, but still is in charge. Is it not possible and likely that the EPA does not have the same authority to do some of the things they might do if the consent decree was either not in place or is still not being used as some kind of frame work. And if that is the case, why doesn't someone come out and say, hey, we would like to do this, but the consent decree prevents us from doing it. We are sorry. Nobody should have signed it back then. Westinghouse shouldn't have signed it back then. The Kellogg School of Business at Northwestern has been studying this issues for years. And they have came to the same conclusion that nobody should have signed this thing. Because of all of the inconsistencies and unpredictable events. But nobody comes out and tells the public, sorry, we're screwed. But you can't even say that now because you are still negotiating for your little piece of whatever that might be. And the City and the County and EPA might want to get one more shovel full. That may be their only option. That's never discussed. The reality is, legally a lot of the parties hands are tied. Because of the sins of our fathers. Jeff Chan I agree. In some ways this agency has been concerned by the decree. But what we are doing right now is making sure that we get a clean up that's consistent with our sanitary landfill policy. That we meet the health standards that we have to meet. Despite the limits that the decree puts on us. Second part of it is. The question of walking away from it. That's like opening up a can of worms. That some parties probably would ___________. I don't think it would have any negative impact on this agency in terms of its goal. But I think the limits it puts on us in some legal sense. In terms of what we can order to do. I still think we are going to get good clean up. Because we still have to comply with the fundamental underline requirements. It's not merely EPA decisions. Department of Justice goes through this as well. I see two factors here. First of all, in one sense what you had said is correct. Since we don't have an absolute clean slate here. Ordinarily then what happens is that EPA makes its decision. Based on all the factors that you have heard. That decision the courts treat with deference. Because EPA is an administrative agency that doing the will of Congress. And if anyone tries to challenge that in a typical situation. We have a lot of the law on our side with that. They have to prove that the decision was arbitrate. Based on the actual administrative record. The situation we are in now is not as clear. And may be that EPA can make decisions by ______. But we have to engage in good faith negotiation to try to reach an agreement with all of the parties. If we are unable to reach a decision, it may be we can make a decision ______. And have that decision subjected to the same deferential standard of review. But it is highly uncertain whether we would win if we tried to make that argument in court. So we have to do our very best to negotiate with all the parties an agreement that we feel will solve the problem. And get the other parties to agree to. If we can't get the problem solved to our satisfaction, the only recourse is litigation. But we are doing our very best. Now, from a Department of Justice perspective. We want to make sure that the clean up is as good as it would be if we are starting today. In terms of analyzing the situation and doing it from scratch. And that's why EPA policy that Tom has explained before, about how we clean up in landfills, is so important. And we are doing, at least, what is in those policies and probably a lot more. We are trying very very hard. But the policies, in terms of how we generally approach these problems today, is not that you just take everything out. It's not that when you have a landfill that contains all kinds of ________ wastes. You don't rid the system out and analyze the entire system. Our guidance generally don't have us do that for these kinds of landfills. Mike Baker You explained my first part about why we would excavate the dry landfill, assuming that it is dry. But we have been told many times that it is dry. Tom Alcamo We certainly feel, especially in the southeast corner of
that site, it's not dry. We think there is a source of material leaving
that site. There's two hundred thousand ppm PCBs in some of those areas.
We feel the risk is worthwhile to dig that material out than leave it
in place and cap it. CBS does not. But there is a lot of "ifs"
in there. We feel getting that worse case material out of there makes
sense. I went back to EarthTec and talk to them after last CIC meeting
and asked them why these samples were put on these locations based upon
site history. There was some reason behind those sample locations, then
fine. Yes, I agree with you David and Mike, it's not a statistical sampling
scene. It's not suppose to be. It's a landfill. It's going to be capped
that people are not going to be exposed to that area. We feel it is going
to be protected. We are trying to get rid of the fish advisories. I want
people to be able to fish at Clear Creek. But it's going to take a while.
But that's our goal. But in terms of removing that material, we think
it's worthwhile. How come everyone ignores the consent decree. Tom Alcamo That's it for the section about the consent decree. It's about Westinghouse providing an alternative with incineration. That's how you read this section. Unknown Man Jim, the way we understand that if CBS or Westinghouse had or has the ability to propose alternatives on the decree. Any alternatives that they propose has to be _____ of incineration. Jim Cartmell It's says level. ............ Unknown man But that doesn't prevent us from coming in together. An alternative technology that can achieve the same level of removal and destruction. Unknown Man What Jim wants to argue is that the decree requires that these excavations be as extensive as the excavations that were required under the 1985 decree. And that's not what we are trying to go through. That's not what that language talks to. What that language talks to is to achieve the same level of removal destructive PCBs from the garbage ______. Using the technology which is alternative to incineration. Jim Cartmell Yes. You got to excavate the same amount which is treated in a different way. Other than incineration. And you have to achieve the same level. The decree provides for an alternative. It says fine. If Westinghouse doesn't do incineration. You can do one. Unknown Man We aren't going through that provisions Jim. Larime They all agreed to sell out. Tom Alcamo That's not true. I just want to show you quickly this is tentatively the geophysical study that was done at Lemon Lane. And those stick lines are where we think conduits are going through Illinois Central Springs. They have to get an assess agreement with the cemetery to do the drilling. Hopefully within a week or so. We'll be doing drilling to verify those conduits. And sampling within the conduits. I'll give COPA the plan that we are going to be using to deal with that. In terms of all the other water that's coming from the base of it and coming into the base of Illinois Central Spring. It would lessen CBS's requirement. Maybe not initially, but later on down the line. That they would have to treat it at Illinois Central Spring. Because they could stop the PCBs from getting there before it's discharged. In terms of this study, I wish this was done many years ago. I think this certainly shows some potential. We may get something good from this. If the ground treatment is effective we are going to do that at Neal's Landfill. Ground truthing - they will start and if it is possible, they will move on to other areas. Jim Cartmell What's that intended to accomplish? Tom Alcamo They are going to drill into those conduits to see, and then video log them to see. They think there may be a cave in there. Somewhere maybe in here. There is evidence there could be. They are going to do video and sampling. Jim Cartmell What about these other ones? Same thing? Tom Alcamo Yes. Right now on west side of the site, these probably are not valid. It's not a strict conduit leading. Jim Cartmell How do they tell it's not strict conduits? Tom Alcamo Because they use the Back-hoe. They dug down. They back holed the whole area. We probably won't drill on Griffin's property. He wouldn't like that. Unknown Woman In terms of ground truthing. Will they be following along all those lines? Will a number of samples be taken and where? Tom Alcamo No. Right now they will start with these areas. If positive, then they will move .If this comes forth, we'll go on to Neal's. Larime Where do the conduits go inside .... mean? Tom Alcamo We don't know where they go. I'll get you a map. We think there is only one. Larime One single, two single, question. We got hot dumping up in a whole other bend. That's west of the main whole that is claimed that it doesn't connect to anything? They are doing it all outside. What are you doing inside? To tell where. The hot stuff is inside. Tom Alcamo It's only across the railroad track. They did it along here. Larime How do you know it's not coming from clear up in the hot spot you never tested? That hot 1961 year that you refused to test? Unknown Man The concern is to isolate where the water is coming from and catch it at those points. Jim Cartmell So what about the ground water that doesn't move through...... Tom Alcamo We are going to monitor. We will be doing additional _______ test. Unknown Man In the perspective of conduits that flow into the landfill, there is potential to divert those flows around the landfill so they never get into the contaminated areas. Jim Cartmell How far do they trace those lines? Unknown Man Jim, you are asking though where is water flowing away from the landfill. Because you are not as interested about how far you look at the sources of water that flow into the landfill. You want to make sure that contaminated ground water doesn't migrate away from the landfill. Jim Cartmell Right. That is what I'm saying. I want to make sure when you monitor that you test all the Springs. You aren't going to be testing 38 Springs. You don't test 38 testing now. I drank from a Well that has never been tested yet. It was suppose to be tested under the consent decree. It's in conduit. It's northeast of the landfill. Where _____ comments that says water goes there. The only three Well's that I've know of that have never been tested. Our Well was so shallow at the bottom you could stick your hand up into the conduit. You could feel the water flow. And it came straight from the direction of Lemon Lane. It's never been tested. And it use to be a surface spring. Larime Everyone on that hill drank from that. Before crest mountain was built in 1969. Jim Cartmell So how will you deal with that? Will you test them? Tom Alcamo Certainly we will take the information.... Jim Cartmell I want it tested. High flow, low flow. ....... Unknown Man What is your water source? Jim Cartmell One might be on water, but my house isn't. Unknown Man This is good information. We will check on it. Larime The only person who made the decision not to test the Well was Mike McCann from Westinghouse. Technically it didn't have a pump so it wouldn't be used. That's one question to use the Wells for whether we are going to drink out of them or not. But when we are starting to use the Wells sampling to show where water moves from, then it's highly inadequate, and it doesn't matter whether anyone is going to drink out of into that Well and feel the current and you could test it. We've been given the information for years. 1111 Ooltic Street. And 1306 15th Street. And that's not connected to city water and never has. Unknown man We will look into this. Tom Alcamo You make valid points. Let us look at it. If it's going the other way, we will have to treat it there too. Unknown man We are going to use scientific methods to make sure that we are comfortable that we got all significant sources of drainage. David Porter So that you are aware that with the major dye trace study that 1/3 of the injected dye never got out of the sample Well? Unknown Man You have to ask the expects whose opinions I rely on. David Porter They claimed they recovered 99% of all the dye. But yet they had to pump the Well clean because the dye in it never got out of the Well. And you wonder why we think the data is corrupt. There's a real bad problem there. Jim Cartmell What you are claiming is site history, it's just one that they made up. We showed it last week. They said that material was dumped in the north end of the landfill. Video shut off.
|
|||||||||||||||
|
The Cast | The Tragedy
| The
Comedy | The
Ending | News
| Library
| Seating
Plan | Top
|
Home |
CALL (812) 333-8888 FOR MORE INFORMATION OR E-MAIL info@copa.org | |||||||||||||||
The Coaltion Opposed to PCB
Ash in Monroe County, Inc. is a nonprofit organization. | |||||||||||||||