19.04.2018 Views

West Lake CAG NRRB Submission REVISED ADDENDUM January 4 2018

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Appendix A – Technical Concerns Letter to Mr. Kelly<br />

Mr. Albert Kelly<br />

EPA Superfund Task Force<br />

November 6, 2017<br />

Mr. Kelly<br />

It is our understanding that you are meeting with Administrator Pruitt this week. On behalf of our<br />

community, the <strong>CAG</strong> and Just Moms StL would like to highlight some inconsistencies and concerns<br />

regarding the current FFS for <strong>West</strong> <strong>Lake</strong> Landfill that may inform your actions and<br />

recommendations moving forward.<br />

A. Despite the PRPs claim that “All of the following remedial alternatives … meet EPA’s<br />

criteria for overall protection of human health and the environment.” 1 , we believe that this<br />

conclusion cannot be reached based on a number of key omissions in the FFS analysis as<br />

pointed out by Region 7 in their Comment Letter dated October 26, 2017:<br />

1. Not included: “is an evaluation of the potential risk that an SSE could cause a release<br />

of particulates from OU1or an estimate of the resulting risk should a release occur.” 2<br />

2. Not included: Presence of “petroleum soaked soils” mixed with RIM in Area 1 3 and<br />

the risk of meeting with a SSE<br />

3. Not included: Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME) to evaluate exposures to<br />

residents or workers. These are missing. Averages were used instead of RME. 4<br />

4. Questionable Parameters Used in Modeling: Reductions in the volume of gases in<br />

the soils used in the modeling are suspected of generating an underestimate of<br />

potential radon releases. 5<br />

5. The risks identified by the ORD report 6 have not been fully addressed or nullified:<br />

The ORD report states that even a properly maintained Cap would not be protective<br />

of our community.<br />

6. Multi-agencies errors/omissions: Recent FEMA flood map 7 assumes this area is<br />

protected from flooding by Cowmire Creek on the north side by a railroad track that<br />

has not been inspected nor was designed as a levee. Note: there is also a concern<br />

that the installation of a non-permeable cap over a significant acreage at the site may<br />

contribute to flooding of this creek and therefore, adding to the already occurring<br />

flooding of local roads and businesses in this area.<br />

B. Evaluation of earthquake risks at the <strong>West</strong> <strong>Lake</strong> Landfill appears deficient:<br />

1<br />

FFS August 25, 2017, Executive Summary, Page 4, #1<br />

2<br />

US EPA Region 7 October 26, 2017 Comment Letter, Page 1, #3<br />

3<br />

EMSI February 25, 1997 Superfund Document 40056510<br />

4<br />

US EPA Region 7 October 26, 2017 Comment Letter Page8, #50, #56<br />

5<br />

US EPA Region 7 October 26, 2017 Comment Letter, Page 5-6, #33-#37<br />

6 EPA Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Engineering and Technical Support<br />

Center - March 28, 2017<br />

7<br />

http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=cbe088e7c8704464aa0fc34eb99e7f30&extent=-<br />

90.46496139697318,38.76747818611529,-90.42582260302683,38.7785194006372<br />

Page 18

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!