2015-10-19 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Mark Hague notes for call with Mathy Stanislaus

To: From: Stoy, Alyse[Stoy.Aiyse@epa.gov]; Peterson, Mary[Peterson.Mary@epa.gov] Juett, Lynn Sent: Subject: Mon... View Document

Post

2016-01-26 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – EPA discussion of property assurance around West Lake Landfill

To:
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Peterson, Mary[Peterson. Mary@epa.gov]
Brincks, Mike
Tue 1/26/2016 11:04:23 PM
Re: Notes from Just Moms meeting
So an anti-stigma guarantee
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:00PM, Peterson, Mary wrote:
No. It means a guarantee that they can sell their property -basically it’s an assurance of
sustained property value.
Sent from my iPhone
From: Peterson, Mary
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 12:07 PM
To: Hague, Mark Brincks, Mike
Cc: Carey, Curtis
Subject: Notes from Just Moms meeting
Mark, Mike, and Curtis,
We received the notes pasted below from Mike Zlatic with St. Louis County Health
Dept. I have highlighted a few areas for your awareness.
WeO 1/21/16 JustMOMSstl meeting (03/17 /16 next meeting – may be changed due to
St. Patrick’s Day)
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0056269
6:35P Karen
No prayer; recognized elected officials
Reminder to report odors to MDNR
6:38P Karen
Upcoming events
West Lake CAG 02/08/16
FUSRAP Oversight 02/17/16
Saturday 02/20/16 STLCC Wildwood
Community organizer to support Moms is to be recruited by, and funded by,
Lois Gibbs’s organization CHEJ
February 8-10 Mom’s trip to DC (funded by gofundme) to pursue status of
legislation
6:44P Dawn
Update on congressional legislation- keep up the pressure with daily phone calls. Bill
Otto explained the legislative process, i.e., those who introduced the bill must push the
bill or it won’t go anywhere.
6:48P Dawn
West Lake/Bridgeton history recap
6:57P Dawn
Alvarez report
Largest deposit of Thorium in the world at West Lake.
More uranium at West Lake than at a site where uranium is mined.
Pb210 …
Because Republic requested change of venue to federal court, March court date will
probably not occur.
There is documented contamination offsite from West Lake.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0056270
St. Louis County will need to play a bigger role depending on the …
7:08P Dawn/Karen
Senator Maria Chapelle-Nadal’s ‘buyout’ bill. Testimony next week in
Jefferson City.
7:11P Christen Commuso “Humans of West Lake Landfill” (see attached handout)
Human interest stories- wants more testimonies.
7:15P Dawn
Dr. Khan canceled his appearance tonight but Dawn, Karen, and Harvey have
a meeting with him next week.
7: 17P Karen/Dawn Q&A
Why weren’t yards around Coldwater Creek tested before now?
A: USACE follows the creek, cleans up what they find, then test further
downstream. Request to lobby congressionals to increase FUSRAP funding.
Attend upcoming County Council meeting to support transfer to FUSRAP and
for Dr. Khan to expand (not explained) his health survey.
Comment about necessity to test soil that is being farmed.
Comment about not knowing what to do if/when the ‘landfill blows’.
Comment that the President is immediately involved in Flint MI, but not
West Lake/Bridgeton.
A: Matt Lavanchy explained that alpha emitter needs to be ingested or inhaled,
effects are long term, and different persons respond differently. This will not be a
catastrophic explosion, if the ‘fire’ reaches the RIM (and it has not advanced in the last
year or so). But, we do need a physical barrier.
When do we go to the United Nations to investigate EPA?
A: Dawn urged people to ‘get angry’.
Testing water supply?
A: Drew, representative of Alliance Water, water supplier at/around WSSRAP
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0056271
(Weldon Springs): Won’t see effects of this for ~5 years. Radiation doesn’t leave
water. Review your Consumer Confidence reports from your water supplier.
A: Karen reUnited Nations investigation- Lois Gibbs working on this.
Is the area being monitored?
A: Matt Lavanchy explained that monitoring occurs 24/7. 250,000 tons of S02
left the site in 2013(?). Report odors as soon as you smell them. Radiation in a smoke
plume is not a concern. Shelter in place is a temporary measure.
Comment: Make sure the doctors in the area are informed.
Is vegetation moved offsite?
A: Dawn “not yet” and don’t know where the vegetation will be disposed.
Matt explained that the vegetation will be ground up, placed on site, and
covered with road base.
7:57P Howard? Had been nmning for Bill Otto’s seat but is dropping out and
supporting his opponent, Byron DeLear(?).
Byron thanked him.
8:00P Is the science (facts) available online?
8:01P “Safe Side of the Fence” will be shown on 02/23/16 at a church in Ferguson (see
attached handout)
8:02P Karen looking for 5 persons to write op eds to newspapers.
Looking for someone to track political fundraisers.
8:06P Drew (Alliance Water) started ….
8:08P Karen reiterated WSMOMSstl 3 goals (Buyout within 1 mile, Property
assurance within 3? Miles, Transfer from EPA Superfund to USACE FUSRAP)
8:09P Adjourn

WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0056272
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0056273

Post

2015-11-19 – EPA – West Lake Landfill is more difficult to clean up than other St Louis FUSRAP sites

To:
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Fritz, Matthew[Fritz.Matthew@epa.gov]
Hague, Mark
Thur 11/19/2015 6:15:17 PM
FW: New Bill in Senate: R7 OPA –West Lake Landfill Updates
From: Carey, Curtis
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 11:41 AM
To: Hague, Mark ; Brincks, Mike ; Peterson,
Mary ; Stoy, Alyse ; Juett, Lynn
; Vann, Bradley ; Field, Jeff

Cc: Washburn, Ben ; Sanders, LaTonya
Subject: RE: New Bill in Senate: R7 OPA –West Lake Landfill Updates
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055787
For Immediate Release
November 19, 2015
Contacts:
Missouri Members Demand Action on
West Lake Landfill
WASHINGTON, DC- Today, members of the Missouri congressional delegation,
including Senators Roy Blunt and Claire McCaskill, and Representatives Ann Wagner
and Wm. Lacy Clay, introduced legislation to transfer remediation authority over the
West Lake landfill from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Army Corps of
Engineers, putting the site in the Corps’ Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action
Program (FUSRAP).
“The EPA’s unacceptable delay in implementing a solution for the West Lake landfill has
destroyed its credibility and it is time to change course,” said Blunt. “The Corps has the
knowledge, experience, and confidence of the families living near the site. Transferring
clean up efforts to its control will help move the process forward and finally give these
families the peace of mind they deserve. No parent should have to raise their child in an
environment where they fear for their health and safety.”
McCaskill added, “The needs of this community are our top concern. We’ve heard loud
and clear that they want the West Lake site transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers’
program that oversees all other sites in St. Louis containing this World War II era
nuclear waste. This legislation is not a silver bullet, and will take far longer than we’d like
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055788
to resolve the many issues surrounding this site, but this is a concrete, positive step
forward in a process that’s been stagnant for far too long.”
The bill introduced today would not alter the current liability of potentially responsible
parties at the site nor its designation as a Superfund site.
The measure represents the latest step in the delegation’s effort to utilize the Corps’
expertise to expedite remediation at the West Lake site. In July, Blunt, McCaskill,
Wagner, and Clay sent to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz asking the
Department of Energy to re-evaluate whether West Lake qualified for inclusion in the
Corps’ FUSRAP in light of new information regarding the source of radioactive waste at
the site.
“My constituents in the St. Louis region deserve a government where officials work
proactively on their behalf, rather than kicking the can down the road with recurring
delays and deflections,” said Wagner. “The Formerly Utilized Site Remedial Action
Program (FUSRAP) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have an excellent track
record, broad support in the community and the expertise to handle a site as
complicated as the Westlake Landfill. I believe that this legislation is a crucial step in our
efforts to reach a permanent solution for the people of Missouri.”
Clay added, “Over a year ago, I called for the transfer of West Lake to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers FUSRAP program. This new bipartisan legislation will bring us
closer to achieving that goal.
This is a 70-year old problem and the federal government has a duty to finally do the
right thing.
I am totally committed to removing all the nuclear waste from West Lake landfill. It just
makes no sense to allow radioactive waste to remain buried in an unlined landfill, near
residential neighborhoods, schools, a hospital, the airport and the Missouri River. It’s
time to clean up West Lake landfill.”
On February 28, 2014, the members also sent to the EPA asking the agency to
contract directly with the Corps to handle remediation efforts through FUSRAP, citing
the Corps’ “expertise in this area, and the local community’s faith in the Corps’ FUSRAP
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055789
mission.” In March of 2014, the agencies~~== an agreement to work together to
build a fire break at the West Lake landfill.
Peterson,
Cc: Washburn, Ben Sanders, LaTonya
Subject: New Bill in Senate: R7 OPA –West Lake Landfill Updates
To require the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers,
to undertake remediation oversight of the West Lake Landfill located
in Bridgeton, Missouri.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055790
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055791

Post

2015-12-17 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – EPA receiving complaints about Coalition to Keep Us Safe

To: Stanislaus, Mathy[Stanislaus.Mathy@epa.gov]; Distefano,
N ichole[DiStefano. N ichole@e pa .gov]
From: Hague, Mark
Sent: Thur 12/17/2015 12:23:35 AM
Subject: Fwd: Post-Dispatch Editorial WLL
Mathy and Nichole
FYI. We heard from several stakeholders similar concerns as expressed below when we were in
StLouis Tuesday.
Mark
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: “Carey, Curtis”
Date: December 16,2015 at 6:16:12 PM CST
To: “Hague, Mark”
“Peterson, Mary”
Alyse”
Christopher”
Subject: Post-Dispatch Editorial WLL
Editorial: Politics and money drive advocates of keeping radioactive waste in Bridgeton
By the Editorial Board
The let’s-keep-radioactive-waste-buried-in-Bridgeton crowd is not what it’s pretending to
be.
More than a group of concerned citizens who say they don’t want contaminated waste
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055757
transported through their communities, the righteously named “Coalition to Keep Us Safe”
is a political campaign in action.
It has little to do with keeping anyone safe, considering that there already have been more
than 1 million cubic yards of contaminated material shipped by rail through Missouri since
the 1990s. Where was the coalition then?
This group was largely assembled and paid for recently by a subsidiary of Phoenix-based
Republic Services, owner of the Bridgeton and West Lake landfills. Its purpose is to lead
opposition to a clean-up effort that would involve excavating an estimated 150,000 cubic
yards of radioactive waste and transporting it by rail to a nuclear storage facility. That
would cost Republic most of an estimated $400 million.
What the coalition members have in common are ties to Republic Services. Spokeswoman
for the group, Molly Teichman, is a conservative political commentator based in Lafayette
County, Mo., near Kansas City. She has political ties to state Rep. Glen Kolkmeyer, ROdessa,
a coalition supporter. They are both longtime friends of Kay Hoflander, chair of the
Lafayette County Republicans, who has worked on behalf of the coalition.
The common thread stitching them together is Russ Knocke, Ms. Hoflander’s son. He is the
director of field communications and public affairs for Republic. Mr. Knocke told the PostDispatch’s
Blythe Bernhard and Jacob Barker that the company spent between $10,000 and
$100,000 on a recent advertising blitz against unearthing and transporting the waste. Ms.
Teichman is paid $1,500 a month from Republic.
Pretty easy to see where the opposition gets its marching orders, isn’t it?
It gets even better. Republic Services has taken a page straight out of the playbook of David
Plouffe, architect of the long-shot bid to get Barack Obama into the White House in 2008,
and currently the “strategic adviser” for Uber. When Mr. Plouffe was hired by Uber, the
ride-hailing company that is disrupting taxi services everywhere, the company discussed
“Uber the Candidate.” Mr. Plouffe was known as the “campaign manager.”
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055758
The basics in Mr. Plouffe’s playbook are:
• Tum your campaign into a cause.
• Find a theme.
• Build an inspiring narrative around the theme.
• Speak to your core audience through social media, email, advertising or face to face.
• Tum your audience into advocates, partly by equipping them with selective facts.
• Ignore anything that doesn’t fit your strategy.
And, perhaps most importantly, keep doing the same thing day after day until people start to
buy your argument.
With this strategy, there is nothing that can’t be fought as a political campaign. But there is
also no meaning in it. Telling people you want to keep them safe when what you really
want to do is save a waste management company a lot of money is cynical. So what if
thousands of other people who live in the vicinity of West Lake and Bridgeton landfills
actually may not be safe? The coalition isn’t working to keep them safe, is it? But then,
those aren’t the people signing the checks.
Don’t fall for this strategy. This group is tying to scare the rest of us into thinking that
putting a cap over the landfill, a plan put forth by the Environmental Protection Agency in
2008, is the right way to handle radioactive waste in a landfill that is adjacent to another
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055759
landfill in which an underground fire has been burning for years. They’re trying to convince
people that it is better to let the people around Bridgeton live with the waste in their
neighborhoods than it is to transport the contaminated material along rail lines through their
communities.
The evidence suggests otherwise. The waste products where they lie are a threat of
unknown proportions. A million cubic yards of contaminated waste already have moved
through Missouri- with more being transported daily- and there have been no known
disasters as a result.
The right thing to do is excavate the radioactive material and move it to a safe nuclear
storage site. Stop the political campaign. Tum off the money spigot. Let the phony concern
wither.
Ms. Teichman showed her complete lack of sensitivity and tin ear to the concerns of others
when she thumbed her nose on social media at members of the group, JustMomsSTL, which
wants the waste hauled away.
She tweeted: “Dear mombots of #westlakelandfill, your reality tv show is over. Go home
and hangout with your kids -they miss you.”
Nice. Easy shot to take when you live more than 200 miles from St. Louis with little chance
that you, your kids or loved ones are going to become ill or contaminated from radioactive
waste. Way to run a political campaign, Ms. Teichman.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055760

Post

2015-12-12 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Analysis of requests to transfer authority to USACE

To:
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Hague, Mark[Hague.Mark@epa.gov]
Woolford, James
Sat 12/12/2015 8:24:55 PM
FW: WLL
I sent this and then, catching up on email, saw your note.
We argue similar points.
Let me know if I can help further.
Jim Woolford, Director
Office of Superfund Remediation & Technology Innovation
US EPA
Sent from my Windows Phone
Please excuse typos
Here are arguments from the Missouri coalition for the environment:
1) The St. Louis Army Corps of Engineers Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
must be put in charge of the site now! The Corps is right for the job because:
West Lake Landfill deserves a much needed second opinion after mistakes made by the EPA,
it removes a significant amount of influence that Republic Services and Exelon Energy currently
enjoy as a Superfund site,
the Corps has the technical expertise and track record for the safe cleanup of radioactively
contaminated sites in the St. Louis metro area,
workers are better protected and compensated at FUSRAP sites than EPA Superfund sites,
the Corps is already familiar with the site through current interagency agreements with EPA
Region 7 so the transfer will be smooth,
the Corps office is local and therefore more accessible to the community
2) MCE supports the safe removal of the radioactive wastes from the West Lake Landfill
because the EPA’s 2008 decision to “cap-and-leave” the wastes will remain a constant threat to
our drinking water, public health, and our environment. The safe removal of the illegally dumped
radioactive wastes is necessary because the West Lake Landfill:
was never designed to permanently store radioactive material,
has no liner separating the radioactive material from the groundwater,
is in the floodplain of the Missouri River,
is upstream from St. Louis regional drinking water intakes,
is in an urban area,
is vulnerable to earthquakes,
is threatened by a smoldering landfill fire or future fires,
is susceptible to tornadoes, and
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055676
is at a site never designed to temporarily or permanently store radioactive material.
+++++++=====
I have little exposure to the USACE-FUSRAP program since I went over to OSRTI.
Background. Around 1997 Congress transferred responsibility for remediating some of the
former DOE sites to the USACE. DOE and the USACE then signed a MOU defining their
respective responsibilities. The Legacy Management office at DOE has responsibility for
monitoring the sites and operating any technologies and ICs.
The USACE did get the St Louis property sites which were in reality not nearly as technically
challenging as WLL. Generally these properties had some radioactively contaminated soils as
fill. Most of the cleanup has been a relatively simple dig and haul although special precautions
were required due to the radioactivity. Most if not all if these properties/sites were on the NPL
and thus had EPA oversight from Region 7.
Interestingly, remediation work at the sites in and around St. Louis has been going on for almost
20 years. The most recent ROD was 10 yrs ago and remediation work is still going on. Not
exactly expeditious.
The challenge the USACE will have is there is an actively engaged PRP doing work. The
FUSRAP sites where the USACE has responsibility don’t typically have this element as far as I
can recall. That is, they are doing the work and not overseeing PRPs doing work. I don’t think
they are particularly well suited to perform such a task. The MCE seems to believe the USACE
can somehow ignore the PRPs. I can’t see that happening unless there is a cash out
settlement. The PRPs to date have not signaled any such interest.
I cld find 3 LFs in the USACE’s FUSRAP portfolio. At each, (the Tonawanda LF in NY,
Middlesex Muni LF in NJ and Shpack LF in Mass ) the USACE is doing the work. I could not
find any evidence of PRP involvement with the USACE .
Shpack is on the NPL abd has a separate EPA I PRP element. The USACE did excavate rad
waste there – about 50 k cubic yards. The entire site achieved CC about a year ago. Not all rad
contamination was excavated.
At Tonawanda LF, the most recent info I cld find is the USACE has issued a PP in Sept 2015
with the following preferred alternative : “targeted shallow removal and off site disposal of fusraprelated
material to address the contaminated soils in the LF OU”. The removal depth is approx 5
ft. 1000 yr post closure monitoring is also included. They propose to leave more deeply buried
waste in place. Public comment pd closes Dec 14. Remedy is estimated to cost about $12M.
They proposed a “deep excavation” alternative costing about $55M. It was not their preferred
alt. Each alternative has off site disposal.
I mention the above becz if the rationale or belief behind the legislative push for a change to the
USACE is that the LF will be excavated and all the rad/FUSRAP waste will be removed, that is a
huge leap of faith. Tonawanda is in many respects most similar to WLL.
PROS and CONS for transfer
-Pros
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055677
1) Significant public discontent with EPA. (but the allegations of mismanagement stem from
disagreement with the first ROD and that the subsequent work has not resulted in a new ROD
requiring full excavation of all the rad waste.)
2) USACE generally has good reputation in StLouis area
3). The radioactive waste is similar to FUSRAP-related materials. Some argue it is. USACE has
experience here.
4). USACE had some knowledge of site due to support on the subsurface smoldering eventbut
not the WLL site – so an easy transition is not a given
5) site has been a significant investment for R 7 – they cld redirect to other sites
-Cons
1) USACE does not have experience working with or overseeing PRPs
2). Uncertain PRP reaction- PRP has generally been cooperative with EPA. Republic owns the
LF. When the legislation was announced, their statements were in opposition citing potential for
significant delays.
3). Despite community negativity, work on both the SSI and the characterization of the WLL has
been progressing. Sorting thru the USACE role and bringing the USACE up to speed will likely
stop progress towards a new PP.
4) related to #3- there are a number of EPA enforcement instruments- AOCs and UAOs- in
place that cover WLL. Not clear how the legislation would/ could affect. What happens with
special account? Can USACE access?
5). The US (DOE) is a PRP. Negotiations have been ongoing with them and DOJ I ED.
6). Outcome/remedy could be not much different than an EPA-lead process. The work has to
go thru the same CERCLA process. Full excavation faces two significant challenges that I see :
1 – FAA concerns about bird strikes from SL airport and 2- not likely to be a cost effective
remedy under CERCLA.
There is no evidence of off site contaminated GW migration and the GW likely will be monitored
at the fenceline. If CoCs are identified, then the remedy will be to pump and treat- that will be
less costly and safer -see FAA- than full excavation. Same level of protectiveness.
Tornadoes are surface events. Assuming there is a cap of substance, it a tornado very unlikely
to have an effect. Not far away from here is the above ground (75 feet) DOE Weldon Springs
waste storage facility/disposal cell- part of a state park if memory serves. It is much more
vulnerable to tornadoes. It has, according a website., 1.5 M cubic yards of hazardous wastes.
7). I have heard DOE does not support
8). Not sure about the USACE- but I think they are not in support
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055678
9). Putting site under the USACE is one thing, will they have resources to address? Likely would
adversely affect delay other FUSRAP sites if no more funding.
Jim Woolford, Director
Office of Superfund Remediation & Technology Innovation
US EPA
Sent from my Windows Phone
Please excuse typos
Can you give me your thoughts on this question? I frankly can make an argument both ways
Mathy Stanislaus
USEP A Assistant Administrator
Begin forwarded message:
From: “Distefano, Nichole”
Date: December 11,2015 at 7:51:42 PM EST
To: “Stanislaus, Mathy” “Hague, Mark”
Subject: WLL
Mathy and Mark
I am going to raise the WLL issue with Gina via email.
I need to know from you both how strongly you feel about her weighing in on this. There
may be a couple of things she can try to do if we want to suggest she try to stop it – though
it may not work. She also may come to that conclusion on her own. That said, I need to
know from you all what you would suggest.
She gets back on Sunday so she may want to discuss with us when she lands.
Sent from my iPhone
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055679

Post

2015-12-13 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Agency review of SB 2306 – Transfer of authority to USACE

To:
From:
Hague, Mark[Hague.Mark@epa.gov]
Distefano, Nichole
Sent:
Subject:
Mon 12/14/2015 4:14:13 AM
Re: SB 2306
Thanks!!! What’s FFA stand for?
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 13,2015, at 11:11 PM, Hague, Mark
From: Peterson, Mary
Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 1: 14 PM
To: Hague, Mark
Cc: Stoy, Alyse
Mike
Subject: RE: SB 2306
Juett, Lynn
Cozad, David
wrote:
Brincks,
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055671
Attorney Work Product
Attorney Client Privilege
Deliberative
Do Not Release Under FOIA or in Discovery
Mark,
Alyse and I consulted on this today. Find below our responses in red to the points in your
email.
-‘–J,_j~’-J’—‘~’–”–‘ Reads like a transfer of oversight on WL to the COE under FSURP. And is
unclear what if any role EPA would have moving forward.
-~J_jl_j’–J’—‘l_j~jc_j Funding section talks about “funds made available to the Secretary”. That
seems to imply an appropriation that would go to FUSRP. I don’t see anything that would
imply the funding would come from EPA/SF approps. Given the site work is being paid by
the PRPs and if memory is correct we have some special account funds, there really is little
to no funding we have from our approps for this work.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055672
-~,~~~~,~~,~ It would seem that if signed into law that there is a transfer to
ACOE. .. although there is something in the language that like as soon as possible. Not sure
how that would implicate our work underway …. would we stop, continue or wait for
direction from the ACOE? You all may not have a different reading but want to check.
-‘–“–‘~~~’~’–”-‘-Does the transfer only include WL (language on radiation contamination) or
does it mean the entire site including areas where the State currently has the lead? This
seems unclear in reading the limited text and to my knowledge there is really no legislative
history beyond the bill language. If this moves quickly, which it could, we may not have
much more legislative history to guide next steps. If enacted figuring that out in and off
itself could add delays.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055673
From: Hague, Mark
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 5:52PM
To: Peterson, Mary
Cc: Stoy, Alyse
Mike
Subject: Re: SB 2306
Juett, Lynn
Cozad, David
Yes anytime tomorrow. A quick few points are fine.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 12, 2015, at 5:50PM, Peterson, Mary
Brincks,
wrote:
How soon do you need this Mark? I’m not in a good place to review the attachment
until later tonight. I plan to work much of the day tomorrow- will that be soon enough?
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 12,2015, at 11:37 AM, Hague, Mark wrote:
Mary, Alyse and Lynn
Attached is a copy of SB 2306. The bill to transfer WL to the ACOE.
I believe this is the same version we saw a week or two ago. If possible could I
get your general sense on a few key points.
-‘–“–‘~’–‘~”–‘~”–‘Reads like a transfer of oversight on WL to the COE under FSURP.
And is unclear what if any role EPA would have moving forward.
-‘-J’_j’-Jc_]L_” _ _cl_jc_j Funding section talks about “funds made available to the
Secretary”. That seems to imply an appropriation that would go to FUSRP. I
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055674
don’t see anything that would imply the funding would come from EPA/SF
approps. Given the site work is being paid by the PRPs and if memory is correct
we have some special account funds, there really is little to no funding we have
from our approps for this work.
-~,~~~~,~~,~ It would seem that if signed into law that there is a transfer to
ACOE … although there is something in the language that like as soon as
possible. Not sure how that would implicate our work underway …. would we
stop, continue or wait for direction from the ACOE? You all may not have a
different reading but want to check.
-~,~~~~·~~,~ Does the transfer only include WL (language on radiation
contamination) or does it mean the entire site including areas where the State
currently has the lead? This seems unclear in reading the limited text and to my
knowledge there is really no legislative history beyond the bill language. If this
moves quickly, which it could, we may not have much more legislative history to
guide next steps. If enacted figuring that out in and off itself could add delays.
If at all possible send me a few bullet points if you have any insights.
Thanks
Mark
Mark Hague
Regional Administrator
Office of the Regional Administrator
EPA Region 7
11201 Renner Boulevard
Lenexa, KS 66219
913-551-7546

WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055675

Post

2015-08-10 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation

To:
Cc:
From:
Hague, Mark[Hague.Mark@epa.gov]; Breen, Barry[Breen.Barry@epa.gov]
Stalcup, Dana[Stalcup.Dana@epa.gov]; Peterson, Mary[Peterson.Mary@epa.gov]
Juett, Lynn
Sent: Mon 8/10/2015 12:59:33 PM
Subject: FW: Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation
From: Woolford, James
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 9:24AM
To: Juett, Lynn
Subject: Fw: Update on status of West Lake and A TSDR Health Consultation
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055622
here is latest I have.
Jim Woolford, Director
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
US EPA
Phone: 703-603-8960 (office)
Mailing address:
1200 PA Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20460
Mail Code – 5201 P
Address
2777 S. Crystal Drive
Arlington, VA 22202
Room 5622
Note – EPA email cannot receive or send emails greater than 25 mbs.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055623
From: Stalcup, Dana
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 9:12PM
To: Breen, Barry
Cc: Woolford, James; Gardner, Monica; Hilosky, Nick; Bergman, Shawna; Stanislaus, Mathy
Subject: RE: Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055624
From: Breen, Barry
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 7:23 PM
To: Stalcup, Dana
Cc: Woolford, James; Gardner, Monica; Hilosky, Nick; Bergman, Shawna; Stanislaus, Mathy
Subject: RE: Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation
From: Stalcup, Dana
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 7:08 PM
To: Breen, Barry
Cc: Woolford, James; Gardner, Monica; Hilosky, Nick; Bergman, Shawna; Stanislaus, Mathy
Subject: RE: Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055625
Non-site related radon recommendation
ATSDR believes that radon migration through the soils on the West Lake
landfill will not extend past the landfill property. However, the average
indoor radon levels from naturally occurring radon in St. Louis County is
known to be higher than national levels ,~~~~~
As a general practice, the Surgeon
General and EPA recommend that all homes be tested for radon
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055626
From: Breen, Barry
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 6:16PM
To: Stalcup, Dana
Cc: Woolford, James; Gardner, Monica; Hilosky, Nick; Bergman, Shawna; Stanislaus, Mathy
Subject: RE: Update on status of West Lake and ATSDR Health Consultation
From: Stalcup, Dana
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 2:59PM
To: Stanislaus, Mathy; Breen, Barry
Cc: Woolford, James; Gardner, Monica; Hilosky, Nick; Bergman, Shawna; Fitz-James, Schatzi;
Ammon, Doug; Scozzafava, MichaeiE
Subject: Update on status of West Lake and A TSDR Health Consultation
Mathy I Barry,
I wanted to provide you with a quick update on the status of our discussions with ATSDR
regarding their pending health consultation for the West Lake landfill.
Based on our discussions with ATSDR, they have modified how they are including the radon
recommendation, but they have not deleted the recommendation. They separated this
recommendation from the other site-specific recommendations, they state it is not related to the
landfill, and they cite the fact that St. Louis County has elevated levels of radon, and thus
recommend that people test for indoor radon.
In response to this latest change/draft, we provided a counterproposal to A TSDR. I have
provided our proposal below. You will see three requests in order of preference, from
completely deleting the recommendation, to putting it only in outreach materials, to making the
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055627
language clearer that radon testing is generally good and not related to West Lake.
I also wanted to share a couple of points they have made during our discussion that might be
worth considering:
• They considered this recommendation somewhat analogous to health consultations for sites
with lead in soil, wherein they often weigh in on the importance of looking for other sources of
lead in households, such as lead paint, lead in toys, water/pipes, etc.
• They also thought it might be good to be clear about the elevated background radon levels
in St. Louis to help citizens’ understanding if they do find elevated levels in their homes.
So, we have provided these recommendations, and I have told them I would update you on our
discussions. Please let me know if you have any questions or need further information. Also, it
would be helpful to know whether you would be able to live with the Health Consultation going
out with our recommended new language, or whether you plan to elevate if I hear at my level
that they plan to proceed with the recommendation.
Thanks for your help and guidance – Dana
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055628
Non-site related radon recommendation
Although unrelated to the landfill, inform residents to have their house
interiors tested for radon as the average indoor radon levels in St. Louis
County is known to higher than national levels ,~=~~~
Non-site related radon recommendation
ATSDR believes that radon migration through the soils on the West Lake landfill will not extend
past the landfill property. The average indoor radon levels from naturally occurring radon in St.
Louis County is known to be higher than national levels ,~=-==–==”-
As a general practice, the Surgeon General and EPA
recommend that all homes be tested for radon .~~~======~==~~~======
Dana Stalcup
Director, Assessment and Remediation Division
OSWER/Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI)
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055629
Desk – 703-603-8702
Cell – 202-309-54 73
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0055630

Post

2016-01-04 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Coordination for Release of information to the media

To:
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Weber, Rebecca[Weber.Rebecca@epa.gov]
Cozad, David
Mon 1/4/2016 3:09:11 PM
FW: RELEASE IS READY
From: Brees, Angela
Sent: Thursday, December 31,2015 5:00PM
To: Juett, Lynn
Cc: Hague, Mark ; Stoy, Alyse ; Cozad, David
; Peterson, Mary
Subject: Re: RELEASE IS READY
Last one I’ll link for today.
Angela M. Brees, Deputy Director
Office of Public Affairs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7
11201 Renner Blvd.
Lenexa, KS 66219
0: 913-551-7940
C: 816-663-2707
On Dec 31, 2015, at 3:46 PM, Brees, Angela wrote:
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0057913
1
19
81
From: Juett, Lynn
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 2:45PM
To: Brees, Angela
Cc: Hague, Mark
7
David Peterson, Mary
Subject: Re: RELEASE IS READY
Release shared with MDNR and USACE.
I also shared the final version with Joe Benco with Republic.
Lynn Juett
913-551-7883
(Cell) 913-948-1129
Cozad,
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0057914
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 31, 2015, at 2:01 PM, Brees, Angela wrote:
7
1
19
81
From: Hague, Mark
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 1:57PM
To: Brees, Angela Juett, Lynn
Stoy, Alyse Cozad, David
Peterson, Mary
Subject: RE: RELEASE IS READY
From: Brees, Angela
Sent: Thursday, December 31,2015 1:55PM
To: Hague, Mark Juett, Lynn Stoy,
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0057915
Alyse Cozad, David ~~~~~~~~~· Peterson,
Mary
Subject: RE: RELEASE IS READY
7
1
19
81
From: Brees, Angela
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 1:47PM
To: Hague, Mark Juett, Lynn
Alyse Cozad, David ~~~~~~~~~·
Mary
Subject: RELEASE IS READY
Once I have a final concur, we’ll start work on getting it out.
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0057916
1 1
19
81
WLLFOIA4312- 001 – 0057917

Post

2014-02-06 – EPA – Health Assessment West Lake Landfill

Gravatt, Dan
From: Tapia, Cecilia
Sent: Friday, February07, 201411 :16AM
To:
Cc:
Hammerschmidt, Ron; Hague, Mark; Field, Jeff; Gravatt, Dan; Brooks, Karl
Peterson, Mary; Whitley, Christopher; Sanders, LaTonya
Subject: Document referred to in news artcle – followup info
Attachments: westlake health-threat.pdf
From: Rodenbeck, Sven (ATSDR/DCHI/OD) [mailto:svrl@cdc.gov]
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 11:13 AM
To: Jordan-Izaguirr, Denise; Tapia, Cecilia; Cvsl@cdc.gov; Harman, Erin
Subject: RE: kid question
Hey Everyone!
I have just reviewed the ATS DR Records Room file for the Westlake Landfill. We do not have a copy of the attached
document in our files.
The Westlake Landfill was proposed to the NPL in 1989. So it is unlikely that ATSDR had done any “health assessments”
prior to that date. Our first ATSDR public health assessment was finalized in 1991.
Sorry!
Sven
Sven E. Rodenbeck, Sc.D., P.E., BCEE
Rear Admiral (retired), USPHS
ATSDR/DCHI – Mailstop F59
1600 Clifton Road, NE
Atlanta, GA 30333
Office Telephone: (770) 488-3660
Cell Telephone: (404) 729-5041
FAX: (770) 488-1543
Machinatores Vitae
(Engineering for Life)
07/t./
40490540
Illl lll lllll II/II llllll llll llll/l llll lllll II/I llll
Superfund
1
OUOI
From: Jordan-Izaguirre, Denise (CDC epa.gov)
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 10:58 AM
‘ ‘
To: Tapia, Cecilia; Rodenbeck, Sven (ATSDR/DCHI/OD); Smith, Casandra V. (ATSDR/DCHI/WB); Harman, Erin (CDC
epa.gov)
Subject: Fw: kid question
Cecilia – I’m out of office so can’t check our files. I’ve read attached document and here are my thoughts l}Without letter
head or signature line it’s hard to say who wrote this; 2) It’s dated 8/85 which is pre ATSDR; 3}The document states no
chemical concentrations were reviewed (last sentence in first paragraph); 4) MDOH appears to have done private well
sampling, cancer inquiry and possibly a’ health survey’; 5}Conclusions are not based on data concentration only MDNR
reported chemical and Rad presence; and 6)this is a Draft document with only state agencies mentioned. Without
signature, letterhead or author and pre-ATSDR (although there was a Superfund Implementation Group part of NCEH) I
don’t think this is ours. But 1985 predates me in ATSDR plus I didn’t come to Reg 7 until 1992. Hopefully HQ can find this
or I will look when I’m back Mon.
From: Tapia, Cecilia
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:18:25 AM
To: Jordan-lzaguirr, Denise
Cc: Gravatt, Dan; Field, Jeff; Hammerschmidt, Ron
Subject: FW: kid question
Denise, is this something that ATSDR produced or MDHSS?
From: Peterson, Mary
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:16 AM
To: Tapia, Cecilia; Gravatt, Dan; Field, Jeff
Subject: FW: ksdk question
Attached is the memo that KSDK references in their report. Apparently, the inquiry came in late yesterday after Chris
had left for the day.
Mwy P. Pot111soH, AdlHIJ Dopl.ty Dltoetor
Office of Public Affairs
EPA Region 7
11201 Renner Blvd .
Lenexa, KS 66219
913-551-7882 – desk
816-398-3945 – mobile
From: Whitley, Christopher
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:09 AM
To: Peterson, Mary; Thomas, Hattie
Subject: FW: ksdk question
She sent this at 4:59 p.m. I left the office yesterday at my usual time of 4 p.m.
From: Zigman, Leisa [mailto:LZIGMAN@ksdk.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 4:59 PM
To: Whitley, Christopher
Subject: FW: ksdk question
2
Hi Chris,
I sent this 1985 memo to DNR and asked the question below. I was told to ask EPA. Any thoughts?
From: Terlizzi, Gena [mailto:Gena.Terlizzi@dnr.mo.gov]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 4:55 PM
To: Zigman, Leisa
Subject: RE: ksdk question
Hi Leisa,
For information on work completed at Westlake Landfill over that timeframe, I’d recommend reaching out to the EPA, as
they are the oversight authority for West Lake Landfill.
Gena·
Gena Terlizzi
Communications Director
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Ph: (573) 751-1010
From: Zigman, Leisa [mailto:LZIGMAN@ksdk.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 3:36 PM
To= Terlizzi, Gena
Subject: ksdk question
Hi Gena,
Did something happen from the SO’s to now to show that the threat to public health at the Westlake landfill was
diminished? I ask based of this memo. (deadline for six)
Thanks!
Leisa Zigman
Five on Your Side
KSDK-TV
314-444-5295
lzigman@ksdk.com
3

HEALTH ASSESSMENT
(Westlake Landfill) 11VHO
The Westlake Lapdfill site, located near Bridgeton, St. Louis County
Missouri, has been’·found to be contaminated with 4000 tons of chlordane,
trichloroethylene and toluene, and 7,000 tons of low level uranium ore wastes.
Missouri Department of Natural Resources personnel have characterized the site
containment and diversion system as leaking and unsound. lnformation supplied
did not contain concentrations of contaminants.
Chlordane is a broad spectrum insecticide that has been observed to cause
the following symptoms: blurred vision, confusion, ataxia, delirium, coughing,
abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, irritability, tremors, convulsions,
anuria, and cancer in laboratory animals. It attacks the central nervous
system, eyes, lungs, liver, kidneys, and skin. TCE or trichloroethylene is an
animal carcinogen and is also capable of causing the following symptoms:
irritation of the eyes, nose and throat; dermatitis; headache, dizziness,
vertigo, tremors, nausea and vomiting, irregular heartbeat, sleepiness,
fatigue, blurred vision, unconsciousness, and death. Damage occurs to the
respiratory system, heart liver, kidneys, and central nervous system. Toluene
has been observed to cause irritation of the eyes, respiratory tract, and skin;
dermatitis, headache, dizziness, fatigue, muscular weakness, drowsiness,
incoordination, staggering gait, skin paresthesia, collapse and coma.
Uranium is reported to cause adverse health effects in two ways: toxic
chemical effects including damage to the kidney and liver, pneumoconiosis,
pronounced changes in the blood and generalized injury; and radiation effects
including lung cancer, osteosarcoma, and lymphoma.
Analysis of the rates of fetal death, low birth weight, and malformations
for 1972-1982 showed no rate significantly higher than the state average.
A well survey and water sampling has been completed and an exposure
questionnaire is at present being administered to selected residents
surrounding the site in conjunction with a survey of all hazardous waste sites
in the State by the Missouri Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental
Epidemiology. This investigation has yielded the following information
concerning Westlake Landfill:
There are only four wells still in use in the area that are down gradient
from the site. One is used only occasionally and one 1s not used for potable
water at all. None of the wells sampled had detectable amounts of any of the
chemicals disposed of at the site. None of the residents questioned so far
appeared to have any adverse health effects caused by materials disposed of at
the site.
Based on available information, a health threat exists due to the toxic
effects of chemicals and low level uranium wastes buried at the site and the
possibility that off site migration of the materials might occur because of the
unsound condition of the site. While there is no evidence of past or present
exposure, a potential does exist for future exposure based on the possibility
that off site migration may occur. Sampling and corrective containment and
diversion should continue at this site until risk to the public health can more
accurately be determined.
8/85

Post

2016-02-09 – EPA – West Lake Landfill – Notes on February 9, 2016 CAG meeting

To: Peterson, Mary[Peterson.Mary@epa.gov]; Hague, Mark[Hague.Mark@epa.gov]; Carey,
Curtis[Carey. Curtis@epa.gov]; Stoy, Alyse[Stoy.Alyse@epa.gov]
Cc: Washburn, Ben[washburn.ben@epa.gov]; Mahler, Tom[mahler.tom@epa.gov]; Vann,
Bradley[Vann.Bradley@epa.gov]
From: Juett, Lynn
Sent: Tue 2/9/2016 5:57:32 AM
Subject: CAG
WLLFOIA4312 – 001 – 0014038
WLLFOIA4312 – 001 – 0014039
WLLFOIA4312 – 001 – 0014040

Search Document Archive

Navigating the Archives

The archives can be accessed here.

To make a detailed query of the text of every document in the Archives, use the search bar at the top of the screen

The file names for each record include up to three components:

  1. the date of publication;
  2. the acronym of the agency or organization involved (if applicable);
  3. and the subject matter of the record.

Search Queries:

To search for any record that contains one or more words in the body of the document, put those search terms in the search bar. A search query with two or more search terms (ie: Fukushima Daiichi) will return all records that include ANY of the terms entered(Fukushima AND Daiichi), even if they are not found consecutively in the document.

To search for specific strings of two or more search terms(ie: Fukushima Daiichi ), while excluding records that include separate references to each search term, place the search query in quotations "Fukushima Daiichi" in the search bar.

Document Collections

Records are grouped together into the following collections:

  1. Collections by Agency
  2. Collections by Organization
  3. Collections by Event
  4. Collections by Site