letter3

COMMENTS OF THE BOARD OF LAKE TOWNSHIP TRUSTEES ON
THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE REMEDY AT THE

INDUSTRIAL EXCESS LANDFILL SUPERFUND SITE PAGES 13-19

involvement requirement is a violation of law. The agency must provide additional information on the proposed changes to the cap and the groundwater monitoring program and reopen the comment period, to comply with the public comment requirements of CERCLA. Failure to provide such an opportunity is arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law.

In addition, the responses of the USEPA to the public comments must be specific. Statements that additional data will be gathered are insufficient. That is what the USEPA did in the Responsiveness Summary to the 1989 Record of Decision. As discussed in the Bennett and Williams report, the USEPA has failed to gather the promised information in the ten years following the ROD. Responses must contain complete explanations of what information will be gathered, the protocols to be followed, and a timetable in which the work is to be completed.

Radioactivity.

A longstanding issue that remains unsettled in the eyes of the citizens of Lake Township is whether the radioactivity detected at the land fill has been adequately investigated and will be properly addressed in the proposed remedy for the site. A number of sources of this radioactivity have been identified. As discussed in the Bennett and Williams report, the flyash disposed at the site by Firestone and other PRPs is a likely source of some radioactivity. Any remedy adopted for the site must consider not only the transport and fate of heavy metals in the flyash, but the possible radioactivity as well. We understand that a number of Superfund Sites were listed on the basis of flyash content alone.

Radioactivity.

liable under CERCLA. Why the USEPA will not rely on the sworn testimony presented by former employee of IEL, James Shover, and neighbors of IEL is unknown.

The testimony of Mr. James Shover, Mr. Rex Shover, Lizette McGregor and Harlan McGregor is a relevant factor in determining how to characterize and remedy the site with respect to radioactivity. To ignore all of this information in developing a remedy is arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law and not in the public interest.

Additional information regarding potential disposal of military and radioactive waste at IEL was gathered by Mr. Timothy Kern, Chief of the Environmental Enforcement Section of the Ohio Attorney General. He spoke to Robert Simons, Ph.D. (800)296-7053, an expert in the class action lawsuit filed by local landowners (DeSario --et al. vs. Industrial Excess Landfill, Inc., et al.., Stark County Common Pleas Court). Dr. Simons advised Mr. Kern that during discovery in that lawsuit he saw documents that indicated that radioactive waste had been taken to landfills by the military in the Stark County area. Unfortunately Dr. Simons did not specifically recall the identities of the landfills. The Board of Township Trustees received a copy of the inartfully drafted request for information the USEPA issued to the defendants in that lawsuit requesting copies of documents produced to Dr. Simons to follow-up on Simons' statement. Not surprisingly, the defendants provided no information. No documents would have been produced to Dr. Simons as he was not a party to the action. Counsel for the Board of Lake Township Trustees will make themselves available to assist the USEPA in preparing a well drafted request for information to obtain this information. Even without the specific documents, Dr. Simons' testimony tends to corroborate the testimony of Rex Shover, James Shover, Lizette McGregor and Harlan McGregor.

The USEPA must plan and implement a scientifically sound investigation of the IEL Superfund site to determine the nature, scope and extent of radioactive contamination there. All environmental media, air, water and soils, should be tested for its presence. The consultants and all laboratories used must be experienced and competent in such work. Strict protocols and QA/QC procedures must be developed and enforced. Selecting and designing a remedy for this site that does not address radioactivity is arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law and not in the public interest. The site remedy must address radioactivity.

Hydraulic Control of Groundwater from IEL

The 1989 record of Decision listed two reasons for the pump and treat remedy: treatment of the contaminated groundwater and separation of the waste mass from the groundwater. The Board of LakeTownship Trustees has found nothing in the record indicating that separation of the waste and ground water is not still a concern. Without some sort of hydraulic control of the landfill, what will prevent groundwater from coming into contact with the waste, or slugs of contamination from the waste mass from entering groundwater and moving offsite? The administrative record indicates that the cap will serve this function; however we question this conclusion as the landfill does not appear to have sufficient walls into which to tie a cap. The administrative record provided in support of the proposed changes to the remedy does not include information sufficient to address this very important question. A CERCLA remedy must prevent movement of hazardous substances from the landfill. Accordingly, it will be arbitrary capricious and contrary to law for the USEPA to design and install a cap without some hydraulic control of groundwater.

Health Concerns.

In response to continuing inquiries from citizens and concern for the health of the public, the Board of Lake Township Trustees gathered all the information that it could regarding the incidence of cancer in Uniontown, near IEL. Admittedly, the survey (to date) is completely unscientific and informal; however, its results, in light of the new information regarding local hydrogeology and geology, are important. Attached as Exhibit K is a copy of correspondence from Elaine Panitz, PhD, who is on the faculty at Princeton University, identifying cases of cancer, many near IEL. At least three of them rare. This information was previously submitted to the ATSDR; however nothing was done to investigate. In addition, we spoke to Mrs. Darlene Lansing, R.N. who has informally gathered cancer incidence information. Mrs. Lansing shared with the Board of Lake Township Trustees, the numbers, kinds and street locations of cancer that she has documented She declined to provide victims' names on privacy grounds. Care was taken not to double count cases. The health information presented in the two public hearings were also included. (See the public hearing transcripts, Exhibits B and C.) Exhibits L and M, attached hereto are the results. Exhibit L is a list, by cancer types, of the numbers of cancer cases and the streets on which they have occurred. Exhibit M is a map of the area with the streets with cancer incidences highlighted. Three areas of the map have what appear to a layperson, high incidences of cancer: directly west of the landfill, southwest of the landfill and northeast of the landfill. Based upon the information contained in the Bennett and Williams report, each of these areas may have a closed exposure pathway through environmental media.

According to Bennett and Williams, the ponds and soils in the marshy areas west of the landfill may be receiving areas for heavy metals and other contamination from IEL. As depicted on the various wetlands maps in the Bennett and Williams Report, Krieghbaum Road abuts a marshy area. Timberlake and Leafland are low areas and - circle natural ponds. All of these areas appear to have a significant number of cancer cases. The majority of members of a family on Krieghbaum Road that ate strawberries from a patch in the marshy area, have all been afflicted with cancer. (Exhibit K) Children also played in the marshy areas. Thus the exposure pathway of ingestion, inhalation, absorption, may have been completed in this area. This area has already been supplied with an alternate water source, however that installation may not have completely disrupted the exposure pathways from all environmental media.

Southwest of landfill on Mulberry Street, Dogwood Street, Heartwood and Basswood is another area with what appears to be a significant number of cancer cases. Mrs. Lansing advised the Board of Lake Township Trustees that in the 1970's she lived in this neighborhood. According to Mrs. Lansing, whenever a hard rain came, Metzger Ditch overflowed down the street, into the yards and gardens. People eat the vegetables from their gardens. Children play in yards and mud puddles. Whatever went into Metzger Ditch from IEL was flushed into this neighborhood. According to the testimony of Kenny Catlette, a former employee of the landfill, trenches were cut from the waste lagoons at the landfill to Metzger Ditch (See Exhibit N). In addition, he saw leachate from the side of the landfill enter Metzger Ditch. Exposure pathways appear to be closed in this neighborhood as well.

A third area of cancer appears to be northeast of the landfill in the Nutmeg, Sesame and Foxfire area. While hydraulically up gradient of the landfill, this area is downwind of it, as prevailing winds in the area blow from the southwest to the northeast. During the time that the landfill operated, this area. may have received airborne contaminants such as flyash and landfill gases such as methane, vinyl chloride and benzene. They may still be exposed to fugitive emissions of uncontrolled landfill gases and emissions from the incineration unit installed to bum landfill gas. Nothing exists in the record that the incineration of the gases results in 100% destruction of the gas. Analytical results do show that methane, benzene, vinyl chloride and radon are in the landfill gases. Exposure to some of these hazardous air pollutants at even at very low levels is dangerous. Any of the contaminants in groundwater can be volatilized and leave the landfill in the gas stage. For example, arsenic in groundwater can be volatilized as arsine gas. (Telephone conversation with Elaine Panitz) Landfill gases and flyash can be inhaled or ingested, closing the exposure pathway.

As discussed in the Bennett and Williams report, during the operation of the landfill, it is likely that hazardous substances were leaving its boundaries in the groundwater and air. Those plumes of volatile organic compounds and heavy metals may have dispersed, may have moved on or may have accumulated somewhere. No matter which, the people of the township may have been exposed to them. They are a potential source of the cancer identified in the informal Health Survey. Insufficient identification and investigation of the exposure pathways in all environmental media has been done for this Superfund site.

Continue to Pages 20 to end