Monthly Meeting Minutes - Oct. 20, 2021
PINE RIVER SUPERFUND CITIZEN TASK FORCE
General Membership Meeting Minutes
October 20, 2021
The meeting recording is available at the following web link with the password below, with timestamps included in minutes:
Meeting Recording: https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/3sYcnWHz_EFL-lXK3ELlUeRdatPiDZwabgUkeG9vyozd4xRRj1NJrurkObkW5K-C.84rX00lAqgkCG9Kh?startTime=1634770978000
The meeting began at 6:50 pm via Zoom with Secretary Brittany Fremion as host, with 17 participants. Aides for US Senator Gary Peters and Congressman John Moolenaar attended the meeting, and the CAG appreciates their presence.
Chairperson Jane Keon called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm.
I. Additions to Agenda: None
II. Approval of March minutes. (Liz Braddock and Doug Brecht)
III. Treasurer’s Report [00:01:45]: Gary Smith, Treasurer
A. September 2021
1. The General Fund Checking balance stands at $5,923.18. The CAG received two donations in Phil Ramsey’s memory. The Money Market Account (Oxford Automotive settlement) has $64,653.14. TAG grant money available for the Former Plant Site (FPS) stands at $6,854.76. Additional $50,000 in TAG funding approved and distributed in small amounts ($15,000). The Velsicol Burn Pit (VBS) has $48,744.28. Gary was able to transfer funding to cover the cost of the CAG website after connecting with EPA and getting the suspension of funding lifted. Velsicol Burn Pit (VBP) Fund Checking $85.62. The complete reports will be attached to the permanent minutes.
2. Memberships are $5/year and t-shirts $12-15 each (new pricing TBD). Send check to PO Box 172, St. Louis, MI 48880.
3. Ed asked about donations to the CAG and whether any funds have been deposited via the website, suspecting that the deposit would automatically be made. Gary recommended a trial run over the next day or two and will report back next month.
IV. Correspondence and Communication [00:12:35]: Jane Keon, Chair
A. The CAG sent a letter to EPA Administrator explaining why the former railroad spurs should be included in the Velsicol plan, formalizing the request for an investigation with the hope EPA will address community concerns about the site.
B. Diane Russell sent the CAG a copy of the latest issue of the EPA newsletter, Pine River Progress, about work at the Velsicol Site (accessible at the following hyperlink: https://semspub.epa.gov/work/05/969695.pdf).
C. CAG leadership recently received EPA’s final work plan for OU-4 floodplain sampling.
D. CAG leadership is working on a letter of support for a continuing medical education grant proposal for the Emory team, which maintains the Michigan PBB Registry. If awarded, the project would focus on educating healthcare workers about endocrine disruptors using PBB as a case study.
E. Ed is in communication with Elena Conis, an academic, who is working on a book on DDT and wants to include information from the 2008 intergenerational conference held at Alma College. The book is expected to be published next spring.
V. Looking Back [00:19:30]: The CAG discussed a news clipping about a cooperative effort forty years ago (1971) between the City of St. Louis and Velsicol Chemical Company to tear down the old sugar plant (recently mentioned in the Gratiot County Herald). Jane found a small blurb that explains how prior to the chemical plant closure, the city and Velsicol negotiated how to tear down the old sugar plant and what to do with chemicals there, such as DDT. The CAG hopes to find more evidence tied to these efforts.
VI. EGLE Report [00:21:10]: Erik Martinson, Project Manager
A. Erik checked to see if anyone was able to access the drone recording. CAG officers will try to do so and report back.
B. Railroad spur investigation — EGLE made revisions to the Access Agreement and sent it to the railroad; unfortunately, the version the railroad returned still contained unacceptable clauses. EGLE will hold off on gaining access to the north, as recent research revealed a portion of the southern property (202 S. Watson) was purchased from the railroad in 1994, which is good news, because it's private property and the owner has given EGLE access. Weston is drafting a revised scope of work which reflects these changes, which Erik will share. Recent communication with Weston also included hiring a surveyor to identify property boundaries, which is scheduled for early December. EGLE will do sampling to the north of the private residence and to the south near Crawford Street. Sampling to the north will be performed every 10’ along the former railroad spur along with the sidecar, which appears to extend down toward the residence. As they go further south, EGLE will sample at 20’. Erik feels confident that sampling will cover the areas of concern. Samples include 2 borings at 5’ with surface soil samples. If any abnormalities appear they will do a third boring. Any evidence of contamination in the borings will provide rationale and evidence for court ordered access to northern portions.
1. Discussion:
a) Each of the soil cores will be screened with a PID, an instrument to gauge VOC vapors from the soil, along with visual inspection to identify staining, unusual colors, and other things that might be abnormal for soil in the area, such as odors which might be a sign of something amiss.
b) Does the property owner know of possible contamination? Is he concerned?
(1) He is worried about possible damage to his property and is aware of the challenges with the railroad. Erik is unsure whether he is concerned about contamination, but noted that the resident was worried about the course of action if contamination is discovered and what a cleanup might entail.
(2) Jane noted that when DDT waste was dredged out of the river in the 1970s, residents used as fill dirt for their yards, and the railroad may have also used it.
VII. EPA Report [0:31:25]: Diane Russell, EPA Community Involvement Coordinator
A. Updates on heating and NAPL collection in Area 2 Phase 2 — ISTT system is operating as expected, but the 90 day treatment window will extend beyond November 6 because we have not yet reached diminishing returns. That said, NAPL recovery is slowing. To date the system has pulled 128,000 pounds of contaminants out of the ground. The cost to run the treatment is about $800,000 per month.
1. The two extraction wells that had different NAPL (MPE 71 and 72) are being pumped three times a week, with about 10 gallons removed each time (30 gallons/week). Again, as this NAPL starts to cool, it solidifies, presenting challenges with removal.
2. The NAPL is about 80% DDT, as expected. The wells are very close to Manhole 1, near the groundwater collection trench, which staff check weekly and confirmed there is no NAPL present. They are also monitoring Well 48, too. EPA will provide another update in November.
B. PSA 1&2 — EPA is in the contracting phase for the removal of 100,000 tons of contamination, with funding expected even in absence of the federal infrastructure bill. Construction is expected to begin in spring, likely with the Army Corps of Engineers doing oversight. With new requirements, Jacobs (contractor) cannot do oversight; rather, it must be another firm. EPA will present on the plans early next year.
C. OU-3 - RI (Remedial Investigation report) expected in early November followed by FS (Feasibility Study report), in December. The public meeting presentation will take place early next year, followed by the Proposed Plan for public comment next spring or summer.
D. OU-4 sampling work plan and carbon amendment pilot study — OU-4 RI and FS, floodplain sampling downstream in 5 locations along Pine River, with more floodplains added for sampling next spring. EPA shared the workplan for sampling with CAG chairperson and is on the website. Additional sampling for carbon amendment study will be completed next week, with report expected early next year.
E. City well installation —Last well for city drinking water supply should go out for bid soon. The state is still reviewing the permit, with work expected to begin in spring 2022.
F. Infrastructure bill update — This is a fund-led site, there isn’t a responsible party, so work is dependent upon general fund money for FPS and VBP. If the bill passes, the EPA Superfund Program will get additional funding, which will put the site in a better position moving forward. VBP may begin if proposed infrastructure funding includes Superfund money. There are major implications if the bill passes.
G. Other
1. Diane mentioned that there is a note of remembrance for Phil Ramsey, “a dear friend and fierce advocate,” in the EPA newsletter.
2. Gary followed up on questions about a different NAPL at the site and asked for clarification about whether it was analyzed. Diane suspects that yes, it had 80% DDT, but will confirm.
a) Gary also asked what else the NAPL contained (what is the other 20%)? He also asked if the Access Agreements for floodplain sampling were completed.
(1) Diane will follow up on NAPL results and reported that EPA is sampling 5 floodplains now, so the note about Access Agreements in the minutes might be in reference to spring sampling in OU-4.
(2) Jane clarified that OU-3 and OU-4 were separated so that work wouldn't be delayed in one area. OU-4 was separated out from OU-3 so work in latter could proceed, which is why sampling there is further advanced, and will allow remediation to begin there while the investigation in OU-4 is ongoing.
b) Gary asked for updates on MW 48 pumping (“99’ well”), Erik clarified that the 48 well series is adjacent to MP 71 and 72. Gary confirmed that they’re near the intercepter trench (which was “temporary” but now permanent) and asked if the wells are deeper than the trench. Erik said they did pump MP 71 and aren't seeing any L/DNAPL. The CAG would like confirmation on the depths of the wells and interceptor trench.
c) The CAG would like to follow-up on the request for the video footage Scott Pratt shared of the NAPL at the last meeting. Jane and Diane will address.
d) Finally, Gary asked if the EPA is still showing air monitoring on the website? Because there seems to be a glitch with the page and data (missing information?). The temperatures are also goofy, there’s no consistency in readings at different depths, which raises concerns about whether the probes are working. The CAG would like reassurance that the site is being monitored well and consistent data is being gathered and shared.
(1) Diane will look into why some wells have no heat data for different depths (the depths are 1, 6, 12, 18, and 22 feet). But it should be easy to use. She will report back to Scott and Tom. She also suggested a tutorial on using the site.
VIII. Old Business [01:02:10]
A. CAG website update – Ed Lorenz
1. Ed tested the donation function and received a receipt, so the portal is working. He also got an email from Donor Box, the donation platform, thanking him also for the donation. He also gave a tour of the website, highlighting features, such as opportunities to donate and/or join the CAG on each page.
B. TAG Grant finalization — Gary Smith
1. See discussion under treasurer’s report. Gary also reinforced the challenges of navigating grants.gov and noting how helpful it was to be able to submit everything via email to Region 5, especially as an organization staffed by volunteers.
2. The funds were available October 1st, the start of the new fiscal year. Both grants are in good shape, we should be set for 2 years with VBP and 3 years for FPS.
3. Ed clarified that for the website, we need to determine how to handle donations and the annual platform fee. He encouraged the CAG to get a credit card. Gary opposed and Jane recommended discussion among the Executive Board.
C. PBB Leadership Team update – Brittany Fremion
1. The CAG has been involved with the Michigan PBB Registry Leadership Team since 2015, managed by Emory University team. The Emory team is working on a new grant proposal to help develop a continuing medical education course which will use PBB as a case study. While discussion of the course was the focus of the meeting, the team also discussed next of kin requests. A farm family member reported back that she received her father’s records with scans of official documents. MDHHS sent her the records on microfiche and a hard copy, but she needs to determine whether they contain the same information. It is also likely the only copy of the materials. There are also ongoing efforts to identify communities impacted by PBB but overlooked in the 1970s, such as migrant workers and people of color. Finally, Dr. Robert Hood, a postdoc working with the team, reported on his efforts to update some of the data in the registry, particularly elimination rates and half-life of PBB.
IX. New Business [01:19:55]
A. Nominations for CAG Hall of Fame – we vote next month
1. We are still accepting nominations through next month. Jane has already received two nominations and hopes to get a few more.
B. PFAS regulations – Scott Cornelius, Cornelius Environmental Consulting and CAG TA
1. Scott reported on the Biden administration’s efforts to tackle the PFAS dilemma in the US. PFAS are forever chemicals because they don’t break down in the environment. Part of the plan is to classify PFAS and PFOAs as hazardous substances, which will make them eligible for Superfund funding, because there is currently a large debate about whether PFAS sites can be remediated. These chemicals are fluorinated compounds used in many products, such as fire fighting foams (why many sites include airports and military bases). Scott talked about Wurtsmith Air Force Base (Oscoda) and Wolverine (Rockford), which used a waterproofing agent that contained PFAS too. He explained that PFAS and PFOAs have been found in cosmetics and fast food packaging, non-stick cookware (Teflon), and dental floss. It’s a stain repellent too, found in products like Scotch Guard. This means there are many means of exposure and it’s not regulated. If industry is moving away from PFAS, it’s mostly voluntary, as the substance is not currently banned or restricted. Scott mentioned that the Rogue River has one of the highest concentrations of PFAS in foam and sediment in Michigan. How did we get here? Scott explained that industry hid PFAS agents by saying they were “trade secrets,” but they’ve causes a host of issues, such as those tied to DDT and PBB. During the Obama era the federal government issued a 70 ppm drinking water recommendation, which couldn’t be enforced; moreover, many argued 70 ppm is too high. Companies who most notably participated in production also include 3M, starting in the 1940s in Minnesota, and DuPont (Teflon production).
2. How does this impact the Velsicol site?
a) The compound was used widely so we should suspect that it is present here too. There should be testing to determine such. Scott suspects that most landfills will be required to test for PFAS (as recycling centers have been), that drinking water testing is underway, but also that with designation as a hazardous substance, Superfund sites will fall under testing requirements too.
b) Next month Scott would like to talk about how climate change will impact Superfund sites. In the next 20 years, scientists predict that Superfund sites by rivers are going to be in trouble, so planning for future is important so we can avoid those problems.
c) Ed asked that as new information like this becomes available to please share it with him so we can post it to the website. The PFAS Report, for instance, is there.
C. The CAG will nominate officers and board members in November and vote at the December meeting. Send your nominations to CAG Secretary Brittany Fremion, fremi1b@cmich.edu and/or CAG Chairperson, Jane Keon.
D. Scott thanked Gary for his time and work on the grant and accounting. George Kubin also thanked the CAG for its work.
Please remember to pay membership dues ($5/year). Send check to PO Box 172, St. Louis, MI 48880.
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 17, 2021 via Zoom.
Meeting adjourned at 8:36 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Brittany Fremion, Secretary