public meeting ) report of proceedings had in the · above-entitled matter, taken before cindy...

))H.O.D. PROPOSED PLAN )PUBLIC MEETING )

7 ))

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had in the

above-entitled matter, taken before Cindy Benner,

C.S.R., a notary public within and for the County of

Lake and State of Illinois at Antioch Village Hall,

874 Main Street, Antioch, Illinois on Tuesday,

August 11, 1998 at the hour of 7:00 P.M.

Reported by:Cindy Benner, C.S.R.L & L REPORTING SERVICE, INC.9 North County StreetWaukegan, Illinois 60085

L & L REPORTING SERVICE, INC. (847) 623-7580

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

APPEARANCES:

MR. ALAN WALTSUnited States Environmental Protection Agency77 West Jackson BoulevardChicago, IL 60604-3590

appeard on behalf of the United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

MR. BLUM: Good evening. My name is Gordie

Blum. I'm a community involvement coordinator for

the U.S. EPA. With me tonight is Ron Murawski. Ron

is a project manager for the H.O.D. Landfill site;

and Alan Walts, Alan is the attorney assigned to the

site. And the reason we're here tonight is to

accept your public comments on the proposed plan for

the H.O.D. Landfill site.

Also, you will notice to my right that

there's a court reporter. She is here to record

tonight's meeting verbatim, word-for-word, and in a

couple of weeks a copy of tonight's transcript will

be located in the information repository, which is

located at the Antioch Public Library, and what an

information repository is, it's a collection of

documents related to the site that you can go and

read more about the site if you want to do research

about things that have went on in the past. There's

fact sheets and things like that. So, again, that's

at the Antioch Public Library.

If you didn't sign up, I would really ask

you to do so because that's the way we keep our

mailing list updated, so we can keep you up-to-date

on things that are going on at the site. And also,


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

there are copies of fact sheets back there, so any

time you have questions, my name and number are on

there and also Ron's name and number are on there,

so please don't hesitate to call us.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Do we write to you then if

we want past forms that have been mailed out, these

facts sheets that you guys prepared?

MR. BLUM: Yes. If you have an agenda, let

me kind of quickly go over how tonight's meeting

works because there,is a specific format to

tonight's meeting.

It's called a Proposed Plan Public Meeting.

What we're going to do is give you a brief overview

of the Superfund process, a general idea of some of

the terms and how the process works.

Then after that, Ron will give you a

presentation on what's happened at the site in the

past and then give you a presentation on what we've

come up with for a proposed plan.

After his presentation, we're going to open

up the floor for questions and answers if you need

some clarification on anything he has went over.

And then we're going to open up what we

call a formal comment period, and that is a chance


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

for you to, state your opinion on the proposed plan,

whatever criticisms that you have of it, if you're

for it, if you're against it, whatever. It's your

chance —- it's your forum, and the court reporter is

here to record those.

The comment period runs to August 20th.

You do not have to make your comments tonight. You

can submit them to me — the address, again, is in

the fact sheet — via E-mail, fax. You could mail

it. It just should be postmarked by August 20th,

and mail it to me.

What happens then is Ron takes the comments

that he has received and we compile them and we

respond to them in a document called a

Responsiveness Summary, and I'll explain more on

that later.

MS. GUSTAFSON: If our questions are

already in writing, can we leave them here tonight

with you?

MR. SLUM: Yes, you may. I'd very much

appreciate that.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Okay.

MR. BLUM: Okay. I'm going to go in right

now and kind of go into an overview of the Superfund


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

process.

This is the generic version of how the

process is supposed to work. Normally we have the

contamination is discovered. It can be discovered

through a variety of means. We then do a

preliminary assessment and a site evaluation. The

site is assessed for the presence of hazardous

chemicals and for the potential impact on the

environment and it's assigned a score on the

hazardous ranking system. It's a numeric value.

If it's over, I believe, 28, the site is

then eligible for the Superfund process. If it is

deemed that it scored high enough, it can be

proposed for the National Priorities List. The list

is a national list of the most hazardous sites in

the country which are eligible for cleanup under

Superfund. If it makes the NPL, normally it will

move into a Remedial Investigation and a Feasability

Study.

The purpose of what we usually call the

RI/FS for short is to characterize the waste that is

out there. We want to find out what's out there and

what it's doing. Is it moving? Is it just sitting

there? What is the potential threat? We try to


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

characterize that. And then we look at the

different ways that we have to treat it. There

might be — I mean for a particular type of waste

there might be a half a dozen or more types of

remedies that potentially we could use to treat

this. What we want to do is look at that then and

decide what would be the best remedy.

With a landfill, since we deal with

landfills quite often, what we've done to try to

speed up the Superfund process is we have what we

call a Presumptive Remedy. That's because landfills

are pretty much generally the same. There are

certain things that we know we're going to have to

do.

We're going to have to have leachate

collection; we're going to have to have gas

collection; and we're going to have to have a cap on

it. So those are things that we know we're going to

have to do with every landfill. We try to cut the

administrative process down and be able to move

forward more quickly. So that is what we mean by

Presumptive Remedy. Those are things we know we're

going to have to do and we did have to do with this

landfill.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

8

As I said, then we have maybe five or six

alternatives or something that we're looking at to

try to decide what is the best plan we feel to go

ahead attacking and to clean up this site. We've

come to that point, which is where we are tonight.

We've come up with what we think is the overall best

solution.

We have what we call a proposed plan, and

we go forward to the public and we say, okay, we've

got this plan, we want your input on it. We have a

thirty day comment period that you can — as I said,

you can E-mail me; you can fax me; you can submit

them orally tonight. We want your input because

it's in your community. You can help us judge how

well the remedy is going to work.

So after the comment period is ended, Ron

takes those, does a Responsiveness Summary, and

issues what we call a Record of Decision. This is

where we say, okay, this is the plan, this is what

we're going to do. We're going to move forward on

this .

We then begin the Remedial Design and

Remedial Action, which is where the engineers get

together and say, okay, we're going to do this. How


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

are we going to do that exactly? They come up and

they do their engineering designs and their plans,

and then the Remedial Action is the actual

construction. They're going to implement that

design.

The next step in the process is de-listing.

This can be quite a ways down t.he road. Sometimes

it never occurs. It only happens when it's deemed

that critical cleanup levels are met to our

satisfaction, then the site can be de-listed from

the NPL.

At any time during this entire process if

an eminent threat is discovered that we think is

going to be an endangerment to the community, we can

do what we call a time critical removal action and

go in without any type of administrative procedures

and go in and take care of that action. Is there

any questions on this?

MS. GUSTAFSON: My name is Chris Gustafson.

My responses that I can look forward to from the

EPA that I leave with you tonight then I would look

up in the repository on the Responsiveness Summary

that the EPA puts in the repository?

MR. BLUM: Correct. Since there is a court


10

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

reporter tonight and she has to try to get

everyone's comments, you're going to have to please

state your name and spell it, and you're going to

have to speak slowly and clearly so that she can get

everything down.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: What about their address?

Normally we have that as part of our hearing

process.

MR. BLUM: No, we actually don't take down

the address. I know this is somewhat tricky how the

meeting is supposed to work, so if there's any

questions, please ask.

MS. GLENN: My name is Sue Glenn. My

question is — and it probably will be stated as the

meeting goes on — but I was wondering what is the

ranking that you referred to in your opening

comments?

MR. BLUM: What was the site scored at?

MS. GLENN: Right.

MR. BLUM: To tell you the truth, I don't

know. Do you know that, Ron?

MR. MURAWSKI: No. I think it was in the

30's though.

MS. GLENN: And twenty —


11

J

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

MR. MURAWSKI: I think 28 1/2 is the

minimum threshold.

MS. GLENN: Thank you.

MR. SLUM: So what I'm going to do is I'm

going to turn it over to Ron and Ron is going to go

over the past site history and then also give you an

overview of what our proposed plan is.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Can I ask one more

question?

MR. BLUM: 'Sure.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Chris Gustafson. As far as

the hazardous ranking score, I understand that they

rank it on a variety of topics. What would those

topics be and do you know what the score was for

each topic for the site?

MR. BLUM: No, I don't know that at this

time. However, I could find that out and get back

to you.

We ask kind of that — if you can kind of

hold them until the end of Ron's presentation, only

because we have to get through and also get your

comments tonight, and I want to make sure we have

time for that. But I mean don't think that I'm

telling you not to ask questions, but — anyways,

12

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

this is Ron Murawski, who is the project manager.

MR. MURAWSKI: Alan, the attorney for the

site, pointed out that the hazardous ranking score

is 34.68, which is above the 28.5. That's why it's

a Super fund site.

As Gordie said, I'm going to go over the

background of the site, the procedure — the

investigations that occurred, the procedures that

were used to get to this point, and then finally the

EPA's planned remedy and proposed actions beyond the

Record of Decision.

Here's a drawing of where the site is

located. It's on the eastern side of Antioch within

the Village of Antioch, very, very close to Silver

Lake, as you can see. And another important issue

is Sequoit Creek is right there bordering the site.

The Illinois /Wisconsin border is approximately two

miles north.

There' s about approximately 51 acres is the

landfill out of a total of about 121 1/2 acres with

the property mostly owned by Waste Management of

Illinois, a small part of which is owned by the

Village of Antioch, and it's divided into so-called

old and new landfills.


13

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Let me put up a little drawing of that.

We're treating the old and new landfill really as

one unit here as far as for remediation. There are

some differences as far as when the Remedial Design

occurs, but from a Superfund standpoint, we're

looking at both units as far as concerns of what the

remediation will entail. I'm not sure how much of

this is still current as far as what companies are

actually located in the Sequoit Industrial Park

there. We don't have a pointer here, do we?

I'll get into this later, but village

well 4, which is right there, has been

decommissioned because of the vinyl chloride levels

we found in it, and village well 7 was installed

farther west of the site.

As I said earlier, the landfill borders

Sequoit Creek. Surface water flows from Silver Lake

through Sequoit Creek to Lake Marie and ultimately

into the Fox River. Groundwater flow according to

the Remedial Investigation is southwesterly. And

seasonal wetlands exist south of the landfill. We

don't expect that these are going to be impacted by

the Remedial Action.

MS. GUSTAFSON: The groundwater flow you're


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

14

referring to in the southwesterly direction is

referring to the combined deep sand and gravel

aquifer?

MR. MURAWSKI: Yes.

MS. GUSTAFSON: And how deep is that

approximately to the top?

MR. MURAWSKI: I don't know. Let's see.

I'm not quite sure when that would technically start

with the sand and gravel aquifer. I know that some **

wells are drilled about 85 feet, and that's part of

the deep sand and gravel aquifer.

MS. GUSTAFSON: What about village well 3?

Is that the one that was closed before?

MR. MURAWSKI: Yeah, that's — the village

wells are in the deep sand and gravel aquifers.

MS. GUSTAFSON: But do you have a well log

showing how deep that —

MR. MURAWSKI: That's in Volume 2, I think,

of the Remedial Investigation. I'm working closely

with the Illinois EPA on this site. They're heavily

involved in the review process and we expect to get

their concurrence on the selected remedy when it

comes time.

Back in the 1980's, I believe the Illinois

T, ft T. REPORTING SERVICE, INC. (847) 623-7580

15

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

EPA classified this as a municipal solid waste

landfill, which means that certain Illinois EPA regs

or actually Illinois Pollution Control Board regs

take effect.

The earlier investigation showed that

municipal waste was primarily deposited on the site,

otherwise known as household waste, and other

solvents and hydraulic oils.

The site was closed and capped around 1989

under Illinois Administrative Code 807, which calls

for not less than two feet of suitable material over

the entire landfill. The Remedial Investigation

shows that there's actually a lot more than that

over the landfill, which is why later in this

presentation we're going with the 807 cap as opposed

to a more luxury model. Yes?

MR. ANDERSON: Lynn Anderson. I was on the

committee and I believe there's evidence — you have

the wording in your slide "may" have been deposited,

.disposed of at the site, heavy metals, hyraulic

fluid. I think there's a lot of evidence in the

record that those things were deposited, just to

remind you. So you can change that.

MR. MURAWSKI: Thanks for that


16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

clarification. Remedial Investigation is a big part

of the Superfund process. That uncovers what levels

of contamination are on-site in the ground and in

all sorts of media — groundwater, surface water,

surface soil, sediments, air — and U.S. EPA

approved that in 1997.

The Baseline Risk Assessment, another very

important document in the Superfund process,

quantifies the risk at the site from a number of

different exposure pathways, such as from drinking

groundwater or breathing the — if a trespasser

breathes the air, and dermal contact with the soil,

inhalation while showering, thermal contact also of

organic chemicals while showering, and a host of

other exposure pathways.

As I said earlier, village well No. 4 was

closed in 1997 even though there were no

site-related contaminants — I should say the vinyl

chloride which showed up as late as 1989 has not

showed up since then, and as I will explain later,

that becomes the main driver in the decision to go

forward with Remedial Action. Nonetheless, the

decision was made to decommission that well and

replace it with a well farther away from the site.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

17

Ten to the negative fourth is one in

10,000, and the EPA policy is that we normally —

sites normally don't warrant Remedial Action that

are less than ten to the negative fourth risk or one

in 10,000 risk. However, the EPA guidelines also

state that if a maximum contaminant level is

exceeded, then cleanup in general is warranted, a

maximum contaminant level being for each safe

drinking water contaminant that U.S. EPA has

designated, it has a maximum contamination level

over which it is deemed unsafe to drink. The

drinking wat.er is not safe to drink based on —

typically based on a certain — typically seventy

years, and I think it's two liters a day.

Now, the third bullet gets into one of the

reasons that we're pushing for Remedial Action. The

Baseline Risk Assessment showed it was beyond one

times ten to the negative four, and mostly from just

vinyl chloride contaminated drinking water, and that

was from well US3D, which was very close to the

site, just southwest of it. The levels were as high

as 35 parts per billion in 1994 and currently

they're around 15 to 20 parts per billion, which is

still well above the maximum contaminant level of


18

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

two parts per billion.

The Baseline Risk Assessment also showed

that the human population would likely not be

adversely affected from a noncarcinogenic

standpoint. The contaminants are classified as

either cancerous or noncancerous, otherwise known as

carcinogenic versus noncarcinogenic. So we' re

really looking at a carcinogenic risk here. Vinyl

chloride is a carcinogen, and that's why we are

particularly concerned .

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is this risk factor — does

that include the synergistic effects of the other

contaminants that were detected in those monitoring

wells or that monitoring well or is it —

MR. MURAWSKI: A pathway is generally for a

given category of an individual, either an adult or

a child or teenage trespasser, and that would

include — the pathway — like let's say you take an

adult . That would pretty much be all of the

possible ways of being exposed to that contaminant.

So in the case of vinyl chloride, you would have

drinking it, inhalation via showering, thermal

contact via showering, and so on.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So the risk factor is off


19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

the constituent vinyl chloride alone, not the other

compounds that we're —

MR. MURAWSKI: Right. It's not added to —

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is it quantified per

constituent then and then that total is used or just

off of the vinyl chloride?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, in this case the other

constituents that were studied, of course —

beryllium, mangoneze, arsenic, thallium — showed up

rather high, but none of them were at the ten to the

negative fourth range. Vinyl chloride was the only

one that was beyond the one times ten to the

negative four.

Let's see. Waste Management was the

responsible party that undertook the Remedial

Investigation and Feasability Study, so some of this

presentation is based on documentation that they

produced — either they did or their contractors —

and we reviewed and we had a lot of different people

reviewing it - the attorney's office, toxicologists,

hydrogeologists, and so on.

So there are capping alternatives, leachate

collection alternatives — leachate being when the

rainwater interacts with the soil contaminants, it


20

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

creates leachate, the liquid form, and I'll explain

later how important it is for us to draw that out of

the waste mass, — gas collection alternatives.

Also, it's very important to get the volatile

organic chemicals out of the waste mass to prevent

them from leaching into the groundwater.

The minimum-maximum p'retty much refers to

the cost of the components, and the 81 1 cap was the•a

delux cap that 1 talked about that was deemed not

applicable in this case. The '807 cap is applicable

based on the dates during which — the dates after

which the H.O.D. Landfill stopped accepting waste

and the dates, I believe, that they closed the site.

Gas collection, the minimum condition is

just continuing with the existing setup of flares

out there, which aren't doing a very good job.

Maximum condition is a dual extraction system of

leachate and gas collection where the wells have two

different purposes, and an active system too as

opposed to passive, meaning that we're going to. have

a mechanism actually draw the gas out of the ground,

and leachate collection once again used in

conjunction with the gas collection system. The

minimum is use the existing system, which we feel


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

21

would need significant upgrading in order to reduce

the leachate in the waste mass.

Leachate treatment, what to do with the

leachate after we draw it out, we feel that we can

get by with the current system of discharging or

transporting the leachate to the Fox River Waste

Reclamation District I believe it's called. Should

this not prove to be acceptable or feasible, we'll

look at some other alternatives, but it will

probably just involve another publicly-owned

treatment works, otherwise known as wastewater

treatment plants.

Groundwater monitoring, we're looking at

enhancing the present system with more monitoring

points, and "monitored natural attenuation" involves

monitoring the reduced concentration of the

contaminants over time by monitoring related

parameters, and it's used in conjunction with

Remedial Action, most notably leachate and gas

collection here.

When we evaluate all of these proposed

alternatives, there's nine criteria. Notice that

the bottom is community acceptance. That's not to

say that that's the least important; that's just how


22

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

they show up in the EPA policy. State acceptance is

there as well and cost .

The two most important ones, however, are

overall protection of human health and the

environment and compliance with ARARs, which are the

applicable or relevant and appropriate laws and

regulations, and in this case a lot of which are

Illinois EPA, Illinois Pollution Control Board

regulations .

Long-term effectiveness , we obviously want

to remedy it, do the job over time. No. 4, reduce

the leachate and gas in the waste mass. Short-term

effectiveness, make sure it's not too upsetting to

the workers or the residents during implementation.

Implementability , whether it can be done, and so on.

After we've looked at all nine of those —

well, actually we're not through with the community

acceptance part, but actually seven of those we've

looked at. State acceptance, we found that the

Illinois EPA does concur with the proposed

alternative.

We chose for capping to become compliant

with the 807 cap, which I talked about earlier, and

it's mostly going to involve regrading and


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

23

recompacting soil. There's a lot of unevenness out

there that needs to be leveled out, especially

obviously the low spots.

Gas collection and leachate collection,

we're going with the dual extraction system. We

feel that's the most effective in reducing the waste

mass and preventing migration of volatile organic

chemicals into the groundwater.

And an active system, there will be a

centralized blower and flare station which will

actively collect the leachate and the gas as opposed

to what's happening now.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Are we allowed to ask

questions?

MR. MURAWSKI: Yes.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Chris Gustafson again.

What would be the BMPs that you will require when

you're redoing the cover, the 807 cover?

MR. MURAWSKI: The best management

practices? Is that what you mean?

MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes. Let me cut to the

chase. Could I request that you guys use G02s

(phonetically) instead of silt fence since they have

a higher rate of particle removal around the


24

•-+ujr1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

perimeter of the activity?

MR. MURAWSKI: You could request that.

That's going to be evaluated during the Remedial

Design, whether silt fences are acceptable. So

you're talking more about access limitation?

MS. GUSTAFSON: What they do, they take

on-site soil and they feed it into a tube, and it

has a better effective rate of removing the

particles than the silt fence, which is still about

85 percent, and you .want to have 90 percent

efficiency. That's why I was just coming up with

using that as an alternative.

MR. MURAWSKI: Instead of silt fence?

MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, instead of silt fence.

MR. MURAWSKI: Okay. We'll definitely look

at that.

MS. GUSTAFSON: It requires less

maintenance. I think it's 100 pounds per foot, so

it's less removable, requires less maintenance,

won't sag to cause those problems.

MR. MURAWSKI: But as I said, when we get

the Remedial — the draft Remedial Design hopefully

from the responsible parties — we do, by the way,

desire the responsible parties to do the cleanup as


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

opposed to the EPA doing it and then trying to get

the money from the responsible parties, but, you

know, we will look at all aspects of the Remedial

Design before we document any changes needed or

before we approve any.

Okay. I already talked about leachate

collection and it's going to be in conjunction with

gas collection. Leachate treatment, currently the

leachate is trucked to the Fox River Water

Reclamation District, and we're planning to have

that continue. It would be on a more voluminous

basis, of course, because there's going to be more

leachate collected.

I understand that the responsible party,

Waste Management — by the way, Waste Management is

not the only responsible party, but they are the

only ones who came forward to do the Remedial

Investigation and Feasability Study.

MS. GUSTAFSON: They're a volunteer

responsible party, Waste Management?

MR. MURAWSKI: No, they're a responsible

party based on an evaluation years ago of — it's

quite a — Alan, do you have any input on how that

process occurs? I know they actually seek out and


26

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

try to figure out who deposited or transported what,

right?

MR. WALTS: Right. Early on in the process

the EPA analyzes the evidence that it has about

potentially responsible parties. Those include

owner/operators, people who generated material that

was sent there, and sometimes people who transported

material there. So EPA did that analysis early in

the process.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So has Waste Management

owned this site since it became a landfill site of

municipal waste then?

MR. MURAWSKI: They purchased the site in

1975, I believe. /MR. WALTS: By merger.

A VOICE: 1972.

MR. MURAWSKI: And there were landfill

operations going on prior to that.

MS. COWAN: Mary Ann Cowan. If I

understand correctly, you were saying that Waste

Management did the inspection, provided the report,

will do the cleanup. Is that — am I getting that

correctly?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, actually there are


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

27

many phases of the investigation besides the

Remedial Investigation. There are investigations

prior to that. Most of that was done by Waste

Management contractors. Some was done by U.S. EPA

contractors.

And as far as the cleanup, we're hoping

that Waste Management will step forward to do it,

but that has not been resolved yet.•<)

MS. COWAN: Would they in turn — if they

do it, will you then come in arid inspect to be sure

that they did what they said they were going to do?

MR. MURAWSK1: Yes, we will have a U.S. EPA

contractor onboard to actually — actually located

pretty close to the area and they will — and I as

well will go out periodically, but the U.S. EPA

contractor will be the one to do the more indepth

inspection.

The groundwater monitoring alternative that

we chose includes a predesign investigation to

further study the extent, if any, of the contaminant

plume. So far we haven't really found anything that

would indicate that there's a contaminant plume out

there, but we're looking for a few more wells to be

drilled and some samples being taken from there


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

28

critically — I mean strategically placed from US3D

where the main contamination was found. We would be

downgrading it for the most part from US3D.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Excuse me. What is the

haIf-life of vinyl chloride?

MR. MURAWSKI: I would have to talk to, I

guess, a chemist, which I could do.

MR. ANDERSON: Lynn Anderson. Half-life

with respect to what?

MS. GUSTAFSON: Biodegradation or —

MR. ANDERSON: I don't know if it's been

determined.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So that's still too new of

a thing to know.

MR. ANDERSON: You talk about what

temperature — you have to be very specific what

temperature and so on and so forth, otherwise it's

probably — as a rough guess, organic compounds at

ambient temperature, probably on the order of —

just hazarding a guess — greater than a million

years. I'm pretty safe on that.

MR. SPINNER: Greg Spinner. Who was the

previous owner of this site?

MR. MURAWSKI: Let's see. At one point it

T, & T, REPORTING SERVICE. INC. (847) 623-7580

29

O 12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

was Horak and Dishinger and I think Cunningham owned

part of it at one point also.

The groundwater monitoring well will

include quarterly monitoring. If at some point in

the future we can determine that there's not much

change going on or there's sufficient attenuation,

then we may go to a less frequent monitoring.

Institutional controls, most notably

drinking water use, has restrictions, most of which

are in place already I understand from the Village

of Antioch. For instance, no private wells can be

installed now in the village, no new private wells.

Any property I believe that's within 200 feet of a

water main has to be connected to it for water

purposes. The existing fencing and gates and signs

will be upgraded. Yes?

MR. OSMOND: My name is Tim Osmond, and I'm

wondering, you say that there's a restriction for

new private wells in the village. Is there a radius

that we should be concerned about, and is Lake

County involved in it, a hundred yards south where

it gets into the township area?

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: My name is Marilyn

Shineflug. I'm the mayor in the village. That


30

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

restriction that you mentioned with the village has

nothing to do with the landfill. It's because we

have a water treatment — or we provide water to

people and sewer. So it made it sound like —

because you might have interpreted that, did you,

Tim, that because of the existence of the landfill

we don't allow private wells to be drilled in the

village, but we don't allow them to be drilled in

the village anyway. We require them to hook onto

the system if they aren't on already if their well

fails, but this new construction, they automatically

have to hook onto the system, and it's not related

to their proximity to the landfill. It's two

separate issues. It's a building and zoning issue.

MR. OSMOND: Can I ask a followup on that,

please? In your context of explaining that to us

that that's one of the things that are done with

regards to access restrictions, is that something

that should be a concern and do you have some

guidelines that could be made available to —

MR. MURAWSKI: Is what?

MR. OSMOND: Well, you mentioned that we

want to restrict the access to drinking water and

then you said the village has put in a rule not to


31

o 12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

have private wells. Marilyn corrected you in that

that wasn't a relationship. Should there be a

relationship?

MR. MURAWSKI: I didn't mean to imply it

was because of the landfill. It works out to our

advantage that that ordinance is already in effect.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Me again. What are the

village boundaries so that people in this room know

what that means?

MR. MURAWSKI: What are the village

boundaries? Well, I know that the landfill is on

the eastern boundary of the village.

A VOICE: No, the eastern boundary is out

to Route 45. When you go as far south — what's the

road — Beach Grove, and there's North Avenue and

west to — what's the name of the —

MR. MURAWSKI: South on 173.

MR. BLUM: The question is is there

somewhere in the village that they should be worried

about if, say, for instance, they could have their

own private well? Is there somewhere in proximity

to the landfill — The point I think we were trying

to address is you haven't seen the on-site

investigation. I'm getting back to his question.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

32

A VOICE: I was just trying to clarify

where the restrictions for the private well is and

where are the limits of the village water supplies.

MR. PUCINIK: Steve Pucinik. I live on

Little Silver Lake on the east side. We're all on

wells over there. Is there any contaminants that

are running towards our wells? Which way are the

aquifers running?

MR. MURAWSKI: The groundwater flow was W

found to be southwesterly away from there, but I

know that Lake County is monitoring at least some of

those private wells.

MR. PUCINIK: There's test wells that are

on the north side of the lake. Are they still

monitoring those?

MR. MURAWSKI: I'm not sure about those,s

but I know that certain private wells in the Little

Silver Lake subdivision are being monitored by Lake

County.

MR. PUCINIK: Have they found anything?

MR. MURAWSKI: No, they haven't.

MS. RISET: Debbie Riset. I live there too

and the test well on the west side of the

association has not been used for quite a while, at

T, » T, REPORTING SERVICE. INC. (847) 623-7580

33

J

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

least four or five years that I know of. It might

have been longer. So our association is township

and we're directly east of that.

MS. PIASECKI: My name is Kathleen

Piasecki, P-I-A-S-E-C-K-I, and you said that those

wells are being tested by Waukegan?

MR. MURAWSKI: By the Lake County Health

Department.

MS. PIASECKI: And I would like to know

what they're testing for.

MR. MURAWSKI: They're testing for volatile

organic chemicals, semivolatile organic chemicals,

inorganic chemicals.

MS. PIASECKI: Can I ask you when they plan

to test for that type of thing?

MR. MURAWSKI: I'm not sure when that

started, but I know that they're testing for the

contaminants that we're most concerned about in the

landfill.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Do you know when those

samples were collected?

MR. MURAWSKI: I believe they're collected

yearly, and I'm not sure of the scheme they use,

which houses they do when, but I understand they're


34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

collected.

MR. GIROUX: Greg Giroux, Lake County

Health Department. Yearly they're sampled for

ammonia, chloride, chemical oxygen, arsenic, iron

nitrate, pH, total dissolved solids, specific

conductivity, and sulfate. That's yearly. There's

six or eight to ten wells that were sampled, and

then we contract with NET for sampling of the

constituents that Mr. Murawski had mentioned.

MS. GUSTAFSON: What were the results of

the chemical oxygen?

MR. GIROUX: I don't have it with me.

MR. CANELLA: John Canella. In light of

the magnitude of the size of this landfill back in

1989, why are we just addressing the problem in

1998?

MR. MURAWSKI: You're probably not going to

like the answer. In my case I took over the site

last year, so it's hard for me to speak to those

issues. I think that's a general criticism of the

Superfund process. I mean Congress and a whole lot

of other entities voice that same complaint.

We are claiming now that we're cleaning up

the sites quicker than we used to, which probably is


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

35

still not quick enough according to a lot of people,

but I think the typical cleanup cycle was about ten

years and it's down to eight or something like that

from when the site is originally put on the

Superfund list to when the cleanup is completed.

MR. CANELLA: And with all of the

complexities, why didn't we have some proactive

action going on rather than waiting until these

contaminants reached the point where you had to shut

down the well?

MR. MURAWSKI: Shutting down village well 4

was precautionary, but the last twenty some

analytical results didn't show any vinyl chloride.

However, based on the fact that there was vinyl

chloride detected in the well and based on its

proximity, those were the main reasons it was shut

down.

MS. GUSTAFSON: One more question. Is part

of the reason that the cleanup time and the decision

on what alternative remedies you guys want to prefer

or recommend, is that because of a schedule of

samples needed to determine what's there and the

length of time that needs to go between? When you

say quarterly, you mean every three months then or


36

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

does it mean two rounds of sampling before you would

make a decision?

MR. MURAWSKI: Quarterly is typical.

That's typical in U.S. EPA policy and state policy.

There's nothing sacred about that.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Do you need two rounds of

quarterly samples then to make a decision or how

would they do that? What would be the primary —

what would be the primary action limit? When you

reach a primary action limit the first time, is that

when action occurs or does it have to be detected in

two sampling events in order for it to be —

MR. MURAWSKI: I think it probably depends

on the contaminant tested and the concentration thati

is found. Obviously if we find, let's say, vinyl

chloride or dichloroethane or trichloroethane, if we

find that those levels are not attenuating or

increasing, then we have to go to Plan B, so to

speak, which I'll get into. If we don't — if the

contaminants do not attenuate to our satisfaction,

then there's going to be a contingency in

the Record of Decision to go into an active

groundwater remediation. That's usually a pump and

treat operation, pump the contaminated water out and


37

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

treat it.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is that by forcing oxygen

into the ground or by using nitrous gas or how is

the — is that a chemical pumping process?

MR. MURAWSKI: I think it's mostly a

mechanical type situation.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Using' oxygen then,

compressed air?

MR. MURAWSKI: Yeah, basically putting

extraction wells, trenches, arid so on and channeling

that to a treatment plant and using carbon-activated

filtration and whatever other mechanisms to get rid

of the volatile organic chemicals.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Would air stripping also be

a possible alternative here?

MR. MURAWSKI: That could be a possibility,

but at this point we don't anticipate the need for

active groundwater remediation.

MR. BLUM: I'm going to ask that we can

kind of move forward so you can get through your

presentation and then we can have comments.

MR. MURAWSKI: The land use on the site

will be restricted so as not to impair or interfere

with the remedy. That's pretty much true for all


38

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Superfund sites where Remedial Action is occurring.

As far as what the site could be used for

in the future, that will be highly dependent on the

zoning laws of the village and how much the Remedial

Action really does reduce the contaminant levels.

We developed the proposed remedy based on

the EPA's Presumptive Remedies guidance, and Gordie

went over that earlier, but it's where we looked at

a whole lot of landfills and noticed that there were

a lot of commonalities both in the type of the

waste, the variety of the watse, and the

contaminants that were found in the landfills, and

we found that containment was the most sensible

route to take, and that usually involves waste cover

caps and leachate and gas collection.

The Responsiveness Summary is part of the

Record of Decision, and the Responsiveness Summary

really lets us know the level of community

acceptance, and when the Record of Decision is

circulated for review, there's a lot of offices that

look at it, including the state and EPA

headquarters, and this document could be amended

later on if conditions change. We try to write

these Records of Decision so that we don't have to

T, a T, REPORTING SFRVTCK . TNC. (847) 623-7580

39

J

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

go amending them for obvious reasons, but that's

always a possibility.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Will there be additional

monitoring wells on the south and west borders of

the landfill?

MR. MURAWSKI: There will be additional

monitoring points over what is currently going on,

and we're going to — during the Remedial Design,

we're going to look at the locations and quantity of

the wells.

After the Record of Decision is signed and

we go through the negotiations to try to get the

responsibile party or parties to do the cleanup,

then the Remedial Design either by the responsible

parties or by the EPA or one of its contractors

really gets into specifics of the cleanup and has to

be consistent with what's in the Record of Decision.

As I said earlier, we strive to get the

responsible parties to conduct the Remedial Design

or Remedial Action instead of us spending the money

and trying to get it from the responsible parties,

which is a long, long legal process, and the EPA may

get a high percentage of their actual costs or may

not. Sometimes there's armies of lawyers involved


40

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

so —

The operation and maintenance is typically

a thirty year period, and that's where we continue

the monitoring and the reporting to U.S. EPA. We

look at what's going on with the contaminant levels.

And as Gordie said, at some point we want to get to

the point where we can take it off of the National

Priorities List so it's not a Superfund site

anymore, and ideally the property could be used for

beneficial uses, but we don't'expect that to happen

in the near future. That's about all I have for my

presentation.

MR. BLUM: Okay. Let's open it up again

for questions and answers. I'm hoping to keep it to

questions right now pertaining to what Ron has

presented as far as the proposed plan. If you can

keep it kind of specific to that, and then later on

after the meeting if you have general questions

about specific things not pertaining to the plan,

we'll be open for those.

MR. OSMOND: Tim Osmond. I don't expect

any kind of a firm number, but when you use terms

like "not in the near foreseeable future", just can

you ballpark at all from start to finish when things


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

41

might move if you get cooperation from the other

responsible parties and what kind of action you're

looking at?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, the Remedial Action as

far as implementation of the waste cover and

implementation of leachate and gas collection

systems could all happen in one construction season.

If the negotiations go smoothly and quickly, that

could happen as soon as the end of next construction

season.

MS. GLENN. I'm Sue Glenn. My question is

earlier in your conversation you talked about a

delux cap and then I believe — I'm not sure if I'm

using the same terminology, but you said you would

settle for the 807 cap that would be applicable for

ours, and then you listed some things that would be

done under that cap. What are the differences

between the 811 cap and the 807 and why was it

chosen?

MR. MURAWSKI: The 811 cap is more

substantial in terms of the amount of clay needed in

the intermediate layer and the amount of top cover

needed. I think it's three feet each, three feet

each thick, where I think the 807 cap only calls for


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

42

two feet of suitable material for the top layer.

There's two main reasons that we decide on

the 807 cap versus the 811, and one is the

conditions that were in place of the landfill having

stopped accepting waste as of a certain period and

having closed the site, and due to the fact that

it's classified as a municipal solid waste landfill.

That's why the 807 requirement kicks in.

The other part of that is that there's

already according to the studies in the Remedial

Investigation from four to seven feet of suitable

material out there, and that was the other reason

why we felt that we didn't need to go with the 811

cap

MS. GUSTAFSON: What is the mean

permeability of the current cover? At what point is

it saturated to the point it no longer accepts rain

on and it is now run off in that type of cover

that's on there now?

MR. MURAWSKI: I think the permeability

established during Remedial Investigation was one

times ten to the negative seven centimeters. I'm

sorry. I don't have that information committed to

memory. But the infiltration now is about — it's


43

J>

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

approximately four inches a year, I think, and when

the upgrades occur for the 807 cap, we would be

cutting that down to about 1.6 inches per year or

so, over a two inch per year reduction in

infiltration.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So do you do a sive test

and a particle size to determine the compactability

or the geotechnical stuff so that you know that it's

compacted to a specific ratio?

MR. MURAWSKI: The method that was used is

U.S. EPA approved hydrologic evaluation, and I don't

have that — It's the HELP model. But basically

it's a computer model where you input the parameters

of the landfill and it will give you the information/most notably that we're interested in, being

infiltration.

We found that the 811 cap doesn't actually

help matters much over the 807 cap because of the

additional thickness of the top layer, which in this

particular case would contribute to infiltration due

to the saturation into that layer.


Piasecki. Looking at your health assessment, which

I had looked at at the library, it mentioned the

L & L REPORTING SERVICE. INC. (R47t fi;n-75ftn

44

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

soil gases and it states — it says, "Residents

nearest to the site and employees in area commercial

establishments may have encountered past, present

and future potential exposures to methane gas or

other volatile organic contaminants. The methane

gas emitted from the landfill probably depends on

the decomposition of the landfill's soil

constituents and of off-gas resulting from anaerobic

decomposition of stored waste. VOCs could also be

emitted as gases or -in condensation and they may

migrate off site and expose downward populations.

Future exposure of nearby residents, remediation

workers or trespassers is thereby a possibility.

However, the methane gas is flared and disbursement

throughout the atsmosphere would likely occur."

Now, you're going to continue to use the flaring

situation to burn off the gases?

MR. MURAWSKI: It's going to be a dual

collection system. I think flaring is still going

to be used, but it's going to be used much more

effectively, and I should say also —

MS. PIASECKI: Is there not a certain

temperature or whatever that they have to burn at in

order to —


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

45

MR. MURAWSKI: I'm not sure. But I should

say that based on the risk assessment, it did not

show risk from inhalation of vapors near the one to

the ten centimeter fourth threshold. It was

significantly less than that.

MS. PIASECKI: How do they determine a

study like that?

MR. MURAWSKI: They look at exposure

pathways, you know, what are ways you can

typically —

MS. PIASECKI: Like it indicates here like

downwind. There could be certain populations that

would be more inclined to have a problem from this,

from the prevailing winds, and the only reason I'm

asking is because this is a method that you are

considering using.

MS. GUSTAFSON: I think what she's trying

to ask is what type of modeling method do you use

for the air current temperature, the seasonal

fluctuations?

MR. MURAWSKI: I'm not entirely sure of all

of the assumptions that are built into the Baseline

Risk Assessment, but I imagine it's an average

condition, you know, based on some windy days and


46

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

some calm days.

MR. BLUM: Isn't it true that you are

upgrading it from passive to active?

MS. HENDERSON: How will that help?

MR. MURAWSKI: Right, right. That will

help to remove more of the gases from the landfill

to get to the point eventually where there won't be

any volatile organic chemicals in the waste mass,

not nearly as many as there are now. The more we

can reduce the leacHate arid the gas in the landfill,

the more we'll reduce migration in the groundwater

contaminants and into the air.

MR. BLUM: Don't gases generally too at 25

or 30 years drop off?

MR. MURAWSKI: Actually, as I understand

it, the leachate and gas collection will really — a

large volume of that will be removed after about

five years, but I don't know how well that's

substantiated.

MS. HENDERSON: I am concerned about the

flaring and I wanted you to explain to her why that

would be better, the active .withdrawal would be

better, and I'm not sure I'm getting that because it

sounds like you'll just be doing it faster.

T, & T, RKPORTTNO TNP 847

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

47

MR. MURAWSKI: More gas will be burned off.

I should point out too there will be air monitoring

to make sure th£ levels are within the state

guidelines, federal guidelines.

MS. GUSTAFSON: You're talking about air

monitoring done by the U.S. EPA or American Academy

of Allergies & Asthma, or who does that?

MR. MURAWSKI: That would probably be the

responsible party or their contractors under the

oversight of the EPA or EPA contractors.

MS. WENINGER: My name is Carol Weninger.

I live in Antioch Township. W-E-N-I-N-G-E-R. When

I first learned about the landfill years ago in the

early 80's, it was not only vinyl chloride, but it

was lead and cadmium and the synergistic pool, and I

will be contacting the Lake County Health Department

to find out where those monitoring wells are.

I live in the Moon Lake watershed, less

than a mile south of the landfill, but one of — I'm

the waste management liaison in my community, and I

try to educate our residents that if they have

paint, instead of continuing the problem — we have

residents that have copper sulfate, DOT by the bins,

and instead of putting it in the garbage, does the


48

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Antioch area or somewhere in Antioch Township have a

drop-off site for pickup for special wastes that is

picked up by the EPA like some other residents in

Lake County?

MR. MURAWSKI: I would hope they would.

Most municipalities do.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: Marilyn Shineflug, mayor

of Antioch. The Solid Waste Advisory, SWALCO, is

trying to site a household hazardous waste facility,

assuming these are household.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Isn't it considered an ag

product though? Do you have an ag chem cleanup

program in the community?

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: No, we don't. This

isn't an agricultural community. I'll get back to

you in a minute, but the question — we're trying to

site a household hazardous waste facility where it

will be mobilized, meaning that a truck would come

to Antioch one weekend and Lake Villa another

weekend and different quadrants in the county. We

have not been able to achieve siting of that yet.

In the meantime we're using household

hazardous waste collection days in conjunction with

the Illinois EPA, but they're very much more


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

49

expensive than this other procedure, but assuming

and as soon as we get a facility sited and built,

then we'll be able to advertise for mobile

collection and people could bring in all of the junk

in their garage — well, not all of the junk, but

the types of things that we all hold there that we

know we really shouldn't be putting into the

landfill because they might leach. Does that answer

the question?

MS. WENINGBR: Yes. Thank you.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: We don't have an

agricultural program.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is not DOT a pesticide?

MR. BLUM: I think we're kind of getting

off the track right now. Right now what I want to

do is I want to make sure we have time to get formal

public comments if people wish to do so. So I just

want to lay down two quick groundrules. One is that

you stand up, you state your name and spell it, and

then of course speak slowly and loudly so that our

court reporter — who seems to be doing a great job;

it's not a very easy job — can understand.

Also, number two, you don't have to make

your comments tonight. I know a lot of people don't


50

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

like to speak in front of large crowds, myself

included. You can mail them to me; you can fax them

to me; you can phone them to me. All of that

information is actually at the back of the table.

If there is not any left, I have some business cards

and you can write it down.

Also, I want to ask, if you didn't sign in

when you came in, would you please do so? We have

quite a large turnout tonight, and I think this is

excellent, and hopefully we cah continue this

interaction, and one way for me to do that is to

have an updated mailing list so I can get the

information to you when it's time to do so. So with

that, I'm going to open up the floor for formal

public comments. We're going to have to go one at a

time .

MS. GUSTAFSON: I just had two more

questions.

MR. BLUM: We'll do questions and answers

again after the comments, okay?

MR. OSMOND: Tim Osmond. We'll also have

at the township all of your addresses and sources of

information so people who don't get it or in talking

with other people down the road, they can contact


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

51

our office for that.

MR. BLUM: Okay, great. Thank you very

much.

MR. ANDERSON: Lynn Anderson. I would just

like to say something. It was mentioned earlier

that the heavy metals, such as arsenic, beryllium,

and thallium were discovered, and if one looks at

the old legal record, you would find that there was

some evidence that large amounts of heavy metals

were put in — from .Illinois EPA records were put in

the landfill, and so what I would like to know is —

or make sure that's it's followed up on is that all

of the heavy metals, arsenic in particular, are

studied and that the EPA should be aware of these

inorganic arsenic compounds such as lead arsenide —

which is suspected of being in there — to the best

of my knowledge can be converted into organic

arsenic compounds, which are more water-soluble and

leach at a faster rate, and that that should be

monitored also.

Secondly, on GW2, the quarterly monitoring

should be at the minimum and kept that way rather

than annual monitoring — one of the overheads said

that — based on the previous history and the fact


52

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

that vinyl chloride has shown up with the little bit

of monitoring that has been done. I think quarterly

monitoring is the minimum that should be done and

not the maximum.

And then finally, a statement was made that

sometime thirty years from now this could be removed

from the Super fund list. Well, as all the

gradeschool children know, there is such a thing as

the law of conservation of energy, which is

equivalent to the law of conservation of mass, and

since you're not removing any material, i.e., the

heavy metals, and they don't decompose by

themselves, I don't see how this could ever be

removed from the Superfund list.


Piasecki. I have a list here of the things that

again were in your health assessment, and I have one

last thing after I'm done, but that the waste dump

does include — and we talked about vinyl chloride,

but I do believe that all of the chemicals that are

there should be of concern because even cancer from

vinyl chloride is just one item, and in fact

contaminants such as cadmium, for example, can

affect the kidneys and the brain and other areas of


53

\

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

the body that we're not talking about specifically,

but basically according to your records we have oily

waste (PCBs, oils and coolants), inorganic chemicals

(cyanide, salts), organic chemicals (epoxy resins),

paint sludge, solvents (phenols) and heavy metals,

(zinc, mercury, chromium and lead). You have waste

oils and chlorinated solvents —

THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. You're

going to have to slow down.

MS. PIASECtfl: This is on page 5 of their

health assessment. And the list goes on. But the

last thing I wanted to ask you is — I have asked

this question before and I've never been adequately

given an answer. Has the dump been tested for

radioactive material of any kind? The reason I

ask —

MR. SLUM: We're actually in a comment

period. We're right now just asking for comments,

but do you want to address that question, Ron?

MR. MURAWSKI: I think — once again, going

on this idea of the Presumptive Remedy, that the

site was assessed, the characteristics of the site,

the type of waste, the amount of the waste, the

byproducts of the waste, and I think — I'm sure —

T (?, T CTTPWrr-T?

54

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

I mean I know that screening was done during the

site assessment period and the decision was made

that radioactivity was not of concern.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is that based on what is

typically detected as far as ionizing radiation from

a landfill as these organic compounds decay then?

Is it typical for a landfill based on what you know

to be in there?

MR. MURAWSKI: Right, right. Once again,

going along the lines of the Presumptive Remedy,

this landfill had a lot of commonality with other

landfills that didn't show any radioactivity either.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So did they or did they not

then use a natural gamma log where they drill a well

and put a little thing down that measures radiation?

MR. MURAWSKI: I don't know if that

occurred.

MR. BLUM: What I want to get back to again

is to give everyone a chance to make comments of

what they think of the proposed remedy. We'll get

back to questions after we're done with this, but I

want to give everyone an opportunity to submit

formal public comments. After all, that's actually

why we're here today.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

55

MS. GUSTAFSON: Well, If I see someone's

hand up, then I won't ask a question.

MR. BLUM: If nobody has any comments,

we'll go back to questions.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Okay.

MR. BLUM: Do we have a question?

MS. GUSTAFSON: I would ask that they use a

Waterloo barrier, which in this situation they could

use a medium weight steel pylon, which is similar to

what you see along y-our channels here, whether it's

interlocked. They use an either removable,

waterproof sealant that they could pull out every

three years on a maintenance schedule to —

MR. BLUM: You're actually requesting that

they look at that? That would be more of a comment.

Why don't you enter that as a comment?

MS. GUSTAFSON: That a Waterloo barrier as

far as a containment system is possible for

prevention of horizontal movement of groundwater in

the superficial aquifer or the landfill. Right now

the leachate collection system is what the

containment system is in the cap; is that right?

MR. BLUM: I'm sorry. What was —

MS. GUSTAFSON: The containment system —


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

56

when I think of containment, I think of a jar lid.

Now, in a landfill it's different. It's a trench,

is it not, with a pipe laid in a specific grading to

allow it to move to a specific collection point?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, the active system

would actually draw the leachating gas.

MS. GUSTAFSON: But I mean is there — on

the perimeter of this system as it's upgraded, is an

impermeable membrane used on the exterior wall of

the ditch or impregnated membrane?

MR. MURAWSKI: Those specifics of the

design will be offered during the Remedial Design,

but we're really not at that point.

MS. GUSTAFSON: And when will that be made

available then in the repository? Any anticipation

of that?

MR. MURAWSKI: I think generally up to the

Record of Decision is what is in the information

repository. I don't know that the Remedial Design

is normally in that.

MS. GUSTAFSON: So that won't be available?

MR. MURAWSKI: I don't believe it is.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Could I request a copy?

MR. BLUM: Yes, that's fine.

L & L REPORTING SERVICE, TNC R47

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

57

MS. GUSTAFSON: That's what I would like

is —

MR. BLUM: It's not a secret. It's just

that generally a lot of people don't care to read

that indepth.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, it's just that

biomonitoring and —

MR. BLUM: And also, that is another part

of the Superfund. When you have an information

repository, which is- a little k>it more scaled down,

it has general materials, fact sheets, things like

that. If you would like to do even more indepth

research, you can check out the Administrative

Record, and I don' t know if there' s one of those out

here — there is one at the EPA record center — and

that has every document pertaining to the site and

would keep anyone —

MS. GUSTAFSON: You're talking about on

Jackson Boulevard?

MR. BLUM: Yeah. And you don't have to. go

down there. You can always send a Freedom of

Information Act and request those documents.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is there a copy fee or is

that copied free?


58

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

MR. BLUM: For private citizens I believe

it's free. I don't know if there's a stipulation on

the volume, but I believe it is free.

MR. MURAWSKI: Yeah, it depends on the

amount of effort and cost. If it's a pretty easy

request, then it would be free.

MS. PIASECKI: Kathleen Piasecki. I have a

question. I'm wondering how often Antioch tests the

water in its municipal wells.

MR. BLUM: -I don't know. Is there

someone —

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: Marilyn Shineflug.

I don't have anybody from Public Works here today.

I think it's — I'm not sure. We've certainly

gotten extra samplings because of our concerns over

this, but — Donna, do you remember if it's —

MS. HENDERSON: It's quarterly. I believe

most of those are quarterly and occasionally —

Donna Henderson — we occasionally — we were during

the period of greatest concern doing it weekly at

one point, but presently we are, I believe, back on

a quarterly basis, which perhaps exceeds that.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: Right.

MS. PIASECKI: Are there communities that

L & L REPORTING SERVICE. TNP. fR47

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

59

have —

MS. HENDERSON: I'm sure everybody that has

these concerns is doing the same sort of thing. I

would say we have to a great extent put our faith in

the U.S. EPA and in management on this site. We've

made that clear to them in the meetings.

A VOICE: It takes them ten years to show

up.

MS. HENDERSON: As you know and you're all

maybe aware, we were not really — we did not have a

degree of comfort with the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency because we ended up having to sue

IEPA in order to close this site. So there's a long

history of the village being very active in trying

to monitor the site.

MS. PIASECKI: When our wells are

monitored, the test results, where are those kept?

Where would a person be able to see those on a

regular basis?

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: I would have to check

with Public Works.

MS. HENDERSON: They're a matter of public

record, and as he was telling you about making your

Freedom of Information request, it's much easier for

L & T, REPORTING SERVICE , TNC (847) 623-7580

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

60

you. You live in the area. You can come in and

under the Freedom of Information Act request and get

copies of what we submit to the state. You can also

go directly to the state.

MS. PIASECKI: Excuse me. I need to say

that for all the people that live here, if you go

out and talk to them, most people do not even know

this exists because there's been a gag order and

everything else and, you know, I feel that — I

don't think anybody "—— all you have to do is look at

the tiny little notice that was for this evening. I

mean if you want people to know that this is

happening and have them participate, I think your

notice should be little bit larger than something

they can barely read. Okay?

And the records that are of sample wells

should be placed in the library so that everybody in

this town knows. Vinyl chloride is of concern, it

is a cancer-causer. And I even feel that talking to

people moving into this community — and I know 'that

this is something that you feel probably very

different about — but if I was moving into a

community, I would certainly want to know that there

is a toxic dump there so that I'm given my own

T, R T, REPORTING RFRVTTF . TNP (R47)

61

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

thoughts as to whether I want to drink the water,

how long I want to take my showers, and I feel in a

community that's growing like this, people should

have that information available to them; that when

they buy a house, I believe that that should be

supplied to them.

MR. BLUM: Since my job is community

involvement, I would like to address that. I

appreciate what you're saying. I'm very glad that

you told me that about the newspaper ad because I

actually requested a 2 by 10 column, which actually

is —

MS. PIASECKI: I had to —

MR. BLUM: I don't want to get into the

specifics, but I know that we did request a large

ad.

MS. PIASECKI: This is what was in the

paper. If you can find another one to show to me —

MR. BLUM: We also advertised in two

publications. One was in the Daily Herald, Lake

County edition, and the other one was the Antioch

News Reporter. Where is this from?

MS. PIASECKI: It's pretty hard to spot.

MR. BLUM: Do you mind if I keep this

T 9. T PPPOPT-TKm CJFPVTrF TIM*"1

62

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

because I would like to —

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: Could I comment? First

of all, I don't believe you technically live in the

village, do you?

MS. PIASECKI: I live right — Antioch

Township comes right up to Miller Road and I live

just a short hop behind that.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: I don't believe you're in

the corporate limits.

A VOICE: S'o what?

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: No, no, no. Don't get me

wrong. So your well results, you would then be

monitored — your well results would be monitored by

the health department, correct?

MS. PIASECKI: Yes, that is correct, but

what I'm going to say here is that toxic dumps are

basically in the phenomenon — there's a great deal

of involvement that we don't understand. For all

the knowledge that the people had to appear tonight

who go to school to study these things, the truth is

there's a great deal of mystery about a whole lot of

things here. Everything is done and just

information is gathered and then worked out, but the

truth is there's a great deal we don't know.

L & L REPORTING SKRVTTF:.

63

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

I mean we know that the dump is partially

in a gravel pit. We know there is gravel. And

these contaminants have been here a long time, and

initially when the EPA came, they said no one was

safe around this dump within five miles. Now

they're saying that there's a three mile radius that

is suspect. Well, if you drive from where that dump

is Savage Road, it's 3.4 miles. So I feel that as a

citizen of Antioch Township — I pay my taxes — I

feel I have a right -to know what's going on with the

water in this area.

MAYOR SHINEFLUG: Sure. If I can continue.

I do share your concerns. As part of — to show you

we do share your concerns, we mailed this out/

certainly to all our planning and zoning board

members. We mailed it to the newspapers, so that we

have probably three newpapers here tonight. We

reactivated our original Landfill Committee.

Some of us in the village along with our

attorney, Donna Henderson, and our other attorney,

Ken Clark, have been very concerned about this

landfill for many years and worked hard with the

Village of Antioch to fight the expansion of it. We

have Al Little here, who is the original Landfill


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

64

Committee chairman. We have Dr. Lynn Anderson, who

is a very active and knowledgable member of our

Landfill Committee, and we have Jim Glenn, whose

brother Hank was on our committee. Who else is here

from the Landfill Committee? Steve Strauss

(phonetically) was invited because he is a current

member of our environmental committee.

So we agree with you in that we share a

concern about the village water supply, and as our

attorney has said, we need the help of the U.S. EPA,

but we thank them for the monitoring — additional

monitoring wells, not to be confused with drinking

water wells, but we appreciate the fact that they

put those in a number of years ago. It's a huge

project and we want to all work together to make

sure that the water supply is kept safe, not only

for village residents, but certainly for those in

the township around.

So just because we're here and just because

we have some degree of authority in the village does

not mean that we're not concerned. We are very

concerned and we work with our Public Works staff

and with the revenue that we have to do the testing

and such. That's my statement.

T P, T CTTPVTfT TWP

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

65

MR. BLUM: Thank you.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Another one for you. Chris

Gustafson again. I've got actually a couple

questions in regards to Loon Lake, East Loon Lake,

Silver Lake, and I believe it's Sun Lake to the

south. Are they perched on the piezometric surface

or above it, and what are you going to do in regards

to impervious cover restriction on development

around the Loon Lake, East Loon Lake so as not to

increase run-on quantities into that watershed,

which appears from what I found today flows into the

wetlands, which is south of the landfill?

MR. BLUM: Personally I have no idea to be

honest. Your questions I just want to say are

really specific, very technical in nature, and we

have quite a staff assembled that actually works on

these things. We have toxicologists, other people.

There is no way I mean off the top of our head that

Ron is able to answer a lot of these questions.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is it possible you could

arrange another meeting then to discuss some of

these questions so you guys can make it back to

Chicago before midnight?

MR. BLUM: Well, here's the thing. You


66

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

submitted a list of fifty questions to our office

recently and Ron is taking them and taking those

into consideration. We're going to have people look

at them and give answers to those questions for you.

That's really all we can do. What we're looking for

tonight is we have a plan. We want to move forward

so that we can clean up and get this thing over

with.

MS. GUSTAFSON: I just want to make sure

that the plan for the recommended cleanup and what

the procedures are that you follow also addresses

the quantity — I mean what is the flood storage of

this watershed if it was impervious? Every time you

plop a house in there, that's less area that that

water can soak into. So as you increase the

impervious cover around this watershed, it's going

to increase the quantity that runs off into the

landfill.

Can't there be some type of incentives for

developers or potential development in that area,

which it looks like there could be more potential

development in this area? I'm not sure if those

homes are filled in, but this is something that

the —


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

67

MR. BLUM: I don't know if anyone has

really looked at it that much and addressed —

MS. GUSTAFSON: So as to decrease the

amount of infiltration of surface water to the

watershed that the landfill is —


MS. GUSTAFSON: I learned this from a

conference you guys invited me to. That's why I'm- i iasking.

.sMR. BLUM: Sorry for the glassy-eyed look.

Sir?

MR. GLENN: James Glenn. I was just

wondering. You say it flows from the northeast to

the southwest.

MR. MURAWSKI: The groundwater.

MR. GLENN: That's funny. Our recharge

area is from the west. How would you get water

flowing from the west going back east if it flows

from that direction?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, I'm going by what- the

investigation during the Remedial Investigation

showed, southwesterly groundwater flow of the peat,

sand and gravel aquifer.

MR. GLENN: Do you call 120 foot wells deep

T, L REPORTING SERVICE. INC. (847) 623-7580

68

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

aquifers?

MR. MURAWSKI: As I said earlier, I'm not

sure of the exact minimum and maximum length of the

deep sand and gravel aquifer. It's' in the Remedial

Investigation somewhere in the report, but I don' t

have it committed to memory.

THE COURT REPORTER: I need to change my

paper.

(Short break had)

MR. BLUM: This gentleman, I'm. going to let

him submit that as a formal comment. Could you just

state your name?

MR. GLENN: James Glenn. What I was asking

for is they say the water flows from the east to the

south here . Our recharge area evidently is to the

west of us because it' s all gravel from the other

side of the Fox River this way. The other way is

all a clay overburden. And I would like to see if

we could find out the direction of the flow of water

and in which direction.


MR. PUCINIK: Steve Pucinik. My question

was then — he is a well driller from town, so if he

is saying it's running from west to east and people


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

69

live on the east side of Silver Lake, that means

that contaminant is leaking into the people that

have wells on that side of the lake because you

just —

MR. MURAWSKI: The analytical results

didn't show that from Lake County.

MR. PUCINIK: My well is drilled — I don't

know what — the well head itself is actually

pulling 173 feet. So how deep is the leakage?

Where is the leakage- at? At what level?

MR. MURAWSKI: I think US3D was around

somewhere between 85 to 120 feet deep.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Me again. I'm curious on

how you guys are going to address the TCE that was

detected in the clay diametric, which is the

confining layer of clay that is within the

superficial aquifer and the deep aquifer.

And as far as the groundwater goes, the

Wisconsin Geographical and Natural Histories Survey

has recently published a subsurface geographical

survey. Basically what it does is it tries to

locate areas most susceptible to contamination based

on the underlying geological conditions, and I'm

wondering if Illinois or USGS is proposing to do


70

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

anything similar to that in Lake County.

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, the TCE will be

handled as the vinyl chloride will because they're

both volatile organic chemicals, namely the leachate

and gas collection and waste cap improvements. The

leachate and gas collection would reduce the VOCs,

volatile organic chemicals, in the waste mass. The

waste cap cover will reduce the infiltration. And

as I said, TCE and vinyl chloride are two of many. *

VOCs that we're covering, in this planned Remedial

Action.

MS.'GUSTAFSON: So the same plan that's

going to treat or contain the contaminants in the

anaerobic conditions of a landfill are also going to

take care of what's down there in that clay

diametric that's lacking probably to dissolve oxygen

sufficient to support the microorganisms like

hydrocarbons?

MR. MURAWSKI: One of the goals of a

leachate and gas collection is to reduce the chance

for migration in the groundwater. That's probably

our biggest goal here.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Is to reduce infiltration?

MR. MURAWSKI: Reduce migration into the

T, * T. RFDORTTNO SFRVTPF. (8471 623-75RO

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

71

groundwater, and we feel the more we can draw out of

the waste mass, the better chance of reducing

migration.

MS. STEWART: My name is Kathleen Stewart

and I live on Depot Street, and I want to know —

and I can see the landfill from my home — what can

I expect when you do start doing this?

MR. BLUM: Good question.

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, there's going to be a

lot of earth-moving equipment, but, you know, I

should say that by us choosing the 807 cap, that's

going to be a lot — as far as one of the nine

criteria of evaluations, the short-term effects on

residents and workers, the 807 cap is the minimal

situation with respect to upsetting the residents

and workers compared to, for instance, the 811 cap.

MS. STEWART: Will there be a lot of odor

or smell along with this or not really?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, there will be dust and

noise, those kind of factors that we're going to try

to minimize as much as we can with watering the

areas in question and so on.

MR. BLUM: So you're saying it's basically

going to be general construction type activities

TOT n •n rt »-M-I ri T? TMC""

72

J

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

with heavy equipment, moving dirt, things like that?

MR. MURAWSKI: Right.

MR. BLUM: The main disturbance will be

noise, I guess.

MS. GUSTAFSON: Has preproduct been removed

from saturated soils on the site?

MR. MURAWSKI: Do you mean the leachate in

the --

MS. GUSTAFSON: No, I mean any incidental

surface seeps.

MR. MURAWSKI: The surface — we feel with

the upgrading of the 807 cap that the seeps won't be

a concern.

MS. GUSTAFSON: How will that address her

concern with dust and the constituents that will

cling to those soil particles as they're carried off

from wind erosion?

MR. MURAWSKI: Well, the dust and noise of

course will be the greatest on-site during the work.

The farther you are away as a resident, the less —

MS. GUSTAFSON: Are you going to require

specific moisture content of that as it's being

worked to prevent wind erosion of those particles

from the landfill?


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

73

MR. MURAWSKI: Once again, I think that

would be part of the Remedial Design, that level of

specificity.

MR. BLUM: If there's nothing else —

MS. PIASECKI: Kathleen Piasecki.

Municipal well No. 4 had picked up traces of vinyl

chloride and we know that village well 3 is a

hundred feet away. Has it picked up contaminants

also?

MR. MURAWSK-I: No, it hasn't.

MS. PIASECKI: Have any of the other

municipal wells ever?

MR. MURAWSKI: I'm not aware of any

site-related chemicals showing up above detox levels

on wells other than village well No. 4.

MS. PIASECKI: So what you're saying is on

no occasion other than municipal well No. 4 have any

of our municipal wells ever picked up levels that

were not —

MR. MURAWSKI: Based on the information in

the Remedial Investigation, that's the case. Now, I

don't —

MS. PIASECKI: When you say Remedial

Investigation, I'm talking about like your

L & L REPORTING SERVICE, INC. (B47)

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

74

sampling —

MR. MURAWSKI: I don't — that would be

something that Illinois —

MS. PIASECKI: I'm talking about the

specific —

MR. MURAWSKI: Right. That would be

something that — I don't watch the quarterly

results. The Illinois EPA does that.

MS. HENDERSON: Okay. Donna Header son. I

think IEPA has a pro-gram that anything that is

found, you get notified. There are things that go

out that you hear about, and I would presume that

you would hear about it from your testing group as

well. Lake County would have to be reporting into

the state as well. So I guess what I'm saying is no

news is good news. But, again, I'm not real

familiar with how you —

MS. RISET: Debbie Riset. We have a

monitoring well on our property in the association

lot. If we have any questions about it, would we

contact you?

MR. BLUM: Which monitoring well is that?

MS. RISET: It's a monitoring well on the

east side of the landfill.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

75

MR. MURAWSKI: That would be Lake County.

MS. RISET: It hasn't been used in a long

time.

MR. BLUM: So that would be Lake County you

would want to contact.

MS. RISET: It's a monitoring well.

MS. GUSTAFSON: I just want to make sure I

understand. There has not been any detection of

vinyl chloride above the MCL in any private wells

that have been tested?

MR. MURAWSKI: Right. I'm not aware of

that based on the results of the Remedial

Investigation. Also, someone mentioned — I think

it was Donna did mention that if MCLs are exceeded

at least in the community water supply that all of

the residents are notified of that.

MS. GUSTAFSON: And when you say that — I

don't know if that gentleman is still here — when

VOCs were tested, does that include TCE, the parent

product of TCE, which is the parent product of vinyl

chloride, or did you look for the broader product

only?

MR. MURAWSKI: The contaminants that are

tested I believe are part of the list of the


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

76

Illinois State Groundwater Quality Standards, and

that includes all of those you mentioned.

MS. GUSTAFSON: One other question. I'm

sorry. This is just — I'm just playing back

information I've learned from attending these

conferences you guys hosted.

MR. BLUM: I'm going to have to attend

those conferences.

MS. GUSTAFSON: They're pretty good, and

they cram a lot of stuff down your neck and you see

what dilemma the village is in. However, I have to

ask this. Typically during spring melts when the

ground is not quite so saturated that it's been

flushed, the levels increase not just because of the/landfill, but what we have in terms of, you know,

road chemicals for desalting, your parking lots have

stuff, your probably storm sewering, most of this

via ditch, I would imagine, and some culvert with or

without pretreatment. So has the quarterly samples,

have they occurred like, say, February 28th when we

see the spring melt not quite finished yet, and then

also are you optimizing like just before the rain

period we had a dry flow, a dry season low flow?

Those are other times you can see concentrations be

T, ft T, RFPORTTNG SERVICE, INC. (847) 623-7580

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

77

a little higher because of temperature and so forth.

I'm wondering if those have been optimized.

MR. MURAWSKI: As far as the pattern that

the Illinois EPA uses, I'm not sure, but I worked in

Drinking Water for a little over three years at EPA

and I know that some states do take into

consideration that. I'm not sure if Illinois does.

MR. BLUM: I think at this time I would-'ilike to thank everyone for coming out and, again,

reiterate that the comment period runs through

August 20th, and also any questions, there's an 800

number you can contact myself or Ron at, and please

feel free to do so.


12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

78

STATE OF ILLINOIS )) SS:

COUNTY OF LAKE

I, CINDY BENNER, do hereby certify that I am

a certified shorthand reporter doing business in the

County of Lake and State of Illinois, that I

reported in shorthand the foregoing proceedings

taken on Tuesday, August 11, 1998 and that the

foregoing is a true -and accurate transcript of my

shorthand notes so taken as aforesaid.

Lu^Ji/ACindy Benner flCertified Shorthand ReporterLicense No. 084-002426

OFFICIAL SEALCINDY BENNER

NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS |MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:03/01/00

wV*


public meeting ) report of proceedings had in the · above-entitled matter, taken before cindy...

Documents