****There is a compressed ABBHEAR.ZIP file in the MAIN library
    that can be downloaded.  That file is an ASCII text file when
    expanded.  Requires about 208,000 free space to expand with
    PKUNZIP version 204G.  Either file is over 192 pages long.



                         ABB PLANT
                   SOIL REMOVAL PROPOSAL
                      PUBLIC MEETING


                 Highland Park Elementary
                   Bloomington, Indiana
                     January 23, 1995

























                                             ABB PLANT
                   SOIL REMOVAL PROPOSAL
                      PUBLIC MEETING


PARTIES PRESENT:

Dave Novak
Community Involvement Coordinator
U.S. EPA

Dan Hopkins
Remedial Project Manager
U.S. EPA

Dottie Alke
Project Manager
Westinghouse Electric Corporation

Gordon Taylor
Senior Project Engineer
Westinghouse Electric Corporation

Diana Lynn Stultz
Manager/Court Reporter
Depositions, Inc.












                  INDEX OF PUBLIC MEETING

Opening Remarks
     By Dave Novak . . . . . . . . . . . .    4


Project Background
     By Dan Hopkins. . . . . . . . . . . .   11


Soil Removal Proposal
     By Dottie Alke. . . . . . . . . . . .   20
     By Gordon Taylor. . . . . . . . . . .   21


Questions by Audience. . . . . . . . . . .   35


Comment Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  124


Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . .  192















              OPENING REMARKS:  BY DAVE NOVAK

      I'd like to welcome everybody tonight. 
It's the first of these type of meetings that
we've had here in the Bloomington community,
certainly not on my tenure with the project,
but it is something that we think is important. 
I'm Dave Novak, by the way, the community
involvement coordinator with EPA out of Region
5 in Chicago.  
      With us this evening---we've got a copy of
the agenda if you didn't get one; you can pick
one up and kind of follow along with us---with
us this evening, we have starting on my
immediate right, we have Dan Hopkins, who is
with EPA Region 5.  He's the remedial project
manager.  Dan has been around on the project
now for four or five years and working with the
community, so, most of you should know him.  To
his right is Dottie Alke.  She is the project
manager from Westinghouse.  She's got overall
responsibility, not only for the ABB site here,
but for all the other PCB contaminated sites in
the community.  To her right is Gordon Taylor,
the senior project engineer with Westinghouse. 
He's the on-site person here who is working at
the ABB Plant.  They all have something that
they will be saying tonight, as you can see
from the agenda.  They will keep things going,
and we've got a full evening planned.  
      In order to keep things rolling, we are
going to set up a few ground rules so that we
can keep it going.  We have background
materials on the table, and there's a variety
of different things out there.  We have the
Fact Sheets that EPA put out.  We've got a
sheet that Westinghouse prepared that's got
some facts and figures on it.  It's that sheet
there.  We will be passing along a lot of good
information through the course of the evening. 
The September 1993---well, I guess this last
one here, too, would be February '94, for the
purposes of part of this evening, has got both
Dan's and my address and phone number on it. 
You will need that for taking care of a portion
of the evening when we get to the comments. 
      But the ground rules up front.  We have a
court reporter here tonight.  That's unusual. 
We use a court reporter when we want to make a
verbatim record of the proceedings that we are
going through.  Generally, we use it on our
normal Superfund site for the proposed plan,
and go out and solicit comments in the
community, where that is part of the
requirement of the Superfund process.  A
transcript of the entire evening's proceedings
is going to be made available, and it will be
placed in the Public Information Center in
Fountain Square.  Also, it will be available in
the Monroe County main Public Library downtown
at 303 East Kirkwood, and also, the
Ellettsville branch library.  We are only going
to have it mainly at these two right now
because these are the two that do pertain
directly to the ABB Plant.  
                          Like I say, that transcript will be
available within a week or so, and we will put
copies of it in there, so that you will be able
to see what the transcript is.  That transcript
will be used as part of the process that Dan
will go through, and I will work with him on
the Responsive Summary.  That says we are going
to take a look at all of these things and study
them, listen to your comments, and make a
decision based on that.  
      There's a definite separation going to be
happening tonight between the questions.  When
they finish their presentations, we'd ask that
you hold your questions until they are all
finished with their presentations.  Then, we
will entertain questions.  The questions we
will respond to---and we are offering the
question period so that you can make a better
judgment on your comments, if you don't
understand something.  They are going to
explain a little bit about what the proposal
is.  
                          After the questions are finished, we will
make a definite break, and we will go into
comments.  At the comments, we will not respond
to.  All we do is ask that you do go up and
state your comment, and we will make note of
it, and that will be put in the Responsive
Summary.  So, that is the relationship of the
document, the court reporter, and everything
else happening tonight.  It's only after that
the comments are reviewed and taken back, and
everybody has had the chance to review them,
that the proposal will be responded to.  
      We've had this proposal on Westinghouse
and ABB in November to deal with the soils that
are stockpiled behind the plant.  That is what
we are here tonight for.  When we do get to the
questions and the comments, we'd ask that
because we are recording this, both for the
cable access and for the Responsive Summary,
that you walk up to the microphone.  It's just
going to help us get everything clear and
understandable.  So, walk up there.  I ask that
you state your name, and if you have an unusual
spelling, please spell it for us.  Then, we
will get everything right.  We won't embarrass
anybody by misspelling their name.  
      The purpose of tonight's meeting, again,
to clarify, to date, about ninety percent (90%)
of the work has been completed on the cleanup
activities at the former Westinghouse Plant,
which is now the ABB Plant on Curry Pike.  What
we are specifically going to talk about tonight
is that proposal to deal with the soils that
are stockpiled behind it in the interim storage
facility.  
      In November of '94, just to reiterate, ABB
and Westinghouse issued a joint proposal to
deal with those soils.  While soliciting
questions as to how they will be disposed of,
our main concern again tonight, is it
appropriate for EPA to suspend it's Superfund
cleanup action, thereby allowing a private
party cleanup to proceed.  It's somewhat
unusual when we have offers of responsible
parties to want to bear the full burden of
removing these soils or whatever the
contamination is.  Generally, when they walk up
and say, "Hey, we are going to do this," we
look at it very closely, because it's not all
that often that that does happen.  
      So, again, soliciting your questions for
clarification and opening it up then later to
the public to the comment from you folks.  So,
I'm not going to talk all that much more.  We
don't need your comments tonight if you want
some time to consider them.  The comment period
is going through February 1.  My address is on
the Fact Sheet.  If you would like that, we
will give it to you if you don't find the right
Fact Sheet, because there are some older ones
there.  We will give it to you again.  Send the
comments postmarked by February 1, and they
will be considered, and again, your oral
comments tonight.  
      So, I'm going to get off and let Dan
Hopkins give you an idea of what the proposal
was, and then we will carry on.  I will be
watching everybody as the evening goes on, if
you've got some questions, just so that we
don't have six hands and six people jump up.  I
will be off to the side just watching
everybody, and I'll keep track of who has got a
question, and I'll be calling on you so that
they can concentrate on finishing the
questions.  So, I'll just keep a mental note of
who is next.  So, just keep an eye on me.  So,
we have now the project manager, Dan Hopkins.

            PROJECT BACKGROUND:  BY DAN HOPKINS

      Good evening.  I see some familiar faces. 
I know some of you, and some of you are new,
but I'm glad that you are all here and have
taken an interest in this.  Again, as Dave
said, my name is Dan Hopkins.  I'm the senior
remedial project manager for EPA.  I have
worked on this site, the ABB site as well as
the other sites in Bloomington.  
                          Just to give you a little bit of very
brief background, for those of you that live in
the area, you may have noticed that back about
a year and a half ago, actually from June of
'92 through about December of '93, there was a
lot of activity that had gone on on the ABB
grounds.  There was a lot of equipment, a lot
of activity, quite a bit of excavation had
occurred.  As a matter of fact, about sixty-two
hundred (6,200) cubic yards of material had
been dug up from the site and transported off
site---as a matter of fact, out of state---to
either be incinerated or to be landfilled, and
approximately eleven thousand three hundred
(11,300) cubic yards of material still remain
on the site stored in a synthetic liner system
that's double lined.  It has a leachate
collection system associated with it, and as
Dave Novak mentioned, it is that material that
is really the subject of the proposal that we
wanted to discuss with you tonight.  
      In about September of 1994, both ABB and
Westinghouse approached EPA and said, "Listen,
we have an idea about how you can proceed to
remove this material from where it is and
dispose of it."  Dave had actually said it
before, but I'm going to say it again.  We may
say it a couple of times tonight, but what it
involves is ceasing the Superfund activities at
the site with regard to the stored material. 
Now, all the other activities that I mentioned
before were handled under Superfund.  They were
actually conducted by Westinghouse, and they
were overseen by EPA, and it was done using
Superfund authorities.  
      The proposal is now to cease those
activities under Superfund for this eleven
thousand (11,000) cubic yard pile and allow the
responsible party, Westinghouse, to dispose of
it under another law, under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, which really,
specifically, applies to PCBs.  
      So, what that would mean by switching from
Superfund to the Toxic Substances Control Act,
basically under TSCA---and that's the acronym
that I am probably going to slip into through
the night for Toxic Substances Control Act---
but under that act, there are basically three
ways they can handle soils or dispose of soils
that are similar to what is currently stored at
ABB.  One is treatment incineration in a
chemical waste incinerator that is compliant or
that complies with the laws of TSCA in terms of
operation and construction; a chemical waste
landfill that also complies with the
construction and operation requirements that
are set out very specifically in the law; or
another method that can be approved by EPA,
provided that it's essentially equivalent to
incineration.  
      So, those are really the three ways that
TSCA identified what can be done with the
material.  
      Now, Westinghouse has proposed to us that
they will landfill this material in a chemical
waste landfill that complies with the
requirements of TSCA.  For those of you who
were familiar with the work that was done in
the last year and a half, the plan that
Westinghouse has proposed to move this material
to that landfill in, what it will be is in
Utah, is very similar to the plan that they
executed about a year and a half ago to remove
the fifty-three hundred (5,300) cubic yards of
materials that went to a TSCA landfill at that
time.  So, it's a very similar activity.  
      What I would like to discuss with you,
okay, if we didn't do that, if we didn't
entertain this proposal, what else would we do? 
There are a couple of things that EPA can do. 
      One is under Superfund, we would proceed
according to the criteria that are laid out in
the National Contingency Plan, which is
essentially a blue print for implementing
Superfund, and the first activity would be the
preparation of an engineering evaluation and a
cost analysis.  What that essentially does is
it allows us to evaluate different disposal
options, different treatment technologies.  It
goes through a cost benefit analysis that
considers such things as effectiveness of the
particular remedial treatment alternative,
would look at the cost associated, the
reduction of risk and so forth.  
      There are a number of criteria that it
would look through in going through this cost
benefit analysis.  EPA would then propose an
alternative---here's what we think based on
this engineering evaluation, we think would be
appropriate to do the job.  Then, we would seek
formal public comment period---I mean, formal
public comment in a setting maybe such as this,
but it would be formal.  We would be taking
comment, as we are here.  Actually, this has
very much the look of a formal public comment
period, although it's not, but it would be very
similar to this.  The difference is that we
have to give it to you.  Under what we are
doing tonight, we are giving it.  We don't have
to, but under a formal public comment period,
we have to.  So, that's kind of the difference. 
      We would then respond to the comments
formally in writing.  That would all become
part of a record, and then we would select a
remedy and then implement it.  Now, actually,
what has happened though, is instead of
following that route, EPA has recognized that
the parties have expressed an intention to work
together since about February of 1994, and they
have been doing that.  
      Rather than proceeding with an engineering
evaluation for ABB, what we have done is
considered that perhaps if an alternative can
be found to the Bloomington incinerator, there
might be some consideration such as the
economies of scale.  There might be something
else that could work that these soils could
also be included in the treatment.  So, if
there was another site, that a solution was
found that involved the treatment or involved
some other method of disposal, that soils like
this, or maybe soils that, say, Fell Iron and
Metal, could be used under, the technology
could be used for, then we would consider that. 
      So, basically, what's happened is that we
have held off on performing the engineering
evaluation so that we can see whether or not
this joint working relationship is going to
bear fruit.  
      So, just to summarize what we see in this
proposal, first we've got a responsible party
who is willing to take the action.  That's not
a small thing.  I mean, that is something that
we consider beneficial.  
      This proposal would provide for a
protective solution.  It would go to a TSCA
landfill.  There's no legal prohibition for it. 
I mean, it is legal to do this, and it allows
for a faster cleanup.  That is something that
is, I think, beneficial, too.  
      If we were to go forward and propose, we
would perform an engineering evaluation, that
probably would take us about eight (8) months
to a year.  It just would.  This way, the work
is probably going to start in April of this
year.  So, there is a considerable time
savings.  
      We also know that even though this is not
something that we need to afford you,
historically, this community has expressed a
strong interest in the work that we do, and
also the decisions that we make, and we are
very conscious of that.  
      Also, since you would not be getting a
formal public comment period---if we don't go
forward with the engineering evaluation, you
won't get a formal public comment period---in
order to sort of fill that gap, we are
providing this, because you would be otherwise
missing that.  
      I guess not the least of which, we would
like to go forward, and we see a benefit in
being able to go forward and completing this
action, as Dave said, on about ninety percent
(90%) of the site.  So, there are some
benefits.  I want you to know that we have not
made any decision about this, and although we
recognize that yes, there are some benefits, it
would not involve treatment.  There won't be
treatment for this material under this
proposal.  That's just it.  
      So, before we do decide, we do want to
hear back from you, hear what you have to say. 
So, thank you.  I'm going to turn it over now
to Gordon Taylor.
          SOIL REMOVAL PROPOSAL:  BY DOTTIE ALKE
      I really don't have a formal presentation
this evening.  Gordon will be handling that.  I
am Dottie Alke, and I'm the overall project
director for Westinghouse for all of the sites
in Bloomington.  
      The work at ABB has been under the project
management of Gordon Taylor, and he has been
involved in developing the plan that we would
use in the event that we would receive EPA's
consent to go forward with this.  Once, if that
would happen, and we get that permission, then
what would happen is the work would actually be
turned over to our field office here for
overall management.  Many of you here are
familiar with Jim Patricks.  So, he would be
involved with the overall management of that,
and also as Dan said here, this is really an
EPA forum that was established here this
evening, and they have invited Westinghouse to
participate with them so that, in the event we
could be helpful in answering your questions,
that we will be able to do that.  
      So, with that, I'll turn it over to
Gordon, and he'd like to explain a little bit
about exactly what we would want to do in the
event we do receive consent to move forward.
         SOIL REMOVAL PROPOSAL:  BY GORDON TAYLOR
      Thanks Dottie.  Good evening.  Has anyone
had an opportunity to read the plans?  Nobody? 
I didn't think so.  I think we failed to
mention, Dan, it is available at three places,
at the Monroe County Library, Ellettsville
Library, and the Public Information Center. 
      What I'm going to do is actually go
through the plan.  The excavation plan is made
up of basically five (5) plans.  The overall
excavation plan which is thirty-nine (39) pages
of text, which doesn't go into great detail,
but enough detail on to actually how the
project will be implemented.  The other four
(4) plans, a quality assurance project plan,
field sampling plan, air monitoring plan and
health and safety plan are all included in that
plan.  I'm not going to go into any detail in
those plans.  Basically, they are plans that we
have used in the past at the facility, and they
are available for anyone's inspection.  
      So, where I'd like to start is just the
beginning.  I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm
reading this.  It's because I am.  All I want
to do is go through it and pick out the
highlights, and then afterwards, if you have
any questions, feel free to ask them.  
      The ISF is currently used---and the ISF,
I'll refer to that acronym, it's the Interim
Storage Facility---is currently used to provide
interim storage of soil sediments and concrete
debris containing PCBs excavated from areas in
the vicinity of the ABB facility.  It's a
double-lined unit designed to securely contain
the materials without allowing releases to the
environment.  The line system starts with an
eighteen (18) inch layer of permeable stone,
designated as the operable cover.  
      I want to explain this liner system in a
little detail.  I'm starting from the top of
the line, where the soil is being placed.  So,
the eighteen (18) inch thick layer of permeable
stone comes right after or right underneath
where the soil has been placed.  After that is
a synthetic drainage layer constructed of a
geo-composite, which is a geo-textile or a geo-
net.  This layer allows any leachate water that
was in the soil when it was excavated that has
accumulated to migrate to a sump.  One end of
this interim storage facility is lower in
elevation than any of the other areas, and it's
designed to drain to this one area where this
leachate has been collected, removed and
treated.
      After that comes the primary geo-membrane. 
It's a sixty (60) mil-thick high density,
polyethylene liner.  Below the primary membrane
is another geo-net layer, and this layer
provides a leak detection function.  So,
anything above that second primary geo-net
layer is considered the dirty area.  Anything
below that, where the leak detection system is,
is considered the clean.  In its entirety, it's
considered the liner system.
      Below the last geo-membrane is a one (1)
foot thick layer of compacted clay, and that's
in the cell bottom only.  An estimated eleven
thousand three hundred (11,300) cubic yards of
material have been stored in the ISF, as Dan
has explained.  Right now, a tarp is
temporarily covering the material to prevent
any migration from wind or rain.  It's a
temporary cover.  This cell was designed with a
final cover, which has not been put on.
                          Going back a little bit, the purpose of
this plan is designed to present methods
established to minimize the risk to human
health and the environment, and to minimize the
potential for damage to the underlying primary
membrane when the soil was excavated from it, 
if the primary geo-membrane liners is
compromised during excavation or field sampling
program, and that's one of the work plans I've
talked about will be implemented to determine
to the extent it has been compromised, and to
the extent any cleanup may have to occur.
      This plan also addresses the size and
criteria of material for material disposal.  We
can only put in to the gondola rail cars
anything up to about three (3) feet in
diameter, and there is some material in the
ISF, concrete debris, that is a little larger. 
Storm water handling is addressed, dust
migration, site control monitoring and finished
grading and closure of the ISF in a safe and
timely manner.  This plan is intended to be
used as a guide for the remedial contractor in
performing the work described.
      I'll begin with site preparation, initial
site inspection and survey.  This initial stage
or mobilization occurs with the contractor.  He
sets up all his equipment.  What we are
requiring is a lot of information up front to
be gathered, not only to protect ourselves, but
the contractor, to document existing site
conditions and verify the pertinent background
data.
      Right now, site access is controlled and
will be controlled throughout this operation. 
I believe a six (6) foot chain link fence
that's kept locked during non-operation hours. 
Speaking of operation hours, this plan right
now calls for five (5) days a week, I believe
ten (10) hours a day; so, Monday through
Friday.  The plan defines a work zone, which is
generally defined as the area inside the fence
surrounding the ISF, plus the railroading area,
which is about four hundred (400) feet from the
ISF.  It includes scales for weighing trucks
prior to disposing their material into the
gondola cars, and all the roads connecting the
scales, the ISF and the railroading area.
      Surface water controls are addressed. 
Right now, we do have surface water controls in
place outside the storage facility.  Water that
is non-impacted with PCBs is drained through
existing drainage channels.  Water that does
come into contact with the top line or
temporary cover is also collected, tested and
treated, if it has to be.  The same thing will
be done during the removal of the soil.
      Let me jump on through here.  There will
be two (2) phases of excavation, a primary
excavation, which we'll be allowed to use heavy
equipment.  This will be most of the material. 
Of the eleven thousand three hundred (11,300)
cubic yards, probably ninety-five percent (95%)
of this material will go out in the primary
phase.  Large type of equipment will be placed
into the ISF, and larger volumes in a quicker
amount of time can then be off-loaded onto the
trucks for disposal or removal into the rail
cars.  The secondary excavation will take
longer.  It's a more delicate operation.  We'll
use smaller equipment, equipment that won't
affect the integrity of the liner system.  In
most cases, towards the very end, the removal
will be done with handfuls, shovels and brooms.
      Not to go into any great detail as to how
this will be accomplished, the removal of the
soil, but the tarp covering the material will
be laid back starting in about the central
portion of the interim storage facility.  Right
now, it's shaped, if you haven't seen it, it's
shaped like an oval.  So, when I talk about the
central portion, the equipment will be placed
into the ISF, and they'll start right in the
center and start working their way out toward
the outer edges.  At the end of each working
day, the tarp will be put back on exposed areas
to minimize having to collect and treat
impacted storm water that will directly evolve
on the exposed areas.  We won't be able to
completely eliminate storm water from hitting
the affected areas, so, we will have to pump
and treat some of the water.  That will be done
on the treatment system that exists on site
right now.
      As I said, work will proceed progressively
working in a downward and outward manner, down
to the primary, down to the limits of the
primary excavation operation, which would be
about when you get within probably let's say
about six (6) inches of the operational cover
of the eighteen (18) inches of soil or of stone
that lays above the primary geo-textile.  
      Trucks will be on a loading pad directly
outside the ISF.  This loading pad will be
designated a clean area.  As such, there will
be frequent inspections.  Precautions will be
taken when loading the material so that nothing
gets spilled.  This is all done to avoid the
spread of the impacting materials to adjacent
areas.  Some of this stuff, I went over
already.
      Following loading and inspection of the
trucks and cleaning, if necessary, all trucks
will travel to the weighing scales.  The trucks
will be weighed so that we know how much
material is going into the gondola cars.  After
that, the trucks will proceed to the railroad,
what we call the trans-loading area.  It's a
ramp, a pre-fabricated ramp that will be
installed, and the trucks drive up the ramp
into a tarped enclosure to prevent affects from
the wind---we don't want too much dispersion---
where they will dump the material into the
gondola cars.  There will also be a spray
mechanism, a mister, that was used before at
this site, to prevent any dust migration from
the loading area.
      At ABB, four (4) or five (5) railroad cars
can be loaded at a time before they will be
removed from the site for transportation to the
disposal facility.  Each car can hold up to one
hundred (100) tons.  We are limited, we are
actually limited on both ends.  We are limited
to eighty-five (85) tons on the low end---they
won't take anything less than that---and we are
also limited by one hundred (100).  So,
normally, we stick to about ninety (90) tons in
that range, prior to sending them off site.  
      Some other activities at the site, because
there are large chunks of concrete and debris
that have to be broken up, that will be done
outside the ISF on a de-contamination pad.  If
we note any dust generated from this operation,
misting operations will go into affect there. 
We don't expect anything, but the contractor
will be prepared for that option.
      On that same de-contamination pad, that is
where any of the equipment coming out of the
ISF that has come into contact with the
material will be de-contaminated, and any of
the trucks that may become impacted from
spillage due to loading.  All the de-
contamination waters will be transferred to the
waste water treatment system for treatment as
was the storm water.
      We will also have a personnel
decontamination area there for the workers.  It
will be in a trailer, such as we have out there
or had out there for the remediation portion of
the project.
      I don't want to go into any great detail
in the secondary, again, the secondary
excavation methodology.  Again, that will be a
quite delicate operation at times, and we want
to make sure that we don't puncture, tear or
impact the liner in any way so that we will
just create more work for ourselves.  We are
going to do this in such a manner that the
impacts will not effect anything below the
liner system.
      I want to talk a little bit, I think I
said earlier there's two (2) parts to the
liner.  Anything above the upper primary geo-
membrane is considered impacted and dirty, and
anything below is considered non-impacted. 
That's the way we proceed with disposal of the
liner.  When we get down to the liner faces,
the liners will be cut up, rolled up, sized
appropriately.  They also have to be less than
three (3) feet in diameter, and the impacted
liners will go on to the railroad cars for
disposal.  The unimpacted liners will then be
disposed of at a non-hazardous facility.  After
that's done, the ISF, which is actually a small
depression at the site, will be back filled and
graded and seeded, and storm water
sedimentation erosion control devices will be
put in place and monitored for a period of
time.
      I want to talk about the air monitoring
plan real quickly before I exit in the schedule
a little bit.  The air monitoring plan is,
basically, the same one we've had out there
since '91, I believe.  I could be wrong.  Maybe
a part of '92.  There will be an air monitoring
station in the south east corner of the mobile
home or E and N Mobile Manor.  We will
reinstall that high volume air monitoring
station.  As before, around the active area,
the ISF contains four (4) air monitoring
stations.  We will get background monitoring
before, during mobilization operations, before
the excavation starts.  When the excavation
phase begins, we will collect new data, compare
it to the background data.  
      Quite frankly, I think we know a whole
heck of a lot.  We have about three (3) years
worth of air monitoring data from this site. 
We are not going to do anything different than
we have in the past.  Personnel will also be
monitored that are working in the area.  There
will also be real time dust monitors in the
excavation area so that managers can determine
quickly, in a real time sense, if they think
there may be a problem or potential problem.  
      The schedule, the overall schedule will
take about one hundred forty (140) days.  So,
we are looking about three (3) months, three
and a half months.  That's weather dependent. 
We won't do any removal actions in severe
weather, for health and safety reasons as well
as economical reasons.  There's no reason to
work in a lot of mud.  Have I left anything
out?  Thank you.
                   QUESTIONS BY AUDIENCE
DAVE NOVAK:              Do we have any questions
                         relative to the proposal
                         that was made by ABB and
                         Westinghouse, for
                         clarification, so that we
                         can make good comments? 
                         Gentleman here in the brown
                         jacket, if you'd step up to
                         the microphone please, just
                         identify yourself.
DICK SAMMIS:             My name is Dick Sammis.  I
                         wonder, what is the
                         condition of the
                         contaminated soil right
                         now?  What has been the
                         result of your leak
                         detection system since it's
                         been there, and the air
                         monitoring that you've been
                         doing?  I'm wondering what
                         is the difference between
                         the present site, and the
                         site that you'd be moving
                         into in terms of the
                         integrity of the system and
                         so forth?  I would like to
                         know first of all what is
                         happening out there right
                         now?
DAVE NOVAK:              Those are for the TV
                         camera, so, if you want to
                         step back up here to the
                         microphone, you are welcome
                         to do that.
GORDON TAYLOR:           What's going on there now
                         is we are only monitoring
                         the storage facility as it
                         sits.  It's temporarily
                         tarped for collecting storm
                         water in an interior trench
                         that's generated.
DICK SAMMIS:             How do you treat that?
GORDON TAYLOR:           There's an on-site
                         treatment system that will
                         remain on-site.  It will be
                         probably the identical
                         treatment system we will
                         have on there during the
                         removal operations.  Carbon
                         filtration is the basic
                         treatment standard, and
                         it's discharged to less
                         than point one (.1) parts
                         per billion.
DICK SAMMIS:             Then, what do you do after
                         it's treated, where does it
                         go, the water?
GORDON TAYLOR:           The water?  It's discharged
                         to the storm drainage
                         system.
DICK SAMMIS:             Just back into the soil
                         right on the treatment
                         plant?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Right, it goes back into
                         the drainage system.
DICK SAMMIS:             So, have you had leakages
                         from the container?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, we have not.
DICK SAMMIS:             None at all?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No.
DICK SAMMIS:             What about the air
                         monitoring unit?  Detect
                         anything in the air?
GORDON TAYLOR:           I could discuss the action
                         limits.  The action limit
                         being, and correct me if
                         I'm wrong, is before dust
                         suppression controls go
                         into affect, is one (1)
                         microgram per cubic meter. 
                         We measure them down to one
                         (1) nanogram per cubic
                         meter.  So, one microgram
                         will be one thousand
                         (1,000) nanograms.  We've
                         never had in exceedance of
                         that at the trailer park
                         area, during the
                         excavation, through about
                         three, two and a half years
                         of excavation of the
                         facility.  We exceeded the
                         action level a few times. 
                         I don't know how many times
                         that is.  I'd have to go
                         back through the data. 
                         It's an action level not
                         for immediate health and
                         safety concerns.  It's an
                         action level that may
                         create, if it gets worse, a
                         problem with health and
                         safety.
DICK SAMMIS:             How long could this
                         container hold this soil
                         under these conditions and
                         be effective?
GORDON TAYLOR:           The liner was designed for
                         twenty (20) years.  
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Well, that ought to give us
                         enough time to solve it.
DAVE NOVAK:              I think for clarification
                         on that, this was only
                         meant to be a temporary
                         storage facility.  If it
                         were moved, it would be to
                         a more sophisticated one
                         than this, much more than
                         twenty (20) years, I'm
                         sure.  Any other questions? 
                         Yes, ma'am.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Where is it going?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Sorry about that.  I forgot
                         to mention that, didn't I? 
                         The USPCI facility, it's
                         called their Grassy
                         Mountain facility in Utah. 
                         It's a TSCA licensed and
                         approved facility.  USPCI
                         will also be transporting
                         it.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          And I have another
                         question.  Do you have any
                         idea how the community
                         there feels, the community
                         that is about to receive
                         it?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, I don't.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Have you had any word from
                         them?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, we haven't.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Had any calls?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Perhaps we should find that
                         out.
UNKNOWN PERSON:          We can't hear the
                         questions.
DAVE NOVAK:              She was just wondering how
                         the community where they
                         would be receiving the
                         materials felt.  Just in
                         talking, my own talking
                         with our region out there,
                         again, it's a regulated
                         facility.  The folks around
                         there make a living off of
                         it, so, obviously, that's
                         no bearing on it, however,
                         but we have not in our
                         Region 8 office, that they
                         could find in their files,
                         anything recent against
                         these facilities out there. 
                         We have a question, go
                         ahead.
LINDA GREENE:            I have some information
                         about Grassy Mountain here,
                         and I think the public here
                         would be very interested in
                         it.  I talked to somebody
                         from Salt Lake City last
                         Saturday night.  There are
                         actually three (3) USPCI
                         facilities in that area. 
                         It's called the West Desert
                         part of Utah.  They are the
                         nations largest solid waste
                         dump, twenty-seven thousand
                         (27,000) acres, which is
                         the USPCI facility. 
                         There's Grassy Mountain,
                         which is a hazardous waste
                         dump.  There is Clive
                         Facility, which is a solid
                         and hazardous waste
                         incinerator, which is
                         built, but it's not yet on
                         line.  I also have some
                         information about the three
                         facilities, except for
                         what's happening there. 
                         According to the person
                         with whom I spoke, all
                         three USPCI facilities are
                         in direct violation of RCRA
                         because they don't have a
                         contingency plan.  They
                         don't have a plan for
                         moving people out in the
                         event of an emergency.  The
                         only hospital that is
                         anywhere nearby is across
                         county lines.  It's at the
                         University of Utah.  Also,
                         I'd like to point out that
                         in the last, well, since
                         1986, Grassy Mountain has
                         had seventy-five (75) to
                         one hundred fifty (150)
                         violations per year.  These
                         are real violations.  These
                         are not paper violations;
                         in other words, they didn't
                         just break a law on paper. 
                         They actually, things
                         happened that, events
                         occurred that threatened
                         human health and the
                         environment.  I'd also like
                         to point out that Grassy
                         Mountain hires indigent
                         workers, with no training
                         and no protective clothing,
                         to enter the waste fells. 
                         The waste fells are
                         actually the pits on which
                         the hazardous waste is
                         dumped.  It effect, it
                         requires them to climb in
                         to these pits, entering the
                         plastics and other solid
                         waste, to make room for
                         other hazardous waste.  I'd
                         also like to point out last
                         that Grassy Mountain is
                         contaminating the
                         groundwater now, as we
                         speak, and has been all the
                         way along, and if anyone
                         would like to verify any of
                         this information, I would
                         be glad to give you the
                         name and phone number of
                         the person whom I talked to
                         there, who is a member of
                         the State Sierra Club.
DAVE NOVAK:              Is that some of the
                         information relative to the
                         facility, something you
                         could share so we could put
                         it in the repository? 
                         Could we get copies of
                         that?
LINDA GREENE:            Sure, I'd be glad to.
DAVE NOVAK:              If you could provide that
                         to Sona then at the office,
                         she will contact you.  It
                         would just be interesting
                         if anybody is interested in
                         seeing that, like to share
                         that information.  Up
                         front.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       My name is Melissa
                         Valentiss, and I have a
                         couple of quick questions. 
                         One is to get a handle on
                         what the alternative if the
                         material is not shipped out
                         this spring.  You mentioned
                         that the secondary geo-net
                         is the leak detection
                         system.  In what ways is it
                         a leak detection system,
                         and what are the detection
                         methods?
DOTTIE ALKE:             Let me answer the first
                         part of that.  The first
                         part of that question
                         relative to what would we
                         do in the event we didn't
                         pursue this approach.  One
                         approach would be that this
                         is addressed as part of the
                         overall program that we are
                         pursuing right now in the
                         search for alternatives. 
                         We have stored material at
                         various places throughout
                         Bloomington that has to be
                         taken care of.  This is one
                         of them.  As you know, Fell
                         Iron is another one, and we
                         also have an interim
                         storage facility at the
                         Winston Thomas plant.  So,
                         that would become part of
                         an overall solution.  That
                         is one approach that could
                         be taken.  That puts it in
                         a different timeframe,
                         obviously.  I don't know
                         if---as an alternative,
                         it's possible that EPA
                         could pursue something,
                         somewhere.  Dan referred to
                         an EE/CA, an engineering
                         evaluation and cost
                         analysis.  They could also
                         pursue that, and that would
                         be something that could
                         take eight (8) months to a
                         year, you were saying. 
                         That would come up with a
                         recommendation at the end,
                         and you could come to the
                         same recommendation, and
                         you could come to a
                         different recommendation. 
                         So, there are various ways
                         to pursue it.  This one
                         seemed like one, certainly,
                         that would be a means of
                         handling the material for a
                         permanent basis for this
                         community.
MELISSA VALENTISS:                           That's the impression
that
                         you gave, that if it
                         doesn't move, it will
                         probably stay in place for
                         a little while at least. 
                         So, my question is---
DOTTIE ALKE:             Well, a fair amount of
                         time.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       They are just interested in
                         trying to maintain
                         integrity of the physical
                         facility.  You said that it
                         was designed to be a twenty
                         (20) year facility, but it
                         only had---
GORDON TAYLOR:           The liner.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       But it only has a temporary
                         cap, so, with that
                         temporary tarp, it's not a
                         twenty (20) year facility,
                         and if you didn't take it
                         to an off-site landfill
                         this spring, would you put
                         on the permanent cap?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Yes.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       When?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Well, we would probably
                         start immediately, I would
                         imagine.  The leak
                         detection system is
                         monitored manually with,
                         it's much like a
                         groundwater monitoring,
                         water level indicator.  In
                         fact, that's what they use. 
                         It's a resistivity meter,
                         and water levels are
                         measured in the sump and in
                         the leachate liner system,
                         and head levels are looked
                         at.  If levels in the leak
                         detection system rise as
                         high as what's in the sump,
                         then we know we have a
                         problem.  Right now, what
                         is the moisture where the
                         water, which is created by
                         moisture, what is in the
                         leak detection system was
                         moisture resulting from
                         when the system was built. 
                         So, that's how it's being
                         done presently.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       You said that when the rain
                         falls on this tarp, it's
                         captured and treated if
                         necessary.  Has it ever
                         required treatment?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Right.  Lately, it hasn't. 
                         Typically, it's a temporary
                         tarp, so, when it rains,
                         winds come with rain. 
                         There's constant daily
                         monitoring of that tarp. 
                         So, overnight, if it rains
                         and the wind blows a little
                         bit, we can't be sure if
                         some of the rainwater
                         contacted some of the, got
                         underneath, some of the
                         loose tarp impacted that
                         water.  We have to sample
                         it.  So, it's very
                         carefully noted after a
                         rain the condition of the
                         tarp.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       So, there have been
                         occasions when you've
                         needed to treat the water
                         that runs off the tarp?
GORDON TAYLOR:           To tell you the truth, I'd
                         have to go back.  I can
                         look in the records to see. 
                         I know right now, lately,
                         since there's been
                         inactivity at the site, and
                         it has been closed
                         completely, I don't believe
                         we've had to treat any of
                         that water, but I could
                         look for the entire period
                         of time, if you'd like to
                         have that.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       And the method to determine
                         whether or not to use
                         treatment is just whether
                         or not the tarp lifted off,
                         or do you sample it?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Oh, no, sample.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       Okay, and if it's more than
                         point one (.1)---
GORDON TAYLOR:           If it's more than point one
                         (.1), we have to treat it.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       Do you collect one hundred
                         percent (100%) of the run
                         off?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Inside.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       What comes off the tarp,
                         you collect one hundred
                         percent (100%) of?
GORDON TAYLOR:                               Yes.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       Are you going to do any
                         post-excavation sampling
                         under the interim storage
                         facility after excavation
                         is complete?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No.  Only if we see, on a
                         visual basis, if the liner
                         integrity has been damaged
                         in any way while trying to
                         remove the entire system.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       And you said you were going
                         to suspend activities in
                         severe weather.  Will you
                         cover the excavation area?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Oh, yes.  It will be
                         covered at the end of each
                         work day, and during the
                         day, when there's severe
                         weather, and there's no
                         work being done.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       And you said that after you
                         restore the area where the
                         interim storage facility
                         was, there would be long-
term monitoring.  There
                         would be some sort of
                         monitoring for some time. 
                         I wonder if you could
                         define that.
GORDON TAYLOR:           Oh, no.  That was for
                         sedimentation erosion
                         control, sulfuric fences,
                         just to make sure the
                         vegetation takes hold. 
                         Usually, we monitor for
                         about a year just to make
                         sure that the grasses have
                         come back, there is no
                         erosion.
MELISSA VALENTISS:       Thank you.
DAVE NOVAK:              Did the gentleman in the
                         back, did you have a
                         question?  Somebody stood
                         up here before, just when
                         you mentioned you couldn't
                         hear.  Any other questions?
DAN HOPKINS:             May I say something?
DAVE NOVAK:              Sure.
DAN HOPKINS:             I just thought for some of
                         you who find it kind of
                         hard to keep some of these
                         sites straight in terms of
                         who's doing what and why
                         and under what authority,
                         there are two sites in
                         Bloomington that EPA has
                         taken action
                         administratively, and ABB
                         is one of those, and Fell
                         Iron and Metal is another. 
                         You may have heard
                         reference to the Consent
                         Decree sites, and there are
                         six (6) sites included in
                         the Consent Decree.  They
                         are different---well,
                         whatever happens with the
                         Consent Decree sites
                         doesn't necessarily have to
                         happen for the sites for
                         ABB and Fell.  It so
                         happens that we have, we've
                         considered as a possibility
                         that there might be some,
                         you know, if there's a
                         treatment alternative that
                         looks promising for the
                         Consent Decree sites, that
                         they could be considered
                         for use for ABB or Fell,
                         for instance.  I mean,
                         we've considered that
                         that's possible, but they
                         are not linked in any way
                         that way.  That's why we
                         have the ability to really
                         be somewhat flexible here
                         and say okay, we can move
                         forward and identify a
                         remedy using this
                         engineering evaluation, or
                         we could wait and see. 
                         That's really within our
                         prerogative, if you will. 
                         It's at least something
                         that we have that we don't
                         need to move quickly, or we
                         can move quickly, and so
                         far, we are interested in
                         moving jointly to an
                         overall solution, and that
                         may include some of these
                         ABB and Fell Iron and
                         Metal, but they don't have
                         to.  Just, if that clears
                         it up for you.
DAVE NOVAK:              Lady in the front chair and
                         then the gentleman in the
                         back.
UNKNOWN PERSON:                              So, you are saying that
you
                         are going to move ABB now
                         and Fell later, is that
                         what you are saying?
DAN HOPKINS:             For some of the very same
                         reasons, Fell, we are
                         certainly looking at Fell,
                         to whether or not something
                         similar could be done
                         there; however, Fell has
                         gone a little further in
                         terms of EPA performing an
                         engineering evaluation,
                         rendering a decision and
                         sending out an
                         administrative order to get
                         it accomplished.  So, the
                         ability to move the site
                         forward in terms of
                         ultimately disposal,
                         there's a similar mechanism
                         here that might be able to
                         be worked, but from an
                         administrative standpoint,
                         we would have to go back
                         and fix the administrative
                         record, for instance.  We
                         would have to withdraw the
                         order.  We would have to
                         supplement the record. 
                         There's some administrative
                         steps that we would need to
                         take in order to lawfully
                         do it, but it's possible,
                         and we are looking into
                         that.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Yes, Dan, it's been so long
                         since I've been to a
                         meeting, I've almost
                         forgotten to think EPAese.
DAN HOPKINS:             Sorry.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          That word ultimate
                         disposal, what I think
                         about is that it ultimately
                         is not disposed.  It goes
                         from one community poisoned
                         to go and to poison another
                         community, and I don't
                         understand how, being with
                         the EPA, you can possibly
                         consider that.  Why would
                         you do that?  Why would you
                         know it happened to one
                         place, and put it in
                         another place to do it all
                         over again?  We have
                         residuals here, and all of
                         that monies that---and it's
                         not spent on moving people
                         out of dangerous sites. 
                         It's not spent air testing
                         for things like phosgenes,
                         which is what we really
                         need to know.  It's not
                         spent on the things that
                         the people need.  In that
                         very brief comment that you
                         gave to us about how you
                         were, oh, in this meeting,
                         what I heard was---and I
                         know you are a nice guy,
                         and I don't think you meant
                         it this way---but what I
                         heard was look, you people,
                         we can do what we want.  We
                         are being kind enough to
                         hold his meeting.  And we
                         know in this community,
                         particularly, you raised
                         enough stink that we know
                         we can't just like fly this
                         through, so, we are going
                         to have to hold a meeting. 
                         I hope you really are
                         listening, because I think
                         you people know the same
                         stuff we know.  I'm not
                         surprising you here.  I'm
                         not surprising anyone.  I
                         know you are all
                         intelligent people.  It
                         doesn't make any sense to
                         take one poisoned community
                         and put it in another. 
                         It's as simple as that.  We
                         want you to do the right
                         thing, and you owe it---
everyone does.  We are all
                         in this together.  We pay
                         your salary, and you want
                         (inaudible), and that's all
                         we are asking you to do.  I
                         think it's very important,
                         and if you don't want to do
                         it on your own, we might
                         just have to give you a
                         little push, okay?
DAN HOPKINS:             That was a comment.
DAVE NOVAK:              Ma'am, was that a question,
                         phrased in a question of
                         your comment?
SHERI SHERIDAN:          No, are you---
DAVE NOVAK:              No, we are not into
                         comments yet.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          No, I commented, but also I
                         have a question.  What are
                         you testing for in the air,
                         and what have you found
                         out?  Are you just testing
                         PCBs, or are you testing
                         for any other things
                         including phosgenes?
DAN HOPKINS:             Are you talking about just
                         specifically for this site?
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Yes.
DAN HOPKINS:             At this point, what is
                         going to be tested for is
                         PCBs.  I mean, the material
                         that went into that fill
                         area has already been
                         tested, and it's been
                         tested for a number of
                         other things.  We had to do
                         that.  It's been,
                         basically, screened down to
                         PCBs.  So, I think it's
                         appropriate to do air
                         monitoring to evaluate PCBs
                         for that route, and to
                         sample water for that
                         route, but other sampling
                         has been done at the site. 
                         Basically, what is in that
                         facility are PCBs.
GREG MOORE:              So, this is the question
                         part, and later will be the
                         comment part?
DAVE NOVAK:              This is the questions. 
                         Right.  We will answer your
                         questions, and then we will
                         make that separation for
                         comments.
GREG MOORE:              I'd like to know if there's
                         somebody from USPCI here? 
                         We are being asked to give
                         public comment on what we
                         think about somebody coming
                         into our community, loading
                         up hazardous waste, moving
                         it across the country, and
                         unloading it at another
                         facility.  I think that a
                         fulcrum of this, why isn't
                         someone here to answer for
                         their track record, whether
                         they are in litigation over
                         anything right now.  Is
                         there anybody from USPCI
                         here?
UNKNOWN:                 No.
GREG MOORE:              Thank you.
DAVE NOVAK:              Thank you.  Gentleman?
DICK SAMMIS:             I just don't understand one
                         thing.  Why should we treat
                         this material, this site
                         differently from the other
                         sites around the county? 
                         Is there a good reason for
                         leasing this out and
                         wanting to handle this in a
                         different way?
DAVE NOVAK:              For one, it's a separate
                         action.  It stands all by
                         its lonesome in this
                         particular one.  ABB plant
                         is one entity.  Fell Iron
                         and Metal is another, and
                         the other six (6) sites are
                         another---
DICK SAMMIS:             But the PCB problem is one
                         problem, and if we are
                         waiting on the rest of them
                         to figure out what they are
                         going to do with it, why
                         handle this site
                         differently?
DAN HOPKINS:             To be honest with you,
                         there is some value in
                         being able to cleanup the
                         site and getting it out and
                         getting it into a licensed
                         facility that's set up to
                         store this type of
                         contamination.  I mean, I
                         recognize, you make a very
                         good point, but keep in
                         mind that it would be going
                         to a facility that's
                         licensed to accept this
                         stuff.
DICK SAMMIS:             It appeals to me in one way
                         to get rid of this stuff,
                         you know, but is that the
                         right way to do it?
DAN HOPKINS:             Well, that's what we'd like
                         to hear from you.
DAVE NOVAK:              Gentleman back there.  Yes,
                         you.
TOM TOKARSKI:            My name is Tom Tokarski,
                         and I would like to ask
                         will this cleanup set a
                         precedent legally or
                         otherwise for the cleanup
                         of the other PCB sites in
                         the area, and is it meant
                         to set a precedent for the
                         cleanup of those other
                         sites?
SHERI SHERIDAN:          They need the new highway,
                         Tom.
DAN HOPKINS:             I don't think it sets a
                         precedent for the Consent
                         Decree sites.  I mean, the
                         similar reasoning might be
                         used for, as I mentioned
                         before, between ABB and
                         Fell Iron and Metal, but as
                         far as a precedent setting
                         for the Consent Decree
                         sites, I don't believe it
                         does.
TOM TOKARSKI:            No legally or other ways
                         that are considered
                         precedent?
DAN HOPKINS:             No.  I've got my attorney
                         right here that says, "No."
DAVE NOVAK:              Front row.
MIKE BAKER:              Yes, my name is Mike Baker,
                         and I've got a couple of
                         questions here.  One, it
                         appears that Westinghouse
                         has looked into this since
                         probably before September,
                         if that's when they made
                         their initial request of
                         EPA.  I'm sure they've put
                         a lot of work into looking
                         into this plan and what
                         options might be available. 
                         During this exploratory
                         phase, did anyone bring up
                         the fact that TSCA is now
                         being under a proposed
                         change of laws, and that we
                         are now in a public comment
                         period for new laws?  No,
                         I'm just asking if that
                         was---
DOTTIE ALKE:             That really did not enter
                         into our decision at this
                         point.  I think the comment
                         period for the new laws
                         that have been proposed is-
--Jeff, you may know this
                         better than I do---but I
                         believe it's sometime in
                         April.  I don't know when
                         any final rules would be
                         coming out, but that really
                         did not enter into our
                         thinking.
MIKE BAKER:              That precipitated another
                         question.  In the new
                         regulations, they are
                         making it much easier to
                         look for alternatives. 
                         There are very restrictive
                         laws now under TSCA, but
                         under the new laws, they
                         are allowing or proposing
                         to allow even self-
implementation of the
                         cleanup, alternatives such
                         as soil washing,
                         solidification.  So, my
                         question is if those new
                         changes, proposed changes,
                         even though public comment
                         started November 21, may
                         not go into affect for a
                         while, and they would allow
                         for an actual cleanup of
                         the material under some new
                         regulations, is that not
                         something that EPA and
                         Westinghouse could both
                         look at even from a
                         financial standpoint of
                         saving money?
DOTTIE ALKE:             It's hard to say at this
                         point to determine whether
                         or not it ends up being
                         something favorable or not
                         in this particular
                         circumstance.  We have not
                         examined that, and I think
                         there would probably be a
                         lot of legal issues to
                         taken care of before you
                         could even arrive at a
                         decision about the
                         applicability of those, of
                         new rules.
MIKE BAKER:              Second question is assuming
                         Westinghouse and EPA went
                         along with this cleanup,
                         the removal from ABB, would
                         EPA then be giving the ABB
                         site any kind of a clean
                         bill of health, or would
                         the cleanup action there in
                         general stop?
DAN HOPKINS:             No, this proposal relates
                         specifically to the
                         materials that are stored
                         in that facility that
                         Gordon described.  There is
                         remaining some work to do
                         in what is called the water
                         tower area.  It's a pretty
                         complicated system that's
                         laced with utilities and
                         overlayed by asphalt and
                         concrete.  There is some
                         additional contamination in
                         there.  It's fairly kept,
                         it's kept right into the
                         facility and right under in
                         the loading area, but that
                         still needs to be dealt
                         with.  That will keep
                         moving under Superfund
                         authorities.
DAVE NOVAK:              Gentleman in the back.
JOHN LANGLEY:            Hi.  I'm John Langley.  Mr.
                         Taylor mentioned that he
                         planned, the work plan
                         calls for an air monitoring
                         at the E & N Mobile Home
                         Part, I think you said, on
                         the southwest corner.  Are
                         there any other air
                         monitors on the perimeter,
                         and do you intend to use
                         personnel monitors on the
                         people who are living
                         there?
GORDON TAYLOR:           It's the south east corner. 
                         Maybe I didn't explain
                         that.  The high volume
                         samplers that measure down
                         to the one nanogram
                         detection, are the
                         perimeter samplers.  There
                         will be four (4) at the
                         perimeter of the work zone,
                         but we always put an
                         additional air monitoring
                         further out, which is at
                         the trailer park area, the
                         closest habitation point to
                         the facility.  So, we've
                         had the perimeter monitors,
                         plus the additional one at
                         the trailer court area. 
                         And yes, at least one
                         person on the work crew
                         after work, a personnel
                         monitor at all times.
DAVE NOVAK:              Okay, ma'am.
RACHEL LOOP:             My name is Rachel
                         Loop.  What is the
                         cost of this plan, the
                         transporting proposal?
DOTTIE ALKE:             We have not worked out the
                         final pricing on this.  We
                         are still in discussions
                         with USPCI.  Our estimates
                         right now are in the range
                         of four (4) to five (5)
                         million dollars.
DAN NOVAK:               There's a gentleman or a
                         hand, I saw, over on this
                         side.  It went away.  
LYNN COYNE:              I'm Lynn Coyne.  I have a
                         couple of questions.  Once
                         you put it on the railroad
                         cars, what safeguards are
                         on the railroad cars as
                         they go across the country
                         and so forth?  Could you
                         talk about that a little
                         bit?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Once the railroad cars are
                         loaded, they are lined
                         cars, lined with what they
                         call a diaper system, thick
                         polyethylene sheeting.  So,
                         the material's dumped in,
                         it's enveloped, and that
                         envelope is secured, and
                         then a secure tarp,
                         waterproof tarp is taut,
                         pulled tight, and then
                         secured on each gondola car
                         before it leaves.  USPCI
                         will have a representative
                         on site that will inspect
                         each car before they leave. 
                         We heard some comments
                         earlier about fines that
                         USPCI has had.  A lot of
                         fines, we know, are the
                         result of unsecured tarps
                         on railroad cars.  So, they
                         will have a person who will
                         guarantee and inspect and
                         make sure, because it is
                         USPCI's responsibility,
                         while transporting it, that
                         those tarps don't come off. 
                         So, that is the method.
LYNN COYNE:              Are they tracked so that if
                         five (5) cars leave
                         Bloomington, five (5) cars
                         arrive in Utah?  I mean, do
                         we have some---
GORDON TAYLOR:           It's a standard, just like
                         a truck, a standard
                         manifest method, manifest
                         assignment.  When leaves a
                         site, it's expected at a
                         site at a certain time, and
                         it's transferred over to
                         the site within that time
                         period.
LYNN COYNE:              Has this method or
                         procedure or whatever been
                         used in any other sites?
GORDON TAYLOR:           It was used at this site. 
                         We've moved one hundred
                         thirteen (113) rail cars
                         from this site already.
LYNN COYNE:              Using the same methods, the
                         same procedures that you
                         are proposing now?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Yes, yes.
LYNN COYNE:              Did you experience any
                         problems, or were there any
                         violations during that
                         process?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, no.
LYNN COYNE:              Was it US, whatever that
                         was, USPCI or whatever?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Yes, it was, USPCI.
LYNN COYNE:              One thing, maybe for Dan,
                         I'm a little confused of
                         the Fell.  We mentioned why
                         not do this for Fell, or
                         someone asked that
                         question, and you said you
                         were along down the
                         process, an administrative
                         order had been issued.  Do
                         you order them to do this? 
                         I'm confused about what
                         happens next at Fell in
                         relation to this.  I
                         understand this is a
                         voluntary TSCA.  When you
                         order something to be done
                         with the Fell site, what do
                         you order to be done, or
                         how do you do that?
DAN HOPKINS:             Well, we would order the
                         cleanup to be done.  In
                         this case, the order that
                         was issued was stayed. 
                         There was some concern at
                         that time, honestly, that
                         the issuance of that order
                         may have compelled
                         Westinghouse to sue the
                         state and, ultimately, to
                         build the incinerator. 
                         That was a real concern,
                         although that's not at all
                         what we had intended to do. 
                         So, the order, through some
                         concern that had been
                         expressed, the order was
                         stayed.  So, typically, you
                         know, the order, we would
                         pursue the order.  The
                         first avenue would be to
                         pursue that
                         administratively, and
                         ultimately, through to the
                         district court if we needed
                         to, but in this case, it is
                         possible---I'm not saying
                         that this decision has been
                         made.  Even the decision
                         for ABB hasn't been made,
                         but the benefits are
                         similar, and it's something
                         that the community might
                         want to consider that there
                         is a possible extension of
                         that same thinking to Fell
                         Iron and Metal.  It would
                         require us to take some
                         administrative actions,
                         like withdrawing the order,
                         for instance.
LYNN COYNE:              Reverse that?
DAN HOPKINS:             Yes.
LYNN COYNE:              In a sense that if you
                         don't, if Westinghouse
                         doesn't perform this
                         voluntarily under TSCA,
                         would this site end up like
                         Fell Iron and Metal?
DAN HOPKINS:             I don't think so.  I don't
                         think it would.  I mean, if
                         we were to issue the
                         administrative order, it's
                         not necessarily the case
                         that we would have to stay
                         it.  I don't think that's
                         the case.  We weren't
                         stayed in issuing the
                         initial---
LYNN COYNE:              I guess what I'm saying is
                         if you issue an order---I'm
                         confused---would you order
                         them to put it in railroad
                         cars and take it to Utah?
DAN HOPKINS:             Do you mean under this
                         proposal?
LYNN COYNE:              No, no, no.  If this didn't
                         work---
DAN HOPKINS:             I'm sorry, I'm confused.
LYNN COYNE:              Let's say they say, "No,"
                         or it's too expensive, or
                         they don't want to do it or
                         something else.  They've
                         got to move on with the
                         cleanup is my
                         understanding.  The EPA
                         will come in, and they will
                         say it's time to move on
                         with this cleanup.  You've
                         got it stored.  You will
                         order them to do something
                         with it.  What I'm getting
                         at, one of the options that
                         you would order to them to
                         put it on railroad cars and
                         send it out to Utah.  Is
                         that an option?
DAN HOPKINS:             For which site now are you
                         talking about?  
LYNN COYNE:              I don't know.  I think I'm
                         not asking it right.
JEFF CAHN:               If this cleanup for some
                         reason fell through, is
                         this proposal (inaudible)--
-
LYNN COYNE:              (Interrupting) There you
                         go.
JEFF CAHN:               (Continuing)---EPA would
                         fall back on completing the
                         engineering evaluation and
                         the cost analysis, issuing
                         a decision, and then
                         issuing an order, unless
                         Westinghouse or ABB agreed
                         to voluntarily implement
                         the cleanup decision after
                         the EE/CA.
LYNN COYNE:              And one of those options is
                         to order them to put it in
                         railroad cars and send it
                         to Utah.  It could be.
DAN HOPKINS:             Could be.
DAVE NOVAK:              One word we didn't use
                         tonight, if I could just
                         mention that, was this is a
                         means of expediting the
                         removal of these soils.  It
                         could be an option, like
                         you say, under the EE/CA
                         and things down in the
                         future for the same thing,
                         so, this is a way of
                         expediting removal, just
                         one option that they are
                         proposing.  Additional
                         questions?  Yes, sir, in
                         the back.
DAVID SCHALK:            You said something about
                         you had to withdraw the
                         order regarding Fell Iron
                         and Metal because there was
                         a concern that Westinghouse
                         might sue the State of
                         Indiana?  What would that
                         be about?
DAN HOPKINS:             No, I said the order was
                         stayed.  I said the order
                         was stayed.
DAVID SCHALK:            You did say, you said there
                         was some concern that
                         Westinghouse would sue the
                         state to force the building
                         of the incinerator?
DAN HOPKINS:             That was the concern that
                         was expressed to us.
DAVID SCHALK:            What would they do, go into
                         Federal Court in the
                         Consent Decree case?
DAN HOPKINS:             I don't know.  I don't want
                         to go through a lot of
                         hypotheticals like what
                         they might do, and what
                         they could do.  The concern
                         was that this was an
                         interference in---
DAVID SCHALK:            Yes, but they can use the
                         incinerator then as kind of
                         a way to blackmail these
                         people into not doing
                         anything about sites like
                         Fell or the materials on
                         the surface, because they
                         can threaten to force the
                         incinerator to be built. 
                         I'm just interested in
                         that, because I hadn't
                         heard that before.  Is
                         Westinghouse interested in
                         building the incinerator
                         still?
DAN HOPKINS:             I don't know.  You might
                         want to ask them.
DAVID SCHALK:            Does anybody know?  I mean,
                         I know there's a standing
                         court order.  That's not
                         going to change.
DOTTIE ALKE:             We are venturing so far
                         beyond the topic that we
                         are attempting to address
                         today.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Yes, but we are getting to
                         the stuff that matters.
DOTTIE ALKE:             I hear you.  The
                         incinerator remains part of
                         the Consent Decree.  Until
                         we work through our
                         attempts to arrive at
                         alternate solutions, the
                         proposal was made, and we
                         got a decision from the
                         judge, it remains.  So, you
                         know, it's there.
DAVID SCHALK:            I know there's a provision
                         in the Consent Decree that
                         says if all the parties
                         agree to something that
                         costs less than the
                         incinerator, then that
                         would be an option that the
                         judge could approve, or
                         maybe would automatically
                         be approved.  Does anybody
                         know what the incinerator
                         would cost?
DOTTIE ALKE:             Actually, the Consent
                         Decree provides that
                         Westinghouse may propose an
                         alternative to the
                         incinerator; however,
                         rather than doing that
                         individually, we have opted
                         to work in the state, the
                         county, the city and the
                         EPA to come up with an
                         alternative that is
                         generally acceptable to
                         those parties, with ongoing
                         input of the public, so
                         that when we do go back to
                         have the Consent Decree
                         amended, it will have
                         already been evaluated by
                         all the relevant parties to
                         the whole decision making
                         process, and hopefully, we
                         will have something that's
                         going to go.
DAVID SCHALK:            Okay, thanks.
DAVE NOVAK:              I don't want to cut
                         questions short, but we
                         need to get into comments. 
                         We may get kicked out of
                         here and end up doing the
                         rest of this in the parking
                         lot, which I have no desire
                         to do.
BRIAN PENCE:             My name is Brian Pence. 
                         I've got a concern with
                         your proposal to send this
                         out to USPCI.  Do you have
                         any confirmation that USPCI
                         has plans with this
                         material you want to ship
                         out there into the
                         incinerator that's right
                         next door?  I know it's not
                         on line yet, but it's
                         permitted.  Do you have
                         anything one way or the
                         other of assurance they
                         won't, assurance they will?
DOTTIE ALKE:             I'm sure that that's not
                         their plans at all.  You
                         cannot possibly dispose of
                         this material through
                         incineration for the type
                         of pricing that we are
                         receiving.  It's for
                         landfill, transportation
                         and landfill of the
                         material.  No, I don't know
                         what USPCI will do with its
                         landfill for fifty or one
                         hundred years.
BRIAN PENCE:             That was my concern that it
                         would get shipped out
                         there, and that---my
                         concern is is the USPCI
                         planning, is this
                         incinerator being built to
                         burn and cleanup the
                         adjacent landfill or
                         adjacent landfills that
                         seem to surround this area? 
                         Nobody has an answer?
GREG MOORE:              Nobody here represents
                         USPCI.
DAVE NOVAK:              That's correct.  One final
                         question, and then we will
                         get into comments.  Ma'am,
                         second row.
LINDA GREENE:            I have three quick
                         questions.  The first
                         question is what are the
                         levels of PCBs that have
                         been found in this soil we
                         are talking about at ABB,
                         and that can be expressed
                         as the (inaudible) or the
                         range or whatever.
GORDON TAYLOR:           The mean PCB concentration
                         per volume of soil is two
                         hundred sixty-nine point
                         six three (269.63) parts
                         per million.  That was
                         established by taking all
                         the post-excavation
                         samples, thousands, and
                         coming up with a mean
                         concentration.
LINDA GREENE:            What about the hottest?
GORDON TAYLOR:           Hottest, we'd have to go
                         back to individual samples. 
                         I don't have that on the
                         top of my head.
DAN HOPKINS:             Actually, the hottest
                         material that went off of
                         the site came from the
                         north ditch, and that was
                         incinerated, and that was
                         up into the tens of
                         thousands of parts per
                         million PCBs.
LINDA GREENE:            That was incinerated in
                         Hobbyville, Kansas, is that
                         right?
DAN HOPKINS:             I think so.
LINDA GREENE:            With the house incinerator
                         there, okay.  I'd like to
                         know what's the rush to
                         deal with this material,
                         and why is Westinghouse in
                         such a hurry?
DOTTIE ALKE:             We feel that there are
                         certain sites that we are
                         able to address
                         individually, this being
                         one of them.  It's really
                         an attempt to come to
                         closure on a site when
                         we've gone together with
                         ABB to do this.  It's the
                         most expeditious and
                         reasonable approach to
                         getting this done.
LINDA GREENE:            Okay, another question is,
                         according to SARA Title 3,
                         which is the right to know
                         act, the public has the
                         right to know the route of
                         transportation for the
                         materials, and there also
                         are some laws about it. 
                         This material is not
                         supposed to go past
                         schools, nursing homes,
                         other places where there
                         was substantive population. 
                         Does EPA intend to publish
                         that route, and if so,
                         when?
DAN HOPKINS:             You know, again, if this
                         were handled under
                         Superfund, as I was saying,
                         there would be more
                         involvement by us.  In this
                         case, this is going to be a
                         sensation of Superfund
                         activities, it would go off
                         under TSCA, and
                         essentially, it would be a
                         voluntary cleanup.  I think
                         you've got the map out,
                         don't you?
GORDON TAYLOR:                               A portion of it. 
DAN HOPKINS:             Let me just show you---
GORDON TAYLOR:           This was the route used
                         last time.  I don't want
                         to, the route will be given
                         by USPCI to EPA once they
                         are firmly under contract,
                         and well before any
                         material is moved off site. 
                         This route, I believe, was
                         given to the city and the
                         County Health Department a
                         couple of years ago.  
DAN HOPKINS:             The site is right here,
                         close to here.  So, they'll
                         go down into town, and then
                         down, I guess on the east
                         side of, actually on the
                         west side of Rogers.  Right
                         here is the switch yard,
                         and then from the switch
                         yard, the cars are turned
                         and coupled with a
                         locomotive, and then they
                         are transported back up to
                         this spot.  Can you see
                         that?
GORDON TAYLOR:           That was the route that was
                         used when the approximately
                         one hundred thirteen (113)
                         cars went out prior to---
LINDA GREENE:            When was that?
DAN HOPKINS:             The dates, early '93, I
                         believe.
LINDA GREENE:            Was that also done without
                         notifying the public?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, I think Dan---
LINDA GREENE:            Were the people in the
                         neighborhoods notified that
                         hazardous (inaudible)---
DAN HOPKINS:             You know, we did.  We've
                         had a number of meetings on
                         like a six weeks basis.  We
                         put out Fact Sheets.  We
                         contacted the city's
                         emergency coordinator. 
                         It's not like we've been
                         operating in a vacuum here. 
                         We have been coordinating
                         this and making it
                         available.
UNKNOWN:                 Inaudible question.
DAN HOPKINS:             No, I don't think so.  I
                         don't know that we can
                         constantly do that
                         specific, something that we
                         are held, that we know
                         exactly.  I don't know if
                         we know exactly the date
                         that something is going to
                         go out every time.  We can
                         tell you where it is, the
                         route and the approximate
                         time, but I mean, I don't
                         know that you'd know
                         exactly.
UNKNOWN:                                     What about the other
                         fifteen hundred miles
                         (1,500) between this map
                         and Utah?
LOUISE FABRINSKI:        Does the Department of
                         Transportation have a role
                         in monitoring the railroad
                         transportation of hazardous
                         material, and I think that,
                         basically, is what his
                         question is, to get from
                         here to there?
DOTTIE ALKE:             What you really have, and
                         we don't have at this stage
                         of the game, an exact
                         route, USPCI will be
                         following that information
                         if we do enter into a
                         contract with them.  They
                         would have certain
                         responsibilities.  Most of
                         those are accountable
                         through the Department, to
                         the Department of
                         Transportation.  That's the
                         regulating agency for this
                         sort of activity, and
                         that's what they will be
                         acting in accordance with.
LINDA GREENE:            Well, if USPCI already
                         moved out this material,
                         the actual route that was
                         used, how come you don't
                         know what that route is?
GORDON TAYLOR:           No, that was the route---
DOTTIE ALKE:             That was the route in town. 
                         I don't have---
LINDA GREENE:            No, I'm talking about the
                         country.
DOTTIE ALKE:             We don't have that route
                         here.  We could get that,
                         if, in fact, we do.
LINDA GREENE:            My next question is,
                         someone said that the last
                         bit of contaminated
                         material will be dealt with
                         by hand by workers.  I
                         would like to know if those
                         workers are going to be
                         wearing appropriate
                         protective clothing, and
                         I'd also like to know if
                         they are going to be
                         offered a consent form to
                         sign because we know from
                         recent years, we learned in
                         recent years, that there is
                         a class of chemicals called
                         parmonemics, certain kinds
                         such as PCBs, furiens,
                         dioxins and heavy metals,
                         are part of that class of
                         chemicals, and these people
                         are threatening their
                         immune system damage,
                         reproductive damage,
                         nervous system damage, when
                         they handle this material. 
                         Are you going to provide
                         consent forms that tell
                         them what dangers---
GORDON TAYLOR:           I can only respond by
                         saying that the workers
                         that will be handling this
                         material will abide by all
                         the OSHA standards for
                         health and safety working
                         with this material, and it
                         will be properly monitored. 
                         They will be wearing the
                         proper protection
                         equipment.  They will be
                         properly stepping into and
                         out of these areas by way
                         of decon procedures.  They
                         won't, all procedures that
                         are in place right now with
                         regulatory agencies will be
                         followed.
LINDA GREENE:            Thank you.
DAVE NOVAK:              Yes, sir.
MIKE DAVIS:              I was just interested in a
                         comment to raise.
DAVE NOVAK:              Okay, if we've got no more
                         questions, we will go into
                         the comments.  Again, in
                         responding to the comments,
                         we won't tonight.  We will
                         respond to them in the
                         responsive summary, which
                         will be available in about
                         two (2) weeks.  I see a
                         bunch of hands going up. 
                         Now, are those questions or
                         comments?  Okay, let's take
                         these last two questions,
                         and then we will get into
                         your comment.
DAVE PORTER:             What do you expect the
                         longevity of security in
                         Utah to be?  Your facility
                         is good for twenty (20)
                         years, right?  How long is
                         Utah good for?
SHERI SHERIDAN:          (Inaudible) No idea.
DAVE NOVAK:              I don't know if that's
                         something that we could
                         really answer.
DAVE PORTER:             Wait a minute.  How can we
                         compare the value of
                         keeping it here or sending
                         it there then?
DOTTIE ALKE:             We can provide that
                         information.  I don't have
                         it at my fingertips.  We
                         have within Westinghouse a
                         program where we actually
                         limit the disposal places
                         we will go to.  We
                         routinely audit those
                         places to determine whether
                         or not they have practices
                         and procedures that are in
                         keeping with requirements. 
                         In addition to that, they
                         have permitting
                         requirements that are
                         watched by the state, as
                         well as in some instances 
                         federal---
DAVE PORTER:             Okay, but you still have to
                         give me a rough, ballpark
                         figure.  One hundred (100)
                         years, one thousand (1,000)
                         years?
DOTTIE ALKE:             I don't know where they are
                         at in terms of when they
                         actually put in this
                         facility, and what year
                         they were, into their
                         disposal out there.  That
                         information we can provide
                         to you if you want to
                         provide it in the form of a
                         comment.  We can certainly
                         give you exact information
                         about the facility out
                         there, to the longevity of
                         how long its been operated,
                         how much capacity they have
                         left, what is the
                         particulars about their
                         leachate collection system,
                         all that sort of thing.  I
                         just don't have it at my
                         finger tips.  Whenever
                         we've had to deal with
                         them, we've evaluated them
                         overall, and they are in
                         keeping with the standards
                         that we as a company would
                         look for in a place, like
                         we would say, "Is this a
                         place where we want to take
                         material," because we
                         aren't off the hook either,
                         okay?  Westinghouse as a
                         PRP remains responsible for
                         this material, basically,
                         for ever.
DAVE NOVAK:              Even when it's transferred
                         to you guys?
DOTTIE ALKE:             Absolutely, absolutely.
LOUISE FABRINSKI:        But doesn't a facility have
                         to be licensed out there by
                         the same federal
                         regulations as there would
                         be out here if there was a
                         storage facility built here
                         to contain those PCBs?  So,
                         those standards from here
                         or there are not going to
                         be different because they
                         are U.S. federal standards.
DOTTIE ALKE:             There's both state and
                         federal.
LOUISE FABRINSKI:        That's why nobody has it
                         right at their fingertips,
                         because if it's a
                         (inaudible) approved
                         facility, we understand
                         what that means, and it's
                         licensed to accept
                         hazardous waste and PCB
                         soil, yet we don't keep
                         that file.  It's on a piece
                         of paper and not at our
                         fingertips, but that is
                         easily obtainable for you.
DAVE PORTER:             No, but I mean, why do you
                         want to move it.  If it's
                         good---if you've got it
                         here, and all you'd have to
                         do is put a cover over it,
                         and it's safe for twenty
                         (20) years, I assume your
                         sealed enclosure here is as
                         safe as Utah.  Is that
                         true?
DAN HOPKINS:             Well, this isn't a licensed
                         facility.  I mean, it's
                         definitely---
DAVE PORTER:             No, but it's built to
                         certain standards.  It was
                         built to be good for twenty
                         (20) years of interim
                         storage.  We presume that
                         it is safe.  It is lined in
                         leachate collecting system
                         with integrity; therefore,
                         why does it represent a
                         risk, or how is the risk
                         minimized by moving it to
                         Utah, and for what period
                         of time is that risk
                         minimized before it becomes
                         an equivalent situation?
DAN HOPKINS:             Well, you've got two things
                         that you are asking there. 
                         One is more philosophical. 
                         The second one is how long
                         can materials stay in this
                         landfill.  It can stay here
                         a while.  I remember back
                         when this action was
                         originally taken in May of
                         1989, the thinking was that
                         the Bloomington incinerator
                         was going to be built.  So,
                         Westinghouse had several
                         options in the order that
                         we sent out to them in May
                         of '89.  One was that they
                         could immediately dig up
                         this material and store it
                         in a facility and wait for,
                         basically, the construction
                         of the incinerator. 
                         Essentially, that was the
                         thinking that probably
                         would happen, but what was
                         provided for in the order
                         was that it could be dug up
                         and stored, temporarily,
                         pending the decision that
                         would be arrived at through
                         an engineering evaluation. 
                         Another option that they
                         had was that they could
                         immediately dig up the
                         material and transport it
                         under TSCA.  We gave them
                         this option early on in the
                         order.  They elected to go
                         with the storage.  We also
                         said a third option was
                         that for some of the
                         materials on the site, you
                         can leave it in place,
                         characterize it and leave
                         it in place, and choose a
                         solution after an
                         engineering evaluation cost
                         analysis.  So, my point is,
                         they initially had this
                         prerogative right in the
                         beginning, and they are, in
                         a sense, returning to it. 
                         Another thing about the
                         philosophical question,
                         keep in mind that when the
                         Toxic Substances Control
                         Act, that's an act of
                         Congress. That's an act of
                         Congress.
DAVE PORTER:             Dan, you know how I feel
                         about the law.
DAN HOPKINS:             I'm saying, maybe for the
                         benefit of some of the
                         folks, why we don't
                         evaluate what the condition
                         of a TSCA compliant
                         facility is.  I mean,
                         Congress said, basically,
                         you take it to an
                         incinerator that complies
                         with TSCA, you can take it
                         to the landfill that
                         complies with TSCA.  That's
                         what's being done here.  I
                         mean, we would be
                         superseding, basically, the
                         law in making that
                         evaluation, and that was
                         Congress's decision.  For
                         good or bad, that's what
                         they said.
DAVE PORTER:             But you know in terms of
                         good science that
                         destruction of the material
                         as opposed to entombment of
                         the material are not
                         identical.
DAN HOPKINS:             That's right.
DAVE PORTER:             If you destroy it, it
                         really is disassembled and
                         gone.  If you just take it
                         and sequester it somewhere
                         else, it's not going to be
                         gotten rid of, and it
                         bothers me that you are so
                         sloppy in talking about
                         dispose, meaning both
                         destroy or landfill.  I
                         mean, don't tell us how we
                         can judge the compared
                         value of our repository
                         here versus the repository
                         in Utah.
DAVE NOVAK:              In talking with my counter-
part in Region 8, I do know
                         that what you've got here
                         is a minuscule facility
                         compared to theirs.  You
                         have just maybe six (6)
                         feet of liner and fill and
                         things at the bottom.  This
                         pile doesn't consist of
                         one, of many, many liners
                         out there.  So, we are
                         talking about maybe the
                         height of this building in
                         just protection before they
                         start landfilling this
                         stuff.  That's what I
                         understand of this
                         facility, and again,
                         talking with my counter-
part, so, really, when we
                         are looking at that and
                         this, there's apples and
                         oranges.  They have a
                         permanent facility with
                         many, many, many liners.
DAVE PORTER:             But, Dave, they are apples
                         and apples.  They are both
                         (inaudible).  Apples and
                         oranges (inaudible)---
DAVE NOVAK:              Yes, it is quite different. 
                         Yes?
JOE LOOP:                Yes, my name is Joe Loop,
                         and I'd like to as Dan a
                         question.  This is an EPA
                         sponsored meeting, and you
                         don't seem to be able to
                         answer too much questions. 
                         We've had several questions
                         about the site this is
                         going to be moved to, and
                         the transportation route,
                         and you don't seem to be
                         very aware of any of this.
DAN HOPKINS:             Well, Joe, I've read the
                         plan.  I understand that
                         they are going to be taking
                         it out in a very similar
                         route as they did before. 
                         Really, what we are here
                         taking comment on is
                         whether or not, what you
                         think about us ceasing
                         CERCLA activities, or
                         ceasing Superfund
                         activities, and moving
                         forward under the Toxic
                         Substances Control Act.  We
                         didn't really come here
                         tonight to really bring to
                         issue how the disposal is
                         going to occur.  It would
                         be essentially done,
                         although it would be done
                         with oversight, and it
                         would be done after having
                         been provided with the
                         plan, it's essentially a
                         voluntary cleanup.  That is
                         what we've come to you
                         tonight to ask you to
                         comment about.  So, if we
                         are not able to answer
                         every question concerning
                         the remedy, it's for a
                         reason.  That's not why we
                         are here.
GREG MOORE:              CERCLA and TSCA were not
                         mentioned in the public
                         announcement of this
                         meeting in either the
                         Herald Times or The Voice. 
                         CERCLA and TSCA were not
                         even mentioned.
JOE LOOP:                My other question for
                         Westinghouse is what were
                         the ambient air samples
                         that were collected around
                         that mobile home park?
GORDON TAYLOR:           You are referring to the
                         background, or while the
                         work was being conducted?
JOE LOOP:                While the work was being
                         conducted, and the
                         background.
GORDON TAYLOR:           Yes, that was a good way to
                         put it.  It was always less
                         than half the action value
                         of one (1) microgram per
                         cubic meter.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          What was in it?
GORDON TAYLOR:           That's of measured PCBs. 
                         It's quantified PCBs.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          What I asked for earlier
                         was like phosgenes and all
                         the other things that you
                         really should be looking
                         for.  What else are you
                         testing for besides the
                         PCBs?  That's why I worry. 
                         That's why we worry,
                         because you don't do your
                         job, and that makes us very
                         frightened of the next
                         move.
DAN HOPKINS:             The thing that I'd like to
                         mention here, there was a
                         ton of sampling that was
                         done out there.  We have
                         sampled extensively for a
                         number of compounds,
                         especially volatile
                         organics, as well as for
                         PCBs.  So, what we were
                         finding were low levels of
                         other contaminants, and
                         high levels of PCBs by and
                         large.  Now, some of those
                         low levels of contaminants,
                         like trichlorethylene and
                         perchlorethylene, like what
                         you might find in a
                         drycleaning operation, or
                         paint solvents, which maybe
                         they were associated with
                         this plant, that caused
                         some of this material, made
                         us take it off and have it
                         incinerated, because it was
                         considered the type of
                         material that is
                         inappropriate for storage
                         in a landfill, but that was
                         about all that we found in
                         there.  There were a lot of
                         tests that were run on that
                         material.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          (Inaudible) It's
                         circulating all over that
                         neighborhood.  We don't
                         think you just kept it in
                         the parking lot.
DAN HOPKINS:             The PCBs were the primary
                         component of the hazardous
                         material there that we
                         really found.  PCBs was
                         what we found that was bad,
                         and we monitored for that
                         very, very, very carefully.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          So, why aren't we using the
                         money to move those people
                         out of the trailer park?
                      COMMENT PERIOD
DAVE NOVAK:              Do we move into comments? 
                         Are we ready for comments? 
                         Again, when you make your
                         comment, please identify
                         yourself, give your name,
                         and we will not respond to
                         the comments, but through
                         the responsive summary.
MIKE DAVIS:              I'm Mike Davis, deputy
                         mayor of the City of
                         Bloomington.  I want to
                         thank the EPA for setting
                         up this public comment
                         period.  Also, I want to
                         note on behalf of Mayor
                         Allison that the EPA, we
                         understand the EPA is the
                         sole government authority
                         over the site, the ABB
                         site.  We recognize that
                         although we don't have
                         procedural authority in any
                         way over this particular
                         site, that we speak as any
                         other citizen in the
                         community.  We want you to
                         know that we welcome and
                         favor the proposal that is
                         brought for us tonight, and
                         we believe the overwhelming
                         majority of the citizens of
                         Bloomington would also
                         favor this proposal.
SHERI SHERIDAN:          Translated again, may I
                         translate this.  That means
                         that the City of
                         Bloomington is no longer
                         liable, nobody can sue them
                         or anything, they are safe
                         and free, and they are
                         going to say whatever
                         (inaudible from applause).
BILL REFFERT:            My name is Bill Reffert,
                         and I'm the site manager
                         out at the ABB facility. 
                         We, too, favor this
                         proposal.  We've worked
                         with both parties
                         represented here to put
                         this together.  Basically,
                         again, as an innocent party
                         to all these actions, we
                         have a facility that we
                         need to run, and we just
                         want it to get back to
                         normal.  The people that
                         work there want to get back
                         to life as