Participation light at EPA meetings

The public comment period on the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed plan for the Libby Superfund site is officially underway. The plan was released May 8 and agency officials visited Lincoln County last week to solicit public comments on the proposal.

The agency representatives held meetings in both Libby and Troy, but attendance at both meetings was marked by a preponderance government officials and employees, with very sparse public attendance and participation.

“These meetings used to fill up this entire room and then some,” Virginia Loranger, Sen. John Tester’s regional director, said at the Libby meeting May 21.

In addition to agency representatives, staff from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, the Lincoln County Asbestos Resource Program and a handful of elected officials from Libby and Troy attended the meetings. The agency also brought in a court reporter to document the meeting and any public comments received. The comments made are included in the official comments, EPA project manager Rebecca Thomas said.

Thomas said the lack of participation at the public meetings isn’t of great concern at this point.

“We take in comments in a number of different ways,” she said. “And they’re starting to come in. These meetings aren’t really where the work is done.”

The main focus of attention in the proposed plan is the long-term management of the site following the end of the active clean-up. The agency’s plan lists 12 vague bullet points of preferred institutional controls, but provides very little detail about how those controls will be implemented and who will bear the cost.

Thomas said the details will be determined during the design phase, after the final record of decision on the project is entered. Designing the controls after selecting the remedy, she said, affords the agency greater flexibility in responding to the specific needs of the community and any unforeseen events.

“This allows us to make it look like what it needs to be for the community,” she told the county commissioners at their Wednesday meeting. “It’s got to work for the community in order to be successful.”

Others aren’t as trusting. 

“We don’t think the EPA should be making this decision until the institutional controls are developed to the same level as the soil and building material remedies,” said Steve Ackerlund, a consultant to the Technical Advisory Group.

The need for robust public participation is something all parties agree is necessary. In addition to managing long-term exposure from contamination left behind, there is also the matter of contamination remaining on and in properties that have been neither inspected nor cleaned by the agency.

Contamination left could pose an exposure risk not just for property owners, but also for other members of the community, should the contamination be disturbed enough to carry in the air. Such disturbances could be the result of fire, remodeling, demolition, excavation or hauling of contaminated material. 

The official agency position is that in order to keep long-term exposure to Libby Amphibole asbestos at acceptable levels, a program of controls must be implemented in Libby.

“Institutional controls are an important part of the remedy and are required with all alternatives to manage future releases of Libby Amphibole asbestos or ‘waste left in place.’ Libby Amphibole asbestos will remain at the site and could become a new source of exposure after the construction portion of the remedy is implemented… A combination of several institutional controls will be needed to manage the variety of activities that could disturb potentially contaminated soil or building materials,” according to the proposed plan released May 8.

The integrity and effectiveness of the institutional controls, Thomas said, is crucial to the long-term success of the remedy. And public participation is key to the effectiveness of those long-term controls.

According to information provided by EPA’s on-site project manager, Mike Cirian, there are still nearly 500 properties left to be inspected and possibly cleaned. Postcards were sent earlier this year to 484 property owners, requesting access for inspection. Of those, only 87 of the cards were returned, with 67 granting access, 2 deferring access to a later point in time and 18 rejecting access outright.

If those hold-outs remain, there will be more than 400 properties within the boundaries of the Superfund site about which no data will be available regarding possible Libby Amphibole asbestos contamination. 

Thomas and Cirian said the agency will continue to push for access to properties throughout the duration of the active clean-up, up to and including a “last call” to property owners before the agency pulls the plug. The construction phase of the clean-up is expected to be completed within the next three to five years, after which the institutional controls will kick in and the financial burden will shift from the federal agency to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. How much of the burden for clean-ups after that point will be borne by the state and how much will be pushed off to homeowners remains a mystery, as the proposed plan contains no specific details of the costs. 

The public comment period is officially scheduled to end July 8, although it appears likely the Lincoln County commissioners intend to ask for a 30-day extension. During the comment period, the Lincoln County Asbestos Resource Program, in conjunction with the Technical Advisory Group and Citizens Advisory Group, will be conducting interviews with a number of residents and stakeholders to solicit additional comment.

Program manager Nick Raines said the interviews are going well, but are taking longer than originally anticipated.

“We had planned on about 20 minutes for each interview,” Raines said. “But they’re taking between 40 and 45 minutes each. It’s good, though, because we’re getting a lot of information and comments.”