Loading...
Clean CFAC letter to Council re Columbia Falls Aluminum Superfund Sitek! COALITION for a - C L E A N CFAC To: Carolina Balliew, Montana Remedial Section C 'Supervisor, -Region 8, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 10 West 15th Street, Helena, MT 59626 To: Christopher Dorrington, Director, Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) P.O. Box 200901, Helena MT 59620-0901 Feb. 26, 2024 Dear Ms. Balliew and Mr. Dorrington, We are writing you to share that we have surpassed over 1000 signatures' from local residents asking you to pause your record of decision on the Columbia Falls Aluminum Company Superfund site for the reasons we set forth in our previous letter to you on January 18, 2024. Additionally, the following organizations have joined the call for this timeout including, American Rivers, Flathead Lake Protection Association, Flathead Rivers Alliance, Flathead Lakers, Swan View Coalition, and West Glacier Community Preservation Association, with a number of others considering joining pending approval of their boards. These organizations collectively with the Coalition for a Clean CFAC represent over 10,000 individuals. These petition signatures/names were primarily gathered by citizen volunteers who reached out to their friends and neighbors about the proposed plan to leave the highly toxic waste buried at the former aluminum plant and their concerns about the implications for our water and our community, as well as for future use and economic redevelopment of the site. The hours and hours of time such grassroots outreach takes demonstrates the depth of concern that exists in our community about the proposed plan. We are not done. We plan to come back to you over the next month with another 1000 names and then another and another. This is so important to residents of the Flathead as they begin to understand what is at stake if a comprehensive cleanup of CFAF is not fairly analyzed and implemented. While gathering these signatures, a common refrain from our fellow residents was their overwhelming frustration that they had not been kept better informed ' These individuals signed a petition that states "To: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the MT Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)— I signed this petition to respectfully request that your agencies pause the decision -making process to fully and fairly evaluate the cost -benefits of removing not leaving) the toxic waste at the CFAC Superfund site. No cost analysis was done by CFAC when they wrote the cleanup plan. CFAC simply dismissed this option as too costly, even though they acknowledged it would likely be a permanent and effective solution. We ask the EPA and DEQ to require an independent cost analysis be done to evaluate the permanence and long-term effectiveness of off -site removal. This is necessary to ensure the cleanup truly protects our water, our health, our community, and our economy. CFAC and ARCO, and early on Anaconda Co., made many millions of dollars operating this aluminum smelter from 1955-2009 and provided good jobs. But the citizens of the Flathead watershed shouldn't be left with their toxic mess. The site must be fully cleaned up and restored for future beneficial uses. " about opportunities for public input and that more town halls and public information sessions were not consistently held to engage and inform the public in a genuine and meaningful way. Having been asked so many times why there was not more extensive public outreach, we recently went to the EPA web site to try to find a list of community public information sessions and townhall style meetings where the public might have missed opportunities. What we found was an aspirational Community Involvement Plan (CIP) at a broken link that was written in 2017. When we finally got to read this plan, once one of us brought the broken link to EPA's attention, it did not list any such broad -based public meetings that really reached out and tried to engage the larger community. It did reference the CFAC Community Liaison Panel, which consisted of CFAC hand-picked community representatives only, and was run, we are told by members selected, by a public relations firm out of Denver, Colorado that CFAC hired. We can find no record of public notice of the meetings, certainly not the kind of informational, questions and answer, townhall style meetings that we heard over and over again from those who signed the petition they had wanted to see. One of us then emailed to Missy Haniewicz with EPA and asked for a list of the public out -reach meetings that EPA has held since 2017. Her email response did not provide any. Instead, she wrote, "...As far as a report on the community engagement efforts outlined in the CIP, there isn't anything formal. The CIP is meant to be guidance for community engagement efforts, which are described in the Record of Decision. Once the ROD is released, the Agency conducts additional community interviews to help inform an update to the CIP. The original was written in 2017 so it would make sense to do this update now, as is the practice." We hope we are not the only ones who sees the gross irony in updating a community engagement report after the most important decision in the entire Superfund process is made and the public's ability to meaningfully inform that plan is over. To say that the we, and the public we have been interacting with, are frustrated would be an understatement. To say that we are even more frustrated than when we last wrote you on January 18, 2024 (we have not received any response to that letter) would also be an understatement. In that letter we formally requested that the EPA order a time-out to the proposed issuing of a Final Record of Decision on the CFAC Superfund Site scheduled for an estimated time frame in March of 2024. We requested in that letter that EPA and Montana DEQ not go forward with a Record of Decision based on its proposed waste -in -place plan outlined in the 2021 Feasibility Study and the 2023 proposed cleanup plan for the Columbia Falls Superfund site. (Please see that 1/18/24 letter attached again for the details we raised.) Additionally, to help address the public's frustration, the Coalition For A Clean CFAC is applying for the EPA's Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) program to better help us and community members have additional opportunities to gain the information needed to meaningfully participate in decision making and to help the community as a whole better understand what is at stake at the Columbia Falls Aluminum Plant Superfund site. There are many technical issues at this site that are hard for people to understand. The grant will help provide money for a technical advisor to meet with community members to explain site reports, discuss how the site contaminants affect the soil and water, and to evaluate any health issues related to the site. Once again, we urge you to hold off on a final decision until a complete feasibility study evaluating the actual costs and benefits for removal of the highly toxic waste, as well as other missing data and costs for other clean-up activities discussed in our original letter. Residents and businesses of Columbia Falls and the Flathead want and deserve this information before any proposed cleanup plan can receive community acceptance. Furthermore, we believe this missing information is essential to crafting a future vision for the redevelopment of this site that is good for the community, the economy, the environment, and for future generations. Without this information the public and EPA cannot really know if the proposed solution would meet the EPA's goals for solutions that offer long term effectiveness and permanence, as well as community acceptance. In closing, we want to offer to drive to Helena to meet with you soon so we can deliver these petitions directly and share what we hear from our community outreach about the desire for a hard pause in the decision -making process prior to issuing a final Record of Decision. One of us will follow up directly with you soon to try to arrange a meeting. We appreciate the important work you do to create a clean and healthful environment, and recognize that you have many demanding issues you must deal with. We look forward to meeting with you and working together to ensure the cleanup of the former Columbia Falls Aluminum plant site leads to a healthier and more prosperous future for our community and the environment. Sincerely, Mayre Flowers, Shirley Folkwein, Phil Matson, and Peter Metcalf on behalf of the Coalition for a Clean CFAC, PO Box 2198, Kalispell, MT 59903 Mayre Flowers, Mayre@Flatheadcitizens.ore, 406-755-4521, Flathead County Resident Shirley Folkwein, upperflatheadna@gmail.com , 406-890-1659, Columbia Falls Resident Phil Matson, flbsphil@email.com, 406-249-2529, Columbia Falls Resident Peter Metcalf, peterwmetcalf@hotmail.com, 406-531-5098, Columbia Falls Resident Nicole Bond, Columbia Falls Resident Becca Wheeler, Columbia Falls Resident Jim and Heather Peacock, Columbia Falls Residents Larry D. Williams, Columbia Falls Resident Rebecca R. (Becky) Williams, Columbia Falls Resident Attached: Cc • The Clean CFAC Coalition's letter of January 18, 2024 • City of Columbia Falls City Council letters to EPA and DEQ in opposition to a waste -in -place solution,4/6/2015 and 3/25/2022. • Senator Jon Tester's 5/3/2022 Letter to EPA Administrator, Michael Regan • KC Becker, Regional Administrator for EPA's Region 8 • Matthew Dorrington, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. EPA Region 8 • Columbia Falls City Council, Mayor Don Barnhart, • Whitefish City Council, Mayor John Mulfield, • Kalispell City Council, Mayor Mark Johnson • Flathead County Commissioners: Brad Abell, Randy Brodehl, and Pam Holmquist • US Senator Jon Tester, c/o Erik Nylund, Regional Director Butte, and Chad Cambell, Regional Director, Kalispell • US Senator Steve Daines, c/o Katie Devlin, Natural Resource Liaison • Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Council, Tom McDonald, Chair • The Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes: Richard Janssen, Head of CSKT Natural Resources Dept • The Montana Natural Resource Damage Program: Doug Martin and Katherine Hausrath • Montana DEQ Project Manager, Richard Sloan • Flathead City -County Health Department: Jennifer Rankosky • Flathead Lake Biological Station, UM, James Elser, Director and Tom Bansak, Associate Director • Western Montana Conservation Commission, Casey Lewis, Executive Director • Flathead Conservation District, Pete Woll, Board Chair, and Samantha Tappenbeck, Resource Conservationist COALITION for a .. , CLEAN C FAC To: Carolina Balliew, Montana Remedial Section C Supervisor, Region 8, US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 10 West 15th Street, Helena, MT 59626 To: Christopher Dorrington, Director, Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) P.O. Box 200901, Helena MT 59620-0901 January 18, 2024 Dear Ms. Balliew and Mr. Dorrington, Citizens for a Better Flathead is a citizen -based advocacy organization representing more than 3000 residents of Flathead County. We, along with the Columbia Falls -based Upper Flathead Neighborhood Association representing some 200 residents in the Columbia Falls area, and a rapidly growing number of city and county residents throughout the Flathead including a number of former Columbia Falls Aluminum Company (CFAC) employees and other local organizations, have come together to form the Coalition for a Clean CFAC. Our mission is to secure the comprehensive cleanup of the Columbia Falls Aluminum Company (CFAC) Superfund site for the health, enjoyment, and economic benefit of the local community and the protection of the Flathead watershed. We are writing now to formally request that the EPA order a time-out to the proposed issuing of a Final Record of Decision on the CFAC Superfund Site scheduled for an estimated time frame in March of 2024. We Request that EPA and Montana DEQ not go forward with a Record of Decision based on its proposed waste -in -place plan outlined in the 2021 Feasibility Study and the 2023 proposed Cleanup plan for the Columbia Falls smelter site. While the public record will show that the option of off -site removal of highly toxic waste has all along been called for and supported by the local community and the Columbia Falls City Council, the Feasibility Study Report never seriously considered this as a viable option and instead it was deemed, and early on dismissed, as too expensive. An actual cost estimate was never produced. (See discussion of "Relative Cost' beginning on page 69 of the 2021 Feasibility Study Report and page 10 of the 2023 Proposed Plan for Cleanup Columbia Falls Aluminum Company Superfund Site.) We request that EPA and DEQ take a time-out to produce a focused feasibility study evaluating realistic costs for removal of acute and extremely hazardous wastes including the Spent Pot Liner and Wet Scrubber Pond Wastes to an offsite hazardous waste disposal facility. This will require investigation not previously completed during the remedial investigation, including waste volumes, amount of waste intermingling, and volumes of contaminated soils beneath the existing waste dumps. This focused feasibility study should include consideration of use of the existing rail lines at the CFAC site which were used for many years after 1990 to remove highly toxic Spent Pot Liners (SPL) and other hazardous waste. Not only does the CFAC smelter after 1990 have a history of successfully using the existing rail lines at CFAC to ship highly toxic waste like SPLs to a federally certified hazardous waste landfill out of state', other smelters in the northwest like the Alcoa Smelter in Vancouver, Washington have done so as well. Our reservation regarding the proposed action calling for leaving toxic waste in place at the CFAC site is validated and heighten by the recent conclusion of the Montana Natural Resource Damage Program, acting on behalf of Gov. Greg Gianforte, who was joined by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) as well as two federal natural resource trustees, the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture, to issue a notice of intent to perform a natural resource damage assessment at the CFAC site. Most telling is the conclusion of their detailed 34-page pre -assessment screen which states regarding the proposed CFAC cleanup plan that, "EPA has issued a proposed plan for a final cleanup in 2023; the preferred alternative, however, will not return the Site to baseline. Rehabilitation, restoration, or replacement of natural resources is required to reduce future injuries and compensate the public for interim losses of natural resources and the services they provide."2 These findings are one more reason we believe a time out is warranted to ensure more effective cleanup solutions are considered and adopted. Actual cost estimates and investigation of additional alternatives should be done as well on treatment of other potential remaining wastes at the site including their consolidation into a "high and dry" lined and capped landfill meeting state -of -art design and containment standards for toxic wastes. This and the removal of the most toxic wastes should be reviewed as a cost-effective alternative to the very expensive proposed slurry wall containment structure. The proposed use of a slurry wall at this site faces unique site -specific challenges of high ground water that fluctuates significantly during the year by as much as 25 feet and the inability of these proposed slurry walls to reach to the depth of a suitable impermeable layer needed to prevent ongoing contact between groundwater and the buried waste proposed currently to be left in place. Cost estimates and alternatives should also be reviewed for some low-level wastes not contaminated with cyanide and fluoride or other such highly toxic wastes, which could perhaps be sent to the Flathead County landfill, if justified, in limited quantities, as this is a lined facility that sits some 300 feet above groundwater. This requested time-out should also provide time to facilitate the missing consideration of an assessment of climate vulnerability for this superfund site including consideration of long-term impacts from flooding (climate change) and seismic activity. This assessment is now being done all around the country and for the Smurfit Mill site in Missoula. Another important reason and need for EPA and DEQ to take a time-out before issuing a final Record of Decision (ROD) is a missed step under the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative (SRI) process established in 1999 to help communities return Superfund sites to productive use3. As this directive sets forth, "Regions should review the Superfund Land Use Directive and ensure that reasonable future land use assumptions are incorporated into the development, evaluation and selection of response actions, where appropriate." CV 18-131-M-DWM, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, CFACLLC vs Atlantic Richfield, 8/25/21 2 Montana Begins Natural Resource Damage Assessment at CFAC Superfund Site, Flathead Beacon 1/16/2024 3 https•//www emgov/superfund-redevelopment/superfLmd-redevelopment-policy-guidance-and-resources and https://www.epa.gov/superfund-redevelopment/superfund-reuse-planning-support-technical-assistance For whatever reason or set of reasons, be it the disbandment of the G le nco re-created Community Liaison Panel once CFAC was designated as a superfund site in 2016, the time wait for site analysis that followed this, or the chaos of the covid years where no one wanted to gather, a stakeholder process has never been held to engage the community in imagining potential reuses and future development at the CFAC 900+ acre site. In our recent outreach in the community, this lack of a future vision for redevelopment is one that the community wants to see happen so that it can be considered prior to the final selection of cleanup and remedial processes. Indeed, the EPA has a program to facilitate such community visioning known as Regional Seeds. 'The purpose of Regional Seeds is to provide site teams with technical assistance to facilitate redevelopment, remove barriers to productive reuse, and ensure future use is well aligned with the cleanup and removal/remedial process." The 2023 proposed Cleanup plan for the Columbia Falls smelter site states on page 4 that "Local authorities have not adopted a future land use plan for the site." But the plan fails to call for or identify the benefits to the community of having such a plan in place. Instead, it simply repeatedly states that the recommended cleanup strategies in this plan are sound given the "current and reasonably expected future uses" of this CFAC site. But this is not the consensus of the public. As noted in a front-page story in the Hungry Horse News earlier this month referring to the over 750 pages of comment the EPA received in August on this proposal, "Community members were almost universally opposed to leaving the waste in place, slurry walls or not. "Leaving the waste in place next to the Flathead River is a recipe for disaster," one person commented." The proposed waste -in -place plan would indeed impose severe restrictions on future land uses at the site with the need for deed restrictions limiting available land uses near the waste dumps, a groundwater control area banning drinking water wells, and access control points such as fencing and warning signs; not the vision of a cleaned -up, economically revitalized property that the community so desires and deserves. A waste -in -place solution fails to provide the assurances the community deserves that there will not be on -going and worsening leaking of these toxic wastes to ground water and surface waters. as the waste plume grows and moves. Removal of the most contaminated wastes including spent pot liners and wet scrubber pond waste, and consolidation of less contaminated materials in lined and capped and high -and dry landfills on site will reduce the burdensome restrictions that leaving the waste in place would cause. This will allow a broader range of land uses benefitting the community in the future. The smelter produced aluminum, good jobs and taxes for about 54 years, yet the wastes from that process have remained on site limiting the available uses of the land for 15 years since the smelter closed. We do not support leaving the waste in place and restricting the use of this land in perpetuity, just to save some money on cleanup today. The community deserves better than this. We urge you to call for a time-out to provide Columbia Falls and Flathead residents and businesses a focused feasibility report evaluating realistic costs for removal of the highly toxic waste on site, as well as other missing data and costs for other clean-up activities discussed above. We believe this missing information is essential to be able to a craft future vision for the redevelopment of this site that is good for the community, the economy, the environment, and for future generations. Without this information the public and EPA cannot really know if the proposed solution would meet the EPA's goals for solutions that offer long term effectiveness and permanence, as well as community acceptance. Sincerely, Mayre Flowers, Shirley Folkwein Phil Matson, and Peter Metcalf on behalf of the Coalition for a Clean CFAC, PO Box 2198, Kalispell, MT 59903 Mayre Flowers, Mayre Flatheadcitizens.org, 406-755-4521, Flathead County Resident Shirley Folkwein, upperflatheadna@gmail.com , 406-890-1659, Columbia Falls Resident Phil Matson, flbsphil@email.com, 406-249-2529, Columbia Falls Resident Peter Metcalf, peterwmetcaif@hotmail.com, 406-531-5098, Columbia Falls Resident Nicole Bond, Columbia Falls Resident Becca Wheeler, Columbia Falls Resident Jim and Heather Peacock, Columbia Falls Residents Larry D. Williams, Columbia Falls Resident Rebecca R. (Becky) Williams, Columbia Falls Resident Attached: • City of Columbia Falls City Council letters to EPA and DEQ in opposition to a waste -in -place solution,4/6/2015 and 3/25/2022. • Senator Jon Tester's 5/3/2022 Letter to EPA Administrator, Michael Regan Cc • KC Becker, Regional Administrator for EPA's Region 8 • Matthew Dorrington, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. EPA Region 8 • Columbia Falls City Council, Mayor Don Barnhart • Whitefish City Council, Mayor John Mulfield • Kalispell City Council, Mayor Mark Johnson • Flathead County Commissioners: Brad Abell, Randy Brodehl, and Pam Holmquist • US Senator Jon Tester, c/o Eric Erik Nylund, Regional Director and Natural Resources Liaison Butte, and Chad Cambell, Regional Director, Kalispell • US Senator Steve Daines, c/o Bret Slaughter, Natural Resource Liaison • Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Council, Tom McDonald, Chair • The Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes: Richard Janssen, Head of CSKT Natural Resources Dept • The Montana Natural Resource Damage Program: Doug Martin and Katherine Hausrath • Montana DEQ Project Manager, Richard Sloan • Flathead City -County Health Department: Jennifer Rankosky • Flathead Lake Biological Station, UM, James Elser, Director and Tom Bansak, Associate Director • Western Montana Conservation Commission, Casey Lewis, Executive Director • Flathead Conservation District, Pete Woll, Board Chair, and Samantha Tappenbeck, Resource Conservationist 130 6TH STREET WEST ROOM A COLUMBIA FALLS, MT 59912 April 6, 2015 Docket Coordinator, Headquarters U.S. Environmental Protection Agency CERCLA Docket Office (Mail Code — 5350T) 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 RE: FDMS Docket ## EPA-HQ-SFUND-2015-0139 PHONE (406) 892-4391 FAX (406) 892-4413 RECI<IVED APR 14 2015 EPA DOCKET CENTER The Columbia Falls City Council supports the listing of the Columbia Falls Aluminum Company Plant (CFAC) on the National Priorities List. The Council recognizes the importance of the process, particularly the completion of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study. As the owner of the property elected to end negotiations with MT DEO, DEQ and EPA must ensure that remediation and cleanup will occur in a timely manner. The City Council, on be of the community, express their desire to see the site cleaned up, preventing the sftead of grouridwater contaminants. Providing clean, safe drinking Water is important to the Council and to that end, the City has made significant investments in providing safe drinking water to the citizens of Columbia,Falls. While the testing of the City's well have not revealed that the known contaminants from the CFAC site have made their way into the City's drinking Ginter supply as of now, the City would not like to see cleanup and remedial action delayed until the -City is faced with costly emergency measures to protect the City's water supply. Also important, is the redevelopment of the CFAC site to provide long-term, sustainable employment and development in the community. Please record the City Council's unanimous support of the listing of the CFAC site on the National Priorities List. Sincerely, ?r,. Councilman Julie Plevel, Counc' an 1ich id Petersen, C Gilman ael Shepard Councilman POSTMARKED APR 0.7 ZB'5 EPA DOCKET CENTER 130 6TH STREET WEST R0010 A COLUMBIA FALLS. KliT 59912 March 25, 2021 US EPA — Region 8 Attn. Ken Champagne 10 West 151" Street Helena, MT 59626 Sent Via Email: Champagne.l<enneth@epa.gov RE: Columbia Falls Aluminum Company Site Feasibility Study Dear Ken: PHONE (406) 892-4391 FAX (406) 892-4413 The Columbia Falls City Council would like to express concerns over the initial draft feasibility study for the cleanup of the former Columbia Falls Aluminum Company site which proposed leaving some hazardous materials on the property. The EPA and Glencore hosted a virtual meeting on February 11, 2021 whereby the draft plan was discussed. We understand that the EPA will prepare the draft plan for public comment later this spring but we wish to submit our comments at this time. The City Council, on behalf of the community, continues to express their desire to see the site cleaned up with the contaminants removed from the site and not covered up or left in place to prevent the spread of groundwater contaminants. Providing clean, safe drinking water is important to the Council and to that end, the City has made significant investments in providing safe drinking water to the citizens of Columbia Falls. While testing of the City's wells have not revealed that the known contaminants from the CFAC site have made their way into the City's drinking water supply as of now, the City would not like to see cleanup and remedial action delayed until the City is faced with costly emergency measures to protect the City's water supply. History has shown that contaminants can surface many years later. Respectfully, we do not want to have a repeat of the Opportunity/Anaconda site issues with groundwater contamination appearing years after "clean up." Leaving contaminants on site should not be an option. Please consider the City's paramount concern of providing safe, clean drinking water to our community while preparing the cleanup plan as well as the impacts in the residential areas just outside the City, such as Aluminum City. The ecological well-being of the Flathead River is of utmost significance to our community. Sinc ly, Donald W. arnhart, Mayor rl'�' /6�' Darin Fisher, Councilman John Piper, Councilman �-" 4:�, >15 Paula Robinson, Councilman Michael Shepard, Counci man JON TESTER MONIANA coMnlrlltFs. APPROPPIATIO14S BANKING„ I+ }}-^ }nay �.y� ^ }h COMMERCE ' ` l IHSJi liras LI fiLJi L{`� � INDIAN AFFAIRS VFTE RANS' AFFAIRS May 3, 2022 The Honorable Michael Regan Administrator Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Administrator Regan: Su.-TE RANT 8 Smw 311 WA'; INGTOn, DC 20510 202- 224 -2644 tester .agnate-g oviconwct I am writing to highlight growing concerns from communities in Montana about the EPA's use of waste -in -place remedies at Superfund sites, and the importance of outreach from EPA staff to communities navigating the Superfund process. EPA has a critical responsibility to ensure communities are well-informed so that they can provide meaningful input into cleanup decisions, and that remedies the agency supports are protective of human health and the environment. I am troubled by the EPA's reliance on waste -in -place remedies at multiple sites in Montana. Communities are rightfully skeptical about the risks posed by leaving toxic waste on site where it could migrate into groundwater or surface water. There are multiple waste -in -place remedies that are either already in place or under consideration that are mere feet away from rivers in Butte, Anaconda, Frenchtown, and Columbia Falls. In 2017, flooding at the Smurfit Stone site damaged the berm separating the site from the Clark Fork River, and also sent a plume of material into the river. Modeling from the Montana Bureau of Mines indicated that waste from tailings at the Butte -Silver Bow site would migrate much more quickly than EPA suggested, and present an imminent risk to groundwater and surface water. Despite EPA assurances about the extent and mobility of contamination, there has been subsequent testing by state entities raising serious questions about assumptions made during the investigation. At Columbia Falls, community leaders have told me that their repeated concerns about the risks a potential waste -in -place remedy poses to headwaters have seemingly fallen on deaf ears. At a minimum, this creates a public trust and confidence issue at other sites. Worse, a remedy that isn't effective poses a direct threat to human health and water quality. The EPA needs to do more to ensure that planned remediation actions are actually protective of the sites in question, and that the public is well-informed of the inherent risks associated with waste -in -place remedies. EPA should work with affected communities to ensure that controversial waste -in -place remedies receive significant additional scrutiny, either through direct analysis from EPA staff or in concert with hydrology experts from other agencies. Objective experts should clearly demonstrate to the public, based on real -world monitoring from the site and surrounding waters, that their proposed remedy keeps waste where it should be. Input from outside experts, especially those with additional monitoring data, should be welcomed, and responses to that input should be included in the EPA's analysis of the site and its outreach to the affected community. If an affected community calls for an alternative remedy, EPA should give serious consideration to developing an alternative cleanup solution and, if those BILLINGS BOZEMAN BUTTE MISSOULA GREAT FALLS HELENA KALISPELL (406) 252-0550 (406) 586-4450 1400 723-3277 (406) 728-3003 t4W 452-9585 1406) 449-5401 (406) 257-3360 alternatives aren't feasible, provide detailed explanations in public meetings and online why those remedies are not possible. In addition to bolstering its scientific analysis of waste -in -place remedies, EPA also needs to improve its outreach to affected communities. The public needs a clear understanding of the procedural and scientific steps involved with cleaning up a Superf ind site, and much earlier in the process than has occurred, so that their input can be considered in feasibility studies remediation investigations. I have spoken directly with many community leaders from across Montana who have attended EPA briefings on their site, and left without a clear understanding of what steps remained before remediation could begin, when and how the public could comment on proposed remedies, and how EPA was verifying that a proposed remedy was protective. In many cases, briefings that contain digestible information came long after critical steps were complete. When local elected officials, leaders of community groups, and business owners don't have this information in plain English, it is supremely difficult for them to effectively advocate for the remediation that actually works for the community during those critical early portions of the process. For community leaders to be better informed, the Community Involvement Coordinators for Montana's sites need to ensure public meetings are sufficiently noticed. Information presented at those meetings must be comprehensible to members of the public who are not subject matter experts, and local stakeholders need to be informed about the scientific justification for specific remedies well before milestones are reached. Montana communities also need to be informed about their options to secure direct financial support for technical assistance through EPA's Technical Assistance Grants and Technical Assistance Services for Communities. Online information needs to be presented clearly, informatively, and as objectively as possible. The website for Columbia Falls includes a misspelling in the first few sentences explaining the site, and links through to the potentially responsible party's non - government website to explain the Superfund process and remedial investigation. This does not inspire confidence that EPA is treating this site with a high attention to detail and providing objective information to the public. I encourage you to revisit your online presentation of information, and promptly schedule in -person public meetings within your ongoing COVID safety guidelines to more clearly explain proposed remedies and the Superfund cleanup process with Montana's Superfund communities. Thank you for your work to engage with Montana's Superfund communities, and to ensure remedy options are substantially protective of human health and the environment. EPA has an important role to play in our daily lives and has an opportunity to improve public perception across its programs. Sincerely, Jon Tester Flathead Comity Board Of Commissioners (406) 758-5503 Brad W. Abell Randy L. Brodehl Pamela J. Holmquist February 12, 2024 Missy Haniewicz U.S. EPA, Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1 129 Subj: Columbia Falls Aluminum Company Superfund Site The Flathead County Board of Commissioners is urging the EPA to postpone its final determination on the cleanup of the Columbia Falls Aluminum Superfund site until a comprehensive evaluation is conducted. This evaluation must thoroughly assess the potential impacts on the pristine waters of the Flathead River, Lakes, and the Columbia River headwaters that could result from the retention of a million cubic yards of hazardous waste on -site. Additionally, it should entail a thorough cost analysis comparing the removal of waste versus capping and lining in place, with a focus on the implications for the next century and beyond. Given the proximity of this project to the vibrant and expanding community of Columbia Falls, Montana, the EPA should also actively seek public input from residents regarding the potential impact on adjacent neighborhoods and the future growth prospects of Columbia Falls. Please include these comments in the Administrative Record for the Superfund Site. Sincerely, BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA Randy L. Brodehl, Chairman Not Available for Signature /P:am�da-V'Holm u' mber Jie Br '. Abell, Memb 800 South Main, Room 302 ** Kalispell, MT 59901 ** Fax (406) 758-5861