June 16, 2015

  • Print
  • Email
Regular Board Meeting

Libby Area Technical Assistance Group, Inc.      

P O Box 53; Libby, MT 59923

Regular Board Meeting Agenda: June 16, 2015

In attendance: LeRoy Thom, Mike Noble, Donna Martin, Tracy McNew, Karen Horton, Gordon Sullivan, Mike Geisey, Brad Black, Nick Raines and Steve Ackerlund by phone.

  1. 1)The meeting was called to order at 6:00PM
  2. 2)TA Report- Steve Ackerlund
    1. a)Steve discussed his review of the Risk Assessment. His comments are in the form of questions to EPA. He summarized his concerns as follows:
      1. i.Indoor Air Concentrations: The decision for no further clean-up is based on averages and there is about a 10 fold difference between the average and the highest numbers in the data. The risk is based on averages which leaves room for possible risk in homes with above average
      2. ii. Wood burning and handling of ash: EPA doesn’t have any regulatory authority about what people do in their homes. Asbestos concentrations in wood ash are much higher than in bark and it could be a continuing long term exposure for those who burn wood for heat in the winter.
      3. iii.Hiking and driving in OU4. Data indicates that some risk could be present from hiking and driving in forested areas surrounding Libby.
      4. iv.Yard soil ABS data: Steve feels that this data supports more clean-up due to potential for exposure.
      5. v.Long term monitoring: Additional monitoring could help ensure that the remedy remains effective. This could also include health monitoring.
      6. vi.IC cost estimates: Stated Institutional Control cost estimates are not representative of all of the programs that will be instituted; they are based on current costs. This means that there may not be enough money allocated for program operations.
      7. vii.IC effectiveness: There are questions about how this could be adjusted in the future if needed.
      8. viii.DEQ Criteria: They have points submitted to EPA that are worth reiterating.
      9. ix.Natural Background: EPA did respond to questions submitted about this topic last year. Steve feels that a geologist would be more appropriate to comment but that it may be worthwhile.
  3. b)Steve suggested that TAG have a session with EPA to go over the above concerns in a meeting.
  4. c)Steve stated that there needs to be public support in order for EPA to seriously consider these concerns.
    1. i.LeRoy asked if it would be a good idea to have congressional and county government representatives present at the July meeting. Steve stated that he feels that would be a good idea.
    2. 3)ARP Update- Nick Raines
      1. a)Nick stated that he is interested in having a meeting to present feedback and input received through the interview process.
      2. b)Approximately 30 interviews have been conducted to date regarding community feedback on proposed institutional controls.
      3. c)Gordon Sullivan suggested that incentives would be the best way to ensure success of an IC program. He plans to work with Nick and others to put together a steering committee and develop a specific plan which will be given to EPA/ DEQ.
      4. 4)Outstanding meeting minutes were not reviewed for approval as they were not available because the Grant Administrator was not present at the meeting.
      5. 5)Treasurer’s Report
        1. a)No bills have been paid and no reimbursements have been submitted since September 2014. The TAG grant application to renew the grant is incomplete. The final documents necessary to complete the application will be reviewed by the board at this meeting.
        2. 6)Sub-Committee Reports- none.
        3. 7)Special Reports- none.
        4. 8) Old Business
          1. a)The amended Policies and Procedures were reviewed and unanimously approved by the board.
          2. b)The work plan and budget were also reviewed and unanimously approved by the board.
  1. 9)Open Discussion
    1. a)The board discussed the Grant Administrator’s work and how she has not been paid yet. At this time we will request that she submit her monthly time sheets to date.
    2. 10)Action items from the meeting were reviewed and agreed upon as follows:
      1. a)Steve will submit his questions to commissioners and other governmental officials per the EPA distribution list to encourage participation in next month’s TAG meeting.
      2. b)Tracy will submit board approved grant documents to EPA to complete TAG grant application
      3. c)Nick will talk to EPA about getting the Ponderosa room for both meetings in July and getting public notices out.
      4. d)Steve will have his revised questions to TAG and ARP by June 26th.  
      5. e)Mike will request Susan’s time sheets to date.
      6. f)Nick will find out preferred dates for EPA and DEQ for July meetings and let the TAG board know this week.
      7. g)Tracy will ask Steve to attend the July meetings in person per board request.
      8. 11)No in kind hours were submitted at this meeting as forms were not available.
      9. 12)The next LATAG meeting will be on either July 15th or 16th. There will also be a meeting on the day prior for ARP to discuss community IC interview results.
      10. 13)The meeting was adjourned at 7:50pm.
More in this category: « July 16, 2015