最新杏吧原创

The truck owners didn鈥檛 have to pay to dump their loads; what they delivered was billed as clean fill dirt that the landfill operator could use to cover other refuse.

But it wasn鈥檛 clean fill.

The dirt came from Latty Avenue, which was used as a storage site for radioactive materials purchased from the federal government. The materials were owned by a Colorado company, Cotter Corp., which was looking to squeeze what value remained in wastes left behind from uranium processing that supplied the nation鈥檚 nuclear weapons buildup.

Except for what those dump trucks took to the landfill, Cotter shipped much of what was stored at Latty Avenue to its facilities in Colorado, according to official reports.

In the spring of 1974, Cotter representatives told the Atomic Energy Commission that the company decided to dispose of some of the radioactive material in 鈥溩钚滦影稍� County sanitary landfill area No. 1 on Old Bridge Road.鈥� The 8,700 tons of leached barium sulfate, which contained several tons of uranium, were mixed with dirt scooped right off the top of the Latty Avenue storage site, company representatives and documents told the AEC.

AEC records show the agency recommended citing Cotter for not following the 鈥渋ntent鈥� of its regulations because it had mixed the waste with soil.

But a few months later, in November 1974, Cotter requested and received Atomic Energy Commission approval to terminate its license for the radioactive material at Latty Avenue. At the end of the year, the AEC, which had faced years of criticism for being too cozy with industry, was dissolved and its duties handed to the new Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

This chain of events, pieced together from reports and documents from the AEC and NRC, is raising questions about the federal government鈥檚 knowledge of, and liability for, the long-contaminated West Lake Landfill.

It turns out there was no 鈥溩钚滦影稍� County sanitary landfill area No. 1.鈥� The barium sulfate, mixed with nearly 40,000 tons of soil from the contaminated Latty Avenue site, was dumped in West Lake Landfill.

But despite the nonexistent landfill, the company that retains Cotter Corp.鈥檚 liability said it did nothing illegal. The AEC knew Cotter鈥檚 contractor, B&K Construction Co., dumped material in a 最新杏吧原创 County landfill. Yet the government never cited Cotter, and it ultimately released it from its license.

鈥淭his whole thing was done under the watchful eye of the Atomic Energy Commission,鈥� said Craig Nesbit, a spokesman for Exelon Corp., the Chicago power company that retains Cotter鈥檚 liability for West Lake because its Commonwealth Edison utility used to own Cotter.

You cannot have a nuclear material license terminated if something is amiss, Nesbit said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 like trying to sell a house with a lien on it. You can鈥檛 do that.鈥�

Others say the U.S. Department of Energy, or DOE, which retains the AEC鈥檚 liability for the West Lake contamination, has been quiet for too long. Not enough people realize the federal government鈥檚 complicity, they say, in contaminating a landfill that is now surrounded by suburbs and frightened residents.

鈥淭o me, it鈥檚 very clear that this was a federal responsibility,鈥� said Kay Drey, a longtime opponent of nuclear waste who has followed the situation for decades. 鈥淯nfortunately, the Atomic Energy Commission and the NRC didn鈥檛 follow through and pay attention to what was at Latty Avenue and then dumped at West Lake Landfill.鈥�

鈥楩ULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE AEC鈥�

A review of AEC, NRC and DOE documents, spanning the early 1970s through the 1990s, shows that Cotter Corp. was never cited for the disposal of the material from Latty Avenue in West Lake.

An NRC inspection in 1977 confirmed that over 43,000 tons of barium sulfate waste mixed with soil from Latty Avenue was dumped at West Lake. Yet it said 鈥渘either site presents an immediate radiological health hazard to the public.鈥�

鈥淣o items of noncompliance were identified during this investigation,鈥� the NRC found in 1977.

However, a subsequent NRC investigation released in 1988 did say dumping the barium sulfate and soil from Latty Avenue in West Lake was 鈥渘ot authorized.鈥�

In 1989, the NRC released an investigation conducted by researchers from the University of Missouri-Columbia.

鈥淚t is not known what levels of contamination were already in the soil before the barium sulfate residues were mixed into it,鈥� the report authors wrote. 鈥淒isposal in the West Lake Landfill was unauthorized and contrary to the disposal location indicated in the (NRC鈥檚) records.鈥�

Exelon鈥檚 Nesbit acknowledged the NRC called Cotter鈥檚 actions 鈥渦nauthorized.鈥�

鈥淏ut that鈥檚 10 years after the fact, and everything that was done was done with the full knowledge of the AEC,鈥� Nesbit said. 鈥淪o I don鈥檛 know with what validity an agency can come back later and say that wasn鈥檛 the right thing to do.鈥�

鈥楳ORE AT STAKE鈥�

Public concern about the West Lake Landfill contamination has exploded in recent years after an underground fire was discovered in the adjacent Bridgeton Landfill. Many worry if the underground smoldering spreads to West Lake, it could spread radiation offsite.

Republic Services, the nation鈥檚 No. 2 waste hauler and owner of the landfill, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which is overseeing its cleanup, say the fire is not moving toward West Lake. The EPA promises a cleanup plan around the end of 2016, and it said any disagreement over liability among responsible parties won鈥檛 affect its timeline. It also doesn鈥檛 matter if contaminating West Lake wasn鈥檛 technically illegal.

鈥淏ottom line: It wasn鈥檛 the right move for the community, so something has to be done now and that鈥檚 what we鈥檙e focused on,鈥� said EPA Region 7 spokesman Curtis Carey.

Meanwhile, Exelon has begun suggesting that there could be something more than the Latty Avenue material contaminating the landfill, material that isn鈥檛 connected to Cotter and B&K鈥檚 involvement back in the 1970s. That could put more blame on the parties it will split the cleanup tab with: the DOE and Republic Services. Exelon is pursuing additional testing to try and prove it.

Nesbit said new testing requested by Exelon is trying to determine whether 鈥渞adiological material went into that landfill that is not part of the current discussion.鈥�

鈥淣obody really knows the answer to that, and that鈥檚 what the current boring testing is trying to determine,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a lot of stuff that went into that landfill.鈥�

That is adding to suspicion that more material is in the landfill than what Cotter dumped from Latty Avenue, said Doug Clemens, who chairs the community advisory group overseeing the EPA cleanup.

鈥淭he concern in the community and the concern in the research we鈥檝e been turning up is that there are possibly other contaminants dropped in the West Lake Landfill鈥� beyond barium sulfate and soil from Latty Avenue, he said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 this idea that DOE has more at stake in this landfill than just the stuff from Latty Avenue, which Exelon keeps hinting at.鈥�

FEDERAL LIABILITY

Exelon, one of the nation鈥檚 biggest utility companies with annual revenue exceeding $27 billion, has long been quiet on the West Lake situation. It鈥檚 only become more vocal this summer after it says Cotter discovered new documents suggesting material could be in the landfill in locations that haven鈥檛 been 鈥渁dequately tested.鈥�

The DOE has been even quieter. Many question why West Lake hasn鈥檛 been added to a special cleanup program for waste generated by the early nuclear weapons program, as other sites in the 最新杏吧原创 area have.

The cleanup program, called the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, or FUSRAP, was first run by the DOE until the corps took it over in the 1990s.

The DOE says West Lake did not meet the criteria for the program, now run by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. To be eligible, the program requires the site to be involved in Manhattan Project or early Atomic Energy Commission activities. The region鈥檚 Congressional delegation has said they believe the DOE did not include West Lake in FUSRAP because the material was owned by a private company and not under the direct control of the department.

In 1990, a DOE agreement with EPA laying out the framework for cleaning up radioactive contamination near Lambert-最新杏吧原创 International Airport under FUSRAP specifically excluded West Lake Landfill.

Clemens thinks the DOE has done all it could to keep West Lake under EPA jurisdiction rather than the corps. But the federal government should be responsible for cleaning it up, he said.

鈥淭his was permitted by the federal government and created by the federal government under a weapons program,鈥� Clemens said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 their waste they鈥檙e responsible for it.鈥�

Before being named as a potentially responsible party by the EPA, the DOE maintained it wasn鈥檛 liable for the West Lake contamination, according to several internal memos.

Asked whether it still maintains that it鈥檚 not liable, a DOE spokesman did not answer directly. Via email, the department responded that it signed an agreement with EPA in 1993 鈥渦nder which it committed, along with other parties, to pay for the costs of a remedial investigation and feasibility study to be conducted under the direction of EPA.鈥�

A 1993 DOE memo recommended signing the EPA agreement, but it maintained that the department 鈥渞emains firm in its position that it is not admitting liability for the West Lake Landfill contamination.鈥� The memo also says that signing the EPA agreement 鈥渋s not an admission of liability nor a commitment to do anything more than conduct the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility study.鈥�

Asked what share the federal government should shoulder for the West Lake contamination, the DOE said it will 鈥渂egin discussing with other potentially responsible parties an appropriate share of the cleanup costs鈥� after EPA proposes a cleanup plan. The department referred the Post-Dispatch to the NRC when asked whether B&K, Cotter鈥檚 contractor, had engaged in 鈥渋llegal鈥� dumping in West Lake.

In a 1992 memo, the DOE argued it had no 鈥渓iability or responsibility鈥� for West Lake, calling the dumping 鈥渁 license violation鈥� that 鈥渨ould not have been authorized if licensing approval had been sought.鈥�

Based on his research, Clemens said he suspects the federal government didn鈥檛 know Cotter was dumping in West Lake while it was going on.

鈥淏ut they certainly had knowledge after it happened, and the NRC decided not to fine them, not to do anything about it,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t does strike me as a huge mystery as to why DOE doesn鈥檛 just step up and do the right thing.鈥�