Message
From:
Sent: To: Subject:
Kelly, Albert [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=08576E43795149E5A3F9669726DD044C-KELLY, ALBE] 10/9/2017 4:00:22 PM rich.gold@hklaw.com Re: PH baseline sampling - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW
Ok will be there when we 1and
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 9, 2017, at 10:45 AM, "rich.gold@hklaw.com" < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com> wr ot e: >
> Might be easier here as I presume EPA closed today? > > Rich Gold | Hoi 1and & Knight > Practice Group Leader > Public Policy & Regulation Group
> Hoi 1and & Kni ght LLP > 800 17th Street N._W..J._._Suite_._110p_._]^ Washington, DC 20006
> T 2 0 2 . 4 5 7 . 7 1 4 3 | i Personal Phone / Ex. 6 i
> rich, gol d@hkl aw. com"^T'www.'fi'KTaw'rcom
> _____________________________________________
> Add to address book | View professional biography > > >
>
>
------- Origi nal Message-----
> From: Kelly, Albert [mai1t o :kelly.albert@epa.gov]
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 10:53 AM
> T o : G o ld, Ri chard (WAS - X77143) <ri c h .gol d@hkl aw.com> > Subject: R e : PH baseli ne sampli ng - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW
>
> 5 works provi ded my piane gets out of Dal 1as on ti me whi ch it should. Your pi ace or mi ne whatever convenient for you
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
On Oct 9, 2017, at 9:51 AM, "ri c h .gold@hklaw.com" < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com> wr ot e:
Let us know if 5 today works and where best
Ri ch Gold | Hoi 1and & Knight Practi ce Group Leader
Public Poli cy & Regulati on Group Hoi 1and & Knight LLP 800 17th street_.N_, W.l.J._.S_uite_._1100 | Washi ngton, DC 20006 T 202.457.7143 Personal Phone / Ex. 6 ri c h .gol d@hklaw.com | www.hklaw.com
Add to address book | Vi ew professi onal bi ography
-----Ori gi nal Message---- From: Kelly, Albert [mai1t o :kelly.albert@epa.gov] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 10:34 AM T o : G o ld, Ri chard (WAS - X77143) < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com>
Subject: R e : PH baseline sampling - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW I 1and at 4. We can do in person thi s evening or in the morning. Or otherwise as works for y o u . Getting ready to take off for Dal 1as
Sent from my iPad > On Oct 9, 2017, at 9:32 AM, "ri c h .gold@hklaw.com" < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com> wr ot e: >
> I'm around. Whatever best for y o u . Name a ti me and I'll coordi nate
> with Peter > > Ri ch Gol d | Hoi 1and & Kni ght
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00116746-00001
> Practice Group Leader > Public Pol icy & Regul ati on Group
> Hoi 1and & Knight LLP > 800 17th Street..N_.W....J...S.uj.te.._1100 | Washington, DC 20006 T > 202.457.7143 \personal Phone/Ex. 6 iri ch .gol d@hkl aw. com | www. hkl aw. com
> _______________________ i----------------------------------------------- i______________________________
> Add to address book | View professional biography > > > > > -----Origi nal Message-----
> From: Kelly, Albert [mai 1t o :kel l y .albert@epa.gov] > Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 10:31 AM > T o : G o l d , Ri chard (WAS - X77143) < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com>
> Subject: R e : PH baseli ne sampli ng - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW > > I am headed back to D.C. Avai1able for a cal 1. Perhaps we could meet > this afternoon or in the morning >
> Sent from my iPad > > > On Oct 7, 2017, at 10:53 AM, " ri c h .gold@hklaw.com" < ri c h .gold@hklaw.com> wr ot e: >>
> > Interesti ngly you were not copi ed on emai1s markup of the work pi a n . > > It removes any possibi 1ity that the data will impact the remedy > > selected by the ROD and is inconsi stent not only with what you have > > been sayi ng but al so what Mi chel1e has made cl ear several ti m e s . > > The Pre-RD group will have to decide what to do on the EPA proposal
> > on its cal 1 Tuesday at 5. We should catch up before then. Peter is > > in town for WH infrastructure mtg Tuesday starti ng Monday am fy i. > > I 'm avai1able al1 weekend. Thi s is purely Sean and Cami. We are two > > weeks out from 1osi ng the opportunity to get in the water this y e a r .
>> >> >> >> >>
>>
Ri ch
Ri ch Gold | Hoi 1and & Knight Practice Group Leader Public Pol icy & Regul ati on Group 800 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1100<x-apple-data-detectors://0/l>
Washi ngton , D .C<x-appl e-data-det.ec.tai;s.j.Z^Q/.l>.,...20.0D.6..T.___________
2 0 2 .457.7i43<tel:2 0 2 .457.7143> i
Personal Phone / Ex. 6
Ri ch .Gol d@hkl aw. comcmai 1t o :Ri ch 7 G o n w n R l w : r6m> 'l'l0HKlPFK'-------
>>
> > Begin forwarded message:
>>
> > From: "Peter Saba" <psaba@schn.com<mai1t o :psaba@schn.c o m
> > T o : "Gold, Ri chard (WAS - X77143)"
> > <ri c h .gold@hklaw. comcmai 1t o :ri c h .gold@hklaw .c om , "Schweitzer, > > Howard" cHSchweitzerOcozen.comcmai1t o :HSchweitzer@cozen.c o m > > Subject: FW: PH baseline sampling - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW >> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL / JOINT DEFENSE COMMUNICATION / ATTORNEY
CLIENT WORK PRODUCT >> > > We did receive the EPA comments on the Work Pi an at 5 PM today. As per our concern, at first 1ook my vi ew is that they are goi ng to be very problemati c with the group. I am goi ng to forward my emai1 to
the group that I sent to try to put these comments in context, keep the group calm and suggest a path forward. But even I am very skepti cal that we can bridge the fundamental difference in objecti ves between the Region 10 staff (implement the ROD as issued, obtai n base-1 ine data for 1ong-term moni tori ng of remedy effectiveness) and the Pre-RD Group (obtai n data to support a more cost-effective remedy to the extent that the data warrants). This is the core issue, and I can see these comments being the final
straw that everyone says that we have been wasti ng our ti m e , that Regi on 10 staff remai n unchecked, and that even if we get agreement on getting the data, staff will come up with every reason they can not to uti1ize it to modi fy the remedy so we will have also wasted over $17 mi 11io n. >>
> > I am provi di ng the attachments with the EPA comments not because I expect you to go through them in any detai1, but just so you have a f1av or. Data that will be col 1ected by this effort will be much better and more current than the data EPA used to come up with thei r RO D, but based on these comments such data cannot be used for anythi ng beyond setti ng the baseli ne for 1ong-term moni tori n g . Here are some excerpts:
>> > > Intro, Page 1 [A Good Start] >>
>>
Commented [A10]: EPA's objecti ves di ffer from many of those identi fi ed by the Pre-RD Group
in thi s work pi a n . Some of Pre-RD objectives are not ROD requi red or consi stent with EPA's objecti ves and
pianned evaluations. >>
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00116746-00002
>>
Commented [All]: Technology assignments can be evaluated during design phase but not with
1imi ted data to be col 1ected under the PDI.
>>
> > Data Use Objecti v e s , p p . 4-5 >>
>>
Commented [A14]: EPA's objecti ves di ffer from many of those identi fi ed by the Pre-RD Group
in thi s work pi a n . Some of Pre-RD objectives are not ROD requi red or consi stent with E P A's objectives and
pianned evaluations.
>>
>>
Commented [A15]: Technology assignments can be evaluated during design phase but not with
1imi ted data to be col 1ected under the PDI.
>>
>>
Commented [A16]: [Refini ng the Food Web Model] Achieving this goal is not the intent of
the PDI. Concentrations that were esti mated usi ng the FWM should not be recalculated.
>>
>>
Commented [A17]: [Human Health Risks; Background Conditions] Not relevant for this phase
of sampli n g .
>>
> > Evaluati ng Background, p . 13 wi th same comment on p . 14
>>
>>
Commented [A19]: Evaluati on of background concentrati ons is beyond the scope of thi s phase
of work. Primary purpose for data col 1ection in Downtown and Upriver Reaches is for comparison to site
concentrati ons usi ng an equi valency analysi s .
>>
> > Can only evaluate natural recovery going forward from 2018 sampling;
> > evaluati on of any recovery si nee 2004 not vali d - p. 15
>>
>>
Commented [A21]: The pri mary purpose is to col 1ect an unbi ased baseli ne data set to enable
compari son to future unbi ased sedi ment sampli ng data col 1ected under 1ong-term moni tori ng to evaluate
natural recovery. A compari son of 2018 surface sedi ment data from reoccupi ed 2004 sample 1ocati ons wi th
previ ously col 1ected 2004 samples is stati sti cal 1y invalid because 108 of 428 surface sampl e 1ocati ons
are bi ased samples. A vali d stati sti cal approach for evaluati ng MNR for the Si te must be based on a
compari son of unbi ased surface sedi ment data (i.e ., 2018 baseli ne data and future sediment sampli ng data
col 1ected under 1ong-term moni tori ng) to evaluate natural recovery.
>>
>>
Commented [A22]: The work pi an and Table 8 states that the surface sediment data will be
used to evaluate natural recovery changes si nee 2004. Although a compari son of 2018 surface sediment data
reoccupyi ng 2004 sample 1ocati ons (bi ased data) wi th previ ousl y col 1ected 2004 samples may indi cate
natural recovery trends, it is stati sti cally invalid. A vali d stati sti cal approach for eval uati ng MNR for
the Si te must be based on a compari son of unbi ased surface sediment data (i.e ., 2018 baseli ne data and
future sedi ment sampli ng data col 1ected under 1ong-term moni tori ng) to evaluate natural recovery.
>>
>>
>>
> > Data Eval uati on Secti on 3.3, p . 28 - 29 [Speci fi cal 1y referenced in
> > the Agreement-In-Pri nci pi e]
>>
>>
Commented [A40]: Many of the work elements descri bed below represent revi si ti ng the RI/FS
and will result in si gni fi cant del ay in remedy implementati o n .
>>
>>
Commented [A41]: Many of the evaluati on statements in thi s secti on are beyond the scope of
thi s phase of work and not consi stent wi th or support the RO D's data needs or objecti v e s . Wi thout usi ng
the data quality objecti ve process to ful fill a speci fi c data need of the RO D's deci si on framework, the
outcomes of these evaluati ons will be anci11 ary to and not di rectly influence remedi al deci si on maki n g .
>>
>>
Commented [A42]: The ROD states that sedi ment data will be used to deli neate remedy areas;
not fi sh trends and "background 1oadi ng" .
>>
>>
Commented [A43]: RAL curves presented in the ROD should not be revi s e d.
>>
>>
Commented [A44]: The proposed pi an is not suffi ci ent for recalculati ng SWACs because not
al 1 of the 428 surface sediment samples are unbi ased.
>>
>>
Commented [A45]: Fi sh tracki ng results should not be used to refi ne the extent and
segmenti ng of the river. The pri mary objective for the fi sh acousti c tracki ng study is to establi sh the
home range of the speci es used in 1ong-term bi ologi cal moni tori ng to inform the degree to whi ch that
speci es can be associ ated wi th remedi al outcomes.
>>
>>
Commented [A46]: Pri mary purpose for upstream sedi ment sampli ng is to col 1ect samples over
ti me to develop "equi val ency"- determi ni ng incomi ng load or sedi ment quality that would di ctate what
cleanup wi th natural recovery could achieve. PDI will not obtai n suffi ci ent data to evaluate current
background concentrati ons.
>>
>>
Commented [A47]: Detai1ed sampli ng results obtai ned for remedi al design will be needed to
update active remedi al footpri n t s. The surface and subsurface sediment samples col 1ected duri ng the PDI
will not be suffi ci ent to defi ne SMAs-but can assi st in devel opi ng the SMA 1ocati ons to be further
defi ned through addi ti onal sampli ng as part of remedi al design.
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00116746-00003
>>
>>
Commented [A48]: These evaluations are not the intent of the PD I. Concentrations that were
estimated using the FWM should not be recalculated. Fish tissue data can be used to inform fish
advisories but not calculate fish consumption risks.
>>
>>
Commented [A49]: The primary purposes for this AOC/SOW are to col 1ect data for Pre-RD SMA
delineation, which will assist with al1ocation and to col 1ect baseline data to establish existing site
condi tions for long-term moni tori n g . Notably, technology assignments wi thi n SMAs are based on other
informati on components (e.g. erosi on/deposi ti o n , si o p e , propel 1er wash) that are not enti rely informed by
Pre-RD SMA deli neati on and baseli ne sampli ng and more appropri ate for the design phase that is outsi de
thi s AOC/SOW.
>>
>>
From: Ebright, Stephanie [mai 1t o :EBRIGHT.STEPHANIE@EPA.GOV]
> > Sent: Friday, October 06, 2017 4:59 PM
> > T o : Peter Saba <psaba@schn.com<mai1t o :psaba@schn.com> > ; Loren R .
> > Dunn
> > (LDunnObdlaw.com<mai1t o :LDunn@bdlaw.com>)
> > <LDunn@bdlaw.com<mai1t o :LDunn@bdlaw.com> > ; greg.christianson
> > (greg.christiansonOmorganlewis.com<mai1t o :greg.chri stiansonOmorganl e
>> w
>> i
> > s .com>)
> > <greg.christianson@morganlewis.com<mai1t o :g r eg.christiansonOmorganle
>> w
>> i
> > s .c o m ; Karen TRAEGER
> > (karen.traeger@external.total.com<mai1t o :karen.traeger@external.total.
> > com>)
> > <karen.traeger@external.total.comcmai1t o :karen.traeger@external.total.
> > com>>; 3 .W. Ri ng
> > (JWRing@ringbenderlaw.com<mai1t o :JWRing@ringbenderlaw.com>)
> > <JWRi ng@ri ngbenderl aw. com<mai 1t o :JWRi ng@ri ngbenderl aw. c o m ;
> > Chri sti ne L . Hei n
> > (CHein@ringbenderlaw.com<mai1t o :CHein@ringbenderlaw.com>)
> > <CHei n@ri ngbenderl aw. com<mai 1t o :CHei n@ri ngbenderl aw.com;
> > ri chard .george
> > (richard.georgeOpgn.com<mai1t o :richard.george@pgn.com>)
> > <ri chard.georgeOpgn .com<mai 1t o :ri chard.george@pgn.c o m
> > Cc: Sheldrake, Sean
> > <sheldrake.seanOepa.govcmai1t o :sheldrake.seanOepa.gov>>;
> > Grandi netti , Cami
> > <Grandi netti .Cami @ e p a .gov<mai 1t o :Grandi netti .Cami@epa.gov;
> > Opal sk i, Dan <Opalski.Dan@epa.gov<mai1t o :Opal sk i.Dan@epa.gov> > ;
> > Pi rzadeh, Mi chel 1e
> > <Pirzadeh.Michel1e@epa.gov<mai1t o :Pirzadeh.Michel1e@epa.gov> > ;
> > Bi 1brey, Sheryl
> > <Bi1brey.Sheryl@epa.gov<mai1t o :Bi1brey.Sheryl@epa.gov> > ; Cora, Lori
> > <Cora. Lori@epa.govcmai 1t o :C o ra.Lori@epa. g o v ; Ingemansen , Dean
> > <Ingemansen.Dean@epa.gov<mai1t o :Ingemansen.Dean@epa.g o v ; Mackey,
> > Cyndy <Mackey.Cyndy@epa.gov<mai1t o :Mackey.Cyndy@epa.g o v ; Nearhood,
> > Jennifer
> > <Nearhood.Jennifer@epa.gov<mai1t o :Nearhood.Jennifer@epa.gov
> > Subject: PH baseli ne sampli ng - EPA comments on draft WP and SOW
>>
SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION
>>
> > Hi al 1 ,
>>
> > Pi ease see attached comments from EPA on the Pre-RD Group's draft Work Pi an as well as the SOW.
>>
> > Thanks,
> > Stephani e
>>
> > Stephanie Ebright, Assistant Regional Counsel U.S. Envi ronmental
> > Protecti on Agency, Regi on 10
> > 1200 Si xth Avenue, ORC-113
> > Seattl e , WA 98101
206.553.0774 (phone)
206.553.1762 (fax)
>>
>>
> > ______________________________
>>
> > NOTE: Thi s e-mai1 is from a 1aw firm, Hoi 1and & Knight LLP ("H&K") , and is intended sol ely for the
use of the indi vi dual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you beli eve you recei ved thi s e-mai1 in error,
pi ease noti fy the sender immedi atel y , del ete the e-mai1 from your computer and do not copy or di scl ose it
to anyone else. If you are not an exi sti ng cli ent of H&K, do not construe anythi ng in thi s e-mai1 to make
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00116746-00004
you a client unless it contai ns a speci fi c statement to that effect and do not di sci ose anythi ng to H&K in reply that you expect it to hoid in confi dence. If you properly received thi s e-mai1 as a cli e n t , co
counsel or retai ned expert of H&K, you should mai ntai n its contents in confi dence in order to preserve the attorney-cli ent or work product privi lege that may be avai 1able to protect confidentiality. > > <PHPRD_WP_sentEPA (092217)_EPA comments(100617).pdf> <PH-Pre-RD SOW-RLSO_10-6-17.docx>
Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA
Tiers 8&9
ED 002061 00116746-00005