ARCSV t.000002 Remedial Activities at Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites in Region V

United States Environmental Protection Agency

REVISED COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN

G&H Industrial Landfill Site Shelby Township,

WA l2-5L70.0/Contract No. 68-W8-0040

June 30, 1989

221019 O&iHIlL. REVISED COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN

G&H Industrial Landfill Site Shelby Township, Michigan

WA 12-5L70.0/Contract No. 68-W8-0040

June 30, 1989

GLT863/041.50 CONTENTS

Page

1 Introduction 1-1 2 Site Description 2-1 Location and Site Features 2-1 General Site History 2-1

3 Community Background 3-1 Community Profile 3-1 History of Community Involvement 3-1 Community Issues and Concerns 3-2

4 Goals of the Community Relations Program 4-1 Maintain Frequent Contact with Key Individuals 4-1 Provide Information Before Fieldwork Begins 4-1 Produce Regular Project Updates 4-1 Establish EPA as the Key Source of Information 4-1

5 Proposed Community Relations Program 5-1 Community Relations/Technical Consultations 5-1 Informal Contact Program 5-1 Citizen's Information Committee 5-2 Fact Sheets 5-2 Availability Sessions and Public Meetings 5-2 Technical Support 5-2 ROD Support 5-3 Project Schedule 5-3

Appendix A. Community Contact List

Follows TABLES Page

1 Proposed Schedule 5-3

GLT863/022.50 Section 1 INTRODUCTION

This document is a Community Relations Plan for the G&H Landfill site in Shelby Township, Michigan. It is a revision of an earlier plan prepared in 1983. Current issues of concern to the community and local officials and ways to address those issues are outlined. The U.S. EPA is responsible for site investigations, remedial measures, and cost recovery for the G&H Landfill site under the authority of the federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). This plan serves as a guide for responding to the community during EPA's Superfund involvement. It also serves as a qualitative report on the perceptions and expectations held by the community. The suggested actions may change as perceptions and expectations change or are re-interpreted; the plan will be revised as necessary to reflect these changes.

The scope of this plan applies to Phase III of the Remedial Investigation (RI) and the Feasibility Study (FS), which will span a period of about 20 months. It details specific activities the U.S. EPA will perform to disseminate information to the community and to encourage public involvement. Information in the plan is based primarily on discussions with local government officials and residents in January 1989. Additional information was obtained through discussions with representatives of the EPA and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR).

GLT863/014.50

1-1 Section 2 SITE DESCRIPTION

LOCATION AND SITE FEATURES The G&H Landfill site is located in Macomb County, Michigan, about 30 miles north of . It is north of the Clinton River about halfway between Utica to the southeast and Rochester to the northwest (Figure 1). The 100-acre site (Figure 2) encompasses three distinct waste disposal areas: o The original disposal area between 23 Mile Road and the Conrail railroad tracks

o The Phase 2 disposal area south of the railroad tracks o The Phase 3 disposal area at the west end of the site The east end of the site contains an auto disposal area. A commercial and industrial area is located outside the site boundary just south of the auto disposal area. One residential area is located across from the site on the east side of Ryan Road; another is on the north side of 23 Mile Road. The residential area to the east consists of homes that are generally more than 10 years old, whereas the Spring Lake residential area to the north has been partially developed within the last 5 years and continues to grow. The Clinton River is located just west of the site, and the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area lies south of the site.

GENERAL SITE HISTORY The G&H Landfill was operated as an industrial waste disposal site from the mid-1950s to 1967. Millions of gallons of industrial waste liquids, oils, solvents, and process sludges were dumped in pits and lagoons on the site. In 1967, State agencies forced the landfill to stop accepting industrial wastes because of citizens' complaints and the possibility of contaminant migration from the site. The site continued to operate as a municipal landfill until it was closed in 1974. Both intentional and unintentional site trespass in the form of hiking, hunting, illegal dumping, and recreational use by motorcyclists and other vehicle users have been common the last several years.

SITE CONTAMINATION Evidence of contaminant migration is present along the western edge of the Phase 3 disposal area, where leachate seeps are visible, and just south of the railroad tracks (in the Recreation Area), where oil seeps are visible. The oil seeps are presumably related to a large oil source area located along the northern edge of the site. However, certain discontinuities found in early data

2-1 suggest the seeps, as well as a plume of contaminated groundwater. could be related to an as-yet unknown contaminant source area.

Results from Phases I and II of the RI indicated that site-related contamination is generally contained within an area consisting of the site itself and a portion of the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area (north of the Clinton-Kalamazoo Canal). These results are consistent with the north-to-south direction of regional groundwater flow. A preliminary risk assessment identified potential for direct contact with site contaminants as a key exposure risk.

SITE REMEDIATION HISTORY

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act passed by Congress in 1980 allocates funding to the EPA and provides the EPA with the authority to use the funds for cleanup of abandoned hazardous waste sites. The G&H Landfill site was placed on the National Priorities List in July 1982. In June 1983, the EPA allocated funds for and authorized implementation of the RI/FS.

The RI is being conducted in three phases. Phase I, conducted from June 1983 until August 1985, identified releases of contaminants from the landfill into the surrounding environment. Samples were taken of subsurface soil, sediment, surface water, landfill leachate, and groundwater. Phase II was conducted from December 1985 until April 1987 to locate and characterize source areas of contamination. This investigation included sampling of landfill gas and soil waste from test pits in oil ponds, solvent disposal areas, and industrial waste areas. Additional sampling similar to that done during Phase I was also performed.

Phase III of the RI will begin in April 1989. Additional data will be gathered to assist in quantifying the health risks associated with the site and to evaluate remedial alternatives. Phase III tasks will include sampling of air, landfill gas. and surface and subsurface soil. Groundwater monitoring wells will be installed, samples of sediment, surface water and leachate will be taken, and a geophysical survey will be performed to locate buried contaminant sources.

Interim remedial action at the site has included the erection of two fences to prevent direct contact with site contaminants. In July 1982, the EPA erected a fence around a contaminated pond to restrict public access and protect wildlife from direct contact with oily wastes. A trench was installed in conjunction with the fence to divert oily runoff water. The water was collected and skimmed by filtering it through charcoal and strawbeds.

To reduce trespassing and the potential for exposure, the EPA constructed another fence in 1988 to enclose all known areas of site-related contamination (see Figure 2). The chain-link fence, which has been an issue of considerable public concern, is 8 feet tall with barbed wire on top. Warning signs regarding the hazardous nature of the site are posted at regular intervals. Green chain- link material was used along segments next to Ryan Road and 23 Mile Road to improve the appearance of the fence.

2-2 STATUS OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS ACTIVITIES

Community relations efforts for the G&H Landfill Phase III RI and the FS have begun. A mailing list was assembled and a kickoff fact sheet was distributed in November 1988. Interviews were conducted in January 1989 with representatives from the Shelby Township Board of Trustees, the Macomb County Health Department, the Spring Lake Homeowners Association, the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area, the Clinton River Watershed Council, and the Shelby Citizens Against Hazardous Waste. A list of key contacts is provided in Appendix A.

A Citizen Information Committee has also been formed of local officials. EPA and MDNR staff, and members of citizens groups largely through the efforts of the MDNR. The purpose of the committee is to exchange information regularly during the RI/FS process. Its first meeting was held February 14.

GLT863/015.50

2-3 Section 3 COMMUNITY BACKGROUND

COMMUNITY PROFILE Shelby Township is a community of over 45.000 with a strong manufacturing and commercial economic base. From 1982 to 1988 the population increased over 13 percent, thereby necessitating a rapid increase in new housing development. Continued growth is expected because of the availability of land and the continued emphasis on development of the infrastructure. Road improvements and sewer and water system modifications are currently underway. Parks, a golf course, a convention center, and other facilities are in the planning stages.

The community is considered to be among the wealthiest in the state. Several "Fortune 500" companies located in the area establish a strong employment base for professionals and manufacturing and commercial positions. Employment growth is expected to continue especially in the service and educational service sectors.

HISTORY OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

Complaints from residents adjacent to the landfill site began as early as 1964 when residents along the Clinton-Kalamazoo Canal complained to the Macomb County Health Department about strong sewage odors. Complaints continued through 1965, when the Michigan Water Resource Commission conducted a field study. Contamination was found on the site, but none of the adjacent wells tested were found to be contaminated. The State of Michigan began negotiations with the site manager to ban the disposal of liquid waste. In October 1967, the Macomb County District Court issued a Consent Decree that prohibited future discharge of liquid industrial waste including muds and sludges. The G&H facility then continued operation as a sanitary landfill only. In August 1968, a citizen complained of oil seepage at the site. This was followed by numerous complaints from 1970 to 1972 about illegal filling of the Clinton-Kalamazoo Canal. In 1972, a local resident met with state personnel to pursue her concerns about site operation. She indicated that she had talked with numerous agencies about closure of the site.

The site was used as a municipal landfill until 1974 when it ceased operations. Once the site was closed, citizen interest declined. In 1980, oil seepage from the site was noted at the adjacent Rochester-Utica Recreation Area. Subsequent tests showed the presence of PCBs and other contaminants in the seeping materials.

The level of local concern increased again in 1982. The G&H site was the topic of discussion at meetings of the Macomb County Health, Education,

3-1 Environment and Welfare Committee, and local residents appeared at the April meeting of the Michigan Toxic Substances Control Commission to express their concerns. The Shelby Citizens Against Liquid Disposal, a group originally formed to encourage the closure of the nearby Liquid Disposal Incorporated (LDI) site, became involved with the G&H site in 1982. The group has since been renamed the Shelby Citizens Against Hazardous Waste. This group, local and state officials, and interested residents of neighboring communities formed a Citizen Information Committee that met every few months to monitor the progress of remedial activities at the LDI site and to keep the community up to date with accurate information. The committee ceased functioning in 1986. Public meetings were held in February 1987 and August 1988 to inform the community of the project status and give residents the opportunity to ask questions and make recommendations. The meeting in 1988 specifically addressed installation of the fence around the landfill site. Fact sheets and an information repository have also been used as community relations tools. Fact sheets discussing the site history, remedial investigation, preliminary findings, and future activities were distributed in December 1984, February 1987, and November 1988. Documents concerning the site RI/FS have been filed at the Shelby Township Library for review by anyone desiring more information.

COMMUNITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS Community interest and involvement have remained strong throughout the course of Superfund activities at the G&H Landfill site. Many individuals and interest groups have expressed opinions about the site. Their concerns, as recorded in January and February 1989, are presented below. The most common perception is that the sampling and study process has been too drawn out and that meaningful results have been slow in coming.

TECHNICAL ISSUES

There is much interest in the perceived disparity between the EPA's National Priorities List (NPL) ranking and the MDNR's ranking of the site with regard to its hazard level and relative importance. As a result of slightly different ranking systems, the MDNR has ranked the G&H Landfill site first, whereas the EPA has ranked it seventh in the state. The difference has not been of concern to the EPA or the MDNR because the agencies agree that the site needs attention and have allocated funding accordingly. Most community representatives are aware of the apparent contradiction, however, and have expressed concern about it. The public and the media feel that the difference indicates fundamental disagreements between the two agencies. Citizens also feel that more progress should be made at the state's "worst" hazardous waste site.

3-2 Another technical issue is the potential for offsite release of contaminants and subsequent exposure. Residents living near the site are unsure about the potential, and so different perspectives on the issue have formed. The Shelby Citizens Against Hazardous Waste, for example, are concerned that a major release could occur that would threaten the health and welfare of nearby residents, whereas some members of the Spring Lake Homeowners Association (who live just north of the site) have expressed somewhat less concern. All parties desire more information and would like the EPA to make firm state- ments about the potential for contaminant release.

There is also interest in cleanup actions and the timing of remedial alternatives. Community representatives want realistic schedules for remedial action. They are generally skeptical of schedule commitments and will remain so if project delays occur.

PUBLIC HEALTH

The possibility of groundwater contamination and associated health risks is a key concern of residents east of the landfill. They are interested in the possibility of connecting to city water and want to know who will bear the cost for such action. They are aware that sampling results have indicated trace amounts of organic contamination in several private wells and, although this contamination does not appear to be site-related, many believe it is and that they are at risk. Other residents do not consider the public health issue to be a major concern.

Representatives of the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area, the Clinton River Watershed Council, and the Spring Lake Neighborhood Association agreed that the fence built in 1988 has successfully prevented vehicular trespass, illegal dumping, and accidental site access. They generally concur with the reason for its construction, but they point out that, because of the quality of construction, it does little to prevent premeditated trespass.

NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES AND CONCERNS

The Spring Lake Homeowners Association is the most organized and active neighborhood organization in the area. Members of the association believe that the neighborhood image has been harmed simply because of its proximity to the site. They feel this is a result of media attention and past community relations efforts that did not adequately communicate the extent of contamination. Many residents have stated that their real estate investments are adversely affected by media attention, indicating situations where lenders had refused loans to potential buyers. Real estate brokers in the area feel an obligation to disclose information about the G&H Landfill, or risk professional liability. Residents of the Spring Lake residential area are also displeased with the manner in which the erection of the site fence was handled. They feel the fence is unattractive and poorly constructed and that the warning signs are too prominent. They are also unhappy with the EPA's failure to incorporate suggestions voiced in a public meeting regarding the fence. Several residents inquired about removal of unsightly debris, other beautification plans, and

3-3 possible future uses for the site. In general, they recognize that observable progress at the site will continue to be slow and want some positive, substantive action to show their concerns are being met.

GOVERNMENTAL ISSUES

Funding is of interest to most sectors within the community. Government representatives and private citizens alike have asked whether the EPA, MDNR, local government, potentially responsible parties, or some combination thereof will be responsible for various remedial costs. Since the EPA cannot allocate emergency response monies for short-term aesthetic improvements, several neighboring residents hope that funding for such work can be allocated from another source.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

The major environmental concerns expressed by the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area and the Clinton River Watershed Council are to protect and preserve water quality, wetlands, and animal habitats. These concerns address protection of the recreation area and the reopening of safe public access to potentially valuable natural and recreational resources.

AGENCY PERCEPTION

The EPA's image and credibility have suffered in this community. Members of the community are frustrated with delays and lack of positive action. Most citizens feel that further sampling and study are not necessary, even to settle design issues. Furthermore they perceive that the project has been inconsistently staffed and that there has been no unity between the community relations effort and the technical effort.

MEDIA ROLE

Some citizens perceive that certain media may have resorted to sensationalism in the past with regard to the site's hazardous nature and extent of contamination. Residents hope that the EPA will encourage the television and print media to deliver more accurate information regarding technical issues and to portray the remedial schedule as reasonable and realistic.

GLT863/008.50

3-4 Section 4 GOALS OF THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS PROGRAM

The key community perception to be addressed is that there has been little progress toward a long-term solution for the G&H Landfill site. The community relations effort must therefore, ensure residents that EPA, through its remedial work thus far, has developed an understanding of technical issues and is actively working on strategies for remedial action. The goals of the community relations program are summarized below.

MAINTAIN FREQUENT CONTACT WITH KEY INDIVIDUALS Government officials and representatives of various active community groups, including the Spring Lake Homeowners Association, the Shelby Citizens Against Hazardous Waste, the Clinton River Watershed Council, and the Rochester- Utica Recreation Area, should be updated regularly regarding the status of the site. The EPA should maintain contact with these representatives, even if there are no new developments, to acknowledge that it is both aware and concerned.

PROVIDE INFORMATION BEFORE FIELDWORK BEGINS A fact sheet should be circulated and a meeting should be held with the community before Phase III RI fieldwork begins. The importance of the Phase III fieldwork-to provide information necessary to proceed with remedial planning-must be stressed to the public.

PRODUCE REGULAR PROJECT UPDATES

Because of the complexity of site conditions, written updates should be prepared in the form of press releases, fact sheets, or letters to individuals each time a new phase of the project is completed or new technical information becomes available. This formal communication effort will help establish and maintain EPA's credibility.

ESTABLISH EPA AS THE KEY SOURCE OF INFORMATION The EPA remedial project manager and community relations coordinator will maintain visibility in the community through personal contact with concerned members of the public and media. The community must feel free to contact these representatives when seeking site-related information.

GLT863/024.50

4-1 Section 5 PROPOSED COMMUNITY RELATIONS PROGRAM

The following techniques and tasks are designed specifically to address the key issues and concerns of this project. The proposed community relations program addresses community issues and fosters two-way communication between the Agency and those interested in the G&H Landfill site.

COMMUNITY RELATIONS/TECHNICAL CONSULTATIONS Regular interaction between community relations staff and technical staff will be critical to the communication of information to the public. Issues that will be addressed jointly include: o Possible actions and funding methods to improve short- and long- term aesthetics o Public communication of a reasonably firm and technically consistent position regarding the extent of offsite contamination and the potential for exposure of neighboring residents to offsite contaminant releases o Development of project scheduling commitments, including probable time periods for remedial actions o Onsite working arrangements to avoid prominent display of project personnel in protective clothing (i.e., respirators and tyveks) o The need for responsible interaction between onsite project personnel and the public or local officials All of these issues may be addressed within the current project scope and budget. However, none can be addressed without frequent coordination between the community relations and technical staffs.

INFORMAL CONTACT PROGRAM Regular contact between the EPA and interested or concerned citizens can be maintained through a consistent and dependable communications network. The EPA has assigned a single staff member to act as the Community Relations Coordinator for the G&H Landfill site. The coordinator will respond to community concerns and consult with the project staff to provide timely responses. The coordinator's name, address, and telephone number will appear on fact sheets and all correspondence between the EPA and the community. The coordinator will also be the central contact for local media.

5-1 CITIZEN'S INFORMATION COMMITTEE A Citizen's Information Committee has been formed with representatives from local government, the Spring Lake Homeowner's Association, the Shelby Citizens Against Hazardous Waste, the Rochester-Utica Recreation Area, and interested citizens. The committee met with representatives of the EPA and the MDNR on February 14, and will meet every 3 months throughout the RI/FS process. The meetings will be held at the Shelby Town Hall and will be open to the public.

The primary goal of the committee is to keep citizens and the media accurately and objectively informed about site activities, results of site investigations, and technical recommendations. Both technical and community relations staff members representing the EPA and the MDNR will participate.

FACT SHEETS

The fact sheet issued in November 1988 discussed current and planned activities at the G&H Landfill site, results of investigations, and the Superfund program in general. A second fact sheet will be issued in March 1989 to announce the beginning of Phase III and upcoming work on the FS. Another fact sheet will announce the results of the RI, the alternatives being studied in the FS, and the forthcoming public comment period. The fourth fact sheet, to be issued after the EPA signs the Record of Decision (ROD), will present the recommended remedial action as well as responses to comments received regarding the FS.

AVAILABILITY SESSIONS AND PUBLIC MEETINGS

Three availability sessions, or informal public meetings, were scheduled over the balance of the RI/FS process. The first session on April 3, 1989, was attended by about 70 people, indicating strong interest in the site. The next session will be held in the fall to provide information about the risk assessment and other current project issues. The third session will be held in the spring of 1990 to discuss the results of Phase III sampling and the development of remedial alternatives. The availability sessions will be structured, including brief presentations and group question/answer portions, because of the expected large turnout.

A formal public meeting will be held in the fall or winter of 1990 to present the findings of the FS and the EPA's recommended remedial alternative. The meeting will be conducted using a formal "public hearing" format. Testimony received from interested parties will be recorded on a meeting transcript.

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

Technical support will be provided in the form of graphics and technical consultations. The purpose of technical support is to draw on additional

5-2 technical or community relations personnel as needed to assist the CRC with public meeting presentations or other responses to various public concerns during key phases of the project.

ROD SUPPORT ROD support combines community relations with other functions occurring during the public comment period and near the time the ROD is signed. These functions include:

o Release of the public comment FS report o Development of a proposed plan o Receipt of public comments o Development of a responsiveness summary

Community relations and technical staff will develop appropriate public information materials and responses to public comments. Activities will be scheduled and coordinated to ensure that the required public documents, newspaper advertisements, and public information materials are properly completed and distributed. Public comments and agency responses compiled at that time will be used as a basis for developing a final project fact sheet.

PROJECT SCHEDULE The proposed project schedule is presented in Table 1. It includes tasks related to both the RI and the FS as well as the community relations tasks discussed above.

GLT863/023.50

5-3 Appendix A CONTACT LIST

GLT863/042.50 Appendix A CONTACT LIST G&H Landfill Community Relations Plan

MACOMB COUNTY AND SHELBY TOWNSHIP PUBLIC OFFICIALS Joeseph Maguire Kirby Holmes Shelby Township Supervisor Shelby Township Treasurer 52700 Van Dyke Avenue 8430 Pamela Utica, MI 48087 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 731-5154 (313) 781-4941 or 731-5145 Gilbert Parker Joesph Strizic 4090 Morningview Macomb County Commissioner Utica, MI 48087 5453 Auburn Road (313) 731-5154 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 731-0570 David Jaye c/o Rolf Peterson Lido V. Bucci County Commissioner Macomb County Commissioner 52859 Luann Drive 47111 Quaker Court Utica, MI 48087 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 739-3690 Frank Colouzzi Alvin Kukuk Macomb County Commissioner Macomb Township Supervisor 45263 Hecker 19925 23 Mile Road Utica, MI 48087 Mt. Clemens, MI 48044

FEDERAL AND STATE PUBLIC OFFICIALS U.S. Senator Carl Levin U.S. Senator Donald Riegle Jr, 124 w. Michigan 109 W. Michigan Lansing, MI 48909 Lansing, MI 48909 U.S. Congressman William Broomfield 2306 Rayburn Blvd. Washington, D.C. 20515 Arthur J. Miller Jr. Gilbert J. Dinello State Senator, District 27 State Senator, District 26 129 Capitol Bldg.- 20 Capitol Building Lansing, MI 48909 Lansing, MI 48909 Doug Carl Ruby Nichols State Senator, District 9 State Senator, District 8 c/o Dave Robertson 330 Capitol Bldg. Capitol Building Room Lansing, MI 48909 Lansing, MI 48909

A-l U.S. EPA AND MICHIGAN DNR PROJECT OFFICIALS

Kevin Adler Georgette Nelms Remedial Project Manager Community Relations Coordinator U.S. EPA Region 5 U.S. EPA Region 5 230 South Dearborn Street 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312) 886-7078 (312) 886-1660 Brian Monroe Michigan DNR Knapps Center 300 South Washington Lansing 48933 (517) 373-6808

PRINT MEDIA

Editor Editor Utica/Shelby Twp Advisor News Mt. Clemens, Macomb Daily 45184 Case 67 Cass Avenue Utica, MI 48087 Mt. Clemens, MI 48043 Source News Editor 53430 Van Dyke Detroit Free Press Utica, MI 48087 55 Church Street Mt. Clemens, MI 48043

BROADCAST MEDIA News Director News Director WGPR-FM WAAM 2101 Gratiot 4230 Packard Road Detroit, MI 48207 Ann Arbor, MI 48017 News Director News Director WCAR WPAG 18900 James Couzens Hutzel Bldg. 3rd Floor Detroit, MI 48235 Ann Arbor, MI 48108 News Director News Director WCXI WCHB 18900 James Couzens 32790 Henry Ruff Road Detroit, MI 48235 Inkster, MI 48141 News Director News Director WRIF WWKR Radio 20777 W. Ten Mile Road 15001 Michigan Southfield, MI 48075 Dearborn, MI 48126 News Director News Director WJZZ WXYZ 2994 E. Grand Blvd. 20777 W. Ten Mile Road Detroit, MI 48202 Southfield, MI 48075

A-2 BROADCAST MEDIA Ccontinuedl

News Director News Director WHND WMUZ-FM One Radio Plaza 12300 Radio Place Detroit, MI 48220 Detroit, MI 48228 News Director News Director WQMC WJR 2201 Woodward Heights Fisher Building Ferndale, MI 48220 Detroit, MI 48202 News Director News Director WXIN-TV20 WEXL 29935 W. Eleven Mile Road 317 E. Eleven Mile Road Southfield, MI 48075 Royal Oak, MI 48070 News Director WKBD-TV 26995 W. Eleven Mile Road Southfield, MI 48075

SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (SEMCOG) Janis Dobrin Mitchelle Smith 8th Floor, Book Building 8th Floor, Book Building 1249 Washington Blvd. 1249 Washington Blvd. Detroit, MI 48226 Detroit, MI 48226 Pat Brunett 8th Floor, Book Building 1249 Washington Blvd. Detroit, MI 48226

G&H LANDFILL SITE CITIZEN INFORMATION COMMITTEE Joe Maguire Lorraine Schoenbeck Shelby Township Supervisor 50709 Parsons 52700 Van Dyke Utica, MI 48087 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 739-1398 (313) 731-5154 Doug Carl Gilbert Parker- State Senator, District 9 Shelby Township Trustee c/o Dave Robertson 4090 Morningview Capitol Building Room 20 Utica, MI 48087 Lansing, MI 48905 (313) 731-5154 (517) 373-7670

A-3 CITIZEN INFORMATION COMMITTEE (continued)

Mitchelle Smith and Pat Brunett Lido Bucci SEMCOG Macomb County Commissioner 8th Floor, Book Building 47111 Quaker Court 1249 Washington Blvd. Utica, MI 48087 Detroit, MI 48226 (313) 7393-690 (313) 739-1122 Representative David Jaye Mike Van Dyke, President c/o Rolf Peterson Spring Lake Homeowners Assoc. Roosevelt Building Room 436 51150 Sand Shores Lansing, MI 48909 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 524-4620 Chuck Ahlgren Frank Murphy Rochester-Utica Rec. Area c/o Steven Tackitt 47511 Woodall Road Macomb County Health Dept. Utica, MI 48087 43525 Elizabeth Road (313) 731-2110 Mount Clemens, MI 48043 (313) 469-5235 Claudia Kadlitz, President Larry Gefrerer SCAHW 51472 Forster Lane 8649 Speedway Utica, MI 48087 Utica, MI 48087 (313) 731-6524 Peggy Johnson Brian Monroe Clinton River Watershed Council Michigan DNR Knapps Center 8215 Hll Road 300 South Washington Utica, MI 48087 Lansing, MI 48933 (313) 739-1122 (517) 373-6808 Kevin Adler Georgette Nelms Remedial Project Manager Community Relations Coordinator U.S. EPA Region 5 U.S. EPA Region 5 230 South Dearborn Street 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, IL 60604 Chicago, IL 60604 (312) (312) 886-7078 (312) 886-1660

SITE INFORMATION REPOSITORY

Shelby Township Library 51680 Van Dyke Utica, MI 48087 (313) 731-5100 Contact: Judy Chambers

A-4