07.23.2025
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District building in Midtown St. Louis, MO

‍

‍

Jay Hoskins and Sean Stone are employees of the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District, a regional utilities company that operates a landfill at the former shale quarry of the Missouri Portland Cement Co. across the street from Cementland.

‍

Danya:

Can you guys talk a little about yourselves and what your roles are at the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District (MSD)?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

My name is Jay Hoskins. I'm the Assistant Director of Engineering. Currently, I'm also the Assistant Director for Planning, which is the group of folks that looks at our projects and forecasts when they need to be built and how much they're going to cost. Previously, my role was the Assistant Director for Environmental Compliance. I made sure our operations comply with all of our regulations and permitting.

‍

Sean Stone:

My name is Sean Stone. I'm with our Public Affairs Division. I'm here to facilitate and link you guys up, as well as to listen in and get a better idea about your project. Really, Jay is the expert on what we've got going on.

‍

Danya:

Please feel free to chime in at any time, Sean. Jay, are you familiar with Cementland at all?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

I know what it is because of the Prospect Hill Landfill being its closest neighbor. I have driven by it several times. I'm not as familiar with its history, and I look forward to looking at your website. I will probably learn something that'll be interesting to me.

‍

Danya:

The Prospect Hill Landfill site used to be a shale quarry for the cement factory that later became Cementland. Can you talk about MSD’s current connection to Prospect Hill?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

MSD operates what's called a monofill in that former quarry. A monofill is when you dispose of only a single type of waste. The only thing that we take to that landfill is incineration ash from wastewater treatment. Our job is to make clean water out of wastewater, and when you do that, you have to collect the pollution. Then you have to do something with that pollution, so we incinerate it. That incineration process produces ash, and that ash has to be disposed of. We have been disposing of ash from our Bissell Treatment Plant and Lemay Treatment Plant  incineration facilities at the Prospect Hill Landfill since the 1980s.

‍

Danya:

Is MSD the sole operator of the Prospect Hill Landfill?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

We are the sole operators, and the only type of waste that goes in there is the ash MSD creates.

‍

Danya:

Can you talk about the pretreatment project that MSD is working on at that site?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

We are building a pretreatment facility that will remove per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, otherwise known as PFAS, from the rainwater that flows through the ash buried in that landfill into our collection system and then into the sewer system.

‍

Danya:

Does MSD have a lot of other landfill sites where you collect rainwater and channel it into the sewer system?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Only this one, Prospect Hill. It serves the entire region. Why would we do that? There are a couple of things going on. First, a little bit about PFAS. PFAS is a class of chemicals associated with emerging contaminants. There has been a lot of media about PFAS In the last 10 years, and a lot of science has been invested into what PFAS exposure is and what it does to people. Some PFAS chemicals have since been classified by the EPA as a hazardous substance. They have also developed drinking water maximum contaminant levels for some PFAS. As a result, those chemicals are on MSD's radar. We want to make sure that we're doing our part to address these chemicals in a responsible manner and remove them where we can.

Wastewater has all kinds of stuff in it, and our job is to remove all those things down to a level that makes it safe to discharge the water. PFAS is a very difficult pollutant to remove from wastewater. That's not unique to MSD; every wastewater treatment plant in the United States has that same issue. We monitor for PFAS in our discharges, and the levels are thankfully really low relative to benchmarks that we use. We don't believe that there is anything to be concerned about. But nonetheless, wherever we have an opportunity to remove PFAS from the collection system, we want to take that opportunity.

The EPA provided federal funding to municipal wastewater utilities like MSD to remove PFAS through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed under the Biden administration. Later on, a [federal funded] grant administered from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR) funded that work. So we had an opportunity to have the federal government pay 100% for something that we already wanted to do, which was to remove PFAS.

We looked at different water source areas where we could do that, and Prospect Hill became a really good candidate. Since the water there flows through that ash, it comes out with very few of the types of pollutants that make wastewater treatment removal so difficult. This relatively clean rainwater flowing through the ash is then collected in pipes. As it flows through the pipes, it picks up PFAS. That waste stream can be pretty reasonably treated before it is discharged in the sewer, allowing us to address a source in a fairly cost effective manner.

This pretreatment project that will remove a broad range of PFAS is currently under construction. The way it basically works is we collect the leachate, we pump it out of the leachate collection system under the landfill, and then it goes through a filter to remove as much of whatever particulates are there as possible. Then, it goes through a water softening process to remove as many ions in the leachate as possible—things like calcium and magnesium. Particulates and hardness can really mess up the last step, which is the granular activated carbon that actually removes the PFAS. Granular activated carbon is the same type of material as the carbon filter in your refrigerator at home. It's a well researched material for removing PFAS from water systems. The trick for us is to remove all the other pollution first, so that the granular activated carbon can work correctly and efficiently.

Once the project is built, that water will flow through the activated carbon and discharge into our sewer system with much lower levels of PFAS than it would've had before. The levels at Prospect Hill are not tremendously high as it is. They are not alarming by any stretch, but they were high enough that we could do some meaningful removal, so we took that opportunity.

‍

Danya:

Is the project still federally funded?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Yes. The funding is not at risk of being cut.

‍

Sean Stone:

I want to add that the PFAS are not being manufactured or used by us in the process. They all come from human shedding and other sources that are getting into the water stream and coming to us. So the presence of PFAS is not because of anything we've introduced to it; it's courtesy of the people of St. Louis. And that's what we're removing.

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Yeah, really good point. PFAS as a class of chemicals is ubiquitous, and the levels that we're measuring in our community are consistent with the broad nature of PFAS use and exposure that occurred in the '80s and '90s. PFAS was used in all kinds of common materials like Teflon tape plumbing, Gore-Tex, Scotchgard, any carpet. People were exposed to pizza boxes that were coated with PFAS, and they absorbed some of that material in their body. PFAS is known to be a bioaccumulative material. That means the pollution goes in your body and stays there for a long time. Over time, it will come out of your body, but it takes a very long period of time. That's what we think we're seeing in our system. As our general exposure to PFAS goes down because those chemicals are being phased out of production and use, we see the levels in our water decline over time as well.

‍

Danya:

Did you bring that up because people often ask you whether MSD is putting PFAS in the water?

‍

Sean Stone:

I haven't been asked that question. I just think it's an important distinction. This is a class of chemicals that can create a multitude of issues, and we're not creating the problem.

‍

Jay Hoskins:

I think it gives some context to why EPA provides these grants. EPA recognizes that municipal water systems are not the sources of PFAS. There are other parties responsible for providing this product that's detrimental to public health. And therefore, the EPA is trying to help.

‍

Danya:

What effect does rainwater collection at this one site have on the overall regional water system?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Very little effect. The average flow that we monitored there was about 35,000 gallons per day. For comparison, the treatment flow that we produce every day at the Bissell Point Plant is from 80 million gallons per day to as much as 350 million gallons per day. From a dilution standpoint, this is not at all a significant amount of water relative to what the district has to deal with on an average day.

So why does it matter? I think it matters for a couple of reasons. One reason is we need to lead on this. The nearby operating industries are required to treat their wastewater down to a level that's similar to municipal wastewater. We have a pretreatment program, where we go out and inspect industries to make sure they don't discharge any chemicals that would cause a problem with the treatment of our wastewater. If they do cause a problem, we make them stop. That way, everything coming into our treatment plant is basically domestic wastewater. We also expect other landfills in the St. Louis area to do their part to remove PFAS from their leachate, which MSD ultimately treats. So we want to show that not only do we talk the talk, but we walk the walk too.

The second reason is I really believe that it's incumbent on utilities to do what they can. The action levels coming out of the risk assessment being done on PFAS are really low. I'm not a risk assessor; I can't tell you if those numbers are right or wrong, but I do know how low four parts per trillion is. It's really low. So to the extent that we can remove parts per million levels of PFAS from our system in an efficient manner, we can help. We've got to do our part.

‍

Danya:

When did MSD begin operating the Prospect Hill Landfill?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

We started operating it in the 1980s. In order to operate a landfill, you have to have a permit from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. The permit that we have was first issued in December of 1984. I don't know when we actually started putting material in that system after that, but I would think it was pretty soon thereafter.

‍

Danya:

Has it always been used for the same sort of monofill?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Yep. I think early on, there might have been some permission from the DNR to dispose of construction debris in the landfill. I assume that may have had to do with the relationship between the landfill and the cement factory you just told me about. Maybe there was construction debris left over from that process, but I would be speculating. But it's not been something that MSD has ever done that I know of, because we needed that capacity for ash. We can take construction debris somewhere else.

‍

Danya:

I saw the Prospect Hill Landfill listed in an EPA registry of landfills containing asbestos from 1992. Do you know anything about that?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

No. Those kinds of databases are historically fraught with error. Sometimes the agencies have difficulty with classifying what landfills are actually used for. But Prospect Hill is what we call a special waste landfill, and it's the only special waste landfill in Missouri that operates like this. The reason it's special is because it's neither a household waste landfill nor a construction debris landfill, where you take shingles, concrete, and steel. Since it's special, the waste is very narrowly defined, and the permits dictate exactly what you can dispose of in the landfill.

‍

Danya:

So you're not concerned about any asbestos or other industrial contaminants there at this point?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

No.

‍

Danya:

Does air pollution from industry in the area, like all the trucks burning diesel at high rates, get into the Prospect Hill Landfill with the rainwater and enter the collection system?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

It really doesn't. Plus, our own trucking operations are very limited. At a municipal landfill, hundreds or thousands of trucks go in and out every day, and every day they have to cover the waste. At our landfill, a haul happens once a year on average, or even once every 18 months. We fill the ash once a year, and then we re-seed it and make sure it stays in the landfill. It takes a few days to complete the haul and the restoration, so we are there for about one week a year. It's not something that we have to be there for every day.

‍

Danya:

Does MSD work with both St. Louis City and County authorities there?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

You hit an interesting point, because the Prospect Hill Landfill is bifurcated by St. Louis County and St. Louis City. The eastern half of the landfill is within the City, and the western half is within Bellefontaine Neighbors in the County. So we have to work with both entities depending on what the issue is. For example, certain road access is controlled by St. Louis City, and other road access is controlled by Bellefontaine Neighbors. When we started this pre-treatment project, we needed to go through a conditional use change that St. Louis City had to approve, because the treatment process sits in the City, and not the County.

What's unique about us is that we are a political subdivision of the state constitution, and we overlay all of the governmental structure in St. Louis City and St. Louis County by charter. And our authority to operate that landfill is through that permit given to us by the state of Missouri. In the permitting process, the state gets input from those municipalities, but the state is ultimately in charge. At the same time, we really do try to coordinate and communicate with stakeholders in the area.

‍

Sean Stone:

Our service area is all of the City and about 90% of the County, basically everything east of Highway 109.

‍

Danya:

Driving down Scranton Ave, I've seen folks mowing down grass on the MSD side of the street. Is that a City requirement?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Yeah, we cut the grass. I don't know if the City requires it. I would just say that's good practice. It's just being good neighbors.

‍

Danya:

Have you guys been in contact with Beelman Trucking, the current owners of the Cementland property?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

I saw that Beelman bought the property, but I personally have not had any contact with them.

‍

Danya:

A resident of the nearby Chain of Rocks area we interviewed was concerned about Beelman not mowing their side of Scranton Ave, though it seems they may have gotten better about that over time.

‍

Jay Hoskins:

The main issue that we have operating the Prospect Hill Landfill is people who dump trash on our property on Scranton. Since it's out of sight and a little bit hidden, people will just dump a truckload of garbage, and we have to go pick it up. So I can see how that would be really frustrating for people in that area.

‍

Danya:

Has consistently mowing your side of Scranton helped with this dumping issue?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

I think so. We have both mowing and fencing. I think both of those help, as well as just being present. While this new treatment facility isn't going to be manned 24/7, it will be checked on routinely. So in the future, we will have more people around, and hopefully that will help too.

We also keep our fill area mowed. But there is a fringe area around it that we allow to grow up. It provides a screening material. When we're doing our filling operation, we try to control dust, and having that fringe there helps ensure we are not filling all the way up to the edge where the dust could get away and get off site.

A fun fact about the ash is that waste in the water we treat has a lot of nutrient value. And when we incinerate that waste, the incineration process destroys organic material, carbon, but it doesn't destroy the mineral material, nitrogen and phosphorus. As a result, nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the ash are definitely good enough to grow grass. I've seen people try to grow different kinds of plants in the ash, and they've all been really successful. That ash is really nutrient rich. It's basically like a very fine sandy soil that has a lot of nutrients in it. I remember one time, somebody started growing tomatoes there. I don't know that I would eat those tomatoes. It's really cool, but it's still a waste product. We need to recognize what it is.

‍

Danya:

Do you think at any point in the future, maybe once the landfill is no longer active, that land could be reclaimed to support safe plant growth? Or are there contaminants in that land that will permanently keep it a waste zone?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

No, I don't think it will be reclaimable in the future. At least because the final closure plan for the landfill will involve a liner that goes over the top of the landfill to separate anyone from coming in contact with it. What's actually in the landfill will have no bearing on what the final use is. So could you use the ash once we cap the landfill and close it? No, it will just sit there.

But I also think that the waste material we dispose of there is fairly innocuous. We routinely see lots of different types of wildlife on the property. It grows vegetation really quickly. It's very close to the Mississippi River, so you routinely see waterfowl and other types of birds on the site. Generally speaking, our employees are pro environment and they like seeing that. We are operating in a way that's responsible and matches our views on what we want to see in the world.

‍

Danya:

MSD uses the moniker “MSD Project Clear.” When did you start using this moniker, and what does it mean?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Project Clear was the moniker, like you said, that we initially developed to talk about our activities associated with the 2012 federal consent decree to remove wastewater overflows and reduce combined sewer flows. There was a lot of concern about people's sewer bills going up from $30 a month at the time to somewhere in the $60 a month range. And they are going to go up a little bit more to address all the things we have to do. The Project Clear moniker was an attempt to explain to people what we were doing and what the benefit was.

When we talk about investing billions of dollars in new capital projects, all the maintenance activities, and the effort we are putting in to remove stormwater from the wastewater and combined sewer systems, we need a way to tell people very clearly that it's associated with Project Clear. And Project Clear is about removing pollution from St. Louis streams and improving water quality. Instead of explaining that we are building rain gardens and this and that, we can say, "This is part of our Project Clear activity."

What happened over time is really interesting. Because of the work we've been doing since the consent decree, our customers are getting better service than they've ever received. We respond to overflows faster, we clean stuff up faster, and we have fewer basement backups than we've ever had despite the extreme weather and climate change that's occurring. Meanwhile, we branded all our trucks “MSD Project Clear,” so people began to associate Project Clear with those improvements. Project Clear became not something that people worried about changing their rates, but instead something they associated with making their life better. We decided to take a clue from that and change our name from just MSD to MSD Project Clear.

‍

Sean Stone:

It's synonymous with everything we do. It was originally associated with these major improvement projects, but it also defines our rigorous and large scale maintenance program. We have about 356,000 manholes and inlets across our service area. We have almost 10,000 miles of pipe. We set goals for how many of these we're going to inspect each year and how quickly we're going to respond to issues. All these goals came under Project Clear, so we just adopted that identity for everything we do.

‍

Danya:

Was water quality in St. Louis more concerning relative to the national average at the time of the consent decree, and where does water quality in St. Louis stand now?

‍

Jay Hoskins:

The water quality in our area has dramatically improved since we started the consent decree in 2012. We have many examples of substantial improvement, especially with E. coli contamination. The work we've done is a major success story. That being said, the water quality in St. Louis didn't initially drive Project Clear. Not that there weren't water quality issues that needed to be addressed, but it wasn't like the regulators were saying, "Your water quality here is so much worse than everywhere else. You need to get your situation under control." The reason that we entered into Project Clear was that during the Clinton administration, the EPA had an initiative to control combined sewer overflows and eliminate sanitary sewer overflows as a policy. That was something they were going to focus on doing as an enforcement matter.

Oftentimes, we think of enforcement as a bad thing. Nobody likes to be pulled over by a cop. It gives you a queasy feeling in your stomach when you're pulled over for speeding. In our context, it's a little bit different. There was never a disagreement between the EPA, DNR, and MSD about what we needed to do. We knew we needed to remove sanitary sewer overflows to comply with laws and policies that have been longstanding for the last 20 years. What there was a negotiation about was how long we as a community should have to make those changes and improvements. That has to do with rates, what people can afford to pay so that the community can continue to thrive economically and the lowest income individuals in our community can afford to pay their bills.

‍

Sean Stone:

Like Jay said, it's always been a question of how quickly the work was going to get done. The work that MSD has been doing to reduce overflows in the environment goes back far earlier than 2012, to 45-ish years ago. We were working on that for 30 years before the current agreement with the EPA and the Missouri Coalition for the Environment. What we have seen is an acceleration based on the schedule that was laid out in 2012. There are 200+ wastewater utilities across the country similar to us, and many of them have gone through the same process.

‍

Jay Hoskins:

Prior to 2012, the rates that we had reflected what the community was willing to pay for the improvements that MSD had made. After 2012, the rates had to go up substantially to meet the schedule. Nobody likes to go through an enforcement action, but it's not a bad thing to have an agreed upon schedule so people can predict what's going to happen. And that's what we have now.

‍