US Steel/Spirit Lake Sediment Cleanup Update for River Corridor Coalition

Transcription

1 US Steel/Spirit Lake Sediment Cleanup Update for River Corridor Coalition Erin Endsley, Project Manager Mike Bares, Technical Analyst Minnesota Pollution Control Agency August 26, 2015

2 Outline Site history SLR AOC and GLLA Planned cleanup activities Sediment Feasibility Study Discussion of Alternatives Remedy selection process Project timelines/next steps Questions and discussion

3 US Steel Superfund Site

4 USS and St. Louis River AOC

5 Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) Provides funding for contaminated sediments legacy contamination Goal: Accelerate the pace of sediment remediation at Areas of Concern (AOCs) US Steel: estuary sediments eligible for Legacy Act funding as part of the SLR AOC Mechanism: Use partnerships as an innovative approach to conducting sediment remediation Opportunities for habitat restoration in conjunction with sediment remediation

6 Great Lakes Legacy Act Projects Completed or ongoing projects

7 Program Involvement Superfund site, listed on NPL in MPCA lead agency under deferral pilot project with EPA US Steel responsible party EPA-Great Lakes National Program Office administers Legacy Act program, voluntary program based on partnerships USS and GLNPO project agreement for contaminated sediments feasibility study and remedial design

8

9 USS Site Areas approximately 300 acres of impacted Estuary sediments 550 acres of land

10 USS Partnerships USS USS USS USS and EPA-GLNPO MPCA is overseeing all remedial work through Superfund, Voluntary and Petroleum Programs USS and DSPA

11 Upland Stream, Basin & Wetland Sediments Unnamed Creek Corridor & Delta Unnamed Pond Tar Pits Wire Mill Pond

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 St. Louis River Estuary Steel Creek Delta Sediments Wire Mill Delta

21

22

23 1861

24 1861

25

26

27

28 Remedial Cleanup Steps Remedial Investigation - Develop understanding of study area and determine magnitude and extent of contamination Feasibility Study - Develop alternatives for cleanup and evaluate the alternatives Proposed Plan - Document for the public that identifies MPCA s preferred cleanup plan Design - Engineering design and plans for the cleanup Construction - The physical work that is done to complete the cleanup Long-term Monitoring - The inspections and sampling that make sure the cleanup was successful and continues to be protective

29 Superfund Feasibility Study Goals and Considerations 1. The cleanup remedy will protect human health and the environment 2. FS must consider the estuary sediment remedial actions and Upland source control 3. FS must consider land ownership current and anticipated future use 4. Other considerations: Preserve upland for future economic redevelopment GLNPO involvement will provide habitat betterment Input from the resource managers (MNDNR, USFWS, Tribes, City of Duluth, USACE, SLRA)

30 Feasibility Study (FS) Completed July 2015; approx. 2-yr process 12 alternatives developed Stakeholder input incorporated into development of alternatives 5 advanced through more detailed analysis FS identifies USS and GLNPO s preferred alternative Alternative #8 Alternative #12 developed based on tribal input

31 Common Remedy Elements Consolidation of contamination on Upland units in confined disposal facilities (CDFs) Dredging, excavation and capping Natural cover and thin covers Unnamed Creek will be reengineered to control storm water Wire Mill Pond and surrounding dredge spoil piles will be completely removed creating 7-9 acres open water Habitat betterment considerations

32 Alt 4: CDF on OU-M Delta

33 Base

34 8 feet Cap Cap Reroute Steel Creek Outlet Total Removal Volume 354,000 yd 3 Total Capping Area 181 acres Net Change in Open Water +9 acres Estimated Project Cost $61,000,000 Alt. 4

35 Alt 6: Shallow Sheltered Bay w/delta & Upland CDFs 35

36 Base

37 Depth 3-6 feet 19 feet Cap Cap 6 feet CDF Total Removal Volume 648,000 yd 3 Total Capping Area 196 acres Net Change in Open Water +20 acres Estimated Project Cost $68,000,000 CDF 25 feet 37 Alt. 6

38 38 Alt 7: Shallow Sheltered Bay; Delta Cap Area; Upland CDFs

39 Base

40 Depth 3-6 feet 0-3 feet 20 feet 20 feet Total Removal Volume 616,000 yd 3 Total Capping Area 196 acres Net Change in Open Water +20 acres Estimated Project Cost $84,000, feet 40 Alt. 7

41 Alt 8: Shallow Sheltered Bay w/delta & Upland CDFs

42 Base

43 Depth 3-6 feet CDF 6 feet Cap CDF 9 feet Total Removal Volume 648,000 yd 3 Total Capping Area 196 acres Net Change in Open Water +20 acres Estimated Project Cost $66,000,000 CDF 25 feet Alt. 8

44 Alt 12: Open Water Bay w/ Upland CDFs

45 Base

46 Depth 1-2 feet Cap CDF 20 feet Total Removal Volume 716,000 yd 3 Total Capping Area 207 acres Net Change in Open Water +44 acres Estimated Project Cost $77,000,000 CDF 25 feet CDF 20 feet Alt. 12

47 SF Remedy Selection Criteria Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment Compliance with ARARs (applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement) Long Term Effectiveness and Permanence Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume Short Term Effectiveness Implementability Cost Community Acceptance Support Agency Acceptance

48 Resource Manager Concerns Maximize removal of contaminated sediment Improve substrate for benthic communities Increase area and density of aquatic vegetation Increase area of off-channel deep water Improve habitat for fish, waterfowl, songbirds Maintain or increase recreational use Protection of cultural heritage

49 Conceptual Habitat Plan Lower St. Louis River Habitat Plan Project 2-7: Spirit Lake Desired habitat elements: Saturated islands Shallow and deep marsh Shallow, open water Mid-depth, open water Deep, open water Objective create back bay system with sheltered bays and shallow wetlands

50

51

52 City of Duluth Concerns Impacted property owner - City will negotiate with USS for compensation for impacts to their property USS will negotiate access agreement with City Limits on property use during construction Impact of CDF berm heights on use of Cityowned property Additional CDF limits land available for redevelopment Decision on post-cleanup land use

53 City Owned Property Significant Area of Future Land Use

54

55

56

57

58 Tribal Concerns Formal consultation with EPA under Section 106 requirements (NHPA) Stakeholder input from tribes used to develop Alternative #12 Disposal of contaminated sediment in the estuary considered a desecration of a sacred place Open water for wild rice restoration Similar habitat concerns as resource managers Legal ownership of Spirit Island Viewsheds being considered in SHPO review

59 Wild Rice Restoration Implementation Plan for the St. Louis River Estuary, acres of high potential area for wild rice restoration

60 GLNPO Concerns Timing/availability of funding Habitat betterment is a priority Priority to address contamination in AOC in a timely manner Legacy Act funding is a voluntary partnership based program; SF is an enforcement based program Habitat improvements - during remediation vs. post-remediation

61 Community Concerns How can we be informed and provide input? What will the impacts be to the neighborhood during construction? What will the area look like after the cleanup? Will there be increased access or recreational opportunities? How will we know conditions will continue to be safe after the cleanup?

62 Next Steps MPCA remedy selection Sept 2015 Proposed Plan Sept 2015 Public Comment Sept/Oct 2015 Public Meeting Oct Responsiveness Summary/Final Cleanup Plan USS/GLNPO Project Agreement Design/Permits: ongoing Construction: Summer ?

63 More Info For more information: Project Manager: Erin Endsley Phone: Site information: Sign up to be added to the list and/or the mailing list.

64 Questions?