64
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
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
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
US Steel Superfund Site
USS and St. Louis River AOC
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
Completed or ongoing projects
Great Lakes Legacy Act Projects
Program Involvement • Superfund site, listed on NPL in 1983 • 1995 - 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
550 acres of land
approximately 300 acres of
impacted Estuary
sediments
USS Site Areas
USS and EPA-GLNPO
USS
USS
USS
USS and DSPA
MPCA is overseeing all remedial work through Superfund, Voluntary and Petroleum Programs
USS Partnerships
Upland Stream, Basin
& Wetland
Sediments
Unnamed Creek Corridor & Delta
Unnamed Pond
Wire Mill Pond
Tar Pits
St. Louis River Estuary
Sediments
Steel Creek Delta
Wire Mill Delta
1861
1861
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
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)
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
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
Alt 4: CDF on OU-M Delta
Base
Cap
Cap
Alt. 4
Total Removal Volume 354,000 yd3
Total Capping Area 181 acres
Net Change in Open Water +9 acres
Estimated Project Cost $61,000,000
8 feet
Reroute Steel Creek Outlet
35 Alt 6: Shallow Sheltered Bay
w/Delta & Upland CDFs
Base
37 Alt. 6
CDF
Cap
CDF
6 feet
25 feet
19 feet
Cap
Total Removal Volume 648,000 yd3
Total Capping Area 196 acres
Net Change in Open Water +20 acres
Estimated Project Cost $68,000,000
Depth 3-6 feet
38 Alt 7: Shallow Sheltered Bay; Delta Cap Area; Upland CDFs
Base
40 Alt. 7
Total Removal Volume 616,000 yd3
Total Capping Area 196 acres
Net Change in Open Water +20 acres
Estimated Project Cost $84,000,000
20 feet
20 feet
25 feet
0-3 feet
Depth 3-6 feet
Alt 8: Shallow Sheltered Bay w/Delta & Upland CDFs
Base
Cap
CDF
CDF
CDF
Alt. 8
Total Removal Volume 648,000 yd3
Total Capping Area 196 acres
Net Change in Open Water +20 acres
Estimated Project Cost $66,000,000
9 feet
25 feet
6 feet Depth
3-6 feet
Alt 12: Open Water Bay w/ Upland CDFs
Base
CDF
CDF
CDF
Cap
Alt. 12
20 feet
20 feet
25 feet
Total Removal Volume 716,000 yd3
Total Capping Area 207 acres
Net Change in Open Water +44 acres
Estimated Project Cost $77,000,000
Depth 1-2 feet
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
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
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
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 City-
owned property • Additional CDF limits land available for
redevelopment • Decision on post-cleanup land use
City Owned Property
Significant Area of Future Land Use
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
169 acres of high potential area for wild rice restoration
Wild Rice Restoration Implementation Plan for the St. Louis River Estuary, 2012
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
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?
Next Steps • MPCA remedy selection Sept 2015 • Proposed Plan Sept 2015
• Public Comment Sept/Oct 2015 • Public Meeting Oct 1 2015
• Responsiveness Summary/Final Cleanup Plan • USS/GLNPO Project Agreement • Design/Permits: ongoing • Construction: Summer 2016-2018?
More Info For more information: • Project Manager: Erin Endsley • Email: [email protected] • Phone: 218-302-6619 • Site information:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/mvri83b • Sign up to be added to the email list
and/or the mailing list.
