Environmental Assessment

Chippewa Valley Technical College Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center Addition 2320 Alpine Road Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Prepared for: Wisconsin Technical College System Board Chippewa Valley Technical College April 1, 2020

Environmental Assessment

Chippewa Valley Technical College Gateway Campus

Manufacturing Education Center Addition 2320 Alpine Road

Eau Claire, Wisconsin

j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Contents Page No.

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 Description of Proposed Action and Site Location ...................................................................... 1 Schedule of Proposed Action and Funding ................................................................................. 2 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................... 2 Description of Factors Affected in Human Environment .............................................................. 4 Primary and Secondary Environmental Effects ........................................................................... 4

Vegetation ............................................................................................................................. 4 Fish and Wildlife .................................................................................................................... 5 Threatened and Endangered Resources ............................................................................... 5 Surface Water, Wetlands and Storm Water ........................................................................... 5 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 6 Soils ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Air Pollutant and Visible Emissions ........................................................................................ 6 Utilities ................................................................................................................................... 7 Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................................. 7

Alternatives to Proposed Action .................................................................................................. 7 Alternative 1—CVTC Gateway Campus – MEC Building Expansion ...................................... 7 Alternative 2— No Action ........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

List of Agencies Notified ............................................................................................................. 8 Evaluation Section ...................................................................................................................... 8

Irreversible Environmental Effects ......................................................................................... 8 Stimulation of Secondary (Indirect) Effects ............................................................................ 8 Creation of New Environmental Effects .................................................................................. 9 Impacts on Geographically Scarce Environmental Features .................................................. 9 Precedent-Setting Nature of the Action .................................................................................. 9 Significant Controversy .......................................................................................................... 9 Conflicts with Official Agency Plans or Policy (Local, Regional, State, or National) ................ 9 Cumulative Impacts of Repeated Actions of this Type ........................................................... 9 Irrevocable Foreclosure of Future Options ........................................................................... 10 Public Comment Period ....................................................................................................... 10

Recommendation……………………………………………………………..………… …………….10 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 11

j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Regional Site Location Map Figure 2 - Campus Site Map Figure 3 - Site Concept Plan Figure 4 - Floor Plan Figure 5 - Surface Water and Wetlands Indicator Map

List of Appendices

Appendix A Proposed Project Site Photographs Appendix B Wisconsin Administrative Code TCS 12 Appendix C Preliminary Determination Letters Appendix D Public Notifications and Responses Appendix E Public Comment Notice

1 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Introduction The Chippewa Valley Technical College (CVTC), headquartered in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, proposes to construct an addition to the Manufacturing Education Center (MEC) on the Chippewa Valley Technical College Gateway Campus located at 2320 Alpine Road in Eau Claire, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) Board, based in Madison, Wisconsin, is responsible for issuing final approval to CVTC for this proposed action. This action requires a Type II Action Environmental Assessment (EA) that follows the Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter TCS 12 (Appendix B), Wisconsin Environmental Policy Act procedures. CVTC retained Ayres Associates, Eau Claire, Wisconsin, on October 19, 2010, to prepare the initial EA. The EA has been updated by CVTC on April 1, 2020. Following a public comment period, the WTCS Board will use the results of the EA to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for this project, or if the project can proceed without further environmental assessment.

Description of Proposed Action and Site Location The proposed addition to the Manufacturing Education Center (MEC) will be located at the CVTC Gateway Campus located on the west side of Eau Claire, Wisconsin. The campus is located in part of the Southwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ and the Southeast ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of Section 1, Township 27 North, Range 10 East; and part of the Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼ and the Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of section 12, Township17 North, Range 10 West in the City of Eau Claire, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin. Figure 1 is a Regional Site Location Map and Figure 2 is a Campus Site map. The CVTC Campus is an approximately 25.83 acre property located in the Gateway Northwest Industrial Park and is bounded to the south by Union Pacific Railroad, to the east by Prospect Drive and Alpine Road, to the west and northwest by Venture Drive, and to the north by vacant land. The campus is surrounded on all sides by light industrial zoned land.

The proposed project is an approximately 10,000 square foot building that will be constructed as an addition of the existing MEC building. A site plan is attached to indicate location of proposed project; see Figure 3. The proposed addition will be constructed south of the existing MEC building welding lab, and will include a multipurpose laboratory with welding and fabrication areas, interior areas for storage, and one overhead door. Dimensions of the indoor space will be approximately 90 feet by 110 feet. Final building dimensions are still under consideration. In general, the addition will be constructed to match the exterior features of the existing building. Roofing will be a fully adhered steel joist and deck structure with an EPDM membrane system, and will be constructed at approximately a 20-21 foot height. Flooring will be sealed; six-inch concrete slab and the interior will be unfinished, precast wall panels. Clerestory, aluminum framed windows that are thermally broken will be used to help with day lighting and the use of natural light. Doors will be hollow metal frames with wood or hollow metal doors. A rooftop HVAC system will be used. Instructional equipment will include 6 additional welding stations, 11 robotic welding stations, a laser cutter a simulation room and staff offices. A floor plan is included in Figure 4. Photographs of the proposed project site are located in Appendix A. Leadership in Environmental Design (LEED) silver equivalency will be used as a standard for design of this project. The building addition will occupy an area of approximately 0.24 acres. This area is currently the landscaped space around the existing MEC building footprint located on the south and east side of the building.

2 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Schedule of Proposed Action and Funding The proposed schedule fort his project is as follows:

Task Completion Date

WTCS Board Approval May 12, 2020

Design Development June 2020

Construction Drawings August 2020

Bid Opening October 2020

Notice of Award October 2020

Construction Start November 2020

Substantial Completion April 2021

This project is budgeted at $3 million. This cost does not include interior furnishings and equipment. The anticipated funding source will be a municipal bond sale upon successful approval of April 2020 referendum.

Purpose and Need The Manufacturing Education Center currently houses programs in Welding, Industrial Mechanics, Electromechanics, Machine Tool, Automation Engineering and Mechanical Design. The Applied Technology center is also located at this site and includes a number of manufacturing tenants and business partners. Chippewa Valley Technical College is requesting project approval to expand welding instructional capabilities through construction of an addition to the welding fabrication lab at the Manufacturing Education Center. This project will expand the Manufacturing Education Center’s existing welding facilities with a 10,000 square foot addition. The new space will allow for expansion of current welding program capabilities including robotic welding cells, laser cutting technology and associated metal fabrication equipment. Access to this equipment will allow for advanced program integration and hybrid manufacturing training, combining skill sets in welding, mechanical design and machine tool.

Robotic welding cells are required in order to remain current with technology used by business and industry in our region. Employers are requesting training in laser cutting and continuous welding technology. Current lab space is at capacity and programs need additional welding cells along with associated fabrication equipment. We also need classroom space for programming simulation and verification.

3 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

As a result of a curriculum review CVTC conducted with advisory members this fall the program will be modifying 21 of the 27 courses in the program. This process identified areas of development required to stay current with welding processes and technology in the region. Employers have discussed the value of developing certificates that would allow graduates of the one-year welding program to seek additional training in areas including robotic welding, pipe welding and CNC. Employers agreed that exposure to robotic welding is important. Focus should be on operations. Programming skills are not required for entry-level positions. The ability to incorporate simulation scenarios will be an important part of the lab expansion as well. We will be pursuing American Welding Society Program and Facility accreditation once this lab has been incorporated into our program, allowing CVTC to provide industry certifications in robotic welding along with other process based testing and certifications.

Current lab space is at capacity and programs need additional welding cells along with associated fabrication equipment. We also need classroom space for programming simulation and verification.

The current welding lab consists of twenty-four welding stations and four robotic welders. This expansion will add space for an additional six welding stations and seven-robotic welding stations for a total of 30 welding stations and eleven robotic stations. A welding simulation and testing center will provide the ability for the college to conduct AWS weld tests and certifications.

Additional program equipment will include robotic, dual head feed and TIG welders; FANUC education cells, laser cutter, robotic welding tending centers, robotic simulation center with computers, teach pendants and robotic welding software.

The Welding programs have experienced sustained growth over the past three years. In the 2018-19 school year, CVTC’s Welding Fabrication and Welding programs have grown by 47 students or 6.37 FTE’s in comparison to the 2015-16 school year. Additional capacity in robotics and fabrication equipment are projected to spur program growth and additional FTEs. Additional FTEs will come in the form of continuing education for incumbent workers and advanced technical certificates for alumni of our one-year welding program, requiring additional skills in welding fabrication and robotic welding.

The region has 207 job openings per year in the welding and welding fabrication areas. Current space only allows us to serve about 30 students at a time. Employers have expressed interest in the development of a robotic welding operator certificate or programming. This would be a new program opportunity for the college to support our businesses as they incorporate new technology into their manufacturing processes.

Welding programs have a placement rate from 86- 95 percent over the past three years.

4 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Description of Factors Affected in Human Environment The proposed project site is located on the CVTC Gateway Campus. This campus is part of the Gateway Northwest Industrial Park. As reported in a November 2001 Environmental Assessment (EA) for the CVTC Manufacturing and Technology Center expansion, aerial photographs indicate that historical land use was primarily agricultural from at least 1939 until 1995. In 1995, industrial properties began to develop in the area. The CVTC Gateway Campus was first developed in the late 1990’s and began with construction of the MEC in 1998. In 2006, the NanoRite Center for Innovation expansion was added to the CVTC Campus. A welding lab addition was constructed in August 2011.

Many of the aesthetic changes to the site that will be caused by the proposed action have already been anticipated, but are not expected to be significant since the project is an addition to an existing building. The closest residence is along County Trunk Highway (CTH) T, approximately 2,300 feet west-northwest of the proposed CVTC MEC Addition. It is not anticipated that permanent activities at the site will be heard or seen by residences in the area, but construction activities during development may be seen and heard in the short-term.

Currently, there are 280 regular and 7 handicap parking spaces available at the CVTC Gateway campus. Two handicap parking spaces will be lost due to this project. We will designate additional handicap stalls as required.

Primary and Secondary Environmental Effects

Vegetation

At the time of settlement, most of Eau Claire County was wooded. Species present included conifers (Pinus and Picea sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), maple (Acer sp.), and elm (Ulmus sp.). Based on soil type and position in the landscape, the project site was probably dominated by hardwoods and coniferous trees (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1974).

Undeveloped portions of the CVTC Gateway Campus on the north side of the former Prairie Lane are fallow agricultural land dominated by brome grass (Bromus inermis), quack grass (Agropyron repens), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), and golden rod (Solidago sp.). An undeveloped portion of the CVTC Gateway Campus property on the south side of the former Prairie Lane is also fallow land, but includes a former homestead where woody species are more prevalent. Dominant species include white pine (Pinus strobus), red pine (Pinus resinosa), jack pine (Pinus banksiana), sumac (Rhus typhina), box elder (Acer negundo), and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia).

The proposed addition will be constructed on the existing CVTC Gateway Campus. The proposed location of the addition is currently a combination of a landscaped area (turf grass) and sidewalk located south and east of the existing MEC building. The proposed site is adjacent to industrial developed land, and undeveloped areas planned for industrial development. Some of the undeveloped areas were agricultural land many years ago and are now grassland with sparse woody vegetation. The proposed MEC Addition will occupy approximately 0.24 acres of the existing CVTC Gateway Campus. Construction of the proposed addition will result in a loss of 4,812 square feet of existing green space. This green space is a landscaped area with turf located immediately adjacent to the current MEC building.

5 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Fish and Wildlife

The wildlife present in the area consists of passeriforms (perching birds), birds of prey, white tail deer (Odocoileus virginians), and small rodents.

No fishery resources are on, or immediately adjacent to, the proposed project site. The nearest fishery resource is the Chippewa River, located approximately 1.7 miles east of the proposed project site. The Chippewa River is a warm-water fishery consisting of several species of game fish and rough fish. The river is also used by some nesting birds.

There are no State or National Parks, National Game Preserves, Wilderness Areas, or wild or scenic rivers located on or in the vicinity of the proposed MEC Addition site.

Threatened and Endangered Resources

Tom Lovejoy, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), reviewed the Natural Heritage Inventory files for an EA completed by Ayres Associates in February 1998 for the existing CVTC Manufacturing and Technology Center. He searched for any listed threatened or endangered species, high value habitat, or sensitive resources near the site and found that there are no threatened, endangered, or sensitive resources in the area (Ayres Associates 1998).

Surface Water, Wetlands and Storm Water

According to the WDNR Surface Water Data Viewer website (http://dnrmaps.wisconsin.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=SurfaceWaterViewer.wetlands), the nearest surface water body to the proposed project site is an unnamed intermittent stream located approximately 600 feet due east. According to data available on the website, the proposed project site does not contain any wetlands or wetland indicator soils (see Figure 5).

The CVTC Gateway Campus is part of a planned development that has been designed to conform to the City of Eau Claire storm water management plans. The City's storm water management plans include the development of two storm water detention ponds to hold storm water runoff in the area of the Industrial Park. This storm water infiltrates the ground and is eventually discharged to the Chippewa River. At the project location, storm water runoff is collected through inlets located in a treatment swale adjacent and north of the proposed building footprint and in the parking lot, where it is then piped and discharged into a storm water detention pond located east of the project location across Prospect Drive. For this project, the storm water treatment swale located north of the proposed building footprint will be maintained. A portion of the storm sewer system that is currently located under the proposed footprint of the building will be relocated for the project; however, the overall system shall remain in tact with no additional inlets needed.

A constructed wetland, which serves as a regional storm water basin, is approximately 200 feet east of the existing Manufacturing and Technology Center and north of Prairie Lane. This wetland is an emergent wet meadow that has a small pond during storm events. Storm water from this constructed wetland flows directly south through a culvert under Prairie Lane to a natural wetland immediately south of Prairie Lane. This natural wetland is a forested wetland dominated by box elder (Acer negundo) and silver maple (Acer saccharinum).

6 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Another constructed wetland, which serves as a storm water basin, is west and adjacent to the property. This is an emergent wetland that has a small pond during storm events. The storm water from this wetland flows south to southeast through a culvert under the former Prairie Lane. This wetland is mainly fallow grassland.

During construction of the MEC Addition, best management practices will be followed to control erosion and minimize impacts to the wetlands in the vicinity of the project. Runoff from the project will drain to the existing storm water retention basin located east of the site, which serves as a local storm water basin.

The CVTC Gateway Campus does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. There are no shorelines, beaches, dunes, or estuaries on the site.

Topography

The topography of the campus in general is relatively flat with highs near the center of the property and sloping away to the east. A high ridge is present at the north edge of the campus. The current MEC building sits at an elevation of approximately 910 feet (NVGD) with a high spot on the ridge to the north at approximately 930 feet (NGVD). Portions of the project site will be minimally re-graded to accommodate parking changes and the proposed MEC Addition foundation.

Soils

Native soil on proposed building site is comprised of Meridian loam (MeB - 2 to 6% slopes). This gently sloping soil is typically found on stream terraces and outwash plains. Parent materials are loamy alluvium over sandy outwash. Runoff is at a medium rate, and the erosion hazard is slight to moderate. The soil has slight or moderate limitations for non-farm uses. Non-native fill materials are expected to be exposed during construction since the location of the proposed addition footprint is in a previously graded and constructed area and the adjacent parking lot.

Air Pollutant and Visible Emissions

Chapter NR 400 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code regulates air pollution. Contaminants regulated by this chapter include the following criteria pollutants: particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, organic compounds, nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide, and lead. Hazardous air contaminants and visible emissions are also regulated. The proposed project area is not within an area classified as a "non-attainment" area. Long-term air quality will not be affected by the construction of the proposed MEC Addition. Activities at the site are not expected to threaten air quality. The existing buildings on campus use natural gas to fuel the heating system. The self-contained welding booths will be designed with built in particulate air filtering systems that do not exhaust to the exterior; therefore no air permits are anticipated for these systems. No other emissions of regulated pollutants are anticipated from the site or the existing facility.

There are no topographical or meteorological conditions, which will hinder the dispersal of air emissions. The project is located in the Gateway Northwest Industrial Park. Regional topography is gently rolling and vegetation cover is primarily fallow cropland. The developed areas consist of landscaped areas, buildings, parking lots, and roadway.

7 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Utilities

The Manufacturing Education Center (MEC) and the Applied Technology Center are served by the City of Eau Claire municipal sewer and water systems. Both systems have adequate capacity to serve an expansion of the MEC building. The wastewater treatment plant is permitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources under WPDES Permit No. WI-0023850-07-0. Xcel Energy provides electricity and natural gas services to the Gateway Northwest Industrial Park and supplies are adequate for this project. Buried and internal fiber optic lines are present on the CVTC Gateway campus as well.

Hazardous Materials

Historically, the site of the existing CVTC Gateway Campus has been used for agricultural farmstead and rural residential purposes. There is no evidence of hazardous, toxic, or radioactive substances having been used on this property prior to development of the campus.

Currently, chemical use and hazardous materials storage occurring at the MEC building includes the small quantity generation and storage of the following: machining coolants and lubricants (water based); liquid nitrogen for applications in clean room and scanning electron microscope operation; and acids and bases associated with science lab classroom activity and clean room processing for etchants. Expected use of chemicals and/or hazardous materials in the proposed addition include compressed welding gasses and garnet/water slurry for water jet cutting, which will be self contained within a water jet machine. Alternatives to Proposed Action Although no formal site selection process was performed by CVTC, the following alternatives to proposed project were considered:

• CVTC Gateway Campus – MEC Building expansion • No Action

In evaluating the merits of these alternatives, the project goals were considered. The main goal of this project is to provide an expanded facility that will serve to meet the growth of CVTC programs, meet the demands of local businesses, and meet increasing student demands and increased enrollment. Discussion of the alternatives considered for this project follows:

Alternative 1—CVTC Gateway Campus – MEC Building Expansion

This is the recommended alternative and includes the construction of a new addition to be attached to the existing CVTC MEC building. This alternative provides both existing property and an existing building to tie into for the expansion, therefore eliminating the need for purchase of additional property and the construction of an entirely new building. This alternative will also serve to provide advanced cross-training to current students in the area Welding, Machine Tool and Mechanical Design. Adding the multi-purpose lab to the Gateway campus will allow for expansion of program enrollments.

8 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Alternative 2—No Action

The alternative of no action would eliminate the possibility of meeting any of the project goals. This alternative would limit CVTC’s potential for growth and would not meet the current demands of surrounding businesses, students, and the need for expansion and change of program curriculums to meet these demands.

List of Agencies Notified A list of public notifications sent and the responses received are included in Appendix D. Evaluation Section This section provides an evaluation as to whether the proposed action will have effects on the specific areas of concern listed in Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter TCS 12 (see Appendix B). If the evaluation indicates that the proposed action will affect any of these areas of concern, the WTCS Board will decide on the need to prepare an EIS.

Irreversible Environmental Effects

No irreversible environmental effects are anticipated as a result of the proposed action. Storm water runoff and erosion during construction will be managed, and atmospheric particulate or visible emissions will be minimal. The proposed action will comply with City ordinances and permitting processes.

Stimulation of Secondary (Indirect) Effects

No negative indirect social or economic effects are anticipated as a result of the proposed action.

A positive indirect social or economic effect of the proposed MEC Addition is the potential for providing a boost to the local economy. By providing the community with graduates of programs whose curriculum includes the latest requirements of manufacturers in business and industry, CVTC will have a well trained supply of employees to meet local business demands. This will nurture hiring from the local population as well as allow potential growth and strengthening of local businesses. Additionally, the increased need for training of current employees of local manufacturing and industrial business is a growing revenue stream for CVTC. Expanding both the physical capacity and program curriculum at the CVTC campus will allow for CVTC to capture this additional revenue stream.

Creation of New Environmental Effects

No foreseeable new environmental effects will be created as a result of the proposed action. Although there will be a slight reduction in overall green space due to expansion of the building over an existing grass area, this loss will be minimal. This loss is not expected to increase storm water runoff beyond the capacity of the current system.

9 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Impacts on Geographically Scarce Environmental Features

Response letters received for the 2006 CVTC NanoRite Center for Innovation EA indicated no endangered or threatened species are known to dwell in the area or use the area. The main geographical impact of the project will be the site construction, which will be minimally re-graded to accommodate parking lot changes and the addition foundation. This area was graded during the initial construction of the CVTC campus and MEC Building.

Precedent-Setting Nature of the Action

An action of the type proposed is not expected to set any negative precedent. No exceptions to policy are being made for the action.

Significant Controversy

No controversy has been associated with the proposed project. The construction of the MEC addition is not expected to produce controversy because of the benefits it brings to the community, as well as the fact that the construction will be occurring on property that is already developed.

Conflicts with Official Agency Plans or Policy (Local, Regional, State, or National)

CVTC and the project architect will be in contact with the Eau Claire City Engineer, the City of Eau Claire Inspection Department, and the WDNR to ensure compliance with the plans, policies, and ordinances of these groups. During the Environmental Assessment process, notices were sent to numerous public agencies, bringing them into the planning process. See Appendix D for a complete list. Contact with these agencies will continue throughout the planning, design, and construction process of the proposed action, as necessary.

Cumulative Impacts of Repeated Actions of this Type

The construction of impermeable surfaces (the building addition and the adjacent parking lot reconfiguration) could have cumulative environmental effects, such as increased storm water runoff. A proper design would mitigate these effects. At the project location, storm water runoff is collected through inlets located in a treatment swale adjacent and north of the proposed building footprint, and via an inlet located in the parking lot, where it is then piped and discharged into a storm water detention pond located east of the project location across Prospect Drive. For this project, the treatment swale located north of the proposed building footprint will be maintained. The regional storm water detention basin to the east of the site was designed to store excess storm water and release it at rates that will not adversely affect the existing storm water management system.

Eventually, additional construction to expand the CVTC Gateway Campus will be limited by space availability. However, CVTC currently owns approximately 15 acres of land west of the Applied Technology Center, and this area would be available for future expansion of CVTC activities. Expansion of CVTC and the construction of the MEC Building addition will complement the goals and plans of the manufacturing technology industry. The cumulative impacts resulting from this project will have minimal affect on the area's resources and ecosystems.

10 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

The most important effect from this project will be the potential for economic growth related to manufacturing technology industry in west central Wisconsin.

Irrevocable Foreclosure of Future Options

Theoretically, the land could be restored to its pre-construction state if the building addition was removed and topsoil and vegetation restored; therefore, the proposed action is not considered to be an irrevocable commitment of land. Although expansion in the area may be limited by industrial development over time, future options for expansion of CVTC would be available on the present property even after construction of the proposed addition. The proposed action is well suited to the activities of the current CVTC Gateway Campus.

Public Comment Period

This Environmental Assessment will be made available for public review and comment. The

report can be viewed at www.cvtc.edu/about-cvtc/consumer-disclosures

A copy of the report can also be requested by calling 715-833-6480. The 15-day comment period begins when the Legal Notice is posted in the Eau Claire Leader Telegram. A copy of the advertisement is included in Appendix E.

Following the conclusion of the comment period, the WTCS Board will evaluate the EA and comments received. If there is a finding of no significant impact (FONSI), the environmental review process is complete. If significant impacts are determined, the WTCS Board will proceed with preparation of an EIS under the requirements in SS. TCS 12.05 to 12.11.

Recommendation This EA has determined that the proposed project does not constitute a major action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment or involving unresolved conflicts in the use of available resources. The WTCS board has issued a preliminary finding of no significant impact associated with the proposed project. Copies of preliminary determination letters are provided in Appendix C.

11 j:\19-0230.00\101130r.doc

Bibliography Ayres Associates. February 1998. Environmental Assessment, Proposed CVTC Manufacturing and Technology Center, Gateway Industrial Park, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin.

Ayres Associates. November 2001. Environmental Assessment, CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing and Technology Center Expansion, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin.

Ayres Associates, April 2006. Environmental Assessment, CVTC NanoRite Center for Innovation, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin.

Ayres Associates, December 2010. Environmental Assessment, CVTC Manufacturing Education Center, Welding Addition, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin.

Gateway Northwest Industrial Park – www.eauclairedevelopment.com/gatewaynw.pdf

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2010. NRCS Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Viewed on November 12, 2010.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Surface Water Data Viewer, (http://dnrmaps.wisconsin.gov/imf/imf.jsp?site=SurfaceWaterViewer.wetlands, viewed on November 12, 201

Figures

Figure 1 – Regional Site Location MapEnvironmental AssessmentProposed CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center AdditionEau Claire, Wisconsin

Source: USGS Eau Claire, Wisconsin, United States 1979

Approximate Site Location

Figure 2

Campus Location Map Environmental Assessment

Proposed CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center Addition Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Source: CVTC Website

Figure 3

Site Concept Plan Environmental Assessment

Proposed CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center Addition Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Figure 4

Floor Plan Environmental Assessment

Proposed CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center Addition Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Figure 5

Surface Water and Wetlands Indicator Map Environmental Assessment

Proposed CVTC Gateway Campus Manufacturing Education Center Addition Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Approximate Project Location

Appendix A Proposed Project Site Photographs

Proposed Project Site Photos

View looking north: Area of construction to east

View looking north: Area of construction

View looking west: Area of construction

Appendix B Wisconsin Administrative Code TCS 12

41 TCS 12.03WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM

Published under s. 35.93, Wis. Stats., by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Published under s. 35.93, Stats. Updated on the first day of each month. Entire code is always current. The Register date on each page

is the date the chapter was last published. Register July 2002 No. 559

Chapter TCS 12

WISCONSIN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT PROCEDURES

TCS 12.01 Purpose.TCS 12.02 Definitions.TCS 12.03 Board action type list.TCS 12.04 Preparation of an environmental assessment.TCS 12.05 Scoping.TCS 12.06 Contents of an EIS.

TCS 12.07 Distribution and review of the DEIS.TCS 12.08 Conversion of DEIS to FEIS.TCS 12.09 Distribution and review of the FEIS.TCS 12.10 Contested case hearing.TCS 12.11 Record of decision.

Note: Chapter VTAE 12 was renumbered chapter TCS 12 under s. 13.93 (2m) (b)1., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.01 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to:

(1) Establish procedures for board consideration of short−term and long−term environmental and economic effects of boardactions upon the human environment.

(2) Establish definitions and criteria to be used by the boardfor the implementation of s. 1.11, Stats. Implementation includesthe evaluation of proposed actions; the study, development anddescription of alternatives where proposed actions involve unre-solved conflicts in the use of available resources; and the prepara-tion and review of environmental impact statements (EIS’s).

(3) Provide guidance to districts seeking permission to pro-ceed with a proposed action, determine the applicable procedureaffecting the board’s review of a proposal, and establish a mecha-nism for early review of an applicant’s proposal to determine theneed for an EIS.

(4) Identify major actions significantly affecting the quality ofhuman environment and the need for an EIS.

(5) Provide an opportunity for public input in the decision−making process.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87.

TCS 12.02 Definitions. In this chapter:

(1) “Action” means any activity initiated by the board, or anyactivity subject to the regulation or approval of the board, whichmay affect the quality of the human environment.

(a) “Type I action” means a major action which significantlyaffects the quality of the human environment and requires thepreparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS).

(b) “Type II action” means an action which may or may not sig-nificantly affect the quality of the human environment andrequires the preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) todetermine whether the action significantly affects the human envi-ronment and whether an EIS must be prepared.

(c) “Type III action” means an action which normally does nothave the potential to cause significant environmental effects andnormally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of avail-able resources, and unless the board determines otherwise, an EAor EIS will not be prepared.

(2) “Alternatives” means other actions which may reasonablybe available to achieve the same or altered purpose of the pro-posed action, including the alternative of no action.

(3) “Board” means the technical college system board.

(4) “CEQ” means the council on environmental quality.

(5) “DEIS” means draft environmental impact statementwhich is a preliminary format of the final environmental impactstatement.

(6) “District” means a technical college district establishedunder ch. 38, Stats.

(7) “EA” or “environmental assessment” means a brief butcomprehensive analysis of a proposed Type II action to determineits environmental impact; to study, develop and describe alterna-

tives; and to determine whether the proposed action constitutes amajor action significantly affecting the quality of the human envi-ronment or involving unresolved conflicts in the use of availableresources.

(8) “EIS” or “environmental impact statement” means a writ-ten report prepared pursuant to s. 1.11, Stats., in accordance withthe CEQ guidelines, which contains an analysis of anticipatedimpacts of a proposed action upon the human environment, andalternatives to the proposed action. The draft environmentalimpact statement (DEIS) is a preliminary format of the final envi-ronmental impact statement (FEIS).

(9) “FEIS” means final environmental impact statement.

(10) “Finding of no significant impact” means a completedenvironmental assessment which indicates that the proposedaction is not a major action which will significantly affect thequality of the human environment and that no EIS is required.

(11) “Human environment” means all conditions and influ-ences, natural and artificial, which surround and affect all organ-isms, including people.

(12) “Major action” means an action which will significantlyaffect the quality of the human environment.

(13) “NEPA” means the National Environmental Policy Act(42 U.S.C. s. 4321, et. seq.).

(14) “Resources” includes land, water, air, energy forms,plant life and wildlife, aesthetic, social, economic, historical andarcheological factors, and labor and materials used in the pro-posed action.

(15) “Scoping” means an early process for identifying theanticipated range of issues to be addressed by an EIS, the extentto which the identified issues will be addressed, and the significantissues as seen by the public.

(16) “Significant effects” means the considerable and impor-tant impacts, beneficial or adverse, of actions on the quality of thehuman environment.

(17) “WEPA” means the Wisconsin Environment Policy Act,s. 1.11, Stats.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; correction in (3) and (6)made under s. 13.93 (2m) (b) 6., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.03 Board action type list. The board shallreview its proposed action and determine what impact the pro-posed action will have on the quality of the human environment.The board has reviewed its actions and has categorized theseactions into 3 types as specified in Table TCS 12.03. Table TCS12.03 shall be used to determine the category of the proposedaction and the type of environmental analysis that is required.

(1) TYPE I ACTION. If it is determined from Table TCS 12.03that the proposed action is a type I action, an EIS shall be prepared.These are major board actions which would significantly affectthe quality of the human environment.

(2) TYPE II ACTION. If it is determined from Table TCS 12.03that the proposed action is a type II action, an EA will be prepared.These actions have the potential to cause significant environmen-

42 TCS 12.03 WISCONSIN ADMINISTRATIVE CODE

Published under s. 35.93, Wis. Stats., by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Published under s. 35.93, Stats. Updated on the first day of each month. Entire code is always current. The Register date on each page

is the date the chapter was last published.Register July 2002 No. 559

tal effects and may involve unresolved conflicts in the use of avail-able resources.

(a) If the EA discloses that the proposed action is a majoraction that will significantly affect the quality of the human envi-ronment, an EIS shall be prepared.

(b) If the board finds in the EA that the proposed action is nota major action that will significantly affect the quality of thehuman environment, the EA shall be filed in the office of theWEPA coordinator as a finding of no significant impact and shallbe provided to interested parties upon request.

(3) TYPE III ACTION. A type III action normally does not havethe potential to cause significant environmental effects and nor-mally does not involve unresolved conflicts in the use of availableresources, and, unless the board determines otherwise, theseactions will not require an EA or EIS.

(4) OTHER ACTIONS. Every action other than those specified insubs. (1) to (3) shall be evaluated for determination of the type ofaction.

Table TCS 12.03 Board Action Type List

ACTION TYPE OF

IDENTIFICATION EXAMPLE ACTION

I II III

A. Facility Development

1.Construction of a newcampus

New construction on a sitepreviously undevelopedresulting in a significantlyaltered site

X

2.Construction of buildingson an existing campus thathas no prior impact state-ment

New construction on a cam-pus developed prior to April1972

X

3.Additions to existingcampus buildings not con-sidered under a priorimpact statement

Additions on a campus con-structed prior to April 1972ornot considered under a priorEIS

X

4.Demolition of buildings X

5.Vehicle training track X

6.Land acquisitions Acquisition by fee title of par-cels of land

X

7.Remodeling for purposesrequiring more energy thanprior use

Remodel a classroom into awelding shop

X

8.Purchase or lease of relo-catable structures

Temporary classrooms, shop,laboratory or storage build-ings

X

9.Emergency replacement Immediate replacement offacilities to a condition simi-lar to that which existed priorto damage from flood, fire ortornado, or other forces ofnature

X

10.Parking lot constructionthat exceeds 1,000 cars orincremental increases in aparking lot that require apermit from the departmentof natural resources

Self explanatory (see. s. NR406.04)

X

11.Pedestrian elevatedwalkways or bridges

B. Regulation

1.Assuring compliancewith federal, state andsafety codes

X

2.Legislation Board proposals for new pro-grams or major changes inexisting programs, the imple-mentation of which wouldhave significant materialeffects on the human environ-ment

X

3.Program approval Proposals for new programsor major changes in existingprograms, the implementationof which will not have a sig-nificant effect on the humanenvironment

X

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; corrections made unders. 13.93 (2m) (b) 7., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.04 Preparation of an environmental assess-ment. (1) CONTENT. To determine whether a Type II action ismajor and significantly affects the quality of the natural and physi-cal environment of human beings, and to describe the alternativesto the action, the board shall conduct an EA and shall prepare areviewable record in the form of a concise report. The preparationshall be done as early as possible in the planning process, but, inany event, before contracts are let if the action involves construc-tion by a district. The report shall include:

(a) A brief description of the proposed action, the purpose ofthe action, the need for the action, and maps, graphs and othermaterials where appropriate.

(b) A brief description of those factors in the human environ-ment affected by the proposed action.

(c) A brief evaluation of the most significant primary and sec-ondary environmental effects that would result if the proposal isimplemented.

(d) A brief study developing and describing reasonable alter-natives to the proposed action, including the alternative of noaction, and a brief evaluation of the significant environmentaleffects that are different from the anticipated impacts of the pro-posed action.

(e) A listing of other agencies or groups contacted and thecomments of, and other pertinent information from, the agenciesand groups.

(f) An evaluation section which contains brief discussions ofthe specific factors in this paragraph. If the proposed action willlead to any of these results, the need to prepare an EIS is increased.

1. Irreversible environmental effects.

2. Stimulation of secondary (indirect) effects.

3. Creation of a new environmental effect.

4. Impacts on geographically scarce environmental features.

5. Precedent−setting nature of the action.

6. Significant controversy associated with the action.

7. Conflicts with official agency plans or local, regional, stateor national policy.

8. Cumulative impacts of repeated actions of this type.

9. Irrevocable foreclosure of future options.

(g) A preliminary recommendation on the need for an EIS.

(2) GENERIC EA. Where proposed actions are likely to berepeated on a recurring basis or where they have relevant similari-ties such as common timing, impacts, alternatives, methods ofimplementation, or subject matter, a generic EA may be prepared.The board shall, when addressing a single action already coveredby a generic EA, consider the relevance of the generic EA to thespecific action.

(3) NOTICE. (a) Content. The board shall develop a notice forEA as prepared under this section. The notice shall state that theEA has been prepared and is available for review and shall includethe following information:

43 TCS 12.06WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM

Published under s. 35.93, Wis. Stats., by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Published under s. 35.93, Stats. Updated on the first day of each month. Entire code is always current. The Register date on each page

is the date the chapter was last published. Register July 2002 No. 559

1. The name of the proposed action and an identification ofthe district where the proposed action will occur.

2. A brief description of the proposed action, including loca-tion.

3. The board’s preliminary determination of the need for anEIS.

4. The name of a contact person within the board who can sup-ply copies of the EA and can answer questions about it.

5. The latest date on which the board will accept and considercomments before making a final decision on the need for an EIS.

(b) Distribution. The board shall send copies of the notice toall individuals, agencies, and organizations that have requestednotification of the EA or of all EA’s and, in the case of a projectin a particular area of the state, to the news media in the vicinityof the project.

(4) PUBLIC COMMENT AND INPUT. Following the deadline forreceipt of public comment on the EA, appropriate board staff shallreview the EA, consider all public comments, make modificationsas judged necessary, and approve the EA which shall include afinding either of no significant impact or of the need for an EIS.

(5) FINDINGS. (a) If a finding is made in the EA of no signifi-cant impact, no EIS shall be required, the environmental reviewis complete and the original EA shall then be filed in the office ofthe WEPA coordinator as a finding of no significant impact.

(b) If a finding is made in the EA that an EIS is required for aproposed Type II action, the board shall proceed with the prepara-tion of an EIS under ss. TCS 12.05 to 12.11.

(c) The board’s finding on the need for an EIS becomes finalupon signing by the state director or designee.

(6) DELEGATION. Except for the EIS evaluation section asdescribed in sub. (1) (g), any part of an EA may be prepared by adistrict proposing an action.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; correction in (5) (b) madeunder s. 13.93 (2m) (b) 7., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.05 Scoping. (1) As soon as possible after thedecision to prepare an EIS, the district, in actions where the districtis the proponent of an action, or the board, in all other actions, shallnotify and inform the public and affected agencies that an EIS willbe prepared and that scoping is beginning.

(2) The scoping process shall include, to the extent possible,affected federal, state and local agencies, the board, the proponentof the action, and other interested persons. The process may con-sist of meetings, hearings, workshops, surveys, questionnaires, orother appropriate methods or activities, and may be integratedwith other public participation requirements.

(3) The scoping process shall be used to accomplish all of thefollowing:

(a) Determine the scope and the significant issues to be ana-lyzed in depth in the EIS.

(b) Identify and eliminate from detailed study the issues whichare not significant or which have been covered by prior environ-mental review. This will narrow the discussion of these issues inthe EIS to a brief presentation of why they will not have a signifi-cant effect on the human environment or a reference to their cover-age elsewhere.

(c) Set a time for document preparation and opportunities forpublic involvement.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87.

TCS 12.06 Contents of an EIS. (1) When an EIS isrequired, a DEIS and an FEIS shall be prepared by the board, bythe district or by a consultant under contract with the board or adistrict. The board shall supervise and exercise final review of anyEIS prepared by a district or a consultant. The DEIS shall empha-size significant environmental issues identified during the scop-ing process. The FEIS shall be based in part upon commentsreceived on the DEIS and on information received from other

sources. An EIS shall provide analysis of the environmental andeconomic implications of a proposed action contemplated by adistrict that need board approval. An EIS shall include the follow-ing:

(a) A summary of the scoping process used and the majorissues identified for detailed analysis in the EIS.

(b) A description of the proposed action and of the affectedenvironment including the history and background of the pro-posed action, location, type of facility, major dimensions, engi-neering design criteria, general types of materials be used, timeschedules, maps and diagrams deemed relevant, sources of fund-ing, permits and approvals required, and other pertinent informa-tion which will adequately allow an assessment of the potentialenvironmental impact by persons who want to make comments.

(c) An evaluation shall be made of the probable environmentalconsequences, both positive and negative, of the proposed actionas it relates to the physical and chemical, biological, social andcultural, and economic environments. Secondary as well as pri-mary consequences to the environment shall be included when-ever possible. The discussion shall include adverse environmentaleffects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be imple-mented. The EIS shall include impacts which have catastrophicconsequences, even if their probability of occurrence is low, pro-vided that the analysis of the impacts is supported by credible sci-entific evidence, is not based on pure conjecture, and is within therule of reason.

1. The evaluation of the physical and chemical environmentshall include consideration of the action’s effects upon air qualityand climate, surface and ground water quality and quantity, noise,geological structure, topography, minerals and soils, thermaleffects, unique land forms and water bodies, and flood and erosionhazards.

2. The evaluation of the biological environment shall includeconsideration of the action’s effect upon plant life, animal life, fishand wildlife habitat, ecological relationships, endangered species,migrations, unique plant and animal associations, human health,and hazardous and toxic materials.

3. The evaluation of the social and cultural environment shallinclude consideration of the action’s effect upon historic and arch-eological sites, parks and recreation areas, local institutions andcommunity service, existing and future land uses, communitydescription, housing patterns, neighborhood compatibility, dis-placement of families, businesses and farms, aesthetics, potentialfor shared use of facilities or programs, ethnic, religious or othergroups, change in population patterns, emergency services, edu-cational facilities and local ordinances.

4. An evaluation of the economic environment which shallinclude consideration of the action’s effect upon tax base, prop-erty values, employment, community and personal income, busi-ness activities and climate, manufacturing, mining and industry,agriculture, transportation, public utilities, energy resources, andgovernment services and costs.

(d) An evaluation of significant irreversible and irretrievablecommitments of resources that would be involved in the proposedaction if implemented, including a statement identifying theextent to which the proposed action irreversibly curtails the rangeof potential uses of the environment.

(e) Alternatives to the proposed action, including a rigorousexploration and objective evaluation of the environmentalimpacts of all reasonable alternatives, particularly those thatmight avoid all or some of the adverse environmental effects of theproposed action. The option of doing nothing shall be included asan alternative.

(f) The relationship between short−term uses of the environ-ment and the maintenance and enhancement of long−term produc-tivity. The EIS shall describe the extent to which the proposedaction involves tradeoffs between short−term economic gains atthe expense of long−term environmental productivity or vice

44 TCS 12.06 WISCONSIN ADMINISTRATIVE CODE

Published under s. 35.93, Wis. Stats., by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Published under s. 35.93, Stats. Updated on the first day of each month. Entire code is always current. The Register date on each page

is the date the chapter was last published.Register July 2002 No. 559

versa, and the extent to which the proposed action foreclosesfuture options.

(g) The FEIS shall discuss at appropriate points any responsi-ble opposing view not adequately discussed in the DEIS.

(h) An analysis shall also be made of significant direct andindirect energy impacts of the proposed action.

(2) The FEIS shall be an analysis document that enables envi-ronmental and economic factors to be considered in the develop-ment of a proposed action. It shall be considered by the board inthe decision−making process.

(3) The EIS shall be written in plain language and shall useappropriate graphics to aid decision−makers and the public.Where appropriate, an EIS may be combined with other requiredenvironmental or planning documents. The text of the FEIS shallnormally be less than 150 pages and in proposed actions ofunusual magnitude or complexity shall normally be less than 300pages.

(4) If the board makes substantial changes in the proposedaction that are relevant to environmental concerns, or if there aresignificant new circumstances or information relevant to environ-mental concerns that have bearing on the proposed action or itsimpacts, that arise after preparation of the FEIS, but before sub-stantial implementation of the action, the board shall prepare sup-plements to the FEIS. If a supplement is prepared it shall be dis-tributed and reviewed in the same manner as a DEIS or a FEIS asprovided in s. TCS 12.07.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; correction in (4) madeunder s. 13.93 (2m) (b) 7., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.07 Distribution and review of the DEIS.(1) DISTRIBUTION OF THE DEIS. Copies of the DEIS shall be dis-tributed as follows:

(a) The governor’s office.

(b) State, federal, and local governmental agencies having spe-cial expertise, interest or jurisdiction.

(c) Regional and county planning agencies located within theproposed action area.

(d) Libraries in the area of the proposed action.

(e) Department of transportation — bureau of environmentaldata analysis.

(f) Department of natural resources — bureau of environmen-tal analysis and review.

(2) REQUESTED COPIES. Copies of the DEIS shall also be pro-vided to any individual or group requesting a copy. A charge maybe assessed to cover reproduction and handling costs.

(3) NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF THE DEIS. (a) An announce-ment sheet giving a brief description of the proposed action,description of the administrative procedures to be followed, thedate by which comments on the DEIS are to be submitted to thedistrict, and the locations where copies of the DEIS are availablefor review will be circulated as follows:

1. All local and regional units of government which havejurisdiction over the area that may be affected by the proposedaction or reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. A requestwill be made for posting the announcement sheet at the places nor-mally used for public notice.

2. Local and regional news media in the area affected.

3. Groups, clubs, committees, or individuals which havedemonstrated an interest and have requested receipt of this typeof information.

4. All participants in the scoping process not covered in sub.(1) (a) to (c).

(b) The announcement under par. (a) shall be published as aclass I notice, under ch. 985, Stats., in a newspaper published inthe district where the proposed action is to occur.

(4) PERIOD OF TIME FOR COMMENT ON THE DEIS. A minimumof 45 days from the date the DEIS is mailed shall be allowed forthe receipt of comments from state, federal and local agencies andthe public.

(5) INFORMATIONAL HEARING. (a) The board shall hold a pub-lic hearing on the DEIS. The hearing shall be noticed as follows:

1. At least 30 days prior to the hearing, notice shall be mailedto all known agencies and offices required to grant any permit orlicense of approval necessary for the proposal; to any regionalplanning commission within which the affected area lies; to thegoverning bodies of all towns, villages, cities and counties withinwhich any part of the proposed action lies; to the governing bodiesof any towns, villages or cities contiguous to any town, village orcity within which any part of the proposed action lies; and to inter-ested persons who have requested such notification.

2. At least 25 days prior to the hearing, a notice shall be pub-lished as a class I notice, under ch. 985, Stats., in a newspaper cir-culated in the affected area or, for actions of statewide signifi-cance, in the official state newspaper.

(b) The hearing shall be held in the affected area. On actionsof statewide significance, the hearing may be held in Madison.

(c) The hearing shall be recorded either stenographically orelectronically.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; corrections made unders. 13.93 (2m) (b) 1., Stats., Register, April, 1999, No. 520.

TCS 12.08 Conversion of DEIS to FEIS. After consid-ering the testimony received at the public hearing on the DEIS,and undertaking whatever further investigation in response to thattestimony deemed necessary, the board may convert a DEIS to anFEIS. The conversion may be accomplished by replacing thecover sheet, modifying the statement as judged appropriate toreflect information received at public hearing or while the hearingrecord was kept open, and by adding an appendix which recordsand responds to information, concerns, views, arguments, andsuggestions received at the hearing and while the hearing recordwas kept open.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87.

TCS 12.09 Distribution and review of the FEIS.(1) DISTRIBUTION. The FEIS shall be distributed in the same man-ner as the DEIS under s. TCS 12.07, and shall also be distributedto any person, organization or agency that submitted comments onthe DEIS.

(2) NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY. The availability of the FEIS willbe announced through a notice similar to the notice of availabilityof the DEIS under s. TCS 12.07 (3).

(3) REQUESTED COPIES. A charge may be assessed to individu-als or groups requesting the FEIS to cover reproduction and han-dling costs.

(4) PERIOD OF TIME FOR COMMENT ON THE FEIS. A period ofnot less than 30 days from the date the FEIS is mailed shall beallowed for receipt of comments from state and federal agenciesand the public.

(5) PUBLIC HEARING. The board shall hold a public hearing onthe FEIS. The hearing shall be announced through the notice ofavailability of the FEIS which shall be published as a class Inotice, under ch. 985, Stats., at least 25 days prior to the hearingin a newspaper circulated in the affected area or, for actions ofstatewide significance, in the official state newspaper.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87; correction in (1) and (2)made under s. 13.93 (2m) (b) 7., Stats., Register, June, 1994, No. 462.

TCS 12.10 Contested case hearing. (1) PETITION FOR

CONTESTED CASE HEARING. The board shall grant a petition for acontested case hearing on the FEIS when the petition contains astatement of the specific reasons why the petitioner believes acontested case hearing should be held and the petition containssufficient facts for the board to determine that:

45 TCS 12.11WISCONSIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM

Published under s. 35.93, Wis. Stats., by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Published under s. 35.93, Stats. Updated on the first day of each month. Entire code is always current. The Register date on each page

is the date the chapter was last published. Register July 2002 No. 559

(a) The petitioner satisfies the criteria of s. 227.42, Stats.; or

(b) The petitioner has an individual interest in the outcome ofthe proceeding and a public interest will be served by holding acontested case hearing.

(2) TIME LIMIT FOR PETITION. Any petition received by theboard requesting a contested case hearing more than 20 days afterthe date of publication of the notice of availability shall be denied.

(3) HEARING. (a) If the board grants a request for a contestedcase hearing, the board shall inform the person making the requestabout the date, time and place of the hearing.

(b) In the event that more than one request for a contested casehearing on the FEIS is granted, the board shall consolidate therequests and hold one hearing.

(c) The only issue at the hearing shall be whether the FEIScomplies with the requirements of s. 1.11, Stats. The persons whorequested the hearing shall have the burden of proving to a reason-able certainty by the greater weight of the credible evidence thatthe FEIS does not comply with the requirements of s. 1.11, Stats.

(d) The hearing shall be held in accordance with the board’sgeneral procedural rules for hearings or, in the absence of thoserules, the conditions and procedures set out in ss. 227.44 to227.50, Stats., except as otherwise provided in this subsection.Rescheduling of hearings shall be at the board’s discretion andshall be granted only for good cause.

(4) EVIDENCE, DISCOVERY AND DISCLOSURE. (a) The FEIS shallbe received into the hearing record as an exception to the hearsayrule and shall be considered by the board in making its decisionfor whatever probative value the FEIS has.

(b) Notwithstanding any other rule of the board, the parties inproceedings under this section shall have the means of discovery,except written interrogatories and depositions on written ques-tions, available to parties through judicial proceedings set forth inch. 804, Stats.

(c) Not less than 10 days before the hearing the parties shallfile with the board:

1. The names and addresses of all witnesses, includingadverse witnesses, that the party may call to testify at the hearing;

2. A detailed written summary of the testimony to be elicitedfrom each witness identified in subd. 1., including any option orconclusion of the witness on any matter relevant to the proceed-ings and the facts and data underlying that opinion or conclusion.The summary shall be an oath or affirmation; and

3. A copy of any document or other writing, except the FEIS,and a copy or detailed description of any demonstrative evidencethe party may offer into evidence as exhibits.

(d) 1. Any witness whose name, address and summary of testi-mony is not provided as required in par. (c) 1. and 2. shall not bepermitted to testify at the hearing. No witness may testify on anymatter not included in the summary of testimony.

2. No document or other writing or a copy of detailed descrip-tion of any demonstrative evidence not filed as provided in par. (c)3. may be made part of the record.

(e) Unless objected to by the board, any summary of testimonyof a witness for the person who requested the hearing shall bemade part of the record in lieu of the testimony of that witness asan exception to the hearsay rule and shall be considered by theboard for whatever probative value that testimony has in makingits decision. Unless objected to by the person who requests thehearing, any summary of the testimony of a witness for the boardshall be made part of the record in lieu of the testimony of suchwitness as an exception to the hearsay rule and shall be consideredby the board for whatever probative value that testimony has inmaking its decision.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87.

TCS 12.11 Record of decision. Where an EIS is pre-pared, the board shall also, at the time of its final decision, preparea record of decision. The record of decision shall identify all alter-natives considered in the order of their environmental preference.The record of decision for the alternative selected shall statewhether all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmen-tal harm have been adopted, and if not, why they were not.

Note: The final draft of the EIS issued by the board, and the record of decisionprovided in s. TCS 12.09, are intended to satisfy the decision requirement of s.227.47, Stats.

History: Cr. Register, April, 1987, No. 376, eff. 5−1−87.

Appendix C Preliminary Determination Letters

Colleges: Blackhawk, Chippewa Valley, Fox Valley, Gateway, Lakeshore, Madison Area, Mid-State, Milwaukee Area, Moraine Park, Nicolet Area, Northcentral, Northeast Wisconsin, Southwest Wisconsin, Waukesha County, Western, Wisconsin Indianhead

Morna K. Foy, President

4622 University Avenue PO Box 7874 Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7874 608.266.1207 ǀ Wisconsin Relay System: 711 info@wtcsystem.edu ǀ www.wtcsystem.edu

April 2, 2020 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: It is the preliminary determination of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board (WTCSB) that the construction of facilities in Eau Claire by the Chippewa Valley Technical College District will have a non-significant environmental impact. Final determination will be made by the Wisconsin Technical College System Board after its review of public comments and communications from interested parties on the Environmental Assessment. Sincerely, Morna K. Foy President Wisconsin Technical College System

Appendix D Public Notifications and Reponses

Notifications

Notification of this EA was sent to the following: Eau Claire County Administrator Kathryn Schauf 721 Oxford Avenue Suite 3520 Eau Claire, WI 54703 Kathryn.schauf@co.eau-claire.wi.us Eau Claire County Planning and Development Planning Rod Eslinger 721 Oxford Avenue Suite 3344 Eau Claire, WI 54703 rod.eslinger@co.eau-claire.wi.us City of Eau Claire Community Development Director Scott Allen 203 S. Farwell Street PO Box 5148 Eau Claire, WI 54702-5148 Scott.allen@eauclairewi.gov City of Eau Claire Director of Engineering Dave Solberg 203 S. Farwell Street PO Box 5148 Eau Claire, WI 54702-5148 Dave.solberg@eauclairewi.gov Department of Natural Resources – Environmental Analysis Central Team Bobbi Jo Fischer 473 Griffith Ave Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494-7859 Bobbi.Fischer@wisconsin.gov West Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission Executive Director Lynn Nelson 800 Wisconsin Street Suite D2, Room 401 Eau Claire, WI 54703 lnelson@wcwrpc.org Local Media Eau Claire Leader Telegram 701 S. Farwell Street Eau Claire, WI 54701

Appendix E

Public Comment Notification

Legal Notice

The Chippewa Valley Technical College District (CVTC) has completed an environmental assessment

(EA) for the construction of facilities in Eau Claire.

The Wisconsin Technical College System board (WTCSB) has reviewed the EA and has made a

preliminary determination that the proposed action will have no significant environmental impact.

A digital copy of the EA may be viewed at the CVTC public website:

www.cvtc.edu/about-cvtc/consumer-disclosures

You may also request a copy of the EA be mailed to you by calling 715-833-6480

Questions regarding the assessment should be directed to the Director of Facilities (715-833-6480).

Persons having an interest in the proposed action may comment on the environmental assessment. The

comments shall clearly set forth the manner in which the proposed action will affect his/her environment.

Comments must be submitted in writing within 15 days of this notification to:

Daniel P. Scanlon, RA

Director, Facilities Development

Wisconsin Technical College System

P.O. Box 7847

Madison, WI 53707-7874

The WTCSB will make its final determination on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement after

the conclusion of the comment period.

Mr. Bruce Barker, President Mr. Rod Bagley, Director of Facilities Chippewa Valley Technical College District 620 W. Clairemont Avenue Eau Claire, WI 54701