UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5

77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590

Stephen Galarneau, Director Office of the Great Lakes and Sediment Management Unit Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 101 S. Webster Street P.O. Box 7921 Madison, WI 53707-7921

Dear Mr. ~au: ~ve---

REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF:

Thank you for your November 18, 2016, request to remove the "Restrictions on Dredging Activities" Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) at the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern (AOC) located within the cities of Marinette, WI and Menominee, MI. As you know, we share your desire to restore all of the Great Lakes AOCs and to formally delist them.

Based upon a review of your submittal and the supporting data, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hereby approves your request to remove this BUI from the Lower Menominee River AOC. EPA will notify the International Joint Commission (IJC) of this significant positive environmental change at this AOC.

We congratulate you and your staff as well as the many federal, state and local partners who have worked so hard and been instrumental in achieving this important environmental improvement. Removal of this BUI will benefit not only the people who live and work in the Lower Menominee River AOC, but all residents of Wisconsin, Michigan and the Great Lakes Basin as well.

We look forward to the continuation of this important and productive relationship with your agency and the local coordinating committee as we work together to delist this AOC in the years to come. If you have any further questions, please contact me at (312) 886-9296, or your staff can contact John Perrecone at (312) 353-1149.

Sincerely,

FJJ-~ Tinka G. Hyde, Director Great Lakes National Program Office

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (100% Post-Consumer)

cc: Kendra Axness, WDNR Laurel Last, WDNR Rick Hobrla, MDEQ Stephanie Swart, MDEQ Raj Bejankiwar, IJC_ John Perrecone, EPA, GLNPO Wendy Camey, EPA, GLNPO Keith West, LMR Citizens Advisory Committee, WI Mark Eric~son, LMR Citizens Advisory Committee, MI

State of Wisconsin DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 101 S. Webster Street Box 7921 Madison WI 53707-7921

November 18, 2016

Ms. Tinka Hyde, Director Great Lakes National Program Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 West Jackson Boulevard ( G-1 7 J) Chicago, IL 60604-3507

Scott Walker, Governor Cathy Stepp, Secretary

Telephone 608-266-2621 Toll Free 1-888-936-7463

TTY Access via relay - 711

Subject: Removal of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities Beneficial Use Impairment and Dredge Management Plan in the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern

Dear~

We are pleased to request the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Great Lakes National Program Office's (GLNPO's) concurrence with the removal of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) and Dredge Management Plan in the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern.

The Wisconsin Department ofNatural Resources (WDNR) and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) have assessed the status of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI relative to the delisting target that was established in 2008. We are able to report that all actions associated with this impairment have been completed and the target has been met. WDNR and MDEQ have conducted a public review of the recommendation, including a 14-day public comment period and an open house event. As a result, comments were received from the Lower Menominee River Technical Advisory Committee and GLNPO. These comments were incorporated into the final document for further clarification and completeness.

Please find enclosed documentation to support this recommendation, including the Restrictions on Dredging Activities Beneficial Use Impairment Removal Recommendation and Dredge Management Plan document prepared by WDNR and MDEQ and letter of support from the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern Citizens Advisory Committee.

We value our continuing partnership in the AOC Program and look forward to working closely with GLNPO in the removal ofBUis and the delisting of Wisconsin's AOCs.

If you need additional information, please contact Laurel Last, WDNR, 920-662-5103, Cheryl Bougie, WDNR, 920-662-5170, or you may contact me.

Sincerely,

ephen Galarneau, Director Office of the Great Lakes and Sediment Management Unit Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 608-266-1956 step hen. galarneau@wisconsin.gov

dnr.wi.gav wisconsin.gov Naturally WISCONSIN O PRINTED

'· '·, ON RECYCLED PAPER __ ,.,.

Enclosures

cc: John Pe:rrecone, U.S. EPA Ted Smith, U.S. EPA Marc Tuchman, U.S. EPA Mike Bryant, U.S. EPA Kendra Axness, Wisconsin DNR Laurel Last, Wisconsin DNR Cheryl Bougie, Wisconsin DNR Victor Pappas, Wisconsin DNR Sharon Baker, Michigan DEQ Richard Hobrla, Michigan DEQ

Page2

Menominee River Area of Concern

Restrictions on Dredging Activities Beneficial Use Impairment Removal Package and

Dredge Management Plan

Submitted to: U.S. EPA Region 5

Great Lakes National Program Office 77 W. Jackson Boulevard Chicago, IL 60604-3511

By:

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

November 9, 2016

2 | P a g e

Acknowledgements Prepared by:

Office of the Great Lakes – Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Kendra Axness – LAMP and AOC Coordinator Cheryl Bougie – Sediment & Water Quality Monitoring Coordinator, Primary Author Stephen Galarneau – Director, Office of the Great Lakes Scott Inman – Water Resources Engineer James Killian – Water Resources Management Sediment Specialist Laurel Last – Lower Menominee River AOC Coordinator Victor Pappas – Lake Michigan Field Supervisor Office of the Great Lakes – Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Sharon Baker – Lower Menominee River AOC Coordinator Stephanie Swart – Lake Superior Lake Coordinator The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), would like to acknowledge the many contributions and support by the members of the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern (AOC) Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) in the development of this 2016 Lower Menominee River AOC Dredge Management Plan – Restrictions on Dredging Activities and Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) Removal Package. The CAC and TAC collaboration with state and federal agencies has resulted in materials and activities which reflect local issues and concerns.

3 | P a g e

Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 2

List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ 5

Purpose and Limitations ................................................................................................................. 6

Background ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Rationale for Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI Listing...................................................... 7

BUI Removal Criteria (2008 Final Delisting Target) ..................................................................... 8

Assessment of Restoration – Attainment of Sediment Goals and Targets ..................................... 8

Timeline of Events for RCRA and Superfund Alternative Projects and Sediment-Related Remedial Actions .......................................................................................................................... 10

Sediment Contamination Sites and Remedial Actions ................................................................. 11

(Ansul) Tyco - Arsenic Site ...................................................................................................... 11

Contamination Background ................................................................................................ 11

Site Remediation/Source Control ...................................................................................... 12

Site Monitoring/Maintenance ............................................................................................ 15

Sediment-Related Remedial Action Goals ......................................................................... 15

Green Bay Paint Sludge Site (Lloyd-Flanders, Menominee Michigan) ................................... 16

Contamination Background .................................................................................................. 16

Site Remediation/Source Control ......................................................................................... 17

Shoreline Collections ............................................................................................................ 17

Shoreline/Terrestrial Source Control .................................................................................... 17

Site Monitoring/Maintenance ............................................................................................... 18

Menekaunee Harbor – Heavy Metals and PAHs Site ............................................................... 18

Contamination Background ................................................................................................ 18

Site Remediation/Source Control ...................................................................................... 18

Site Monitoring/Maintenance ............................................................................................ 19

Remedial Action Goals ........................................................................................................ 19

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation Marinette – Coal Tar and PAHs Site .......................... 20

Contamination Background ................................................................................................ 20

Sediment-Related Site Remediation/Source Control ............................................................ 20

Sediment-Related Site Monitoring/Maintenance ............................................................. 21

Sediment-Related Remedial Action Goals ......................................................................... 22

Sediment Assessments .................................................................................................................. 23

Lower Scott Flowage Sediment Investigation .......................................................................... 23

4 | P a g e

Rio Vista Slough Sediment Investigation ................................................................................. 24

Evaluation of Potential Remaining Dredge Restriction Areas ..................................................... 25

Outcome of Evaluation for Potential Dredge Restrictions ........................................................... 28

Stakeholder/Public Engagement ................................................................................................... 28

Recommendation Removal Statement .......................................................................................... 29

References ..................................................................................................................................... 31

Definitions..................................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix – Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... 39

Appendix A - Figures.................................................................................................................... 41

Appendix B – Tables .................................................................................................................... 73

Appendix C - State of Wisconsin Administrative Code for Dredging Activities – NR 347 ........ 79

Appendix D - Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Dredge Sediment Review - Number 09-018 ............................................................................................................................. 84

Appendix E – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes and Citizens Advisory Committee Letter of Support ........................................................................................................ 93

Appendix F – Open House News Release, Eagle-Herald 9/10/16................................................ 99

5 | P a g e

List of Acronyms AOC Area of Concern AOOC Administrative Order on Consent BLRPC Bay Lake Regional Planning Commission BUI Beneficial Use Impairment BWGMP Barrier Wall Ground Water Monitoring Plan CAC Citizens Advisory Committee CH2MHill Cornwell, Howland, Hayes, Merrifield & Hill (now called CH2M) CBSQG Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines CQAPP Construction Quality Assurance Project Plan CWA Clean Water Act CY Cubic Yards DMU Dredge Management Unit DNAPL Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid EQM Environmental Quality Management Inc FY14 Fiscal Year 2014 Federal USACE Dredging GLLA Great Lakes Legacy Act GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative GLWQA Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement GBPS Green Bay Paint Sludge Site GLNPO Great Lakes National Program Office LAMP Lakewide Action and Management Plan LFII Lloyd Flanders Industries, Inc. LSF Lower Scott Flowage MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality MDNR Michigan Department of Natural Resources mg/kg Milligrams per kilogram MGP Manufactured Gas Plant MNR Monitored Natural Recovery NAPL Non-aqueous Phase Liquid NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRT Natural Resource Technology NTCRA Non-Time Critical Removal Action PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl PEC Probable Effect Concentration PPM Parts Per Million PRP Potential Responsible Party RAO Remedial Action Objective RAP Remedial Action Plan RCM Reactive Core Mat RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act REL Robert E Lee & Associates, Inc. ROD Record of Decision RVS Rio Vista Slough SWAS Surface Water Assessment Section TAC Technical Advisory Committee TEC Threshold Effect Concentration TCDD Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin US United States USACE US Army Corps of Engineers USCG US Coast Guard USEPA US Environmental Protection Agency USFWS US Fish & Wildlife Service WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources WPDES Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System WPSC Wisconsin Public Service Corporation WWTP Waste Water Treatment Plant

6 | P a g e

Purpose and Limitations The purpose of this document is to recommend removal of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) in the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern (AOC) and identify locations in a dredge management plan where there is residual contamination within post remedial dredging project areas. The dredge management plan was developed by WDNR and MDEQ with input from the communities (cities of Marinette, Menominee, TAC and CAC) and agencies (United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO), United States Army Corps Engineers (USACE) and United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)) and evaluates the following:

• Restrictions that must remain in place to protect human health and the environment • Restrictions that must remain in place due to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA) and Superfund Alternative Approach requirements based on federal and state law • Priority areas for navigational use (all areas, not just the Federal Navigation Channel) • Priority areas for utility dredging (e.g., utility crossings) • Costs and funding options for removing dredging restrictions in priority areas

Note that several state and federal programs overlap as they relate to sediment remediation. The limitation of this document is solely for the intent of the USEPA AOC program as it relates to BUI Removal. The AOC program is not a regulatory program. Rather, it is an effort to restore beneficial uses guided by the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). In no way does this document supersede any past, current, or future regulatory requirements for responsible parties or potentially responsible parties. This document is specific to in-river activities (including sediment remediation), understanding that there may be other upland activities requiring regulatory agency involvement as well.

Background In the late 1980s, the lower three miles of the Menominee River from the Upper Scott Dam (aka Park Mill Dam) to the river’s mouth, approximately three miles north of the river mouth to John Henes Park and approximately three miles south of the river mouth past Seagull Bar along the Bay of Green Bay was designated as an AOC (refer to Appendix A, Figure 1). Green Island in Green Bay is also considered part of the AOC because of its strong habitat value and biological link to Seagull Bar State Natural Area. The AOC was designated under the GLWQA due to pollutants, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), heavy metals (specifically arsenic), paint sludge and fecal coliform bacteria. The primary sources of pollution were municipal treatment plants, industries, and urban runoff. A 1990 Stage I Remedial Action Plan (WDNR and MDEQ, 1990) identified the current status of the AOC and the following six BUIs:

• Restrictions on fish consumption (estimated removal 2016/2017) • Degradation of fish populations (estimated removal 2018) • Degradation of benthos (estimated removal 2016) • Restrictions on dredging activities

7 | P a g e

• Restrictions on Recreational Contact –bacteria from combined sewers (removed March 2011)

• Loss of fish and wildlife habitat (estimated removal 2018) This document pertains only to the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI.

Rationale for Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI Listing Throughout the 20th century, various municipalities and industries developed and prospered along the Lower Menominee River. River discharges of waste were considered acceptable and the increase of municipal and industrial effluent contributed to the impairment of the river’s natural resources. Historical sediment sampling showed high levels of contaminants and provide the rationale for BUI listing in the 1990 RAP (WDNR and MDNR, 1990). The impairment was a result of the introduction of the pollutants arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, oil and grease, and PAHs. Restrictions on dredging activities is an impaired use in the AOC due to sediment that was contaminated with arsenic, coal tar waste, paint waste and other heavy metals (refer to Appendix A, Figure 2 for Sediment Remediation Sites). The presence of contaminated sediment in the Menominee River and Harbor, especially within the turning basin, is a major problem for dredging operations (Appendix A, Figure 5). The USACE has not dredged the turning basin since 1965 due to the difficulty and expense surrounding environmentally sound disposal of arsenic-contaminated sediment (WDNR and MDNR, 1990). USACE is responsible for maintaining a navigation channel from the harbor entrance to and including the turning basin and 200 feet upstream of the turning basin (Appendix A, Figure 3) (USACE, 2016). Dredging materials are typically disposed of in the State of Michigan waters east of the north Menominee Harbor Break Water Light. Open water placement in the bay of Green Bay will continue if the dredge material is determined to be uncontaminated by Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) per Section 404 of the CWA. Portions of the shipping channel were last dredged in fall of 2014 (Appendix A, Figure 4) with the exception of the turning basin. The Lower Menominee River and Harbor is classified by Wisconsin Department of Transportation as a federal navigable harbor and is used as a diversified cargo port. Ports of this category handle more than one or two types of freight, but the origin and destinations of the cargo are generally limited to the immediate vicinity of the port (BLRPC, 1987). The major users of the harbor/port include Marinette Marine, KK Integrated Logistics Inc., the Menominee Paper Company, and Marinette Fuel & Dock Company. Marinette Marine began building barges in 1942. Today Marinette Marine designs and constructs ships for the US Navy, US Coast Guard, and other ocean going vessels. KK Integrated Logistics Inc. provides logistic services: trucking, warehousing, shipping and dock services (KK Integrated Logistics Inc, 2015). The Menominee Paper Company receives coal, wood and pulp. Marinette Fuel & Dock Company began port services in 1903 and receives dry bulk commodities: salt, coal, limestone and pig iron (World Port Source, 2015). There are also four marinas in the port of Marinette/Menominee: Harbor Town Marine, Menominee Marina, Nestegg Marine, and River Park (Marina Mystery Ship). There are six public launches: Boom Landing, Eleventh Avenue Launch, Rail Road Dock, Seagull Bar (Red Arrow Beach), Sixth Street, Stephenson Island and soon to be seventh with the new boat launch planned for Menekaunee Harbor. Since the harbor is used by many different facilities, it is important to note that restrictions on dredging may significantly impact their function.

8 | P a g e

BUI Removal Criteria (2008 Final Delisting Target) In the 2014 RAP Update for The Menominee River Area of Concern, WDNR and MDEQ identify the restoration targets and actions necessary in order to remove the BUI. There are two restoration targets that must be met in order for the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI to be removed: 1. All remediation actions for known contaminated sediment sources are completed and

monitored according to the approved remediation plans and the remedial action goals have been achieved; and

2. An AOC dredge management plan is developed by the communities and agencies that

includes an evaluation of: • Restrictions that must remain in place to protect human health and the

environment • Restrictions that must remain in place due to RCRA requirements that are based

upon state and federal law • Priority areas for navigational use • Priority areas for utility dredging, e.g., utility crossings • Identify costs and funding option for removing dredging restrictions in priority

areas Priority areas for navigational use include the Federal Navigation Channel, commercial and industrial docks, marinas, boat launches, and private docks. Priority areas for utility dredging and crossing include all potential future areas, and specifically those in the sediment remedial areas.

Assessment of Restoration – Attainment of Sediment Goals and Targets The following is a summary of actions taken to address the BUI removal criteria for the removal of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI:

1. All remediation actions for contaminated sediment are completed and monitored according to the approved remediation plans and the remedial action goals have been achieved.

The RCRA and Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) project conducted by Tyco (Ansul), the Superfund Alternatives project at Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPSC), the WDNR-lead project at Menekaunee Harbor and the MDEQ-lead project at the Green Bay Paint Sludge [Lloyd-Flanders Industries, Inc. (LFFI)] site are complete and post dredge sampling confirms that remedial action goals were achieved to the extent practicable (Appendix B, Table 1 Lower Menominee River AOC Sediment Remediation Sites with Summary of Goals, Actions and Monitoring). Additional evaluation of this work and compliance with requirements under each regulated program will continue into the future as part of the required review periods, with the exception of Menekaunee Harbor, where no ongoing monitoring is required or anticipated.

9 | P a g e

The following required actions have been completed:

• Remediation of Green Bay paint sludge/sediment completed and meeting targets • Remediation of WPSC coal tar sediment completed and meeting targets • Remediation of Ansul/Tyco arsenic sediment completed and meeting targets • Remediation of Menekaunee Harbor sediment completed and meeting targets • Lower Scott Flowage sediment characterization showed no remediation needed • Rio Vista Slough sediment characterization showed no remediation needed

The RCRA Administrative Order on Consent (AOOC) for Tyco and the Superfund Program for WPSC require the parties to monitor the sediment to ensure the remedial objectives are met. USEPA RCRA and USEPA Superfund Alternatives also require 5-year reviews that include assessment of the sediment monitoring data at these sites. LFII performs ongoing maintenance and monitoring of the berm, liner, and rip/rap. In addition, monthly and storm event paint nodule collections from the shoreline are performed. Contaminant levels have been monitored both prior to and after completion of each of the dredging projects to determine the degree and extent of sediment contamination. Post dredge monitoring at the Tyco and WPSC sites by the responsible parties will continue to track trends in contamination levels following sediment remediation. Particular attention will be paid to those areas with a sand cover or RCM. Post dredging sampling confirmed that remediation actions for contaminated sediment have met the goals of the approved remediation plans to the extent practicable. More detailed descriptions of sediment remediation and characterization actions are presented in subsequent sections of this document.

2. An AOC dredge management plan is developed by the communities and agencies that includes the evaluation of restrictions that remain in place due to human health and the environment, Superfund and RCRA requirements based on state and federal law, priority areas for navigational use, priority areas for utility dredging (utility crossings), and costs and funding options for removing dredging restrictions in priority areas.

A separate stand-alone dredge management plan will not be developed since the sediment-related remediation activities have addressed the dredging restriction BUI at Tyco, WPSC and Menekaunee Harbor to the maximum extent practicable. As a result of sediment-related remediation activities, three areas were identified for sand cover placement in order to meet the sediment-related remedial action objectives. Narratives presented later in this document describe each scenario and in the Evaluation of Potential Remaining Dredge Restriction Areas section of this document, utility dredging (utility crossings) and priority dredge areas are identified. Priority areas for navigational use include the Federal Navigation Channel, commercial and industrial docks, marinas, boat launches, and private docks. Priority areas for utility dredging and crossing include all potential future areas, and specifically those in the sediment remedial areas.

10 | P a g e

Timeline of Events for RCRA and Superfund Alternative Projects and Sediment-Related Remedial Actions Since the Lower Menominee River was designated as an AOC, significant progress has been made to address pollutant sources. Upland and sediment related site investigation and remediation activities led by USEPA Superfund Alternative, USEPA RCRA, WDNR, and MDEQ, have occurred over three decades. The Superfund Alternative Project - WPSC Coal Tar site; the RCRA Project - Tyco (Ansul) arsenic site; and Menekaunee Harbor, a site containing low-level heavy metals and PAHs owned by the city of Marinette with no responsible party; are located within the lower two-mile river reach. The LFII, Green Bay paint sludge site is located on the bay of Green Bay three miles north of the Menominee River mouth in Menominee, Michigan. Appendix B, Table 1 summarizes the sediment remediation work that has been completed in order to meet the sediment-related remedial action goals, to the extent practicable, for each project. In addition, there is a timeline describing each sediment remediation site and actions taken to meet the sediment-related remedial action goals to the extent practicable. The following is a timeline of events for RCRA and Superfund Alternative Projects and sediment-related remediation efforts in the Lower Menominee River AOC:

• 1978 WDNR is notified of the discovery of the arsenic contamination at Ansul Fire Technology (now Tyco Safety Products)

• 1978 90,000 tons of arsenic waste is removed from the Ansul Property • 1980 – 1989 Sediment sampling and analysis of the Lower Menominee River • 1981 Ansul groundwater extraction system and monitoring program • 1982 LFII purchases Heywood-Wakefield Co and takes responsibility for the paint sludge

contamination site • 1987 Lower Menominee River is designated as an AOC • 1987 USEPA RCRA begins involvement with Ansul site • 1989 WDNR is notified of the discovery of the coal tar contamination at the Marinette

WWTP [former WPSC Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP)] site • 1989 Ansul Menominee River sediment characterization and water sampling • 1990 Lower Menominee River RAP (Stage I) • 1990 AOOC between USEPA RCRA and Ansul • 1993 LFII constructs berm/rock dike to enclose submerged paint wastes and prevent

further migration into the bay of Green Bay • 1995 (summer) – 1998 (fall) LFII perform contaminant removal of paint sludge and

sediment • 1996 Lower Menominee River RAP Update • 1999 Ansul removal of sediment from the 8th Street slip • 2000 Tyco purchases Ansul and takes responsibility for the arsenic contamination site • 2001 USEPA RCRA approves Tyco 8th Street Slip and Former Salt Vault caps • 2005 USEPA Superfund Alternative oversight of WPSC MGP site • 2007 GLNPO Menekaunee Harbor sediment characterization • 2008 Lower Menominee River BUI Restoration Targets • 2009 AOOC between USEPA RCRA and Tyco • 2009 – 2010 Tyco vertical barrier wall installed

11 | P a g e

• 2010 Tyco deed restriction filed with Marinette County Register of Deeds for soil caps and no dredging, anchoring or digging in Menominee River adjacent to Tyco

• 2011 Lower Menominee River RAP (Stage II) • 2011 Tyco vertical barrier wall sheet pile stabilization • 2011 – 2012 WPSC sediment characterization • 2012 Lower Menominee River RAP Update • 2012 WPSC MGP dredging began under Superfund Alternative • 2012 Tyco performs first year dredging under RCRA • 2013 Tyco performs second year dredging under RCRA • 2013 WPSC MGP dredging, RCM and sand cover completed and sediment monitoring begins • 2013 GLNPO Lower Scott Flowage sediment characterization • 2013 Lower Menominee River RAP Update • 2014 Rio Vista sediment characterization • 2014 Tyco GLLA dredging project completed • 2014 Menekaunee Harbor dredging completed • 2014 Lower Menominee River RAP Update • 2015 Tyco RCRA/GLLA sand cover completed • 2015 Menekaunee Harbor sand cover completed • 2016 Tyco pump down program begins

Sediment Contamination Sites and Remedial Actions This section will discuss the known areas containing contaminated sediment within the AOC that contributed to one or more impairments to designated beneficial uses. This section will also discuss additional sediment sampling completed to assess the current status of suspected areas. Primary areas identified in the 1990 Stage I RAP include the following: Ansul arsenic site, including the turning basin and South Channel; WPSC coal tar site; and LFII paint sludge site (WDNR and MDNR, 1990). A secondary area, Menekaunee Harbor, was identified by WDNR. A couple sites, Lower Scott Flowage and Rio Vista Slough, were investigated by state and federal agencies to determine if they were contributing to BUIs. Contaminated sediment management actions have been implemented at all known contamination sites to the extent practicable, as specified in the USEPA negotiated AOOC for each site. See Appendix B, Table 1 for the current status of the contaminated sites in the AOC. In addition, Table 1 provides a summary of the remediation goals for each site, along with the actions taken to achieve those goals, current status, along with the monitoring and maintenance requirements and whether the remedial action goals have been met. A detailed narrative for each sediment remediation site is provided below.

(Ansul) Tyco - Arsenic Site

Contamination Background The arsenic contamination resulted from arsenic salts produced by the Ansul Fire Protection Company (now known as Tyco Fire Products Limited Partnership) at their manufacturing site in Marinette adjacent to the turning basin in the river. Arsenic salts were produced as a byproduct of herbicide manufacturing between 1957 and 1977. The waste salts were stored on-site in uncovered piles and in a bunker area, and were discharged directly to the river via storm water

12 | P a g e

runoff and wind erosion or leached into surface water and ground water, which then flowed to the Menominee River along the turning basin. These discharges impaired water quality and contaminated river sediment (WDNR, 1996). Tyco purchased Ansul in 2000, making them responsible for the arsenic contamination site. Tyco did not contribute to the contamination, which was already present on the site long before they purchased the facility.

Site Remediation/Source Control Tyco International, owners of Ansul Incorporated, signed an AOOC with the USEPA to remediate the site (USEPA, 2009). The AOOC requires Tyco to implement the remedy selected in the USEPA’s 2008 Statement of Basis and Final Decision Document for Ansul Inc. (USEPA, 2008). Tyco completed implementation of the USEPA-approved work plan to remediate arsenic contaminated sediment in 2013. In addition, Tyco worked with the USEPA to implement a GLRI- GLLA Betterment Action at the contaminated sediment site beginning in 2014 with completion in 2015 (EQM, 2015). Many remedial activities were conducted before the AOOC was signed. See the USEPA web page http://www.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/index.html for additional information. Components of the selected remedy are summarized and listed below (USEPA, 2008), and include an informal status.

Terrestrial • Construct and maintain an impermeable below-ground barrier wall to control the flow of

groundwater to the maximum extent practicable (Appendix A, Figure 5). o Status: Complete with ongoing maintenance and monitoring as needed.

• Cap surface soils on-site with arsenic concentrations equal to or above 32 ppm (Appendix A, Figure 6). o Status: Complete with ongoing maintenance and monitoring as needed.

• Remove surface soils near the railroad tracks with arsenic concentrations equal to or above 16 ppm (Appendix A, Figure 6). o Status: Complete.

Groundwater • Contain contaminated groundwater on-site through the use of a barrier wall system. Utilize an

on-site groundwater extraction system and phyto-pumping as a means to keep the site from flooding. Conduct a technical review of the latest science for treating groundwater containing large quantities of arsenic every five years. o Status: Complete with ongoing activities as prescribed. The first five year review was

completed in December 2013 (CH2MHill, 2013a). As a result of the five year review an updated barrier wall groundwater monitoring plan was prepared and approved by USEPA RCRA in September 2015. The updated plan is being implemented and includes the installation of additional monitoring wells, dye testing after the completion of the outfall investigation and the pump down program. Additional monitoring wells were installed in 2015. The pump down program to control hydraulic head within the former Salt Vault and the former 8th Street Slip began in June 2016.

o The next five year review will be completed in 2018.

13 | P a g e

Sediment Sediment with Arsenic Levels Above 50 ppm

o Remove and properly dispose of all Menominee River soft sediment with arsenic concentrations equal to or greater than 50 ppm.

o Status: Completed in 2013. See additional details below. • Remove and properly dispose of all Menominee River semi-consolidated silts and clays with

arsenic concentrations equal to or greater than 50 ppm or, if removal is technically or economically impractical, provide an alternative to removal that protects human health and the environment, is legally implementable, and achieves arsenic concentrations of 20 ppm or less by November 1, 2023. o Status: Complete.

Removal began in July 2012. Soft and semi-consolidated sediment containing total arsenic concentrations greater than or equal to 50 ppm were mechanically dredged using an environmental clamshell bucket and stabilized on-site (CH2MHill, 2012). Stabilization was accomplished through the addition of a drying agent and chemical reagent (ferric sulfate and Portland cement). The stabilized soft and semi-consolidated sediment was then transported for disposal at an off-site nonhazardous landfill. Wastewater produced as part of this process was treated by a series of filters and reverse osmosis to reduce arsenic concentrations, and then discharged to the river in accordance with the limits set forth in the WDNR wastewater discharge permit. If arsenic concentrations in wastewater could not be reduced to acceptable levels, reject wastewater was properly disposed of at an offsite hazardous waste facility. Tyco hoped to remove approximately 100,000 cubic yards (CY) of contaminated sediment in 2012, but when dredging ceased for the season, only 26,913 CY of material had been removed from the River (CH2MHill and Sevenson, 2014). Greater than expected amounts of large woody debris were encountered during dredging, which slowed progress and required additional screening/grinding steps during sediment processing. Dredging was halted for approximately 30 days while sediment stabilization protocols were modified to comply with the leachable arsenic (less than 5 ppm), free water, and shear strength requirements (CH2MHill, 2012). The turning basin is also used by local shipping and ship building industries. Any time the basin is needed to be used dredging had to cease while turbidity control measures were relocated.

o Mechanical dredging resumed in May, 2013. The quantity and size of equipment used increased

significantly from 2012. Larger pug mills were utilized to increase sediment treatment capacity and processing rates. An on-site shredder mitigated problems with wood debris. Dry ferric sulfate was substituted as the stabilizing reagent when treating soft sediment, reducing the amount of sediment that needed to be retreated in order to meet the leachable arsenic requirement. A mobile lab was brought in to increase sediment stabilization efficiency and reduce wait times for treatment results. Dredging and treatment was completed December 7, 2013. A total of 232,133 cubic yards of contaminated sediment was removed from the river in 2013 (CH2MHill and Sevenson, 2014). Confirmation sampling determined that the remedial action goals for 2013 were reached (CH2MHill and Sevenson, 2014). In summary, over the two years of dredging 259,046 total cubic yards was dredged, processed and hauled off-site to the Menominee Waste Management Landfill in Menominee, Michigan. Due to the vast amount of sediment data collected for this project, please refer to Section 4.6, Table N-1 and Appendices N and R in the March 2014 Construction Completion Report, Menominee River Sediment Removal Project Adjacent to the Tyco Fire Projects LP Facility Marinette, Wisconsin (CH2MHill and Sevenson, 2014) for confirmation sediment sampling results. Appendix A, Figures 7, 8, and 9 has DMUs and post-dredge confirmation sediment sampling locations and results.

14 | P a g e

Sediment With Arsenic Levels Between 20 ppm and 50 ppm • A GLLA Betterment Action Agreement between Tyco, USEPA, and WDNR was signed in May

2014. The agreement called for additional dredging of all soft and semi-consolidated sediment having arsenic concentrations greater than 20 ppm remaining after the 2013 completion of the RCRA component of the project. The USEPA RCRA AOOC indicates that Tyco was not required to dredge contaminated material in the glacial till due to difficulty of removing the material and the cost feasibility. This agreement speeds recovery of the aquatic ecosystem and delisting of the Menominee River AOC by an estimated 10 years, because the required time for natural recovery/monitored natural recovery (MNR) of the sediment surface from 50 ppm to 20 ppm arsenic will no longer be required due to the active removal of contaminated material. o Dredging for the Betterment Action began in late August 2014, with sediment processing,

treatment, and disposal methods remaining the same as those used for the RCRA activities. Dredging was completed in mid-November 2014, with 42,000 additional cubic yards of arsenic contaminated sediment removed from the river. When processed, the material resulted in 73,000 tons of non-hazardous waste, which was hauled to Michigan for conventional landfilling. Of this waste, 556 tons was scrap debris, including lumber wood waste and old construction concrete (EQM, 2015).

o Water treatment was a critical component of the project. All the water from sediment dewatering and from spray-cleaning of equipment and trucks was sent through the modified reverse-osmosis treatment system. A total if 2,173,000 gallons of water was treated. Of this amount, 397,000 gallons did not pass the required effluent limits for arsenic and was shipped via tanker truck for out-of-state hazardous waste disposal. Site decontamination and demobilization began at the end of 2014, continued through early summer 2015, and was completed by October 2015 (EQM, 2015).

o Post-dredge confirmation sampling and bathymetry were performed to ensure the project goal of 20 ppm or less of arsenic in remaining surface sediment was met. Due to the vast amount of data collected, please refer to the Sampling Summary Report Great Lakes Legacy Act Lower Menominee River Tyco Site Adjacent to the Tyco Fire Products LP Facility, Marinette, Wisconsin (CH2MHill, 2015b). Appendix A, Figures 10, 11 and 12 has DMUs and post-dredge confirmation sediment sampling locations and results. Appendix G, Table A1-1 contains Confirmation Sampling Analytical Review. Appendix E of the Remedial Action Completion Report, Great Lakes Legacy Act Lower Menominee River Tyco Site contains the bathymetric Survey Data (EQM, 2015).

• In those deep-water areas where dredging activities exposed glacial till, a covering of carbon-enhanced sand was layered on top of any till areas having >20 ppm arsenic. This cover is approximately 12 inches thick and is intended to physically and chemically attenuate any remaining arsenic that might migrate vertically through the till to the water column. The design cover required a minimum placement of 10 inches of sand and activated carbon. Because the majority of exposed till is found within the bounds of the federal navigation channel, the action must be approved through U.S. Code Title 33, sec. 408 permitting by the USACE. That permit was approved on March 2, 2015, with cover placement occurring during the summer construction season. Sand cover placement was completed on June 24, 2015 (Appendix A, Figure 12). Pan tests, pre and post bathymetry and diver-assisted core sampling were performed to verify sediment placement and thickness (EQM, 2015). CH2MHill, 2015b Appendix H of the Sampling Summary Report, Great Lakes Legacy Act Lower Menominee River Tyco Site Adjacent to the Tyco Fire Products LP Facility, Marinette, Wisconsin has Confirmation Sampling Analytical Review and Sand Cover Coring Results.

15 | P a g e

Site Monitoring/Maintenance The Ansul/Tyco Site is following the Operations and Maintenance Plan (Revised Barrier Wall Groundwater Monitoring Plan Update (BWGMP) (CH2MHill, 2015a) agreed to with the WDNR and USEPA RCRA Program. The objective of the BWGMP is to provide the approach to long-term monitoring of the effectiveness of the barrier at containing on-site groundwater. The plan is required by the AOOC between Tyco and USEPA RCRA. Tyco agreed to implement the following activities: • Barrier wall inspections, installation of additional ground water monitoring wells, groundwater

elevation monitoring, and water quality monitoring to demonstrate barrier wall effectiveness • A pump-down program to lower water levels in the former Salt Vault and the former 8th Street

Slip and ultimately maintain a constant groundwater elevation within these areas • Enhanced monitoring of the Main Plant Area by calculating the potential amount of

groundwater migration from the upland area that would impact the ability of the Menominee River sediment to remain less than the remedial action objective (RAO) of 20 ppm total arsenic and conducting groundwater dye testing, upon completion of an outfall investigation, to determine if any portion of the barrier wall is leaking

• Sample collection of post-dredging accumulated soft sediment in the main river channel outside the Main Plant Area, in the turning basin, and the Transition Area (CH2MHill, 2015a). The post-dredging sediment sampling will coincide with the five year review and will be completed in 2018.

Sediment-Related Remedial Action Goals The sediment-related remedial action goals of this remediation project were to prevent arsenic-contaminated groundwater from migrating into the Menominee River and to achieve sediment contaminant levels in the river of less than or equal to 20 ppm of arsenic. The sediment-related remedial actions have been implemented to the extent practicable. Future planned monitoring activities will determine the long-term effectiveness of the remedial actions (see the Site Remediation/Source Control Section above).

16 | P a g e

Photo 1. Tyco Dredging Turning Basin, Menominee River (WDNR, Bougie)

Green Bay Paint Sludge Site (Lloyd-Flanders, Menominee Michigan)

Contamination Background Since the early 1900s, a manufacturing plant in Menominee, Michigan has produced high end, woven wicker furniture and metal seating. The furniture plant operations included the crafting, assembling, and finishing of seating components. Operations involved plating of metal parts or spray painting of metal and wicker components. Until the late 1980s, furniture production processes used water shields (curtains) to capture paint mists and overspray which generated large volumes of paint sludge. The painting and plating processes contained heavy metals, including high levels of lead, and other metals used as colorants. The overspray containing bulk paint wastes collected at the bottom of the painting booths and these paint wastes along with other manufacturing wastes were dumped behind the plant on shore, along the shore, or flushed out to Green Bay off shore of the property (WDNR and MDNR, 1990; WDNR, 1996). The majority of these wastes remained behind the plant or along the adjacent shoreline (Appendix A, Figures 14 and 13). The LFII purchased the furniture manufacturing plant from the Heywood-Wakefield Company in 1982, making them responsible for the furniture production contamination source control at the Green Bay Paint Sludge site. LFII did not contribute to the contamination, which was already present on the site long before they purchased the facility. MDEQ and MDNR site inspections from the early 1980s through the early 1990s documented the presence of the paint sludge contamination in upland areas behind the manufacturing plant, in waters and in sediment along approximately one half mile of the Menominee, Michigan portion of Green Bay, including shoreline properties adjacent to and including the area behind the LFII plant. Site delineation by consultants for the company or MDNR found that immediately behind the plant, these bulk paint wastes formed continuous multicolored layers. In some places, the waste was three feet thick on the sediment of the bay, covering approximately 0.5 acre. Bits of these layers

17 | P a g e

eroded into fragments due to wave and ice actions, and these fragments—through natural water movements, including waves, ice flows, and off-shore currents—spread throughout an approximate half mile radius of the plant. These colorful, putty-like fragments of paint sludge are hydrophobic (fail to dissolve/mix in water), and will sometimes form balls (a.k.a. paint balls). Fragments can be found imbedded in the beaches or sediment and occasionally can be found floating just below the surface of the water.

Site Remediation/Source Control In 1992 LFII was ordered by the State of Michigan to investigate and remediate the paint sludge contamination and other manufacturing wastes connected to plant operations and processes. The Administrative Order required development of a RAP for the Green Bay Paint Sludge Site (GBPS), Menominee Michigan. The RAP and the Administrative Order describe the remediation requirements for the site and also provide paint sludge contamination background, history, and required source control actions.

Shoreline Collections The LFII shore patrol began collection, removal, storage, and disposal of paint balls (nodules) and fragments in 1992. This collection continues as part of their ongoing responsibilities. The purpose of collection is to minimize exposure to wastes washing up to shore. The company is required to collect and remove paint sludge pieces/paint balls after ice-out in the spring and after storm events because water or ice actions can loosen the imbedded wastes. Under the Administrative Order, these paint wastes are to be stored and disposed of appropriately. At the end of 1995, the company had reported removal of 7,500 gallons of hardened paint sludge waste nodules, and fragments. In personal communications with Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) by Mark Erickson, LFII Plant Engineer/Manager and CAC Co-Chair, paintballs and fragment collections have decreased in volume since collection began. The shoreline collection data provided in 2010 to the MDEQ Upper Peninsula District Office showed a reduction of 40% of material collected from 2006 to 2010. An additional 41% reduction was documented between 2010 and 2015. Collection activities in 2015 resulted in a total measured volume of 33 gallons (Mark Erickson, personal communication).

Shoreline/Terrestrial Source Control A berm/rock dike was constructed in 1993 to enclose the submerged paint wastes and prevent further migration into Green Bay. The core of this berm structure contains a series of membrane liners designed to hydraulically isolate the wastes from the bay. The original GBPS RAP required dewatering within the berm to facilitate waste removal and disposal, but testing indicated that dewatering was not feasible due to the conductivity of the sediment underlying the berm. Waste removal plans were modified to allow removal by mechanical and hydraulic suction dredging. Contaminant removal work was conducted during the summer and fall of 1995 and October 1998. Approximately 5,300 tons of bulk paint wastes were sent to a hazardous waste treatment and disposal facility and 10,500 tons of excavated contaminated sediment and soils were sent to the local landfill. Berm dismantling and shoreline restoration was completed in October and November 1998. Shoreline restoration included the installation of a 12-ounce non-woven polypropylene fabric liner anchored and covered by rock-rip-rap on a portion of the shoreline bordering the plant site. This shoreline barrier was intended to prevent further erosion of waste remnants and contaminated soil. Additional actions were taken as described in the Outstanding Issues Regarding the RAP, GBPS Site

18 | P a g e

Menominee, Michigan report to address issues described in the RAP Supplement response letter. Exposure barriers comprised of gravel and crushed limestone were placed on upland soil areas from October 30 to November 3, 2000 to prevent surface soil lead exposures on portions of the Lloyd Flanders plant site. To address elevated lead levels detected along the southern end of the shoreline bordering the plant site after shoreline restoration was completed an additional 180 feet of liner and rock riprap barrier was installed November 6-9, 2000.

Site Monitoring/Maintenance There were no reporting requirements negotiated under the Administrative Order for any parameters—such as the amount of paint wastes collected per year, water quality, groundwater quality, sediment contaminants, viability of the liner placed over the waste area after bulk paint wastes were removed, or stability of the rock berm—to insure site remediation was working as designed. The GBPS site exposure barriers are regularly inspected and maintained, as needed, and shoreline paint wastes are being collected for proper disposal, as required in the Operations and Maintenance Plan agreed to with the State of Michigan. A letter of credit is being maintained to ensure availability of funding for these activities for a period of 30 years. In the last 15 years the upland barrier and shoreline rip rap have required no repairs. Remedial Action Goals The goals of this remediation project were to remove paint waste and impacted sediment and soil from the site and collect and remove paint nodules that wash up along the shoreline. These goals were achieved through the removal of bulk paint waste, sediment, and soil and ongoing shoreline paint nodule collection (see the Site Remediation/Source Control Section above).

Menekaunee Harbor – Heavy Metals and PAHs Site

Contamination Background Menekaunee Harbor is a 13-acre natural embayment of the Menominee River located south of the confluence of the main channel and the South Channel. The city of Marinette owns the property around Menekaunee Harbor with the exception of a small parcel off the south break wall. Sediment quality in the harbor was degraded and sediment deposition in the harbor had a negative impact on the health and functionality of the aquatic ecosystem. Contamination was not as high as other segments of the AOC, but elevated concentrations of metals, PAHs, and nutrients had been reported (Weston Solutions, 2008). Since the harbor is located at the most downstream area of the watershed, it received contaminants from many historical industrial operations and, therefore, responsible parties could not be identified.

Site Remediation/Source Control For many years, the city of Marinette planned to restore the harbor for recreation; however, due to the expense of handling contaminated sediment, the city was unable to move forward with the project. In 2010, the WDNR partnered with the city and USEPA to move the harbor restoration project forward in an effort to meet the goals and objectives and to remove BUIs. After several years of planning and engineering, and with financial support through WDNR and the GLRI, the project moved into the implementation phase in 2014. Appendix A, Figure 16 has the final Menekaunee Harbor plan and contours. Dredging commenced August 21, 2014, with the goal of removing contaminants at or above

19 | P a g e

Threshold Effect Concentrations (TEC) identified in the Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guidelines (CBSQG) (WDNR, 2003) for heavy metals: total arsenic, copper, lead, mercury and zinc (Ayres, 2014a and 2014b). A total of 57,809 CY of material was removed from the harbor. Environmental material (27,129 CY) was placed at the Waste Management Landfill in Menominee, Michigan, and navigational dredged material (30,680 CY) was placed at the city-owned Lot 24. Lot 24 is located in the Sand Hill Industrial Park, west end of Murray Street, city of Marinette. Additional clean dredged material (termed beneficial-use fill) removed from the west side of the harbor was used to bring the southeast quadrant of the harbor to the desired restoration depths. Seventy-seven thousand CY of the clean material from within the harbor was hydraulically pumped to the restoration area. Confirmation sampling indicated exceedances of heavy metals in the area near Harbor Town Marine Dock. Pan Testing and bathymetric surveys were conducted to ensure the 6-inch sand cover thickness was achieved over 12,500 square foot area (REL, 2016). Appendix A, Figures 17 and 18 have confirmation sediment sampling locations and the sand cover area, respectively. Dredging was complete in November 2014 and sand cover was finished in June, 2015. Confirmation sediment sampling results are located in Section 3.4.3.1 and Appendix H in the Sediment Sample Results of the Construction Completion Report, Lower Menominee River Area of Concern Menekaunee Harbor Restoration Project, Marinette Wisconsin (REL, 2016).

Site Monitoring/Maintenance Additional monitoring and maintenance of this site is not required.

Remedial Action Goals The goals of this remediation project were to improve navigation in the harbor and achieve sediment contaminant levels of heavy metals and PAHs below TEC values of the CBSQGs. These goals were achieved through sediment removal and placement of sand cover over a limited area in the southeast section near the Harbortown Marine Dock (see Site Remediation/Source Control Section above).

Photo 2. Menekaunee Harbor Dredging (WDNR, Bougie)

20 | P a g e

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation Marinette – Coal Tar and PAHs Site

Contamination Background The WPSC site is located in Marinette, Wisconsin. The 4-acre former MGP is about 750 feet south of the Menominee River and about 1.5 miles upstream from the river mouth at the bay of Green Bay. The WPSC MGP was formerly located on the property currently known as the Marinette WWTP. Boom Landing Park is between the river and the site and is currently used as a boat launch facility operated by the city (USEPA, 2016). Former WPSC MGP operations have caused impacts to soil, groundwater and sediment. Residual coal tars generated by the MGP operations washed into the Menominee River via a former slough and contaminated sediment along the Wisconsin shoreline of the Menominee River near Boom Landing.

The WPSC MGP operated from 1910 to 1960 using two coal gasification methods: retort and carbureted. The retort gasification process operated from 1910 to 1928. Retort gasification involves heating and volatilizing coal in an airtight chamber (retort) at temperatures reaching 2,200°F so the coal will decompose into gas, tar, and generated impurities, including sulfur, carbon dioxide, cyanide, and ammonia. During the carbureted coal gasification method, used from 1910 until operations ceased in 1960, air and steam were passed over incandescent coal in a brick-filled vessel to form a combustible gas, which was then enriched by injecting a fine oil mist over the bricks, purified, and stored in holders prior to distribution. Coal tars are a byproduct from coal gasification (manufactured gas) and form NAPL (non-aqueous phase liquid) and DNAPL (dense non-aqueous phase liquid). Coal tars contain PAHs and other site-specific processing contaminants including sulfur, heavy metals, and metalloids such as mercury and arsenic. PAHs can cause risks to human and environmental health. Coal tar-affected soil and groundwater were identified on the property and reported to the WDNR during the 1989 WWTP expansion on the former MGP site. The city of Marinette excavated, removed a large amount of the impacted MGP residuals in the soil and backfilled the excavations with clean material (Appendix A, Figure 19 WPSC Previous Remedial Actions – Upland; NRT, 2016a). The groundwater contaminant plume appears to be limited (based on ongoing ground water monitoring) to the WWTP property, Boom Landing, and portions of Mann Street. The groundwater plume does not appear to extend to the Menominee River and is not impacting surface water. A State of Wisconsin Committee on Water Pollution in 1960, in An Investigational Report on Floating Tars on the Menominee River in Marinette, Wisconsin, showed that there were tar droplets in the water of a former slough and two discharge pipes draining from the coal gasification plant area into the river. The tar and tar droplets adhered to anchored boats and equipment located downstream of the gasification plant area, and were seen floating 500 feet downstream.

Sediment-Related Site Remediation/Source Control The USEPA’s Docket Number V-W-13 • C-001 Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order On Consent For Removal Action negotiations between USEPA-Superfund Alternative Approach and WPSC resulted in a decision to remove the coal tar contaminated sediment (USEPA, 2012). https://semspub.epa.gov/work/05/410967.pdf

21 | P a g e

A total of 15,221 CY of PAH impacted sediment was removed from the Menominee River from November 2012 through March 2013 as part of the Non-Time Critical Removal Action (NTCRA). Due to an uneven bedrock surface the mechanical dredge equipment was unable to completely remove dredge residuals on the bedrock surface (NRT, 2013a). Soft sediment was removed to the extent practicable (less than 6 inches) and NAPL was not observed. Post dredge soft sediment cores collected in the dredged areas identified exceedances of the 22.8 milligrams per kilogram remedial action objective (RAO). Sediments exceeding the RAO ranged in thickness from 4 to 7 inches and analytical results from these cores ranged from 46.1 mg/kg to 683.8 mg/kg total (13) PAHs (Appendix B, Table 2 – Residual Sand Cover Analytical Summary Table from the July 2, 2015 NRT Technical Memorandum to USEPA Superfund Alternative Program and Appendix A, Figure 21 WPSC 2015 Bathymetric Survey Sand Cover vs. 2013 Post Dredging Surface [NRT, 2015b]). As a result, per the approved Construction Quality Assurance Project Plan (CQAPP) a minimum of 6 inches of a residual sand cover was required. As discussed in Section 2.9.4 of the Final Report, a minimum thickness of 10 inches of sand was placed over approximately 12,250 square feet in areas of the river where post-dredge confirmation samples indicated residual total (13) PAH concentrations exceeded RAO, for the NTCRA, of 22.8 mg/kg. A post-sand cover monitoring plan was developed. Two sediment/sand sampling events were completed on May 21, 2014 and October 27, 2014. All of the surface sand cover sample results were below 22.8 mg/kg total PAH (13) and are all below 1 mg/kg total PAH (13). Additional sand cover monitoring will be conducted at the time of the five year review in 2018 (NRT, 2015b). A reactive core mat (RCM) was installed around the outfall structure and former slough to the river (Appendix A, Figure 20) over an area of 19,500 square-feet (including mainly side slopes or bank areas) as a conservative contingency measure to prevent any potential small “stringers” of NAPL that may be sorbed to the upland soil and debris from migrating into the river (NRT, 2016b). The RCM construction included 3” minus backfill and 6” of general fill-cushion layer under the RCM. The RCM was then covered by a protective geotextile fabric and 1.5’ diameter riprap on the river bank, held in place by larger toe stones. The small portion that lies on the river bottom is covered with 6-9” of 3” minus stone. Refer to NRT, 2016b Feasibility Study, Appendix B for Sediment Removal Action Information: Sand Cover Monitoring Plan, sediment results, sampling map, Construction Completion Report and Feasibility Report. The “(13)” above stands for the thirteen priority PAHs that were sampled versus the entire list of PAHs. Following is the list of PAHs sampled:

• Acenapthene • Acenaphthylene • Anthracene • Benzo(a)anthracene • Benzo(a)pyrene

• Benzo(b)fluoranthene • Benzo(k)fluoranthene • Chrysene • Fluoranthene • Fluorene

• Naphthalene • Phenanthrene • Pyrene

Sediment-Related Site Monitoring/Maintenance The WPSC MGP Site is following the Residual Sand Cover Monitoring Plan agreed to with WDNR and USEPA Superfund Alternative Program (NRT, 2013b). The residual sand cover was monitored using a combination of bathymetric surveys and residual sand cover core sample results. Two sediment sampling events were completed on May 21, 2014 and October 27, 2014. All of the surface sand cover sample results were below 22.8 mg/kg total PAH (13) and are all below 1 mg/kg total PAH (13). Sand thickness was also measured during the sampling events. During each

22 | P a g e

sampling event, a push core was advanced to refusal. Sand cover thickness was greater than 10 inches in all events with the exception of site A1B35 which was 9.6 inches. Overall, sand cover thickness measurements ranged from 9.6 to18 inches (NRT, 2015b). In addition, bathymetric surveys were performed in 2013 post dredge prior to sand cover placement and again in 2015 post sand cover. Ninety-seven percent of the area contains a sand cover thickness of 10 inches or greater, indicating natural deposition on the sand cover (Appendix A, Figure 21). As a result of the sediment quality data and bathymetry results, sand cover sampling is completed until the 5-year review in 2018, consistent with the decision tree presented in the USEPA-approved 2013 Residual Sand Cover Monitoring Plan (NRT, 2013b). Sediment and sand cover data is located here: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 Discussions are ongoing between WPSC, USEPA Superfund Alternative Program, and WDNR with regard to future long-term monitoring of the sand cover and the RCM. In addition, the upland and river areas of the WPSC MGP site are being evaluated for the purpose of developing a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD is not scheduled for completion until June 2017 and could likely impose continuing obligations associated with the soil, ground water, RCM and other engineered controls, if necessary. This, however, does not change the BUI removal status as the remedial goals for sediment removal action have been met to the extent practicable. The ROD documents the cleanup remedy for a site or a contaminated part of a site called an operable unit. After the remedial investigation/feasibility study is completed at a National Priorities List site, a remedy is chosen (USEPA, 2016). The ROD certifies that the remedy selection process has followed the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the National Contingency Plan for hazardous releases and oil spills. It also discusses the technical components of the remedy. In addition, the ROD provides a consolidated source of information about the site to the public.

Sediment-Related Remedial Action Goals The goal of this sediment-related remediation project was to achieve sediment contaminant levels of less than or equal to 22.8 mg/kg (ppm) of 13 priority PAHs. These goals were achieved to the extent practicable through sediment removal, sand cover placement, and a RCM (Sediment Site Related Remediation/Source Control Section above).

23 | P a g e

Photo 3. WPSC MGP Dredging in the Menominee River (WDNR, Bougie)

Sediment Assessments Lower Scott Flowage Sediment Investigation The Lower Scott Flowage (LSF) is located between the Park Mill and Menominee Dams. The 1996 RAP update indicated that the Scott Paper Company (located on the flowage between the dams) historically discharged its plant effluent, coal ash and other debris into the flowage (WDNR, 1996). There is a fish consumption advisory for PCBs and mercury for the LSF, indicating a potential issue with sediment quality within the impoundment. A sediment investigation was conducted in November 2013 to determine if there were any impairments to sediment quality in the LSF (CH2MHill, 2013b). Sediment thickness and water depth vary throughout the LSF. Water depth is shallow in the western portion of the flowage and the riverbed consists primarily of rock with thin sediment deposits less than one-foot in isolated areas. Very little sediment was identified within the main river channel. The only sediment deposits identified along the south side of the river were located near the culverts located east of the hydroelectric plant property and near the downstream Menominee Dam. Sediment thicknesses up to four feet were identified in the northeastern portion of the flowage. Analytical results were screened against Wisconsin TECs and Probable Effect Concentrations (PECs) (WDNR, 2003) and USEPA Region 5 (USEPA, 2003) RCRA Ecological Screening Levels which include screening values from MacDonald, et al. (2000a and 2000b). PAHs, metals, PCBs, and dioxin compounds were detected at concentrations exceeding TEC concentrations at 11 of the 36 sample locations within the LSF. TEC exceedances of PAHs, PCBs,

24 | P a g e

and dioxins were also detected at two of the three sample locations upstream of the Park Mill Dam. TEC exceedances are located in isolated pockets throughout the flowage and are not indicative of a large contaminated sediment mass (CH2MHill, 2014). No distinguishable trends in TEC exceedances were observed with depth. PEC exceedances were present at only two of the 36 sample locations within the flowage. There were no PEC exceedances upstream of the Park Mill Dam. PAHs and copper were the only compounds detected at concentrations exceeding PECs within the flowage. The two samples with PEC exceedances are located in close proximity to one another within an isolated sediment pocket immediately downstream of the culverts discharging from the vicinity of the former Scott Paper Mill (now Kimberly Clark). The estimated volume of sediment exceeding PECs is approximately 200 cubic yards and covers a limited area (CH2MHill, 2014). The WDNR Storm Water Permit Program staff have followed up with the owners and operators of the storm water system and requested that they (Kimberly Clark and the city of Marinette) evaluate their outfalls at the next required monitoring period to determine if they are an ongoing source of contaminants to the LSF. No further recommendations were made for remediation of this minor deposit or the flowage overall. Therefore, the results of the sediment characterization show that the sediment in the LSF is not a source of PAHs, metals, and PCBs and Dioxin in the AOC [Appendix A, Figures 22, 23, and 24, respectively (CH2MHill, 2014)]. The site does contain PAH levels that could impact disposal requirements for any material dredged. Future dredging requests will be evaluated under their respective agencies and programs (refer to Other Regulatory Processes for all Dredging Activities in Waters of the State).

Rio Vista Slough Sediment Investigation MDEQ-Surface Water Assessment Section (SWAS) staff used a petite Ponar dredge to capture sediment samples at eight locations in Rio Vista Slough (RVS) in 2014 (Appendix A, Figure 25; Appendix B, Table 3). The primary purpose of the study was to help answer the question: Is RVS acting as a partial source for PCBs found in fish tissues driving the fish consumption advisory in the AOC? PCBs were not found in any of these samples (Appendix B, Table 4). As part of this analysis the samples were also analyzed for heavy metals and PAHs. Heavy metals were detectable at all locations, but varied greatly by location and were not above probable effects concentrations (Appendix B, Table 5). The locations nearest the storm drain had the highest concentrations of metals. PAHs were detected at above probable effects concentrations at three locations adjacent to storm drains that flowed into the slough (Appendix B, Table 6). Sheen was observed at all locations during sample collection. MDEQ SWAS staff indicated that the PAHs and metals levels found in RVS were similar to other areas across the state associated with asphalt or tar topped parking lot areas, were not high enough to drive a removal action, and would be reviewed by appropriate state programs. The small size of RVS and its isolation from the main channel mean that the potential for sedimentation downstream is minimal and not likely to impact benthos. Therefore, the results of the sediment characterization show that the sediment in RVS is not a significant source of PCBs, heavy metals, or PAHs in the AOC. As stated earlier the site does not contain PAH levels that merit remediation; however, it does contain levels that could impact disposal requirements for any material dredged. Future dredging requests will be evaluated under their respective agencies and programs (refer to Other Regulatory Processes for all Dredging Activities in Waters of the State).

25 | P a g e

Evaluation of Potential Remaining Dredge Restriction Areas (Ansul) Tyco: The USEPA RCRA AOOC indicates that Tyco was not required to dredge contaminated material in the glacial till due to difficulty of removing the material and the cost feasibility. An approximately 3-acre sand cover was placed to contain exposed arsenic above the 20 ppm RAO in the turning basin and several areas in the transition zone. Appendix A, Figure 13 is a map of the sand cover area that was completed June 24, 2014. Because the majority of the sand cover area is located in the Federal Navigation Channel, a Federal Section 408 Permit was granted for this activity. In addition, a State of Wisconsin Chapter 30 (WI State Statues) Waterway Permit was required for sand placement in waters of the State. Permitting allowed the sand cover to be placed at –23 -feet minimum water depth. This is 2-feet below the Federal Authorized Depth of 21 feet, and includes one foot over-dredge allowance to prevent interference with USACE authority dredging activities in the turning basin. This remediation project restored the Federal Navigation authorized depths in the turning basin for the first time in 47 years. The turning basin is a natural depositional zone due to depth and proximately to the main river channel. Transported sediment will deposit and mix with the sand cover, providing additional dilution of the arsenic. A combination of post dredge confirmation sampling, bathymetry surveys, and pan-tests of the sand cover indicate the RAO of 20 ppm total arsenic has been achieved to the extent practicable. Future planned monitoring activities will determine the long-term effectiveness of the remedial actions. Based on available information there do not appear to be any further risks or impacts to biological or human health from sediment in the turning basin, transition area, and the South Channel of the Tyco project area where the 20 ppm RAO has been met. Appendix A, Figures 10, 11 and 12 have DMUs and post-dredge confirmation sediment sampling locations and results. Also, Appendix G, Table A1-1 has the Confirmation Sampling Analytical Review. Appendix E of the Remedial Action Completion Report, Great Lakes Legacy Act Lower Menominee River Tyco Site, has the bathymetric survey data (EQM, 2015). Currently, there are no utilities that cross the turning basin or transition area due to the hard glacial till, bedrock, and sheet-pile barrier wall between the Tyco property and the river. Due to these physical constraints and USACE navigational depth restrictions, future placement of utilities in the sand cover area is unlikely. Alternate locations for future utility crossings will need to be sought in more suitable or practical areas. Currently, the city of Marinette’s public water supply lines are the only utility crossings and are in various sections of the Menominee River South Channel. This part of the river is not a high priority area for navigation dredging due to limited water depths and a stationary railroad bridge. Tyco’s remedial dredging in the South Channel has met the 20 ppm total arsenic RAO, and no further action or monitoring is required for this area (under the current monitoring plan); therefore, dredging restrictions for the South Channel are no longer required. Green Bay Paint Sludge (Lloyd Flanders - Menominee, Michigan): The MDEQ Remediation and Redevelopment Division staff and files show there is no indication of any dredging restrictions associated with the remedial actions at the GBPS facility. A majority of the waste has been removed, with only small pieces of hardened paint nodules accumulating on the shoreline (Lori Maki e-mail MDEQ, 2016). The volume of paint nodules has decreased from year to year as indicated in annual reporting.

26 | P a g e

Menekaunee Harbor: Two city-owned and operated utility crossings run parallel with the Ogden Street Bridge at Menekaunee Harbor and the South Channel: a sanitary sewer main on the west side of the bridge and a water main on the east side of the bridge. As part of the harbor restoration, dredging occurred near the water main and confirmation sampling indicated the sediment removal met the project goal of removing sediments with metal concentrations at or above TECs. Dredging was not performed near the sanitary sewer main because sediment quality did not exceed 20 ppm for total arsenic. Post-dredge confirmation sampling indicated exceedances of heavy metals (arsenic and lead) in the area adjacent to the Harbor Town Marine Dock boat slips. Given the difficulties of dredging within the existing marina structures, the Project Team deemed a 6-inch sand cover over a 12,500 square-foot area would aid benthic recovery and residual management. Clean, tested sand fill was placed to address low level metal contaminants and bring the habitat area to design elevation (REL, 2016; Appendix A, Figure 18 shows the Sand Cover Area). The dilution layer sand cover will allow for benthos recovery and prevent a direct contact exposure pathway, protecting human and ecological health. Through confirmation sediment sampling, the remainder of the harbor was determined to meet the TEC goals set within the Project Manual for Menekaunee Harbor Improvements, City of Marinette, Marinette, Wisconsin (Ayres Associates, 2014). Impacted sediments within the harbor have been addressed through environmental dredging to the extent practicable and placement of a dilution sand cover. Concerns with material management/disposal or negative impacts on water quality, benthos, or human health have been addressed. For these reasons, dredging restrictions in the Menekaunee Harbor Area no longer apply. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation: Due to uneven bedrock surfaces, approximately 220 CY of MGP residual impacted sediment remains at depth. A 10-inch sand cover was placed over a 12,250 square-foot area along with a RCM that was installed over an adjacent 19,500 square foot area (including mainly side slopes or bank area and a small area of river bottom). The RCM serves as a conservative contingency measure to prevent any potential small “stringers” of NAPL that may be sorbed to upland soil and debris from migrating into the Menominee River near Boom Landing (NRT, 2016b; Appendix A, Figure 20). The sand cover serves as residuals management, and WPSC developed and is implementing a Sand Cover Monitoring Work Plan to assess the effectiveness of the cover to integrate as well as separate the post-dredged sediment surface and meet the RAO of less than 22.8 mg/kg total (13) PAH in the upper six inches of material. As a result of the NTCRA, sediment has been remediated to the extent practicable. The sand cover is not anticipated to impact or impede any priority navigation dredging since it is located outside the Federal Navigation Channel and away from the municipal boat launch (Boom Landing). The city of Marinette and Nestegg Marine are the riparian owners of the WPSC remediation area. WPSC performed dredging at Nestegg Marina between the slips along the break wall to create sufficient draft for sail boats and other large recreational vessels. It is anticipated that with the current Lake Michigan water level and the sediment removal at Nestegg Marine, dredging will not be necessary in the immediate future. Future planned monitoring activities will determine the long-term effectiveness of the sediment-related remedial actions. Currently, there are no utilities located within the dredged portion of the river. It is unlikely that utilities will be placed in this area due to the physical constraints of the bedrock river bottom. The

27 | P a g e

RCM is another limiting factor for locating utilities at this location as it may not be disturbed in order to function properly. Alternate locations for future utility crossings will need to be sought in more suitable or practical areas. If a utility crossing was planned in the sand cover area, the NR 347 application process would consider the available monitoring data and likely additional characterization based on the specific location. However, a utility crossing in the sand cover area is unlikely due to the shallow bedrock that limited dredging. Appendix A, Figure 26 Lower Menominee River AOC Priority Areas for Navigational Use and Utility Dredging (Crossings) is a map depicting the priority navigation areas (Federal Navigation Channel, commercial & industrial docks, marinas, boat launches, and private dock), priority areas for utility dredging (crossings - including all potential future areas and in this instance specifically in the sediment remedial areas), PAH impacted areas in Lower Scott Flowage, Rio Vista Slough, WPSC and Tyco Arsenic impacted area in the turning basin that if dredged, contain levels that could impact disposal requirements for any material dredged in the future (addressed under Other Regulatory Processes for all Dredging Activities in Waters of the State Section below) and, finally, remaining dredge restriction at WPSC RCM area (WDNR, 2016). Other Regulatory Processes for all Dredging Activities in Waters of the State: In addition, any activities associated with dredging, placement of utilities, piers or other streambed modifications requires a State of Wisconsin Chapter 30 (WI State Statues) Waterway Permit along with following procedures outlined in the Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 347: Sediment Sampling and Analysis (Appendix C) for dredging permit application and approval process. This process allows the WDNR to review and evaluate if the project minimizes impacts to the environment and meets the permit and regulatory requirements. Future dredge projects located within the Lower Menominee River should follow the NR 347 Sediment Sampling and Analysis procedures and provide the WDNR with sediment quality results to determine any potential media (sediment, surface water, groundwater, air quality) impacts as a result of the proposed dredging project. Projects will be evaluated and permitted under the State Statutes Chapter 30 permit process. WDNR staff will coordinate to ensure that any proposed actions will be in compliance with laws and regulations. To ensure compliance with the requirements of the Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 700 Series (November 2013) and WI State Statues 292 (August 19, 2016), the WDNR’s Remediation and Redevelopment Program should be consulted prior to disturbing any RCM and/or area(s) exceeding a site-specific RAO. As appropriate, USEPA (RCRA or Superfund Alternative Program) should also be consulted prior to disturbing any RCM, deed restricted area(s), and/or area(s) exceeding a site-specific RAO. MDEQ also regulates dredging projects under a similar permit authority Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams Part 325, Great lakes Submerged lands, and Part 115 Solid Waste Management of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended (NREPA), and proposed placement of dredge spoils upland. Refer to (Appendix D) MDEQ dredging permit policy and approval process (MDEQ, 2013). Other Regulatory Processes for Protecting Water and Sediment Quality:

Such discharges to waters of the United States (US) are no longer allowed. The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the US and regulating quality standards for surface waters.

28 | P a g e

The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. USEPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges along with Wisconsin’s equivalent permit program Wisconsin and Michigan’s permit programs.

The 1987 CWA amendment later (1990) added storm water discharges from construction, industrial and municipal facilities and is administered locally through the states and local storm water permitting programs. Wisconsin promulgated Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 216 Storm Water Discharge Permits in 1994.

Michigan has a similar storm water permitting program under Michigan Permit by Rule – R323.2190 of Part 21, Wastewater Discharge Permits Administrative Rules, promulgated under Part 31, Water Resources Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act 1994 PA 451 as amended, MCL 324.3101 et seq.

The 1978 Wisconsin Spill Law, Chapter 292.11, Wisconsin Stats., requires that a person who possesses or controls a hazardous substance or who causes discharge of hazardous substance shall notify the Department immediately of any discharge not exempted by Statute.

Similarly, Michigan has a spills law under the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act Title III Section 304, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 355.40 Extremely Hazardous Substances, and Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, Section 103, 40 CFR 302 Hazardous Substances.

Outcome of Evaluation for Potential Dredge Restrictions In summary, as outlined above, the target for the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI removal has been met. Of the sites that were evaluated, three sediment remediation sites (Ansul-Tyco, Menekaunee Harbor, and WPSC) relied on a combination of dredging, sand cover and/or RCM to meet the specific objectives for each site. Future dredging requests will be evaluated under their respective agencies and programs.

Stakeholder/Public Engagement This removal recommendation was discussed with the Lower Menominee River TAC and CAC at their regular meetings on August 24, 2016. The Lower Menominee River TAC showed support via meeting minutes and the CAC submitted a formal letter of support for removal of the BUI, dated October 20, 2016, (Appendix E). The proposed action was public noticed via listing in the Eagle-Herald on September 10, 2016: http://ehextra.com/Content/RECORDS/Records-Articles/Article/DNR-seeking-public-comment/16/797/34979 (refer to Appendix F), and also publicized via AOC e-mail distribution lists and the GovDelivery listserve for the AOC. Supporting documents were posted on the WDNR Menominee River AOC Website (dnr.wi.gov/topic/greatlakes/menominee.html) for public review and comment from September 8, 2016, through September 22, 2016. The Departments received written and verbal comments from Federal and State agencies during this period and have addressed the comments by incorporating

29 | P a g e

them into this document. The Departments received no public comments during the review and comment period. A Lower Menominee River AOC Open House was held on September 15, 2016, at UW-Marinette Campus as an additional opportunity for the public to review and comment on the dredge management plan and BUI removal package. The TAC was formed in 1988 to bring together technical experts familiar with the AOC for the development and implementation of the Remedial Action Plan (WDNR, 1990). In addition, TAC members review and provide input on project plans, monitoring data, RAP updates, and the BUI removal documents. The TAC members also provided support for the monitoring programs to assess impaired use, removal of the BUI, and ultimately removing/delisting the AOC status. The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was formed in 1988 as a means of incorporating stakeholder feedback into the RAP documents and to serve as ambassadors on AOC issues to the Marinette and Menominee communities (WDNR and MDNR, 1990). CAC members help the agencies by identifying local issues, developing local targets and goals, serving as a resource for historical information, and assisting in project implementation when possible. The CAC developed governing bylaws in June of 2011 to ensure the committee’s long term viability and balanced representation of the community. As of September 2016, there are thirteen membership positions filled of a possible twenty-six. Dozens more individuals have attended monthly meetings and currently receive meeting minutes and AOC updates through e-mail. The WDNR and the MDEQ strongly prefer that requests to remove the impaired designation of a BUI be agreed to by the TAC and CAC. The TAC meeting minutes and CAC letter of support document support for the removal of the restrictions on dredging BUI and are located in Appendix E. The CAC holds nine or ten regular meetings per year on the UW-Marinette campus open to all interested parties. Meetings are advertised through the WDNR Public Meetings Calendar (http://dnr.wi.gov/Calendar/Meetings/), CAC email distribution list, and other means. Participation in meetings is the primary way members of the CAC stay informed and provide input on AOC activities. In addition to attending CAC meetings, the CAC members have been active in the AOC in the following ways: participated in on-site tours for the sturgeon passage project, the Ansul/Tyco arsenic site, the Menekaunee Harbor restoration site, and the WPSC coal tar site; hosted volunteer waterfront cleanup events; reviewed documents and provided letters of support for AOC related projects; provided local representation or feedback at various state and federal AOC meetings; hosted and participated in AOC Open House events June 2014 and September 2016; and participated in state and federal AOC related conference calls.

Recommendation Removal Statement Based upon the completion of the necessary contaminated sediment remediation projects, continued monitoring under the Superfund Alternative and RCRA Programs, and review of the data for all remediation projects by WDNR, MDEQ, MDNR, USACE, USCG, USFWS, TAC and CAC; the WDNR and the MDEQ recommend the removal of the Restrictions on Dredging Activities BUI for the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern. All management actions established to meet the BUI delisting targets have been completed. Based on the review of all pertinent data, and input from the USEPA project staff, the TAC, the CAC,

30 | P a g e

and the public, all sediment remediation projects have been completed to the extent practicable, and no further sediment characterization or sediment remediation in the Lower Menominee River AOC is required. MDEQ and WDNR AOC Program staff request concurrence with the recommendation to remove the Dredging Restrictions BUI from the Lower Menominee River AOC.

Photo 4. Lower Menominee River AOC Open House – speaker Steve Galarneau, WDNR, Director - Office of the Great Lakes (Ecology & Environment, Inc., Erickson)

Photo 5. Lower Menominee River AOC Open House Attendees (EEI, Erickson)

31 | P a g e

References Ayres Associates, 2014a. Project Manual for Menekaunee Harbor Improvements, City of Marinette, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gzvflVdaq1V2ZIRFdRLXpsWHc/view?pref=2&pli=1 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gzvflVdaq1d294LWxnZzg5a1E/view?pref=2&pli=1 Ayres Associates,2014b. Quality Assurance Project Plan and Dredge Handling Plan, Lower Menominee River Area of Concern, Menekaunee Harbor Restoration Project, Grant/Project No. GL-00E01312-0 Sub 1-Appendix C. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gzvflVdaq1V2ZIRFdRLXpsWHc/view?pref=2&pli=1 Bay-Lake Regional Planning Commission, 1987. City of Marinette Comprehensive Plan 1987 Update. Bloomberg , 2015. KK Integrated Logistics Inc Company Overview. http://www.bloomberg.com/Research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=45763824 CH2MHill, 2012. Draft Final Design Report, Menominee River Sediment Removal Project Adjacent to Tyco Fire Products LP Facility, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://www3.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/pdfs/ansul-report-201201.pdf https://www3.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/pdfs/ansul-report-201201-appendices.pdf CH2MHill, 2013a. Final Five Year Technical Review, Revision 0, Document Control No. 473274.176. Prepared for Tyco Fire Products LP. CH2MHill, 135 S 84th Street, Milwaukee, WI 53212. CH2MHill, 2013b. Assessment of Contaminated Sediment in the Lower Scott Flowage in the Menominee River Area of Concern Site. CH2MHILL for USEPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. CH2MHill, 2014. Final Site Characterization Report: Assessment of Contaminated Sediment in the Lower Scott Flowage in Menominee River Area of Concern. CH2MHILL for USEPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. CH2MHill and Sevenson, 2014. Construction Completion Report. Menominee River Sediment Removal Project Adjacent to the Tyco Fire Products LP Facility, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://www3.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/pdfs/construction-completed-report-201403.pdf CH2MHill, 2015a. Final Revised Barrier Wall Groundwater Monitoring Plan Update. Prepared for Tyco Fire Products LP. CH2MHill, 135 S 84th Street, Milwaukee, WI 53212.

• Part 1 of 4 (PDF) (86pp, 9.5MB) September 2015 • Part 2 of 4 (PDF) (35pp, 6.1MB) September 2015 • Part 3 of 4 (PDF) (194pp, 7.5MB) September 2015 • Part 4 of 4 (PDF) (13pp, 249KB) September 2015

CH2MHill, 2015b. Sampling Summary Report Great Lakes Legacy Act lower Menominee River Tyco Site Adjacent to the Tyco Fire Products LP Facility, Marinette, Wisconsin.

o Part 1 of 3 (PDF) (114pp, 7MB) November 2015 o Part 2 of 3 (PDF) (116pp, 4MB) November 2015

32 | P a g e

o Part 3 of 3 (PDF) (12pp, 6.3MB) November 2015

Citizens Advisory Committee Calendar of Public Meetings, 2016. http://dnr.wi.gov/Calendar/Meetings/ Environmental Quality Management, Inc. - EQM , 2015. Remedial Action Completion Report, Great Lakes Legacy Act Lower Menominee River Tyco Site.

• Part 1 (PDF) (83pp, 9.6B) December 2015 • Part 2 (PDF) (95pp, 7.3MB) December 2015

MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, and T. Berger. 2000a. Development and Evaluation of Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines for Freshwater Ecosystems. Arch Environ Contam. Toxicol.39:20-31. MacDonald, D.D., L.M. Di Pinto, J. Field, C.G. Ingersoll, E.R. Long, and R.C Swartz. 2000b. Development and Evaluation of Consensus-Based Sediment Effect Concentrations for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 2013. Dredge Sediment Review (Guidance), Number 09-018. http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-policy-09-018_414753_7.pdf Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 2015. Sediment Chemistry of Rio Vista Slough, Menominee River Area of Concern, Menominee County, Michigan, June 24, 2014. MI/DEQ/WRD-15/023. Keiper, W. MDEQ-Water Resources Division, 525 W. Allegan, P.O. Box 30242, Lansing, MI 48909-7742 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 2016. Lori Maki, Remediation & Redevelopment Division, Lloyd Flanders June 24, 2016 e-mail information with Sharon Baker. Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, 2016. Sediment Testing for Dredging Projects. http://www.michigan.gov/deq/0,4561,7-135-3313_3677_3697-10906--,00.html Natural Resource Technology-NRT, 2016a. DRAFT Feasibility Study-Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former Manufactured Gas Plant Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. Note: This report will be posted in the near future – once the document is final. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 Will be posted in the near future – upon final version. NRT, 2013a. DRAFT Final Report: Focused NAPL and Sediment Removal Action-Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former MGP Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 NRT, 2013b. Technical Memorandum: Residual Sand Cover Monitoring Plan, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former MGP Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480

33 | P a g e

NRT, 2015a. Remedial Investigation Report Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former MGP Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 NRT, 2015b. Technical Memorandum: Residual Sand Cover Monitoring Results, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former MGP Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 NRT, 2016b. Response to USEPA Comments (dated March 25 and April 8, 2016) on FS Report – Revision 1 and Submittal on FS Report – Revision 2, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Former MGP Site, Marinette, Wisconsin. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.scs&id=0509952&doc=Y&colid=30497&requestTimeout=480 Robert E Lee & Associates, Inc., 2016. Construction Completion Report Lower Menominee River Area of Concern Menekaunee Harbor Restoration Project Marinette, Wisconsin. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gzvflVdaq1RGQ3aXRlRlJ2cDg/view?pref=2&pli=1 United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2014. May 1, 2014 E-mail to WDNR Navigation Dredging Menominee River Figure 4. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2016. USACE Menominee Harbor, Michigan & Wisconsin Federal Navigation Channel. http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/Operations/Menominee-Harbor-MI-WI/ United States Environmental Protection Agency - USEPA, 2003. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Ecological Screening Levels, August. USEPA, 2005. Lower Menominee River Area of Concern Website: https://www.epa.gov/menominee-river-aoc/about-menominee-river-aoc USEPA, 2008. Statement of Basis and Final Decision Document for Ansul Inc. EPA ID# 006 125 215. http://www.epa.gov/Region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/pdfs/ansul_final_decision_2008.pdf. USEPA, 2009. Administrative Order on Consent for Ansul Incorporated Stanton Street Facility. EPA ID# WID 006 125 215. http://www.epa.gov/Region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/pdfs/ansul_order.pdf USEPA, 2012. Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for Removal Action, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation Marinette, Wisconsin, former MGP. EPA ID No. WID 006 125 215. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/05/410967.pdf USEPA , 2016a. Region 5, RCRA, Ansul Site Information Website: https://www3.epa.gov/region5/cleanup/rcra/ansul/ USEPA, 2016b. Region 5, Superfund Program, WPSC Marinette MGP Information Website: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0509952

34 | P a g e

USEPA.2016c. Region 5, Superfund Program, Record of Decision Information Website: https://superfund.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/211635138-What-is-a-ROD-Record-of-Decision- Weston Solutions, 2008. Menekaunee Harbor Sediment Investigation Report. Weston Solutions Inc. for USEPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - WDNR, 1996. Lower Menominee River Action Plan Update. PUBL WR-410-96. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/greatlakes/documents/MenomineeRiverRAP1996.pdf WDNR, 2012. Figure 2 Sediment Remediation sites in the Lower Menominee River. WDNR, 2003. Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines, Recommendations for Use & Application Interim Guidance, December. PUBL WT-732 2003. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/brownfields/documents/cbsqg_interim_final.pdf WDNR , 2011. Removal of Contaminated Sediment Aims at Improving Marinette Harbor Water Quality. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Weekly News Article. WDNR, 2013. Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 347 Sediment Sampling and Analysis, Monitoring Protocol and Disposal Criteria for Dredging Projects. http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/nr/300/347.pdf WDNR and MDNR, 1990. Lower Menominee River Remedial Action Plan-A Water Quality Restoration and Protection Plan, PUBL WR-246 90. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/greatlakes/documents/MenomineeRiverRAPStage1Report1990.pdf WDNR and MDEQ, 2008. Lower Menominee River AOC Beneficial Use Impairment Restoration Targets. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/greatlakes/documents/MenomineeRiverDelistingTargets2008.pdf. WDNR and MDNR, 2015. 2014 Remedial Action Plan Update for the Lower Menominee River Area of Concern. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/greatlakes/documents/Menominee2014RAPUpdate.pdf World Port Source, 2015. Port of Marinette Port Commerce http://www.worldportsource.com/ports/commerce/USA_WI_Port_of_Marinette_3745.php Note: All Tyco and WPSC documents are available at the Stephenson Public Library, 1700 Hall Avenue, Marinette, Wisconsin 54143, (715) 732-7570.

35 | P a g e

Definitions Area of Concern (AOC) – Defined by Annex 2 of the 1987 Protocol to the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA, 1987) as “geographic areas that fail to meet the general or specific objectives of the Agreement where such failure has caused or is likely to cause impairment of beneficial use or of the area’s ability to support aquatic life.” These areas are, or were, the “most contaminated” areas of the Great Lakes, and the purpose of the AOC program is to bring these areas to a point at which they are not environmentally degraded more than other comparable areas of the Great Lakes. When that point has been reached, the AOC can be removed from the list of AOCs in the Annex, or “delisted.” The GLWQA can be found at: http://www.ijc.org/rel/agree/quality.html Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) – Defined by the GLWQA as a reduction in the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes sufficient to cause impairment to a designated use (GLWQA, 2013). The Lower Menominee River AOC has five BUIs remaining: restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption; restrictions on dredging activities; degradation of benthos; degradation of fish and wildlife populations; and loss of fish and wildlife habitat. Beneficial use(s) are ways that a water body can improve the quality of life for people or for fish and wildlife. For example, providing habitat for fish and wildlife is a beneficial use of a water body. If a beneficial use is suppressed or unavailable due to environmental problems, like loss of habitat, then that beneficial use is considered impaired. The International Joint Commission provided a list of 14 possible beneficial use impairments in the 1987 amendments to the GLWQA. Benthos/Benthic Organisms – the flora, fauna found on the bottom, or in bottom sediments of a lake, river or other body of water. Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines – Federal and state sediment quality guidelines were developed for commonly found, in place contaminants to serve as benchmark values for making comparisons to the concentrations of contaminant levels in sediment at sites under evaluation for various reasons (NR 347 dredging projects, degree and extent studies, screening level ecological risk assessments). The consensus-based threshold values have been evaluated for their reliability in predicting sediment toxicity to benthic organisms by using matching sediment chemistry and toxicity data from field studies. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) – A federal program that provides unprecedented funding for protection and restoration efforts on the five Great Lakes. State and local governments and non–profit organizations are eligible to receive grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for projects addressing toxic substances, invasive species, non–point source pollution, habitat protection and restoration or accountability, monitoring, evaluation, communication, and partnership building.

36 | P a g e

Heavy Metals – The heavy metals refers to a group of toxic metals including: arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, silver and zinc. Heavy metals are often present at industrial sites and/former historical industrial operations. Heavy metals are sometimes transported off-site to ground water, surface water, and sediment via wind erosion and storm water runoff. Lakewide Action and Management Plan (LAMP) - A LAMP is plans of action to assess, restore, protect, and monitor the ecosystem health of a Great Lake. It is used to coordinate the work of all the government, tribal, and non-government partners working to improve the Lake’s ecosystem. A public consultation process is used to ensure that the LAMP is addressing the public's concerns. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) - A group of more than 200 compounds, PCBs have been manufactured since 1929 for uses including electrical insulation, hydraulics, fluorescent lights, and carbonless paper to name a few. In 1979, PCBs were banned because of their persistence in the environment and tendency to magnify up the food chain. They have been linked to reproductive problems in wildlife and are suspected of causing developmental problems in human infants. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) - Chemicals commonly associated with oils, greases, and other components derived from petroleum. Some PAH compounds have been identified as cancer or mutation causing. Priority Areas Navigation Use – Include the Federal Navigation Channel, commercial and industrial docks, marinas, boat launches, and private docks. Priority Areas Utility Dredging and Crossing – Include all potential future areas, specifically those in the sediment remediation areas. Remedial Action Plan (RAP) - A RAP is developed for each AOC to identify the status of BUIs and their sources, document restoration targets, and list actions needed to reach those targets. RAPs are updated periodically to report progress toward achieving the restoration targets. Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA)- The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act protects communities and resource conservation. To achieve this, EPA develops regulations, guidance and policies that ensure the safe management and cleanup of solid and hazardous waste, and programs that encourage source reduction and beneficial reuse. Restoration Target - Specific goals and objectives established to track restoration progress of beneficial use impairments. Once targets have been met, the beneficial use is no longer considered impaired. Targets should be locally derived. Working with the Lower Menominee AOC Citizens Advisory Committee, delisting targets were developed in partnership with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) and the

37 | P a g e

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Wisconsin and Michigan use different criteria when assessing BUIs. The agencies and CAC agreed to implement the most restrictive criteria from either state when developing the Menominee AOC specific delisting targets. Superfund Alternative Approach- The Superfund remedial process begins once sites are brought to the attention of the Superfund site assessment program. As EPA uses all available tools to ensure the protection of human health and the environment, various avenues for site cleanup are evaluated during site assessment to determine which is the most appropriate to meet site cleanup needs. Superfund Alternative Approach - When a liable Potential Responsible Party (PRP) demonstrates it is viable and cooperative, EPA regional offices, at their discretion, may enter into a Superfund Alternative Approach agreement with the PRP to facilitate the cleanup of a site.

38 | P a g e

39 | P a g e

Appendix – Table of Contents

A. Figures 1. Lower Menominee River AOC (EPA, 2005) 2. Sediment Remediation Sites in the Lower Menominee River AOC (WDNR, 2012) 3. USACE Menominee Harbor Federal Navigation Channel (USACE, 2016) 4. USACE Federal Navigation Dredging & Disposal Site (USACE, 2014) 5. (Ansul) Tyco Facility Site Map (CH2MHill, 2012) 6. (Ansul) Tyco Terrestrial Remedial Actions (CH2MHill, 2010) 7. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Turning Basin, 50 ppm 2013

(CH2MHill, 2014) 8. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Transition Area, 50 ppm 2013

(CH2MHill, 2014) 9. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - South Channel, 50 ppm 2013

(CH2MHill, 2014) 10. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Turning Basin, 20 ppm 2014

(CH2MHill, 2015b) 11. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Transition Area, 20 ppm 2014

(CH2MHill, 2015b) 12. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - South Channel, 20 ppm 2014

(CH2MHill, 2015b) 13. (Ansul) Tyco Glacial Till Sand Cover Area (CH2MHill, 2015b and EQM, 2015) 14. Green Bay Paint Sludge Site - Lloyd Flanders Site Map (WDNR and MDNR, 1990) 15. Green Bay Paint Sludge Site - Lloyd Flanders Site Map (WDNR and MDNR, 1990) 16. Menekaunee Harbor Plan & Contours (Ayres 2014a and REL, 2016) 17. Menekaunee Harbor Confirmation Sediment Sampling Locations (REL, 2016) 18. Menekaunee Harbor Sand Cover Area (Harbor Town Marine Dock) (REL, 2016) 19. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation - Previous Remedial Actions – Upland

(NRT, 2016a) 20. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation - Sand Cover & RCM Area (NRT, 2015b) 21. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation - 2015 Bathymetric Survey Sand Cover

Versus 2013 Post-Dredge Surface (NRT, 2015b) 22. Summary of Detected PAH’s Results - Lower Scott Flowage, Lower Menominee

River AOC (CH2MHill, 2014) 23. Summary of Detected Metal’s Results - Lower Scott Flowage, Lower Menominee

River AOC (CH2MHill, 2014) 24. Summary of Detected PCB and TCDD-EQ Results - Lower Scott Flowage, Lower

Menominee River AOC (CH2MHill, 2014) 25. Surficial Sediment Sampling Locations - Rio Vista Slough, Lower Menominee

River AOC (MDEQ, 2015) 26. Lower Menominee River AOC Priority Areas for Navigational Use and Utility

Dredging (Crossings)-(WDNR, 2016)

40 | P a g e

B. Tables 1. Table 1. Lower Menominee River AOC Sediment Remediation Sites with

Summary of Goals, Actions, and Monitoring (WDNR, 2016) 2. Table 2. WPSC MGP Residual Sand Cover Analytical Summary Table (NRT,

2015) 3. Table 3. Site Locations and Sample Descriptions for Rio Vista Slough

Sampling 6/24/2014 (MDEQ, 2015) 4. Table 4. Aroclor Results for Rio Vista Slough Sediment Samples Collected on

6/24/2014 (MDEQ, 2015) 5. Table 5. Heavy Metal Results for Surficial Sediment Samples taken in Rio

Vista Slough 6/24/15 (MDEQ, 2015) 6. Table 6. PAH Results for Surficial Sediment Samples Taken in Rio Vista

Slough 6/24/15 (MDEQ, 2015)

C. State of Wisconsin Administrative Code for Dredging Activities - NR 347 (WDNR, 2013)

D. MDEQ Dredge Sediment Review Guidance Number 09-018. (MDEQ, 2013)

E. TAC Meeting Minutes and CAC for the Lower Menominee River AOC Letter of Support

F. Open House News Release, Eagle-Herald 9/10/16

41 | P a g e

Appendix A - Figures

42 | P a g e

43 | P a g e

Figure 1. Lower Menominee River AOC (EPA, 2005)

MICIIIGAN

MENOMJNC~

.4, s

l,EGEII.])

STATE LI

-- MAJOR ROAllS

- Sl:'RfAC£i \VAttR

UR.DANARCAS

AR.EA OF CONCERN

CJ WATER:s.MS.0

a:'llMI: ~~1'1.0M:~..0.:-m-l.U," Dii'.umQ,,"'?'OJ"W..TtJMl. W~Nrtl T~~'ll:COM:'.:ft: Ctl'>.kn.1£..-rto; WA1'U1.AL flaOl'Tl.ezil , 1"7,'Jtl!.'Wt!lf"'~lilH b~A.Mt.m,"T Of ~URALRUOURc:nl, ~/JOJ: ~ t'!l!lll:a.<toA.~~£1 Ko!. Gt.oo:f:11...~C ll-'f01..\(/\f'!"0}{,CEP"1.~ Cf"Cllf05.NAn,;:.t,i 'f!O!l(~!' !1)()6..A.NO!!ltl. too~

0 1,500 3,000 Feet

MENOM INEE RIVE R. MICHIGAN-WISCONSIN

AR.EA OF CON CE RN

44 | P a g e

Figure 2. Sediment Remediation Sites in the Lower Menominee River (WDNR, 2012)

45 | P a g e

Figure 3. USACE Menominee Harbor Federal Navigation Channel (USACE, 2016)

Menominee Harbor, Michigan & Wisconsin m

* Outer Approach Channel cu rrently maintained to maximum 300' width.

Figure 4. USACE Federal Navigation Dredging & Disposal Site (USACE, 2014)

FY14 Menominee Harbor Dredging Areas

BUILDING STRONG®

47 | P a g e

Figure 5. (Ansul) Tyco Facility Site Map (CH2MHill, 2012) j

S ' ace Water Flow 10!.-edlion

- - - s, · e~ Sh H t P'lt;e; Wall(\f,ertl Barr er Wall}

II" --1 __ 1 A.pjpro~rnate Pro;pe-rtiy 8 ,xmd'ary

USACE P.-qjeict Limits for Fw@ral Narvigatioo Chann!il

Sl.lb,Areas

filµ , 1 5re Map T;wfii'e ~ U' far,ffly Ma.rfo:n ~

DN2MHIILL

48 | P a g e

Figure 6. (Ansul) Tyco Terrestrial Remedial Actions (CH2MHill, 2010)

C

D

AREAC (ASPHALT REPAIR)

AREA B (ASPHALT & CONCRETE)

AREA A (ASPHALT, STONE & CONCRETE)

~ ,,_-

.. .

n

r

2

AREAD (ASPHALT REPAIR)

AREAE {ASPHALT)

AREAF (ASPHALT)

5

.tQIEa;

1. DUE TO COHSTRUCTION OF THE GROUNDWATER TREATMENT BUILDING, THEASl'tW.T COi/ER& PLACED IH AREAS AAND B WERE REMOIIED. MATERIAL EXCAVATED AND 510CIC­PILED FOR OFFSITE DISPOSAL. AND• 11-E BUILOINIG CCNS'fflUCTED OVER TifE R\EAS.

2, APOR110N OF.AREAS CAN:1 D WERE. RE-ASPHAL.lfEC IN.2D1C Jta PART OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES REI.ATEDTO SHEETPI.E .,,._ WALL l>l8TAUATION.

3, AREAS A,, B,, C,D, H,, I, J. K. L M, JINJ N~E COMPLETED IN2CI09. Ha:AS E, F. AHDG WERE COMl'\.ETED r; 2010.

4, ~ LJ'\MJ M ~ ~ -cXCA.V/1.~ IN .2011) TO RcMOVc ADOITIONALMA.~fflil\L

A

LEGEND ~ 8'TONa COi/ER

~SOILCO'il'ER

0 ,oo zoo 300 ..... -------12/1i&f'2D1D

..J

..J -:::c I N z 0

VERIFY SCALE

IIAAl80NEaotON OAIOINALOAA'W9ilt:I. 0 , ... = DECEMBER ae!: I

!I

----FOEVl=BION=-11 I PI..OTTIIE: l0-A3;11 N4

49 | P a g e

Figure 7. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Turning Basin, 50 ppm 2013 (CH2MHill, 2014)

liumiflg Basiin

Mote.: USDA 1'4alianal Agriculture Imagery Progralill(NA.IP) acquired "le • on· aerial m ager,

,egend

Gbcial TII V ca l..ocations (\iii5Uall~ Verifie,d n ·· FIE-Id, Mo Sam.fie Collected for Lab!Yatory Te-sting)

Dredge Managemefll l (OMU)

Ll'SAOE Project Limits fur Federal Na'i'igaiion Channel

SuriaiceArsem:: CmD2!1tra1ions

e Final Sample l.oca1ian and Result <50 mg.11!:g

0, 80 11:IO

ft!tn6 ~i11~I PllSWffid!!e- Q1nliJr;3li.'.o Sarr mg~ ~tl Res "fJWFim .fhxilits !P fad{tJ iJt,;m;, ~ M?

CH2MMILL

50 | P a g e

Figure 8. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Transition Area, 50 ppm 2013 (CH2MHill, 2014)

Rll

re._ ..

N 1 • 12 -2

12

Legend

e con- aliillf1 Sampl'e oca

@ Gbcial TJI Vert eaticn Locations

Con - afiDn d USBPA Split Sample Looations

@ > .ft Re-Oiedge G "i rmarion Sal"J1l'Ge L~icns

Ghcial TIii \lefifuaticn and US EPA Spjil Sa Loca "

Dredge IManageimenl M:U)

USAGE Project !..frrms fOI" Fedleral Nal;igatian Channel INote: USDA National Agl'ic,Jl11.Jr;e l mager, Progra ·• on· aerial ima,g,ay

~~3

\ . . ,oL· __ --1. __ _,so ___ ._ _ __,1,oo

Feet

Coo mati G aj a - I.I Localil!OC fJm Rm PmtiJJt15 l PF adl:ty ~ere

CH2MHILL

Figure 9. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - South Channel, 50 ppm 2013 (CH2MHill, 2014)

~nd

D Dredge ManagEl"nenl lint (OMU)

Surtaoe Arsenic Ccncentra:ions

e Final Sam~ Loca1ion and Result <50 mgitg

\ O'--L--Fe«-100L---''--2-'00

SouthChamel

Note: USOA Natiorol Awicdnn l ll\3ligl=ly ?rograrr(NAIP) atq.1ired '"leaf on- aerial imagery I

WMl .,,

AJR8 fml Posl-lno,< Co-S.fl'll[lll9l.ocai<lo,a:id Res:lls TJ!D f iro fl<Xlr:as IP f aciltf Jair>tte M

CH2MHILL

52 | P a g e

Figure 10. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results - Turning Basin 20 ppm 2014 (CH2MHill, 2015b)

!Designates an.~- 140 x 40 ft dredge managemenl· unil

LO -A Designates an a,wro:c. 7 fli ~ 70 ft sub-d'redge - nage,m,mi unit

16.-./1 To1al Arsen ic Ocncerrtration in m illigrams per i logram (mg; g)

0 Sample L=a1ion

0 Glacia'I lill Vemication Loca ·

IDM.U Boundary

Dredge ageiment !Mll j

c::J DMU Grouping1

I)

Aire.:. Vitia>: sand COllE1' was placed

USACE Pn:j_ett Lim:ts for Federal Nai,riga •

00

Feet

Notes.: 1. Ae - Imagery provided by Esri ~· 'ot1d lma,ge-,y Ser.tire_ 2. Tot3'I arse - con .ratioos pos:l.ed in mil ligrams per kilogram (rn,g/kgi) .. 3. Toial arse - reswlts shown in blwe, denote • IJMU composite =pie ~ of tlle 'fI

e:,po:sed surface. 4. Total arse - results shown in d enote the final expc;se;:Lsul'taJCe vra:s ~I till ~d

-- e ClOOICE!niratirn af .. exposed glacial ·tilL · 5. SOMUs wriih final exposed gaciel li ll surface concentra5cns gre.aiEr than 2]]1 mg/ik·g are ,,mer,e

s CO'llerwas .. ~ ~dare shaded in

L06-C 3 J

I f

I

' r

/ Jlff·:" I

UJ6-D

t

, , f

I

, '

l

-~4 1 LO:. I 4 .71

' I

I # I

CH2MI--I ILL

53 | P a g e

Figure 11. (Ansul) Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results – Transition Area, 20 ppm 2014 (CH2MHill, 2015b)

legend

Glacial TIIV ca!

• • n m;e Fl d. Mo Sam Tes.1ing}

.::.J Dredge IManagemem MLJJ

USACJE Prujecli. Lim for Federal Na~on Channel

SuriaceArs:enb Ccncentratians

e Final Sample location and Result <50 mg; g

\ .. ·.... {]L----'----BJ.....D __ __,_ __ ~ 16D

· Feet

l!-k,te: U SDA National .Agricult e Imagery Pl1D!lra MAJ?) acquil'ed "'1es ~ on," aerial imsgery

1 :21!

ftl!Rl illill Fl redye Conmr; · .Sarr: nsi Loc£! t a.til Re£!·

1jID fiIF R"oot/115 iP Far:iilrj liiY:i\\?l'J'aWI

CH2MHILL

54 | P a g e

Figure 12. (Ansul)Tyco Confirmation Sampling Results – South Channel, 20 ppm 2014 (CH2MHill, 2015b)

L•egencl

lil 1 Designates .an ~ - 140 i't x 140 ' · medge management u ni!:

LO 1-A De-sigaa!E-s an appc-=. rO ft:.: 70 fl ~ rnanagefT1 ·Lrit

1'6.4 To• Arsenic Conoerrlra.tion in ·11i'grams per

Sample Localion

Sub-DMIJ Boundary

D redge M anagement

c::::J DMU Groupin 91

MU)

\._~.· o~·----''---1~ffi----'----30~·· D \.. FeE¾

N'ote.s: 1. U SDA National A gria.il turre. Imagery l?J;OQ@liTI ( P) a.oq - ed i ear oo" aaial imBQ=f'Jl-2 . Totil arsenic ,c::cnea nraf" ns. po:s!ed in 1111illigr:arns FJ€f" ki logram ('mq.!kg1}.. 3. Tora! arsenic rre.sut5- sh in IJI ue dED:lte the D'NllJ ccmpos.'IE sample- resul~ a" e - •e.xposed surface..

f""~ :B al rellg1: are- Coofi oo Scir:

~File~· IP FiK.iitJ ~rem

CHZMHIL!L

55 | P a g e

Figure 13. (Ansul)Tyco – Glacial Till Sand Cover Areas (CH2MHill, 2015b and EQM, 2015)

LEGEND DREDGE CONTOUR (2' INTERVAL) (SURVEY DATE 10/26/2013)

VERIFIED EXPOSED GLACIAL TILL

LIMITS OF TILL COVER AREA OF SAND COVER

-.. \--.. - I

, fl. \\

SAMPLE LOCATION (2010)

SAMPLE LOCATION (2013)

NAVIGATION CHANNEL /TURNING BASIN

LIMITS OF POST DREDGE SURVEY

EXPOSED GLACIAL TILL ABOVE AUTHORIZED DEPTH IN NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL (NO COVER 92.493 SF/ 2.12 AC)

Till Arsenic Concentration Data -2010 Rt Sampling & 2013 EPA Samples I

Sample Arsenic:

Top 011111 0 100 200 300 Location ,o ConcentraUon Easting Northing

Elevation

r'Y'h-. - Scale In Feet I Im•"'•'

A2 14 2585053.81 470338.03 SSL17 A7 S3 2584956.S2 470021.17 S68.76 cs S2 2S85024.84 469885.19 564.73

50500 28.2 2584964.07 470088.66 565.3 50501 139 2584985.55 469975.68 565.6 50504 2.6 2S85115.89 4701S5.21 552.9

5DS06HSA 160 2585113.19 469885.64 S62.3 5DS09 4.1 25854S5.0l 470157.00 549.1 S0510 111 2585216.18 469961.77 554.9 SDSll 2.7 2585370.n 470202.26 549.7 S0512 182 2585311.45 470115.99 551.7 SD51l 95.7 2585358.49 470016.81 S50.t SD514 144 2585539.85 470262.17 548.8 SD515 94.6 2585509.51 470073.67 550.9 SD516 28.6 2S8S434.50 469894.27 548.4 SD517 2.6 2585738.01 470214.26 545.5 50519 1.8 2585574.42 469952.31 547.6

S0523H5A 2.6 2585978.09 470080.24 546.4 50551 2.1 2584957.61 470516.38 550.2 50552 1.6 2585175.91 470523.56 547.9 50553 1.9 2585514.79 470408.82 549.6 50554 2.1 2585683.59 470321.32 548.0 SD555 2.1 2585808.19 470310.80 542.1 SD556 2.4 258S92S.78 470176.67 54S.9 50560 2.9 2585561.14 469719.36 543.9 SD561 2.7 2585681.73 469481.92 540.7 SD562 1.6 2585826.11 469408.S7 544.1 50564 14.7 2584124.74 470735.78 547.3 S056S 2.2 258451S.79 470659.98 545.6 50S74 3.1 2585650.58 469636.48 546.7 50576 3.3 2585938.39 469558.52 544.3

VBWOOl 12 2584989.49 470257.76 564.59 VBW002 0.82 2584971.8 470170.68 563.64 VBW004 41 2584983.22 469939.47 566.43

TABLE UST ONLY ARSENIC CONCENTAATIONS FOR THE TOP (SURFACE) ll~OF TILL SAMPLE.

TOTAL ARSENIC DATA PRESENTED WITHIN THE ADJACENT TABLE WAS LINEARLY INTERPOLATED US ING GEOPAK CAO SOFTWARE TO DETERMINE THE 20PPM CONCENTRATION CONTOUR. ONCE THE 20PPM EXTENT WAS DETERMINED IT WAS CLIPPED TO THE '70E-80UNDARY"AND THE 553.5 ELEVATION CONTOUR WITHIN THE FEDERALLY AUTORIZED NAVIGATIONAL CHANNEL. NEW CHANNEL DEPTH BASED ON NLW.

COVER POLYGON AREA fAc.l AREAfSFl

[A 0.99 43 180 1B 0.30 13146 [C 0 .31 13 364 ID 0.32 13858 IE 0 .02 1 088 IF 0.10 4322

TOTAL 2 .04 88957

FIGURE 6 NAV CHANNEL/ TURNING BASIN

COVER ELEVATION 553.50 POTENTIAL GLACIAL TILL

COVER AREA (20ppm) GREAT LAKES LEGACY ACT

LOWER MENOMINEE RIVER TYCO SITE

~===_ =_= _= _ =_ =_= _= _ =_= E=L=EV=AT=IO=N=55=3.=50========================V=BW==WA=L=L===============================================================7--- CH2MHILL®

56 | P a g e

57 | P a g e

Figure 14. Green Bay Paint Sludge Site - Lloyd Flanders Facility Site Map (WDNR and MDNR, 1990)

E:

r·-­-=

~~ttO CONTA lr-.llNG _- - MATERIAL

AREA I

AREA m WOOC DEBRIS

~SEDIMENT IN BAY I SAMPLE}

NODULES / SHOR ELI NE

__ cuRRE NT SHORELINE

GREEN BAY

Source: GZA · - Donolrue., l 989

- 135 •

58 | P a g e

Figure 15. Green Bay Paint Sludge Site - Lloyd Flanders Facility Site Map (WDNR and MDNR, 1990)

aR.r.~S'/ •.ir-_rno ·

Acl8'.

t,~.-- · -\'(1 .=-:.:01.n.,.1 fX"4 1 rr:r=n i::::::l(:U;-t,:W-M:-:r 1:.1 ,-YrJ.' .-;,::?~NI: "itlj'.:H;,

N ---" h ,,.:: ~

( ' l\·m:-.'AI: !:::.:.ql H t-t~ I

!E13E'iD

' I I ; I I

~1 C """- ~"llffi LOc~mt:i

i'Zl IZ, F'll!.ICr.'CiTCFI Loc-.. r,;rii:-tt

ij (8:.) ~, I LL'(.:Arlct-:

l-Pffi.O}!MATE &-..i:.iHt:LJt-1:::: 111-'il::

~>:ID1E a, 1: .. 11" o~ no:::t-:.t. r 1-1~1

.o.-;,;r,ie~i-.<Tli EXTcHT QF ?~l~T 8",IIDA"; ~8:~_N 9::'I '. •1 l~DI

COtlC:riT~TID~

0 tl~ PAm ~L"JD2E F.'tAG\1:Nra EkOO~·ITEfiEC-

0 P.IOOR i.=tU:: l:!i Cll1 ..-,,IMT ~L'O:.il!. l·tr.ACLc.HT!:i ;hl"(l~~TElcD I~ ctl: l!A.lT-!POC~ 3.1/JFL:

lj ~~~:.~~:ci ~~l~~~E~f ~~'t:T~~~D r-~

GRE;EN BAY

\~0 ~:~'~;f~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~H"11. ~EA IIA - ~ra:i ,.11:,md .:..:IJL1iuL 1:::11 ~ ~ • r.11)1· ~:.n1 .. hl~ al ?"~I 1t-.rtr,, (tl=.F'-' II ?,l·I ') 11!'~1i L'il~-:IU1IS,"N,,'I(,;, ,:,~»rv..ii::I wl I..':• 11L·f1i::1 1E1d In ...:.:tlnNTI ••m:,h .. c.Jl~:IM ·J,41t, n •til! .,-~, .

.t.m=:~ 1'1- ,!r.111 • .1u:,-oi1n,::I~ llrv,.:, I~ ,..hi:,,:, tv:-1~· ,.,JL U1u 11111.,ul wrau·l:.i :::111 p1lr.": :.i~.utJ1 ll~rnr1111:.U. :1d 1ri.:u~ to ~hoN,-. :11,,11, lt.(I !JI.ii!)" i,pl,:,oo uz.:, :.ri:. clvl'".Q lr,ril ltl:-NI'" :11=,..-....,.i t;,:: •n:. v:ntt. al;·-, ~ll .

• ~.ft~~~~ ~:~~~IJ\117'~tf!'Q¾I~~~ ~t:~i ~

FICll'l;E 2 AR.EA.S CONT AlN"JIG

.l'~I N l ~LU Ut; ~ :;ui:1~.,u;i:~Eb ~·,,\f,;T~ ~ ::-•..ic)-'.-.L

1'1.0::i l:";t-: ',\'O;:E ~L.-,~, r:r."F.l\.ft~>" r"- t<T f, .,G~( -~ ' :-:

~- ::,.i ::: i,.• NE:.:,, ~~H:I1~~~~ 1:1.:it. J.: t-r rt:1c..::

59 | P a g e

Figure 16. Menekaunee Harbor Final Plan & Contours (AYRES, 2014a and REL, 2016)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l 1111 I I l I I 1111 l1111i---~---'--------f

~'i SHEl=TPILE: 'ci:Ai 100 WALL 7 AND BOAT STAGING AREA

(St±. cm... 2 SI-IT, cs_ i

r----------,

7 ii;li"~Af' Sr!ORl:'LINf.

(5 • C 1 :SITT, C6.0J

WA ~S . fEI.. . ~,!J.,IJi)

I' I' / , ...

( ( \ I I I

\ I ,._

I ;;-::=±======l======i-=======I==;;::====~~~~ I -~-·

MEN61<AUN.EE HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS CITY 0~ MAP NETTE

MARINETTE, WISiCONSIN

..... ,--,~

I , ....

Fl NAL HAR.SOR PLAIN & CONTOURS

MO:l'ITI I -d!!l'J

\ I,

( I I,

I I I

I! f I I

'1 11

1,

II

'I I,

I I I

I,! I I

I I I I

I I I I \ l _: L

,. 1-1 ' -· - _, - I I

... I I I I

I I . , ti I',,._,,

1,' !

t I I ,' .,... ,..,

_J I.,. .,. -

. .

C3.2

60 | P a g e

Figure 17. Menekaunee Harbor Confirmation Sediment Sampling Locations (REL, 2016)

f ~

l I 1! 145900 N

r --- --------i --------.J I;

ii.----------'------"---------'--------------------------...:;:;____J,___J_--L--L----------~------------------..:::a.::::::...._ __ ____J u

DREDGE TASK 38 SAMPLES

a;:,~~': NORTHING EASTING

LCS 38 1· 14616i!.628 fl l2227.700

LCS-38·.i':" 148 178 335 ,812272.882 LCS~-3 1461W.~ 0 1220 1.070

LCS.J8 •4 1'10050,323 01i'204.70.1 LCS-:1B ,S 1'1601'1 070 812320.881

LCS-JS-0 1•I0074 000 0 12'.¼:4.34 1 LCS-31:3-7 140134.008 812:315.425

LCS-313 8" 140104 400 ill:ci20,220

SEDIMENT NORTHING EA STING

L~:eL:. 146 177. 166~ L.CS-30- 10" 146 1:>4.6<19 8 1:>374.204

LCS~U -1 1 140064.730 8 12370 .7'ol5

~CS.J0 ,1:> 140040.453 Q1P3ro.204 LCS-3B -13 146024.~ 8 12424.72-'

LCS-~6 14 140074.00fJ 0 1C4a;,:x;.a LCS-3B-15 " 1461 37.4 23 8 1243 1.04

LC8"B·IO' 1•I0100,M3 81:i4~!5.0

I 11 OCE TASK 40 SAMPL S ~.~:.=OIM~Mp=~NT~. ~N-O_R_TH_I_NG~E-A-ST-IN-G~ -.-:AM_Cl_'!_i~- NO- R_TH_IN_G_ E-AS_TI_N_G_

LCS-40- 1 1451)70,474 812276.645 LCS-4 9,-0 14!,8/~.no 0 124:J<l.2/:;i

LCS 40 2 140020,000 812204,000 ! CS-'IB,10 1'10030,0,~ 0 1:>,158,M8 LCS ,48-3 148074 .300 812231.70 1 1..CS-4B-:,O 14684 1.200 e t.2407.7 11

LCS-40-4 146140.000 U122 17.~ LC6·41J- 11 146006.00 1 0 12470.7:)15

LCS-48-5 1460 18.200 812213.459 LCS-46-12 1400 12.644 8 1251 1.008

LCS 40-6' t4G073.070 812240.4\'I~ LC8 CD 1$ 14GD7i1.762 8 12534,703 LCS-4B 7' 146002.6 12 81Zl4 1. 19 1 LCS-48·16 14!Jfl/5.524 0 12~75.448 LCS-40-8 140089.802 812300.038 I.CS-48•17 MGOII0,200 8 12560.855

s:~"'!i~ NORTHING EASTING

LCS~1B·1U 111002!>.413 81200-1. 167 LCS-48•10" 1,1soo1 ,;M1 8 12625.387

LCS-48-20" 140023.068 8 120 17.0CIB LCS 4B 21• 1400 15.700 8 12685. 132

LCS·4B -22• 145005.835 812064.629 LCS 40 Zl 146022.200 8 12084.070 I CS-4B·24 11100~.•183 8 100..'>3.2:>4 LCS-4EMi!7 " 1<16Q5'1.000 6 1~ .:ioo

s::~~~ NORTHING EASTING

LCS-4B•?O ldf:i9?1.487 13 17700638

I CS"4B-30 1'1!10713 487 0 12758 087

LCS-48-:1 1 14e~ 005 8 1278:) :JOO

LCS-40 ·32 14007:J .:JO l 0 12752 040

LCS-48-33 1'161 09.151 8 12784.768

LCS-18·:M Mti130 1CJ1 tJ 1W~ :tO.!

LCS-4 8-35 1<1E075 850 8 1?624 363 LCS 40 31:\ 1400t2 2:'IO 0 1282 1 700 LCS-4B-:l7 1459n .124 812931 9 1!3

COOl~DINA'I I: VAl.UCS l\l=?C. OAS[D UF>CN I I u: MARIN I: rr [ COUN IY COOl~DIN/1, rE SYS LCS-40-{j& 14t!020000 612623 e ,2

NO, DATE APPROV, REVISION NO, DATE APPR:OV. REVISION

I] N[rlCIAL l~EUSE SAMPL S

~ -.-!~-M-'!E~L~~T----~ --- ~-.-=~-M-'!·-L~~-1-•o_R_TH_I_N_o_l _•_•_•T-,N-a~ I NORTHING l!ASTI NQ

~::WN CHECl<EO ,ow,_

DESIGNED

""

DCS-2-1 BCS-2-16 146044207 8 1305201 1 146050.073 8 12874 270 BCS·2·2 BCS-2-17 14600-1.471 8 13076 853 146000.$24 8 12875 6 18

BCS-2-3 BCS-2-4

BCS•2•5 BCS-2--6

P.CS-2-7

BCS-2-8

BCS-.2--0 BCS-2- 10

BCS-2-11

BCS-2· 12

BCS·2· 1:J DCB 2 14 BCS 2 15

145043.10 1 145007 ~ 146020.872

146076.85 1

1d6n11.:.io1

140171 ,3.17

14fll!iJ.174 146006.32:)

146024,7.'m

145007,655

14592'3.149 14:1041.Stl l 145000.019

81287 1 732 81,9304<,0

~~ 140 100.62'1 813077(\10

BCS-2·111 146154,734 8131V032 812023:305 s cs.2.~ 148067.669 a13123 ,a1 81 2947883 BCS·2·21 146041.499 8 131 21 00 1

81?957 0 1, BCS-2·2-2 140000.008 8 13 1G4 83:'.I

81i'956004 140046.001 8 13131 7'35 81.'Vlifi0,11 IJC8224 l400'30.8J4 8 1J177 100

IJ1302 1 ,624 BCS-2-2!.i 146100,640 8 13186 666

812978705 146 177.397 8 13266 870

og,02aa12 RCS-?-17

tJ12WtJ4'11 BCS-2-28

8 1-'"lnd7 080 BCS•2•2\t

813074 677 BCS-2-90 14-6946.698 8 1.'.3249 070

MENEKAUNEE HARBOR DREDGE CITY OF MARINETTE

MARINETTE COUNTY. WISCONSIN

COVEil f,.fl E/\ 1~.6000 SO, F l

$- CONr lFlMATION SC.DlMLNl SAMPLE LOCA I ION

DENOTE NOT SUBMITTED FOR !AB ANALY SIS ON 10110/14 . TA K 38 DI-N Ol ~ S N O r SUBMlrJ l: D l~OH I..AB ANAi YSIS ON 10/15-'M. TI\SK 49 1\11111 flON/\I f)RI- OG ING nra UI FWl1 n Asro UPON VISUI\I ,- xAMINl\1 ION 0 1" S.I\MPLC:

SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCAT ION MAP

D D D

Ca-J FIRMATICN "I ESl ING. BENEFICIAL R - FUSE All EA 124,033 SQUARE FEE.I

CONFIRMATION TESTING, DREDGE TASK 48 DREDGE AHEA 00,660 SOUAAE FEET

Co-J FlflMATION TESTING, DllEDGE TASK 3 8 ORFOGF ARFA 4;),411 SOUARF FF FT

·4· • 20' 4Q OQ'

T1.0

61 | P a g e

Menekaunee Harbor

6” Sand Cover 12, 500 sq. ft.

Figure 18. Menekaunee Harbor Sand Cover Area (REL, 2016)

1

\ \ \ \ I

' ' \ ' ' '

,__ ---~,- ---------­c ,

~~----~ I I I I I

_J I I I

1------------ ~ • .__ .J I

--.

',

- I I I I I I

r.-----------• I

I I L._------~----~ I I

_ I c.· I I ,._'¥'. I

-I- ~ I • L------------ I I

I I I I I

I I t I

, I ·1 I

L--~---------L-----------I I I I I I

' I -~_ ... _

ME:1'{51<!'11.lNEE H~ DREDGE <CliY OF MA ETTE

MARl NETTE 001.JNliY. WISCONS'I

---·- - -,:--

11.:.-DtE ~ .. """" IOClf,IJUCTTI:ia.lliiUl.'l':M_.lliJ r$ +· •

n $ J-

62 | P a g e

Figure 19. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation – Previous Remediation Actions - Upland (NRT, 2016a)

1!,1'1'6.'0XJl,1-'•iE !.OCA710N OF '-EIII

r,v,:RINETTE IN.RINE

............. ~,~----·- -·- -.. ,.

~ U JU&a.: 8 ~ ARE"'

\ \ \ 1,

\

BLD G ..

I

r---7 I I L ___ .J

- ·-

H,16,TORIC ,MGf' STRIIJGTIJRES

WMTEWATE'l. fflEA™ElNT 19'i'FIDOTUR E:'S

EXISTING! i:I.UILOING

Wl!'\FtOXIMA;TE EXTENJ" OF PLJ>NI) SITE

FO~MER SLOl,iJGW LOG RV

FORMER LUMBER. STO.AAGE AR!;A

PO.IU,la;t MC,;P PROPERTY BOUtEAAV

111111111111111 I ~ l!.!RD,'IIP

G)

AREAS 1EXCA ' '.AJEI) BY C ITY Cl!'° MAAINe-n'E EXt-llBlf lN'.a NlO· l:clilDe.iOE OF' t.lGI" FIBSIIDI.J\Als I .SOIL

AR;EAS EX!<11BIT INGi EV]IJE:NCE 01- MGP RJSSIOIJ/ILS II SOIL 1EJl;CAI/ATWJ!. 0 B.A.Cf<riUEO WITH CLEAN lltATERIM., BY CITY Of' MARINBTI:

AR£AS; 01- ,AFJ;;ECTI;IJrSOIL ~RE N I M85R~ lfZOO IOISCUSSION IN fflE l EXT

NOll!; Jill OF'llrE ~ G~ M O MOSl' 0 1:IE 99.0\\l Q~J\IP !;TT1Rl,,ll;::TUR,!al;l -",SS!llGIAll;P, l'i'fTH TI!!; !,IBP 'i'I~ RHIAOVl:Cl NiD.!OR DEMOUSHEI) ~ Til(Cll!Y·Ofl WIAJ1£1i11!. IN, THE 1,!lallil IN Ffi=PilrRAl"ION ~R lifl; WTTI' l;XPM,15ION,

N

i Q EID 160

SCALE IN FEET

N'!],T,EEi: ~ El'I: MGP AN D WMP Sffl\JCliURES"fR(IM '993, .!, l'!N,N, i,r., ~Ui;JINBTOO 8 "!",., laLY BIii,. NIP ~II/I IJl!l!OIII[(] F,'lf!K,~ -~ M TH!iY EXISrED i,,,! 1Si\l>'I,

0 z :5 a. :::)

(/) z 0 i= 0 ,-:(

-' s; a w ~ l1J er: (D

=> 0 5 UJ a::: a..

IIN __ .- _Ufu-·, -"'-_!L REsoURCE

Ec:H!NOLOG¥

Pm).JECf NO .

154Qi'2Cl.2

FilGURENO.

5

63 | P a g e

Figure 20. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation - Dredge, Sand Cover & RCM (NRT, 2015b)

NESTEGG MARINE

toNTRACTOB' NOTfS·

TREE- & BRUSH

•- PRIOR TO PLA.C~PAENT OF RE:'SIDUAl. SANO ;rfR. CONTRACTOR SHALL PERCORl,I BATHYl,ETRIC SUfl'\IEY.

2.. A Milt,111..f UM OF I 0- INCH ts Ct R'~SIOUAL !ii.NO LAYER 10 BE Pv,crn

J . AF"TtR PL.AC!MOO C,:- Rl:5!00 SANO l.llYO<. oot<l"RAC10R SHAJ...L PERFORM BAlHYMETRIC SURYE'r' TO CON..~IPM 10- INCHES or RESIO~L 5A~O Y~R' PI...ACEl),

4_ ENCJNE.ER TO TAKE OUiliUl\'. ASSU~.riNCE S,6MPl..£S or RESIDI..JAl,. SANO LAYER FOR VISUAL CONFlRt,MllON OF 10-l NC'f-t "INIMVM flf1CKNE:'S$.

GRAVEL

LIMITS OF RESIDUAL SAND LAYER

--------------------

I

48" SANITARY-\! EWER OUTFALL \

INV 573.66 '\

'\ I '\ I

"'--I \

---

\ ' ' '~ '"" \

t \ \

' \ 1

---

WIRC[ NOJfS·

I Tl-llS DRAWING 'Jrb.S ~ .-r<01,1 A SUA'YEY ~ BY WS<::CIN::;tt F'U!!ILJ(;. \ I ~~~L Er[.':;: ::o ~~l.JR.6rfir::~~~N~N~~1~_s_lH~ ::oA:PS or ~'[[RS, DAArfNCi ~ NDITlo« Of ~EL-"5EP. 2000·, SHEET" ,. er 1 ,

2, l101UZONT °"TUW IS. IAARtt'DTE COUtfN' ~INATE S'f'5TD,il _ VN'T5 = US FOOi IJERTIOO. IM.1Ut.l '5 ~\l'DM .

.l. (Jrr-sn:c: Ulill.AIIID f'EAT1JRES DtQl lZED ~ fl~ !r,iJPS -'ER - • 2.C~.2 WICllOSOn COIIPOAAl)Qllt

• lltJl1'M.l SlRIJCTIJR'E ANO Pl~[ IH\l'ERTS ~ IN ~ E, LH & oi\.SSCCIATES, IN,;.. ().Iii OZ/20 •• J ,

!5, 9RCJP[RN ~l[S PROYIDED ffT R08ER'T E. LEE .& "5SOCI.-.TES, it,K;:. ~N; 'lilt l...fiE".cJ.wo~ Ol<I cn/22/ t J.

6 , UC.UHE,1,0 UNe ~ BY R051EJIT E- LEE i,,: ~TES. INC Dli:A'#lNG

7. ~~:~- ::.~/~ONS FROW NA~L RrntU~[ rE:o-fOLOGY. Ir-IC- ,lol,ftJ- EN'.r.ROCQN, !NC ht1J¥OIB.ER 701il-JN,flll,l,ll'I" :Z,O. ! J,

!!t ·~ T"-OR[Cc{ Mel PQ5f-f!,1r,CjC ICILL e,i,,lat'tV0R1C ~t.Y" PLR(,oj;:wO;l, BY FQlH INF"FUSTRUC"IVRL NC.., FtM~, NC-, ~D NATURAi ~ fECHNCJLOCY, tNC- N .W-~UJIRY ~(",tt APRll. !7013

'iii . WW- 1 WAS L,OCAJr!> BY" ft[Ol£R"1 C. La: --& ~,1,."11:!;i, INC. ON

r>-4/..!D/U.

\

I \ \ • ..

11f I

5

\ l.

!!.

REVlstON.

--- ---------...__

\ \ \

-------- -------------------------

_ ______ __ _______ J\1f;f\!.Q/\IJ.LNf;f;_R_Of_ER

FLow --- - --------

I

CONCRETE I BOAT RAMP I

j I i I

I I

I I

i I I I

I

r

I ' I

1,NATLR<L -

Rr,so tTRCE TECHNOLOGY

DATE.. APPO BY

BUILDING

- -- - """"""""'"" --- -'!WROXJWITE.L'iX;.llTIONOF FCQME~SLOID-t

- --- ~"YMifoTIDMALOWiN.B.l.HJ"r.11

-· -·- .....,. - -.......r,._,r-- EX.l!fTINGBHlElPIJ:'h*U ----- SANITA.R\I EffU.JEPff Plf'E ----- $'f('ll9.l l{'N(.Jlll"ll'f ___ .,_

LJNi'iPJ1~Nl)fl,ii i;!ra,(:

EJll!-Tl»G IIBPHi\l..T P,),'-'E.Erfl

¢ L~F'OI.E

...A.. """' • o"" DEODIIIO:iElrl'EE

... I ~ 'llELL

------ -------

MARINETTE ! MARINE

.,. , .. ,,., ..

a 0 25 50

SCALE IN FEIT

RollDtOTOAEROU,WFIE

.:r.Jl'PROXJ.,__,,iE f'RE..D'IEDt7iE E.oeE 01'"

f,1,1,_ff't l ,1 '118'1l;i

I\P<>i;:culJMATE~DGE TOP OF~

IIJ .. T S C:,6" f'il ~ l[JJAI.. $ANO l.Jll'(;rl

8LI.IOEAOUNE

21113 ~IWII... BATHYMETRIC Ml'..OF. CotflOOR

:ZUT~FIN"IL 9",TH'l'METRIC P,t

""""'""

• l'IN.tllJ. ~Sr~DGE~LOCAltt'.lN

"'' R~ /oL w.t!l l..~"rEJl:Q't~PU: LOC:.<inaN

RESIDUAL SAND LAYER PLAN DRAWN BY

NWOD9a1t 1J.

OlEOKEDBY

EJTM.127113

j\f'PRO\IEOBY

JMHOOf.27H 3

RESIDUAL SAND COVER MONITORING PLAN FORMER MARINETTE MGP SITE

WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION MARINETTE, WISCONSI N

FIGURE NO. 2

64 | P a g e

Figure 21. Wisconsin Public Service Corporation - 2015 Bathymetric Survey Sand Cover vs. 2013 Post Dredging Surface (NRT, 2015b)

TH IC KN :SS ID I FFEREI\IC TAB E

' I -

I I

-f,- -i--

J

N

GC-.ILE IN FEE

--...__ I ---

S HC itLINE

I

I

--- ----- --

·------· LIM ITS QF RESIDUA SAND, LA VER

BUU<I EA LINE

D ECIDUO S E-

I

R ID _AL SA Cl LAY R QA SAMPLE L-C)CATION

T HICKNESS MAJOR COl'JTOUR (!FEET)

THICKNESS MI OR CON -a

/, / ,. r ~ I I

--- J I I

--- ~\..

' ~, \'\.

\_ \.

\

"& \

IF[

1. BA HYMETR IC SU R\l Y P RFOR _ B.Y OOL ~1AN NGIN - RI NG ON 4127 ?.015, A.NCI 0 HS ANO N\/I ~OCON'S l!A THYM FA.IC S RV V DA .A OVI - - I MU I L

TR..i\NlSM ITTAlS .A.ND SUPi I.EM = . - ED W ITH DA A COLLECTED .BY NRT, :2. UP D T R S RE OBTAIN D FRO DRAWi _G (FIG :2_J?.09B-33-B 2C-R - S IDUA

SANiJ, LAY -R) iP PM D 18'{ NAT RAL SOURCE TECHNO OGY, J, ORJZ.O - A.l DATV 1-S· MARINETTE ·COU TY C O-O'RDIN-*.TE S,YSTEM, UNITS = US FOOT.

VERTICAL O• . M 15 . VDB8.

0 1fES :

&. ROCK WAS PLAC- D ALO G HE ES. EGG MARINA SE-10 EllN'"'. FOR INSTA Liff ION OF SHEE IP ILE WALL.

\

\

\

\

~,

\

+

i "' -. ,1/

2

A 1EA ~ 2 /

I

I

\

-0 N

PROJECT NO,

2 W5- 4-.1

s

65 | P a g e

Figure 22. Summary of Detected PAH Results - Lower Scott Flowage, Lower Menominee River AOC (CH2MHill, 2014)

J 0 600

Feet

1,200 Q Ana lyzed for alkylated PAHs

0 Analyzed for PAH-17

Flow Direction c::::J In vestigation Area

Notes: 1. Shading indicates the analyt e was detected above Wisconsin Department of Natura l

Resources (WDNR) sed iment qua lity guide lines threshold effect concentration (TEC) indicates the a nalyte was d elected above V\ID NR sed iment qua lil y guidelines

pro bab le effect concentratio n (PEC) 3. Only compounds with detected concentrations exceeding the TEC or PEC are included

on this figure. 4. All detected conce ntratio ns are reported in µg/kg

IHANSENl Rl4r20l 4 1 A0·59 PM

5. J::: Anal yt e is present at an estimated concentrat ion between the method de.tection limit and reporting limit

6. -- = Sample was not analyzed for th is constituent. 7. 201 0 .Aerial Photograp hy 8. \fl/DNR sed iment qualit y guidelines TEC and PEC screen ing levels are summarized in Tab le 5

Figure 6 Summary of Detecte d PAH Results Lower Seo/I Rowage Menominee River AOC

1.5-3.7 ft 8.1

S0058 MR13-S0058

0.0--0.5 ft

28 75

75

310

350

430

330 38

540

CH2MHILL

I

Figure 23. Summary of Detected Metals Results - Lower Scott Flowage, Lower Menominee River AOC (Ch2MHill, 2014)

j 0 600 1,200

Feet

Q Sediment Sample Location

Flow Direction

C:::, lnve~igation Area

Notes· 1. Shadl'lg indicates the anatyte w as ~elected above VV'isconsl'l Department ~f Natural

Resources (WDNR) sediment quality guidelines threshold effect concentration (TEC). 2--indicates the a na lyte was detected above V'\IONR sedlllent qua lityguide ll'"les

probable effect concentration (PEC) 3. Only compounds with detected concentrat ions exceedi ng t he TEC or PEC are included

on this figt.l'e 4. Al detected concentrations a re reported in mg/kg

I\USENVIRONMENTALPROTBM=NOMINEERIYERLO\.\ERSCOTTFLOWI.GE'l.1APFILESISIREPORTIF1GURE 07 - SUMMMlY OF DETECTED MET-'LS RESULTS - FIN-'LMXD J HNJSEN1 8 /4/2014 201:36 PM

5. J = Analyte is present at an estimated concentration betwaen the method detection limit and reporting limit

6. 2010 Aerial Rlotography 7. \li£INR sedrnent qua tity guidelines TEC and P EC screening levels are surrmarized in fable 5

Figure 7 Summary of Detected Metals Results Lower Scott Flowage Menominee River AOC

CH2MHILL

67 | P a g e

Figure 24. Summary of Detected Total PCB and TCDD-EQ Results – Lower Scott Flowage, Lower Menominee River AOC (CH2MHill, 2014)

J 0 600

Feet

1,200

.Analyze cl for PCB .Aroclors, PCB Congeners, and Dioxins

.Analyzed fo r PCB .Arocl ors

.Analyzed for PCB .Arocl ors and Dioxins

Flow Direction

Investigat ion .Area

Notes · 1. Shading_)ndicatesthe ana lyte was detecte d above Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources (VVDNR) sed iment qua lity guidelines thre sho ld effect concentration (TEC). 2. PCB.Aroch lors , PCB congeners, and di oxi ns, were not dete cted at con centra ti ons

above V\IDN R sed iment quality guidelines pro bable effect concentrations (PECs) . 3. Only compounds w ith detected concentrations exc eed ing the TEC or PEC a re inc luded

on thi s fi gure . 5.AII Diox in concentrati ons are reported in ngTEQfkg

6.AII Tota l PCB (aroclors and congeners) are reported in µg/kg. 7 . 2010 A erial Photography 8 . V\IDNR sedi~ent quality guidelinesTEC and PE C screening levels

are su mmarized in Ta ble 5 .

Figure 8 Summary ofDetected Total PCB and TCDD-EQ Results Lower Scott Flowage Menominee River AOC

'------0-00-Tr_ .. c_, a_·_· ·c_co_· -co_a_,c_oo_oo_u_c -a,-o·,_oo_·_eoc_c_a_o·o_co_o=_·_c·o_'"o_c_aa-o--o-c o_CT_co_rc-o r_o_zo_o_oo_, _" T_' _oo_co_o_co_'" r_o_c_, __ • _, .. o_c_, -a -oa_, ·_2 ,_a ·_o o ________________________ __JiH2MHILL

68 | P a g e

69 | P a g e

Figure 25. Surficial Sediment Sampling Locations in Rio Vista Slough – Lower

Menominee River AOC, June 24, 2014 (MDEQ, 2015)

70 | P a g e

71 | P a g e

Figure 26. Lower Menominee River AOC Priority Areas for Navigation Use and Utility Dredging (Crossings)-(WDNR, 2016)

Navigationall Dredge, Areas

Boat Launch l!I 1 _ 1 Ulfl Ave_ Poot Launch

l!I 2_ st,~ph.enson lslan~I Land:ing

B 3 _ Boom1 Landing

l!I 4 _ 61h. Street. Sllip

Ill 5,_ Menekaunee Harbor- Boat Lamu:h

Ill 6,_ Ann Amor- Paiik l.aWilo'h

Ill 7 _ Seagull BaT ,(Red AffQW Beao'h) Lai.mch

Marina

• 1 _ Nestegg Marine

• 2 _ Mystery Ship 'Marina (River Park Boat. Launch)

• 3 _ Hamm Town Nlanne

• 4_ Menominee Marina

O Impacted PAH Area (Lower ScoH: IIFlowag,e}

O Impacted PAH .Area (Rio Vista Sloug'h)

o Impacted PAH Area (WPSC)

• Impacted Arse11F1ic: Area (Tyco)

Utility Dredging f Crossings)

- WPSC Reactive Core .Mat Area

FederaJI Navigation Channel Depth in met

12

19

21 23 'il:.15,000

72 | P a g e

73 | P a g e

Appendix B – Tables

74 | P a g e

75 | P a g e

Table 1. Lower Menominee River AOC Sediment Remediation Sites with Summary of Goals, Actions and Monitoring (WDNR, 2016)

Site '.Hamel Ciontaminanl of c-

Ansulff yco ,(fonne.- An5!ld Fire Protectiool,

Ar.se'll ic

MediaType

Ten;esmal

G«mmd W eter

:Sedime:rn.

16.-een Bay Paint S[u~ l)~d Sedimentl'Soil Flandefs, fomner ll'layw.ar"d-Wakeliel'.d)

lll'enekaunee- H arbor

"Wii"scon,sin IP'ublic, Seir!iice Goq:,or.rtion 1ffanme.J" lfflillUJfactu:red gas, ,plant)

Coal Tar - PAHs

Paint Nodules

Groumd Weter

:Sediment

Table. prep3lred iby UrDJ'.',1,1~ June .1016

Remediation Goals

Clinsi'te Surfia:ce.SoiEs:92 ppm Tatal Airsenic

.Adj :aicem Offsile Suriaoe Soos 1tl :9:Jpm T ata! Arsenic

CCl!lllainment & Rcxx:I Ccmlirol

Remed-.al Action

·• QO,IJIOO TO!lils of Saft Wasle !Removal

·• Limited Soi Removal

" Capping

• B:ainie.-·W • Gmwnd W ater Extira.ci.ion &

Trealmel'llt Sys,tem

• IPhyta P!u~ing Tree. Plots

,;s:m ppm Tatal Ar:senic ·• Dredge 31JD.056CY ·• 1 T Sand Ge.oer Areas

~:mppm

Remove- Paint Waste. Impacted • 1Remove fi.300 Tons Bulk Pain t Sediment & Soil am:11 Install W:aisfe { libazw;dol.1:5 ·waste Shore!ine· Barne. fac ility)

Rem.ave- Paint 1Nodl1d!es tti3t wasih up ,along shoireline

T ffl'e'Slla'ld Effect. Concentra,tion (TtEC) \/skies ro.r .lHlearvy Melals & P,oly:nuciear Arornafic Hl)'d'rocarbcns jPAl-ls}

LimilEd Soill Rema..al Duriflfl COli1struc:fian o f w ·astewafeJ" Trea'lment P.lanl & Raad Ci!1i11slrl.u::Dan _

92:a ppm, 13 P .-iorny IPA!Hls

·• IExcaYBle 1 IJ,500 Tons Sedm:ient & Soil ( local bindfil l

• Coiled & Remo- [Ra.int 11',lod iiles

" HecClil"li.underAdmm ,Qrrller " Dredge '27 ; 112Q CY " t1· Sandi CoveT he.as that

exceed TEC fur Metals..

,. lN'ane .rt lhis Time

• Developingi ReaimJ m De.cisicm (ROID)

• !None at. Ibis Time-• Oevelopingi ROD

• Dredge 1'5.22 1 C¥ • 1 l!r Sand GOW!r Areas ~8

ppm ·• IR,eacliv:e Gore Mat ~ )

C.cmi::,,ele

Remediation Goal! .lier?

V emied2015 • Gonsirucfio.n Gomple1icm IR,eport

• ::;m10 • Yes., with management plan

im_p1ementafiorn

V,erified 20c1fi

• Core S:aimp'lin.Q • Pan T,es.tin91 • Ba'"' T .

Reparted V0lumes in MDc-/,IR UlQ~ & 1 '~8' under Public Act 307_

'!J,eirified 2011 '5

• Gore Samp'lingi • Pan T,es.1ing • Bar'ihymetry·

Remova.l documented & developing ROD lo detemline nexit sie;ps..

'lteirified Fe.asibi fity SrudyRepart.20U} ROO ID determine next 51:eiPs..

Oompllele ~Non-Time V,ernied 2 013, & '2015 Cn.li!ca l Remaval .Action) • Core Samplingi

• Be.'ihymetry· ROO in determine centifming obfirtaticms fu.- Sandi CCl""81'" & RCNL

Ongoing Ma.inisnance & . Moo:itoriRg • '2018 5-Yea;r Review

Omgoing Uamh!nance. & Mormorirng • Bania" W 'all Ground Water Manitoong PIBJ'I

2015 llpc:fate • 2018 5-¥ ear Review & Resear;ch new arsenic

remova! leclinoloaies Ongoing McmiiDlring • Po51: Dfed'Se Sand Cover Sedimelill SafflllJli:ngi

'2U18 • '2018. 5,-.Ye:ar Review Ongoing lmplienn.entatian of Operatiians and Maintenance, Plan

Ongomg mcmthl:y and ;post s1Drm e..ents m llleclion Blong shorel:ir1e.

Ongoing llllOill iloring

Ongoing MainlEITTan,ce &. l'J.!lomtoring • Ree.dirr.re Oocre Mat • Sanc:11 Clava-• 2018. 5-7'fe:ar- Revi-

76 | P a g e

Table 2. WPSC MGP Residual Sand Cover Analytical Summary Table (NRT, 2015)

CiM:!r Ptal,

A.15'.

77 | P a g e

Table 3. Site locations and sample descriptions for Rio Vista Slough sampling 6/24/2014 (MDEQ, 2015)

Table 4. Aroclor results for Rio Vista Slough sediment samples taken on 6/24/14 (MDEQ, 2015). ND = No Detect

SITE ID LAT LONG DESCRIPTION ODOR COMMENTS Men 1 45.10561 -87.6242 organic no no sheen Men 2 45.10550 -87.62524 organic w/ sheen no large outfall, sheen Men 3 45.10537 -87.62581 organic no small outfall, light sheen Men 4 45.10524 -87.62563 organic w/ sheen no sheen Men 5 45.10514 -87.62632 organic no no sheen Men 6 45.10493 -87.62708 organic no no sheen

Men 7 (Dup) 45.10493 -87.62708 organic no no sheen Men 8 45.10441 -87.6271 organic no no sheen Men 9 45.10455 -87.62629 organic no no sheen

SITE ID Aroclor 1016

Aroclor 1221

Aroclor 1232

Aroclor 1242

Aroclor 1248

Aroclor 1254

Aroclor 1260

Aroclor 1262

Aroclor 1268

ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry ug/kg dry

Men 1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 6 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 7 (Dup) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Men 9 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND

78 | P a g e

Table 5. Heavy metal results for surficial sediment samples taken in Rio Vista Slough, 6/24/14 (MDEQ, 2015). * PEC and TEC consensus-based values, Macdonald et. al., 2000. Bold values above PEC values. ND = not detectable

TEC* PEC* Men 1 Men 2 Men 3 Men 4 Men 5 Men 6 Men 7 (Dup) Men 8 Men 9

mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Arsenic 9.79 33 6.3 1.2 2.6 2 3.7 3 3.5 2.3 5

Cadmium 0.99 4.98 2.1 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.9 0.3 ND 0.8 Chromium 43.4 111 46 32 15 26 14 11 7.8 8.8 20

Copper 31.6 149 66 23 23 36 24 26 16 7.7 28 Lead 35.8 128 110 23 42 49 37 42 14 5.7 34

Mercury 0.18 1.06 1.1 ND 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.5 Zinc 121 459 410 180 220 300 89 120 85 38 150

Table 6. PAH results for surficial sediment samples taken in Rio Vista Slough, 6/24/14 (MDEQ, 2015). * PEC and TEC consensus- based values, Macdonald et. al., 2000. Bold values above PEC values. ND = not detectable

TEC* PEC* Men 1 Men 2 Men 3 Men 4 Men 5 Men 6 Men 7 (Dup) Men 8 Men 9 ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg ug/kg

Benz[a] anthracene 108 1050 ND 3700 ND 4200 ND ND ND ND ND Benz[b] fluoranthene na na ND 7200 ND 10000 ND ND ND ND ND

Chrysene 166 1290 ND 6300 ND 8100 ND ND ND ND ND Fluoranthene 423 2230 ND 14000 5600 17000 ND ND ND ND ND Phenanthrene 204 1170 ND 6200 ND 6300 ND ND ND ND ND

Pyrene 195 1520 ND 10000 4100 12000 ND ND ND ND ND Total PAHs 1610 22800 47400 9700 57600

79 | P a g e

Appendix C - State of Wisconsin Administrative Code for Dredging Activities – NR 347

80 | P a g e

Published 1111de1· s. 35.93 , Wis. lals ., by lhe Legi ·!alive Reference Bm~,m.

91 DEPARThlENT OF ATLIRAL RE "OUR ES NR 347.04

hapter N R 347

SEDIMENT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS, MONITORING PROTOCOL AND DISPOSAL CRITERIA FOR DREDGING PROJECTS

:-JR .14701 NR .~4 .02 NR 347 OJ NR 347.0-1-

P,upo<,.c -:md p<>licy. .Ap1>lii;.tl,,ili1y. Oetinitionr.. Pcmllts.. app,r-<>\1115 tu:id rc\'icW'!> rcquU-ed,

~Uh·: C h o.pier ~"R 3-17 i'l!t i i c Ki!lti:d 011 Fcbruat)' 28. 19S9 \\'a'!,, 1-cvcnlc:d aud UC'W ch:ip,tcr l\"R. 347 w11 s- ctt:11tcd effectt\'c March I. 1980

NR 347.01 Purpose and policy. (1) n,e prnpose of rhi. hap1er is 10 pro1ec1 1he vublic right and irnere 1 in the wate, of

the state by specifying definilions. sediment sa11lJ}liug and analy­sis req11freme11t$, dispo~al c:1ite ri~ rmd 1uo11i101; 11g requiremerll s for drcdg:ing. pr~jecl re_,mlnted under one or more of the followiJig s1,11utes: s. 30.20, ·1a1s .. which requires a coutrnct or pennit for !he removal ofnmterial from the beds of waterways: . 28 1.41 , tats .. which es t;,bli shes :, w.i s-tewnter trenh11e11l faci lily plm1 approval progrnm: ch. 289. tats .. which establi hes the solid waste mao­sg.cmcnr program; ch. 291 ,. tnts .. which establishe the hszardou5 wa le prognuu: aud ch. 283. tats .. which e ·tablishe · the \\ iscou­siu pollutallt di clrnrg.e elimination sy tern (\VPDES) prog.rnm.

(2) ll is deparhueut policy lo euco,u-r,ge reuse of dredged material and to minimize cnvirowneuta l harm resulting. from a dredg.iug, projecl.

Hi,lort: Cr Rc11,1cr-, Fcbm!ll')", 1989. No. 398. df. 3-1-89: con-ccl iom, iu {1) uu1dc- uu~kr ~. 13 .93 (.lm) (1.>) .. Su,u .. Rcgi~lcr JauuaJ"y ~00~ };Q, 553.

NR 347.02 Applicability. The provisions of thi chapter apply 10 the removal and d ispo al of mmcrial from the beds of waterways except where exeU1p1ed by ·rnnne.

H.is101'_y: Cr. Re1u'>lcr. Fdmuu)'. 1989. No. 398. d f. 3-1-89.

NR 347.03 Definitions. (1) ··Analyte" means the chemi­ca l subslance or physica l p.-operty being leskd for in a sruuple.

(2) "'Bathym.euy" means the measurement of depth of water in lakes or rivers 10 derem,ine lnke or 11ver bed ropog:mphy.

(3) "'Beach no1n-ishment disposar· meaus !he disposal of dredl!ed nJJ1terial ou the beaches 01 in !he wmer landwm·d fron1 !he ordinary !ugh- water mark of Lak.es l'vl.icbigau and uperior for the p1 uvo$e o r adding, replenishing, or preve11 li11,g erosio1a o f bend1 material.

(4) ' ·Bioassay"' means a me1hod for derennining rhe acme or chronic 1oxici1y of a lllaterial by 111dyiug it effect 011 test organ­isms under conn·olled conditions.

(5) '"Bulk sedin1em analysis" rneaus a tes1 10 U1easure the total concentration of a specific co115titt,1ent in a sample being analyzed.

(6) u m1iag.e w.11er·' means the ,.vnter p 1·lio 11 of a sluny of water aud dredged material.

(7) ·' ·aniage wa ler retum flow"' means the carriage water which i retmued to a reccivino; water after separation of the dredged wa1erial from the can"iage water iu a di posal. rebaudling or treatment facility.

(8) UC01l11ectl 11g. wate-1,vriys" 111ea 11s a porlio 11 o f ~1 11nvigable lake or strerun which is directly joined 10 Lake M icb..igan or Lake . nperio r .ind wh ich contn ins a naviQ::U-ion chrmnel providing acce s for COLWJJercial or recreational wat.-rcrafl to U,ke 1ichi­g.m1 or Lake upcrior.

(9) "Coutmniua1iou" U1eaus a solicl liquid or gas.-ous w ate­iial, nllcroorgfll.llSm, noise, heat, odor. or radiation. a lone or in any

0111bi11n1io11 . lliat may hann th~ <111ali1y of lhe euvironmenl in .:my way.

NR 34 .0 NR 347.06 t\!Jl _i47.07 NR.347.0S

Prclimin,uy :'lpplic.Arion rind MA lyticri l rcqnircmellt'\. SJt111pli11i 11.01..I .'411xly .. i, . R.!!:\.' il!:w pmi=edure~ i 1,d r~\·iew erireri:I. Moui1ori11_@:. 1~poi-1i11,ll r. lld C'uforc-c:rui:li.1 .

( 10) '"Contract" means a bi11din!:! w1ittcn agreeme11t betwec11 the depar lu1e111 and n di·ed8,i11g ;1pp licm1I nulh rizing lhe removal of mate1ial frolll the bed of a nah1ml navigable lake or outlying waler.

(11) ··OepmTmcnr'" means the depm1mem ofnamra l resources (12) "Disposal fuci lity'' mean a site or fuciliry for the dispo 1

of dredged ,nare,i;il. (13) " Dredged mnteriar· means any niat~rial reu,overl from

U1e bed of auy waterway by dredging . (14) ' ·Dredging" w eau auy par1 oftl,e proce of the removal

of material from the bed of waterways: trn nspor1 of1 he material lo a dispO$.l l. relrn11dli11g. or tren 1111e111 fac ilily ~ 1reat111e11t of lhe material: c\ischm·gc of can-iage or interstitial water : aod disposal of the material.

( 15) "Grnill ize annlysi " means a method to dc1cmti.ne cb edged U1ale1ial arid disposal sile seclin1enl pm1ide size disn"il>u­tion.

(16) "Hazardous waste". as defmed ill s. 291.01 (7). lats .. means any solid wa re iclenrifie<l as a hnU1rdo11s waste under ch. NR 66 1.

(17) " lulerslilird w :1te1··· 111ea11s water contni11ed i11 lhe inter­stices or voids of soil or rock in the clrcdg.cd material.

(18) '"Limit of detection" means the lowest concen1rn1ion level rhat can be detennined 10 be srn risrically differenr from a blm,k Salllple for 1ha1 mrnly tical test we1hod and sawple matrix .

(19) "Limit of qrnu11i1nt iou" (L QJ menus the couceulrnl iou of au aualyte at which one can srate witl1 a stated degree of confi­dence for that ana lyt ical rest method and sample man1x that an am1ly1e is pre ·em at a specific couc.-,mmion in the saU1ple tested.

(20) ' ·Parent 1ur11e11al" w emis the native 1uic01i.solida1ed uJJlle­rial which overlies the bedrock

(21) ""PCB '' meaus tho e materials defined in s. 299.45 (] ) (a). tars.

(22) "Particle size di tJibntion" means a cumulative fre­q11e11cy dis1rib111io11 01· fi·eque11cy di ·11·ibuti n o f perce111,1ges of pa11icles of sp ecified diameters iu a sample .

(23) '"RehandJing faci lity" means a temporruy torag.e ite or facility n.scd dnri ng. the rra nsporrarion of dredged materinl 10 a lreannem or disposal fac ili1y.

(24) " re:1tu1e11t fat:il it y" i11 1hi$ chapte1· means a rn1tur:1I or m1ificial confinell!ent faci lity used for the sepru·a1io11 of cb-edg.ed m.rerial solids from the inrersririal 01· ca1Tiag.e water.

(25) "Upland disposal'" mem,s the di posal of ,kedo;ed 1uatcri­als landward frnm the orcliuruy ltigh- wii1er ,rnuk of a wa1e1way or waterbody.

Hl~for·y: Cr. R,ie-g_i-.rc·r. Fcbru:11:v. t 9S9, No . ]98, cff J - I- !i9; co rr,c-c: t ion in (16) m:,,dc under,;.. 13,93 (2m) (b) .. Stru"o. , R.-c-.1.1,1-er, C)c1c,bc,-, IQ9 "i , :-."o, tl?l:l : l'Ol'l'f'('iion In (Ui) 1nad• und f" I' 'Ii , l J .9.l (2 inJ (bJ 7., .<; tan., n,.,t~,n i\l:.,~· lOU ~o. 689.

NR 347.04 Permits, approvals and reviews required. (1) T11e followiug are the pcrlllit, approval and re,~~w requirements for dredging pr jeers:

(a) E~cept where otherwise prov ided by law. all vrivate nud municipal clredgillg projects require a permit or contract nuder s.

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

Is the date the chapter was last pu/Jllshed. Repon errors (60S) 266-3151. Rc, i"crMoy , Oil No. 689

81 | P a g e

NR 347.04

Published ,mder s. 35.93 . Wis. Stal s .. by the Legislati e Referellce Bureau.

\VlSCONS ADMINl TR.A.TIVE CODE 92

30.20. Srnts .. and ch. NR 346. Dredging in po11ions of the Missis­sippi , St. roix and Black ,ive, · by rhe U. '_ anny co,vs of engi­neer is gm·erned by s. 30.202, Stat .

(b) All ch-edcing projects require review uuder cb. 289, Stats., aud cbs. NR 500 to 520 for di po al of drndged ruate,ial 1mder ibe sol id waste manag,ement pro mm.

(c) All dredging projects shall be reviewed under . I . 11 aml 23J l (5). tats .. aud cb. R l 50 for co,upliance with the Wisco11-sin environmcnrn l policy act.

(d) All federally funded . permitted or sponsored dredging projects require ware,· quality ce11ification under ss. 28 I . 11 to 281.36 (12) and 283 .00 1, Stats .. and cb. R 299.

e) Wisconsin pollutnnt dischnrge eliminntion ystem (WPDE ) pe1mit under ch. 283. tats .. is required for dredging projects wit h canit1ge waler return flows to sm-face water or groundwater.

(f) Plan approval under s. 281.-1 1. tats .. is required for dredg­ing projects which include a dredged materia l 11·entme11t foci.lily.

g) Site And facilities for the di poMl of hazardous waste And P Bs reqnire review nnder subch . TV of ch. 291 , Stnt .. ancl s. 299.45 . iars., and chs. NR 500 to 520 and 660 ro 670.

(2) The project applicarion proces hall be coordinated by the clepnrtment. Except ns otherwise provided by lnw, deci ions on nil applicable depa1tment approvals. pennits. contracts and license relating to a dredging proj.ect shall be made concml'ently aud with the decision ou :

(n) Water qunlity ce1iificntion nnder ch. NR 199 for nil feeler­ally fuuded, pennit1ed or sponsored projects. or

(b) Pennit or coutrncl under ·. 30.20. tats .. ,md ch. J R 346 for 1111 other projeer .

Hi.story: r. Rt 11.,rc-1 . l'tbnL11;. 19S9. No, J9S. tff, J- J- S9; corrtction .. in (I) made w1dc-r i. 1J.9J (.!m) lb) .. Surt .. Rcgi~tcr. October. 199.5. No. 4 S: coiTccdoru. in(! ) (b), (d). (•). (I). nod ( n'1<1< ,ui<ltr,, 13,93 (2iu)(b) 7 .. SIOts .. R•~mtr Jom,ory ~002 No. 5~3; t'OIT~cliun~ iu ( l) (t:I), (11,) m:.ult' uudtr i. lJ.93 (lm) (l,) 7 .. Sta l\., Rt>&ht r :,.tuy 20 13 ~ o. 689,

NR 347.05 Preliminary application and analytical requirements. (1) P,ior to submission of a formal applicalion. auyoue seekiui to remove material from the beds of waterway · sha ll pro,·ide the departmeni with preli111iua1y iitfonnatiou iuch1d­ing:

(a) Name ofwaterbocl and localioll of project: (b) Volume of material to be dredged: (c) Brief de criptiou of dredgiug method and equipment: ( d) Brief clesc1iption of proposed disposal metllod and location

and. if a disposal facility is 10 be used. size of the disposal facility: e) ny previous ecliment snmpling (including field observa­

tions) and analysis data from the area to be cb·edged or from the proposed disposal ·it E:-:

(t) opy of a map showing the nrea to be clredgecl, the depth of cnt, the specific locnti on of the proposed sediment sampling sires and the barhymeny of the area to be cb·edged: and

g) Anticipatecl starting ancl completion ruites of the proposecl project.

(2) A.11 initial evaluation ·hall be conducted l.>y the depmtmeut wi1bi.t1 30 business days after receipt of the iuforurntiou micler sub. (I) to detenuine if there is reason to believe tlrnt the material pro­po ed to be dredged is comaminatcd. This iuitial evaluation hall be used by the depru1meul in specify iug sediment sampling and aualy is requirellleuts to the applica.ul under s. NR 347.06 ru,d slrn ll be nccomplished with existing dma. Fnctors which sh.ill be cousidered by the depru1mem i.t1 it evaluation of the dredging site and, if appropiiatc the dispo ·al site, include. but are not luuircd 10. the following:

(a) Potential that contmni.nants may be present . Potential routes that may have introduced coutmuinauls into the dt·edging site shall be ide111 ified by exaruiuiug appropriate maps. aerial pho1ogri1phs, or other graphic material · that ·how 111·foce water-

co1uses aud groundwater flow patterns. surface relief. proximity to smfocc and groimdwarer movement. p,ivAte and public road, . location of buildings , agricnlturn l lan,l umnicipal and indn. trial sewage and stonmvater outfalls, etc .. or by making supplemental field inspections.

(b) Previous tests of the material at tile dredging site or fi·om 01ber projects in the viciuity wbeu there are similar sources rmd types of couta111iu,111ts. water cut:ulalioll and trntificatiou. accu­mulaliou of sedirnems. ~eueral sedirneu1 cbarnlste1ist ics. aud potemial for uupact on th~ aquatic cnvu·owucnt. as long as notlt­i11g is !mown ro have occmTcd which would render the cornpari­on. inappropriate .

(c) TI1c prnbabiliry ofpasr introduction of contaminants from lnnd nmoff.

(d) Spills of toxic or hazardom, ubstances. (e) Iniroduction of contarninams from po int onrces. (I) Source and previous use of materials used or proposed 10

be u ed as fill. (g) an,ra l deposits of 111.inernl aud oihcr uanirnl substances. lh) Any other relevaut iufonuatiou available to the depa11-

meut . 1-llstory: Cr. Rti"""· ftbnuuy. l9S9. Jo;o. 39S. tff. J - I- S9,

NR 347.06 Sampling and analysis. pon completion of the initial cvahu,tion. the dcparrmenl slrnll esrnbl i h ampling nnd .inalysis requil'ements.

(1) EXCEPTION. Except as provided in sub . (3)(a) and (6) . the npplicaul shall collect aud ana l ze dala ou sedim~uts to be cb·edged iu lhe lllam,er outlined iu tlt.i · section.

(2) oM.ECT METHOD . nless othe,wise specified. snmpling, ·muple haudluig ,mcl ·ample aualy ·i 10 clemousrrate compliau e with this section ball be in accordance with methods from appli­cable somees cmuncrntcd in ch , NR 149.

(3) UMBER OF SAMPLES. (a) ed i111eut S,llltpliug 111ay be waived by rhe depa11me11t if it clete1miue from its review of avail­able iufommtion nuder s. NR 347.05 (2) rhat cdimcnt contamina­tion is unlikely.

(b) If avnilnblc infoimAtion i either in ufficicnt to dctennine the possibili ty for sediment contnmin.ition, or shows n pos ibility for sediment contamination. 1he depm1ment shall requi.t·e the applicant to collect sufficieut samples to describe lhe chelllical. physica l aud biological propertie · of the eclimeut. The exacl number aucl location of edimeut ·muple requu·ed aud ,maly ·e · to be couclncted hall be specified by rhc departmellt. iu cousulw­rion with the applicant, ba ed on the initial evah111rion and on other factors including, but not limiicd to. the potential for pos ibility of contnminntion . volume nnd netinl extent of mnterinl to he dredged. depth of cnt and propo ed method of di posal.

(c) For a project involving the disposal of ch-edged matetial at au upland disposal sit e. the depm·trneut may require samples to be iakeu 6:0111 tl.te propo ·eel disposal ite and analyzed for pm1ll.1.leters found 10 be elevated in 1be dredged ma terial ·ediin eut samples. The number fllld location of disposal site samples required shall be pccificcl by rhe clepanment based on the size and other charnc­tc,·istics of tlw , itc .

(d) For a project to he conc:h1ctecl in the G1-eat nkes with bench nonrishment disposa l. nt le,, t one sample eve,y 250 linenr feet of l,e.,ch with a miu.im,1111 of 2 samples ball be taken fi-0111 the pro­posed beach 110,iri .hu,eut disposal site and analyzed for particle ·ize mid color. ore or grnb sa111ple1 may be used.

(4) !VlETHOD Of TAKL'lG SAMPLES, (a) All samples shall be taken witl.t a core snmpler except as provided iu ·ub. (3) ( d) . The depa.rilllent may approve other sampling, methods if it fit.Ids them 10 be appropriate.

(b) All sampliu1.!. equipmem shall be properly cleaued p1ior ro and fo llowiug. each sample collection.

(c) arnples collected for PCB. pesticide and other orgHnic ana lyse· shall be collec1ed aud proce ed 11 ·u12 metallic ( ·1aiuless

Pt1bllshed under s. 35.93, Srars. Updated on the nrst day of each month. Entire code Is always current. The Register date on each page

H,egiiri.rer M1:1y 10IJ No. 6$9 ts me Clare me chapter was last p11011snea. Report errors (508) 255- 3151 .

82 | P a g e

Published under s. 3'\_9~ . Wis. Stsis .. by the Legis lative Reference Buresn.

93 DEPARTME T Or 1 ATURAL RESOUI CES NR 347 .06

, reel preferred) liner , h1bs. spoons end spamlss . Smnples col­lected for other chemical analysi ·. indudiug heavy metals. shall be collected nnd proccssc<l 1csing non netall ic liners, tubs . spoons and ·patulas.

(d) Core samples from the dredging site shall be taken to the propo ·eel dredging depth plus 2 feet.

(c) Core samples shell be v is1rnlly inspected for the existence of strata formatiou. aud a w1.itteu de cription including po ·it ion. length , ndor, tcxhu·e and color of the sh·ata shall be provided to the <lepmtment.

(5) SAMl'LE HANOUNG AFTER.CO LEC'TTON AXO PR.JOR. TO ANAl­

y 1s. Smnple handling and stomge prior to analysis slrnll be in accordance with the maximum holding ti.tnes and con miner I yµes given in table F of ch. NR 2 19 . Samples shall be prese1ved at the time of collection by cooling to 4°C _

(6) "-AL.Y es TO B P£R.FOR.ME1) ON l)l,\,1 $ AMPl s. Aml-yses sball be doue in accordauce with methods from aµpticable sources ennmernterl in ch. NR 149. nalvses submitted lo the departmelll umler th.is chapter shall be doue by a laborn101y ,erti­ficd or registered under ch. R 149.

PCB (To tal)

Total 2,3,7,8 TCDD

Totnl 2.3.7,8 TCDF

A

X

X

X

(s) Samples shall be analyzed from each distinct layer observed w the nmte1ial to be dredged. If no strata fonnation exis ts. core samples shall be divided into 2-foot segments. and each egment hall be analyzed for the required chemicals and clrnrncteri . tics. For cores extending. into parent material , ana lysis of only the top 2- foot segment of parent m~te,ial is required. The cleparlru.,nt may appruve otlier subsmnpling methods if it finds ihem lo be appropriate .

(b) ,1\..ll sruuplcs shall be ana lyzed for tliose parameters listed in table I unless waived by the dcpmTmcnf a provided in par. (d . Elut:riaie testing may be reqaired for all chemicals listed in Table 1 unless wa ived by the depm1ment as provided in par. (d).

(c) If previous sampling data or other adequate available infor­UJaliou indicates the po s.ibilily of contamination by chemicals not listed in table I. the department may require analysi for those chernicn1. _

(<l) Tfprevi01cs sampling cfa ta or other arleqn., te ava ilable infor­umtiou clemoustrnles tlml the possibility ofcoutaminalion is negli­gible. ,mal sis for any chemical may be waived, in w1i tit1g. by the depanmem.

(e) The departmenl may requi.t·e addilioual samples aml aHaly­scs as specified by law or for other approprinte reasons.

SEOI JENT SAl\1JPL ES

INLAND WATERS

X

X

X

AldJ.-iu

Dielchin

Chlordane

Endrw

Heptachlor

Linrlane

Toxaphcnc

DDT

GREAT LAKES

X

INLAND WATERS

X

DDE

Arsenic

Oarinm

Cndm.ium

Chromium

Copper

Cyan ide

hOH

Lead

Maugauese

Mercmy

ickel

Sdeuium

Zwc

Oil nml Grease

O•.NO.i_ H3 - .T Total P

Grain-size

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

~X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

'(

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

'(

'(

X

X

X

X

X

Pull!ish ecJ under s. 35.93, Srats. Updared 011 Ille first day of each month. entire cocJe is always current. Tile Regisrer dare 011 each page fs rile cJare the chaprer was last pull/ls/Jed. Repon errors (60SJ 266-3151 . Rcg i ... rcr Mny 20 1 .l No. 6S9

83 | P a g e

Published under s . 35.93 . Wis. Stats .. by ihe Le!'islative Refereuce Bureau.

NR 347,06 WISCONSIN AD!vllNISTRATIVE CODE 94

Perce Ill Sol ids

Total Organic Carbon

foisture Content

Senleabi lity

(if renuu wate1)

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

Hhtu1·~-: Cr. Re~i..,IC"r. Fc-bnun-y. 1989. ~o. 398. df. 3-1-89; auL ( 5) end (6) (U.11.n,.). Rc~i':.ICT. ~ 01o·embc=-r. 1992. No. -W3 . iC"ft 12-1----91.

NR 347.07 Review procedures and review criteria. euvironrnental safegmu-ds to ensure tliey are iu µlace aud oµer-(1) When sediment sampling and a1rnly. cs have been completed, able . the applicanr shall submit a copy of the testing repo1t to the depmt- (b The depmtment nrny inspect the dredging project ar any rneut. Thi · reµor t shall iuclude raw data for all aualyses, a lilltJJ of ti.we dmiug oµeration to delenu.iue whetl.Jer requireweuts ofµer-the project area showing the specific locations of sediment sam- mi ts and approvnl s are heing met or to conduct efl111ent sampling. µ liu)! sites aud the uame aud adth-ess of the laborato1y which per- (2) MoNITORn-:G. (a) For ti.Jose µrojeel s autliorized iii µart by fo11ned the tests. 11 testing and q1rnliry control procedures shall " \VPOES pennit. monitoring., aorn lyscs and rcpooting shall be per-be described and analytical methods, detection liinits and quanti- fonned as specified iu the \VPDES penuit. fica tion liiuit shall be identified . (b) For all other µroje cts , wou.itoriug , analyses aml reµm1iug

(2 ) Tue depm1ment shall review the information submitted shaJI be performed as specified in ss. NR 347.06 2) and 347.0 7 uucler sub. (1) with.in 30 bu ·iuess clays aflerreceiµI aud detenuiue (I). the applicable stnh1t01y and administ:rntive mle provisions and (c) Project clmrnctc.ristics ro be monitored may include. but are au y additioual iufom1ati.011 requu·ed from the apµlicaut uuder this not Jiiuited to. caffiage water renuu flow. tom! suspended solids. section. dissoln,d oxygen eonccutrntions, ef!l11c111 and receiving wa ter

(3) Based ou the ·ubmitted le ·tiug reµo rl tht- deµartu1ent may temperahn·es. receiving sn-eam flow rares. effluent mmuonia - ni-afte,· consultation with the applicant require nddiiional sedimenr U'ogen concentrntions, and pH. sampling and minlyses when there is evidence of contamination. (3) SusI'ENs10N OF woRK. If the depamuent detennines that

(4) for µrojecis iu the Great L.1kes iuvo lviug: beacl.J uourish- project perfonuance is not in cowpliauce with penuit or co111rnct ment disposal. grain- size analysis results of the proposed dredged conditions . the pemlittee shall suspend work upon w1itteu notifi-material and 11.Je beach shall be cowµa.red by the cleµa.rtmeul. cation frow the deµaruueul. Th.is slrnll be a couclitiou of any µemi.i t

(a) Tue depm1lllent may allow beach nom·ishment disposal if: or contrnct issued by the depmtment. TI1e penuittee shall be accorded au oµporruuity for I.Jeaiiug: iu accordance with s. 227 .5 l (3). tats. Tue issuance of a suspens ion order under ibis subsec­tiou shall uol liinit other enfor<·e1ueu1 actious or µeualtie ·. The depm1lllent and pemlittee shall ana lyze operationa l deficiencies aucl the deµa11weu1 shall µresnibe changes uecess:u y to brim: project operation into conformance with pem:lit or contract condi­tious.

I Tue average µerc eutage of silt µlus day (w ate1i al µa ssiiu: a #200 sie,·e or less than .074 mm din.) in the dredged material does uor exceed the average perceutag.e of silt µlus day iu the exiMing beach by more than I 5~,. and the color of rhe dredged material does not differ sig:i.lificantly from the color of the beach material.

Not~: F('tr c;:,1::unp!t:. if the: , ilt pin<. cby c(')ntcnt of rhc- cxi .-..ring k rich i.-.. 100/4 . .-..nit ­ubl i: dr.,;:d~i:d mal i::1-ial lll\l':, l hRH a ':>ih plu':> ~luy c:oul .,;:ut ofl.,;: :.>:, tlmu 25%.

2. The cri le1ia of auy geueral pemi.it regulatiug wa ·tewater discharges under ihe \Visconsin poll utani d isclrnrge elimination system is not exceeded.

(5) For all µroject · where uµ land disµosa l is required or plalllled, the results of sediinent sampling and analysis shall be cowµared by the deµm't1.ueut lo the solid waste di ·µosal slai1dai·ds and c1ite1ia specified in chs. 1''R 500 to 520.

(6) If the bulk sediu1eut aualy i · ciile1ia iu ·ub. (4) is exceeded. the npplicant shall have the opiion of demonstrnting to the deµartweu t through use of bioas ·ay. or o ther methods approved by the department , tha t the dredging and seduneut clis­posa l operations wilJ have min.inmm effects on the environment.

H i'5.I0l'y: Cr. Rc~istcr. Fcbmary. 1989. Ko. 398. cff. 3-J-S9: correction in ( 5) m.td~ nndc-r "-- U .93 ( 2m) (b) 7., Stat,;.., Rcgi ">h~I"- October. 199 <1\ . No. -HS.

NR 347.08 Monitoring, reporting and enforcement. (1) Su1<v 1.,1..A1ffE. (a) TI,c pcnnittee shall contact the depart­ment 5 busiuess days µ1ior to the COllJllJeucemenl of dredgiug: to provide an opportunity for the department to review all required

(4) PI:N.~LTIES. (a) ,ich -,,;olation of the conrLitiorn of a permit or contn1c1 issued under s. 30.20. tats .. or this chapter. may result iu a fo1fcinu-c of uot Jes than $100 nor more than $ 10,000 for the fast offense and shall forfe it not less than $500 nor more than S JU.000 upon conviction of the same offense a ccond or subse­quent tune. Tue penuit or contract may be rescinded and appropri­nte restorntion orders may be issned as anthorized by ss. 23.79, 30.03 , 30.12. 30. 15, 30.20, 30.292 , 30.294 aud 30.298, Stats.

(b) TI,e enforcewent µro visious of s. 283.91. Stat· .. shall aµµly to any violations of WPDES penuits associated with dredging µrojects.

(c) The enforcement p rovis ions of 289.97 and 299.97, Stats .. and chs. NR 500 to 520 shall apply to violations of solid waste mana!!_ement approva ls for th is chapter.

(d) 77,c enforcement provis ion. of s . 291.95 and 291.97, Stal · .. shall apply to violations of any hazardous wa te apµro val · for di po al activi ties assoc imed w iih dredging project. autho­rized by this chaµtcr.

Fli'5tor:·: Cr. Rcgi.c, tcr. Fcbm:uy. 1989. >Jo . 398 . cff, 3- 1- 89: C(·,r.-c-ctiou-. in (-1) marlc 1mdcr .-.. 13 .93 {2m) {b) ; ,. t!ll-<;. .. Rc gi<,,t'Cr: Octo~r. 1991. No. lilt cQrn-c-ti()n"i in (4) (b) 10 (d) made under,. 13.93 (! m) (b) 7 .. St.its .. Reoi,ier Janu.,ry ! 00: No. >53.

Pub/is/J ed under s . 35.93, Slats. Updated on the firs t day or eac/J monl/J. Entire code is always currenr. Tile Regisrer dale on each page

Ri:_5l i~i i:r-May .2013 No. 689 is the date the chapter was last published. Report errors (608) 256-3151.

84 | P a g e

Appendix D - Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Dredge Sediment Review - Number 09-018

85 | P a g e

DE~ 01::PARTMENT OF EMVIRONMC: NT.<\L QUALln'

POLICY AND.PROCEDURE

Subje:t: Dr,,;dgE;- Sedi m ;;,nt Review

0 ·gin Effective Date: March 19, 2Di3 R0~ris,i;;.1 Date: Rt:!forn mted Date:

Nu mbnr: 09-fi1 1.l

. I Catago1y; LJ ri:-E·n;,llAdministr_c1_1_ivo_~ __ rJ __ tc-·1·_,·1 <1_1_1N_o_r_·-l_n_to_,rp_re_ti_·.-.,, ___ 0 _E_).-_.e_rn_a_1_,,, .,_t_P_p_r_e.1i_·ve __ _

A Dcp-r:rlm!'im cJ f-nviu :,r 1mP.rili1J Qua.rtty (DEC}) ,Oot,;cy ,:;mJ ,0 rocodurs o,;,noot sst,111/.i,<;h r°f!gulritrJfy req11iremor,ts for /J-;!!tios c-H!:s,'d& of(hf.! VHJ. H1is (l'ocument provides diroction to DEO s!Dff re_::;.;:mfir19 tne im;;fementedfc-n cf rules and Jaws arlmlnislsffirJ by /h!i! DF.Q, .If ,11:; rJJerely 0xµ/:!ln2iwy; dm!'!$ '1-:: J/ i:1.ffe1ot the rigf1fs of, or procc-dvro.s and pmcilici}:; !l i/;1 /fob/e lo, thH pi,i.;/1{"}; anc/ {/ooa 1mt have tlw force !lrlr.i ,-,(fe{.'t of i"'w,

This polic;y and prooedlire 51.;i:;.;;rsecles tl1e fo rmer Land a11cl Wate1· Mc1r1c1g~1r1 s:mt Pivi!;ion Po!ic~· ancl ProoedL1re Nu 1bG 301-99-01, "IJredge S,,d'ime.nt R,evie·.v," cla,ed J,n:.iary .26, 2009.

ISSUE:

lckm•· '/ wfrnn µreposed dredging requires tesf r~ uncler fhis pDlicy and prncsiclurs -,.,+·en prc,c:e~ing .:ip-pli~mion:. for c.rmit under su1hcrity o·' f',arf30 1, In.land Lakes ancl Streams; Part :i'.25, Great Lakes St-1bmergecl Lancis: and Pc'lr t 115, .Solid W;;i~te Management, of tl:7e N.aturaf Rciaollr t;l.:ls ;,,r-::l Environmf5fntal F roteciion Act, -'. 994 PA 45-l, .;is .1 11.mdeJ (NREPA), ,:jf!c.1 proposed i:;Jaoement of dmdgfl .:,;pa:I:,; is LJ flf.i:iind.

Unless the proj.e~1 ls loc.ci~ In Ar, aiF.a nf knr;wn or suspected contamonation , this dredge policy and procedure sh.ill not c1ppl'/ to Ile folfowi r ,s:

poncls, • wetla d:,;, • new creation c,f: inland lakGS ar str,aams, ;:irtifid HI w~tP-rwc1,s, can1;ls, ditclles,

la girmn~, 11r .a, i m ii ar wa!erw::ws.

DEFINITIONS:

1. "CIWPIS": Tha Goastel a d lnla1d Waters rermit lnfonnatimi Sy.st'3m, usad bV \f'.f;;rter Re::iourc-es Division (Wrl Dj staff io electro11r,..;.il ly reCQ rd 9;;,rm[t fi le· fnform ation such ~1s loo~rons that are cross-refsre1cecl ag.1J,in;;L s~·all~r irforn1~tion !{o.red in multiple d.:.tata:.E:.s.

2. ''ArHF'l of known or suspecrecl contami:1ation": Either a faciJil~' , e:; defined in Part 20·1 {may sh ow up 9JS .Act 30"/ 011 CPNJ-'1_$) , Environment;;il. Reme:ii~'-'011, of th;;i NHEPA, or any a' a

whicl7 has knowt or suspact&d c,.mtarninoition tl:5 determined by DEQ sti1ff ortho .-.Fplic;:lnt

3. ''[)e:;igr1atfld l e:;i-t Areil"; .Aon area lisfecl in·Cl'J\JPl.fi So,ec:i@I l11tor,:::,s:s c:latabasfl c1:;; containing ccnhrn:inateci ol' polluted 5edimerrt,

86 | P a g e

DC!C POLICY AND PROCEDURE

Subject: [JrndgG $ (c)(iirr1ont H.ev iew Nllmber: 00-018

Page 2of6

4. Sagin~w B~y Dio ·m; .,;.rd Fur-EnE- Te;it Ares"; l he portion of S·s.,:;iinaw· Ba~· that liee b-etween me moutl1 of 1tlc S.igrr1c11.v :Rwcr oind a Ii o drawn bstwee.n the Ii p of Fish Palnt and the 'p of he unnan:ed p~int east of the lakewarci end of East Pinconning R.oad, 1Nhb ·1 sf al" also include dioxins anc· ··ur.ini. tes··ng

5. "On-Site .Ji5posal'': llpland propeJ1y in tne same ownership as ti e dredge ·1ocation a t1d cantiguoliis to, the d1<&dg~ loc;.:it1m,.

6. ·uean Caver"; Six (6) i nclles of unco11tamim,ted soil that cirn su oport vegetatio

PROCEDURES:

1. 1NR D fi e;rd i;taff recfli,,i n;i the ·r.itial application marks all fi les wi · :1 a dredging component as administr,:,.tivel~• incornpl0ti:!, per Joi 1t P1a1rmil Appl.i.;;ilirn1 (JPA) qu,unriv-:1. p· ujeots invot•JinrJ dredging mar reqt...ire sediment testiing and will not be cons'c·ersd .idm'nis'.rntlvely r..amplAEH uriti l thR DEQ d€',tP-rm inF.!!; t at l:!ith!:!r:

• testing is. at 1e;q irEC, a .. the required te-3ti ng resu Its have been received .

2. WRD field staff reviews fho dlroo gw projocl drGdgE,; v1Jlurr1H, lm;<:l tlnri , ar111 rfo~ignated te5t a eas to det.ermine if ,conram i.1atio 1 is likely co oe present. If the p roj i;i~t volum A Is m(]rn t11an 2.,000 cubi c ~,,~rds tot",il, tr,H pmjHct is in a de5i9n ated ~t area. If the ap ~lican· indicates there is conta:-n'ination on,-sitfl, ;)r if fald stsff beJlecves cant&mioaitimil i$ li kely, U1e ti le ig rn ii~:'!d as- requiring testing. WRD fiel d staff coordir.ates Vlith appropriate Remediation e1nd Rsds'Jslc pmsrt D h1 is· cm ii s ki stsfi sncl/or Office of Waste Mmi~ement and Radiol ::igiic.::.I Protection (OWMRPj fic '.c' stc'lfto de·e,mitie apprcp i.;ta tflsting crite ia if field :;;tsff believe it shoLild be d[fferenttha.1 the stan :J ard criteria lis,ted in Step Gb, bolow, {pre.iso soo the attached Drad!'.ja fi.Bdi m.;-nt Review FJO\l/ Chart for a si mpl.:fisd decision ree).

S. Sooimert testing rs required for an~, of thA ·fo!l(":,.,,ing :

s. !J erlging more t11an 2, DOO cubic '.)'ards as a project to1al;

b. Dredgin.;i in designated :est .ire.is; or

c. Dredging in areas w ,ere DEQ :;taff req1~ire.5 testi1·;J, inc:liuding, t,L.t no~ Jimi!ecl to: m aintenanre dredging in c1ri::c1s whore Lhe i-i" · ri1.;<l ' tJr8:Jl.lE;l a I E:frl 1.i.~ been e:-:oanded Vli!f tk;ally aind/or h ::>riz.o ntalil>/ .into areas of suspected cont~minafi on, n@w drGdging fn areas of hls:.aric81 known a.nd/ar suspeGtAd c~r>t tFlr 1imrtinn, nr ~ny -ctre.d!)i:19 in areas wilare ;j esignated uses are -:::Ln Gntly impaired dua to rxmtaminat iai, .

87 | P a g e

DEQ POLICY A D PROCFnLJRF

Subjoct: D 1F.da€! Sediment Review Nu1nber- 09-011.l I _ _ _________ P_8"""q_0_:'.l_uf B _J

4. S;;!::iiment testing ma~· b:ai wa.lved If om'! a· the fc,I owing· conditions is met:

a. Tho matarial 1s dlsppsed of in a numicipal solid wasta 1:=tndfill or a U.S. Army Co rps of 1=.ngine-ers ConfinGCi Dis.pas.ii Fa C"Jlity {USAG E C[)f) .

b. Tl:c tm :i~ ri a I r.:irnsin~ in an uprand area on-site (i.s ., mi!i;ide of wat~rt:-oc!ies. wetland, or floodp!aill areas), 1uith daa ri cover, ancl the applicirnt signs c CBd.;,ir.;,i.tiun af R.,~trictive Covenant to pr&Gril tmm:irnE;111t cf the dredge n ,merial off~ite as well ~ !;

any oll l8:i ni~1Ai[.;tions 1fl3r OWMRP _:,11si g staff dAetns Mces~ary. . .

c. Th?. appficarit can suppiy ap pral.•ed ::irevia us test data from tho slfe, or fror-1 a site im--r1oo ia:el~ adjaaenfto t11e site wi"hin 100 fe~t, c:::,llac;ed a ct analyzed within :i-1.;::; :ast ten (10) years thst demo -strates the dredge mmori;;ils a FJ heJCA•t the criteria 116\-ad i the OWM RP Review 8riter1a end Method De ection Lim its (i. o. , test c'ata th c..f: dO.'lWtH,hi!es tha I ateri al iB inert) . Thrs dato1 rnust ba representative of t ·1e dre<l9u area, iriclucli g depth. FDr prr,jects on the Ti .tab.iwe1Ss8o1 Rivar t'cm nstrearr; Df tile G~Y c-f Midi.and. on "he Saginaw R:h,Br dc)'tm:;;tream ot tt,e Trttabaw.;issee, River,, or in thi; Sic!glriaw Bay Dioxins and Fum1s TGst Are .. , r:ltDx· !'1 :aind furans testing· is eq1:.fre:::I and prnvious test r:l;.itH m1r,t s.'Jo·,,,. dicxins and fllrans.belov, e:ri terla or t11at

p ::ll' ·or of esting wiL still ti,;;;, requi red .

d. T e totar aredge volume is 1·ass than ;1.,0D0 cubic rards, is not •,-,irthin a de:;_,,ignated te:=-1- area , PEQ star. has I ot required histing, disposal lccaifon is in ~r upla t·,c a,ea oUIBidc of c'.l wa:Grbody, wef:l t;.nd. or lloocipl~in arc.a, ;;,t1d:

i. the c1pp lica11: wishes to keep lhG rr =1l0ri;;il c.m-::;ite, or

ii . the appricant wishtis ta dl~pasP. nf the material off ...sit0 8nd tihe, final pe it lnr,ludE,s Gl',JVPIS si:..'111dard p8r~graph. Not l:lassitied as to Cont8.11in~r1t Starus.

b. It tes~ing is n.ot reC1uir~ . \NRD field sta.ff rniir~ the a_3_0'.ic.i1io·n iikl in CIVoJPl'S Es adminiS;trafi·Jely c-cm_:i-:ete and ccntinues proo:::ssing a, ap 11cation ~le ot1tside of ti is pol iGy and i::roccJ 1ro. If tasfi n-g is re,q vired , the file ren ains incom plere and \'\/RD Ii eld sroaa oo,ntimies prc-cessing per this pDlic;y and p-rocecil1re, confrrming to ste![I e, b ,ilow.

6. \'\'RD fie ld staff ser u ~ 1} 1E:; Sediment T esti11g for Dn::dging PrnJent~ l?.f:ter to the 8pplican7 :f ttte proposed sediment clrooging maets F.t flY o,ni;, of the criteri;:!. listGd above in '.:iteps 3a-<: a 1d prmddP.s thP. 01/'JT!JlRP District Super,i'i$or wlih a copy of tile application a 1M letter, which DQ,nta ins the 'foflowi11g B uid<'lr. c-e;

a. Applrcant may opt to condl1ct sieve g ;;,iri ,sr,slysis tea~ fQ·r sand content, er m;,ve t-::­Stcp 6b if n a.t,er;al is believed t~ be less ti an fi'J percr,m s.ind . For all sie'v'e grai1 analy8is testing of drcdgi11~ pmjeoc:;; of less thsn 10.0DO c,ubic.; !J',mj:,;;, applicant shall 5a:nple ss;aimi;;11ts fmn six {6) ,:Fsc1eL;:i k;i.,:cl ·om; withir: the prnpos.1xi dr,edge at'E-.'l . If_ ·1w1"' LI =1ri -/ O,(lOG cubk: ya.rds of dredging ars proposed, ,if: IP.ast one ad6iti onal sample sf1all be obtainoo ,;rnd Hns l;J?P.d ·Qr each 10, 000 ci.:bic ya,ds of additional ri1,iteriF.JI prr:iposeci' for dredg ing. T~·pic:al l'.)' , ear:h sample .viii consist ol a o:.mmposite::i"

88 | P a g e

DEQ POLICY AND PROCC:DUR~

Sl1bject Dredge Sediment Review Numbar: 09-D ·1 e

Page 4_o_t_G ____ ~

!:I bse-t of a core taken ta folr project deptJ, . DEQ fiald ~taff m.1y rnand 9'1_D specific so.rn pl: r· ~ crito · c) , lo cations, andic r depth i·1tervals, based on their s ite specific knowledge·. Appl icar.t ccr.cucts a sieve giain size am,lysi"s 011 the :;;edimenti; using U.S. Standard Sieve Nurnbl:lf 200 ~ie~i:,. Applic;;llr l rBpo1 l,-; :he1 resutls for each of th e, ~I.: {or ,nore) discrete samplG lacafions ~,s a "11ass percentags or retained sedimerits. If the ;,wor~e mass percentage ret c!l ine:I on the Nl1m b,i;,r ?00 ~iev~ i:l :;io F-rcP.nt sand or greater, 11a ·:;;:irMiona I se-c i m!2r.t testing is req uir~d, unleEs ths pro· ect is I ocatad on tha Tittabawassee River -dc'1Nnstre-am o · 1l"IG city of M icll .. nd, o:n tl1e S.:lginaw R.iver dcwns earn oftl1e Tittabaw assee- Ri~·e~. or i the S ll.:::llinaw Ba;· Droxin!:I an d! f llflln!3 Tei;;-t Area, in which CF.;Se d'iaxim; and furans mus( alw L>c a1;i.lyzed. ne sieve gra·r-1 ar1a sis test is a passl'fa.il test. If the average mass percentage of sand is, less dl1ar 90 perc,mt. then the materia l rm.1st be 1inaly~ acc-ordi ng to Step 6b , below. for at leasts· {6) rJiscre-5.e !;;<.lfTI li111-1 lut;alirn1~.

b. If t:1e result cf the mass percenta~re retained on :he Number ?00 scfP. F.'11 is IE'!s~ · · a n 90 peirc~nt sand, on aver1'1gP., e r th;;, appl iCF. rt opted not to con.duct s.ie·.i.i ~r2.in analysis, addit ional testing is r;a.q l ' ired. For c11l c1nc1 tic-al testing of dredging pr?jects of less tl1an 10,CC,O cubic yards, cippJicant shall sample ~edi'menls From 5ix (6} d isc:rete lorat ion3 with in the propo~ed :J' re-::lg e ElraEl. If "r10 rG th.1n 1(1, 000 cubic yards of drerl qi n ~ are pre po~oo , ~t ID.1s:t one additia n al sampl,e sl1all .be obtained a nd analyzed for €;;:sdl 1 0. 000 cub:c yaros of ad cl it ional mat eri propo5e.d fo • dredgtng. Typicallll , eir sarnp. !:! wi II c;w1si1;,i cJr c1 q;,mµrn,;i-1,8:.J o Jbssl u I c1 cum tak8 n tD fulf projec1 depth. :::iEQ eld staff may manda·i;i spec ific sa1mpling criter ia, locaticns, andjor depth interva s, based on their site .speGifir, knowl=gP. ThF. def::iult 8nalyti :1i:i param;,;;t1;1~ i1c lu{l e s.;;•1eJ1 (l } heavy rmital~ ta ' ::~ n.ic, cad1rium, co;::: i::-er, lead, n1.;1c L1ry-, s.;ilenium, and z inc] and pclynuclem ammatic h'.'drocarbons. DetR1lt ana ~;tical parameters also inc lude .J<::il,•c:hl-o,rinaled bi-phan,li;; if "he project is ot1 cn a oi' 1he followi,g bodie.;; af wat0r: Datroi~ Rivar, Rouge R" er, Rc1 isin R'vcr, Ka lcinc1zoo f<iver, Saginaw River, Sagin<Jw Bay, and Manistique Harbor, or canals that connect to any of the listed bodies of water. Add'.tions or deleticr!, k thii; list Gc1n bl:l rna<l;;; c>n a p ·1Jj"'c.;t spl,ldlk L-.;;.,:.fi; if r1 · t:l staff or Lh8 appiic;;mf has add it ionc1I infa.m1o1tion related to the project. For projects o,n the lii:i..'aba·,,.-.;.ssee Ri~·er d ownstrean of n,e city o · Mldl imd o 011 · he S13gin1iw RivP-r f1 nwnstt"e!::it 1 ,i f t~ e ·1 ittsbswassee Hiver, e r in :> Satf naw Bay [)ioxins and F:.rrc1ns T,sst Arna, di oxins and fur-ans ,r.uE t also be analy-zsd . f.or the purposes or clreclging and dredge spoi l clisposa l, def.:l .1lt backg.ro·.rnd concentrations, ::if arseflic h:;ive besin davalo pad. · hosa arE;aa cunren;ly inctuda a statewide dGfault ba-cl<.fJro uml and three Gpocific arc~ id ontifk::d as • __ p_ Scuthwesl Area, L.P. Sou(he~.st Area, and U.P'. 'Nest Central Area (ple;;;se see attaclled figl1re "Ar5€<nic llnrormaii on to Support P redgi n q Mater ;; I Devisiom;"), A :ftf:! Fif..ic.:ifk, bo(.;kg uu nd c1r1c1lisis is olsl.) c1IID•N1a1d k:,, a rs is!nic if tl~1:1 applicant wishoo to p ursue fhat D~•tic n.

c:, l...ev,els of dete~tkm re quited arE r-e fl i:?cted in the QIMJ1RP Review Criteria and Metl1cd D&te,ction limits.

89 | P a g e

DEQ POLICY .AND PROCEDUR

Subj0~;: IJ~dg~ SP.dime.nt Review Mumber. 09 .. 018 7 Page 5ofG _ I

t.L If sed.iment results show PCB andlo r l'II P.r.r:ury r::ancentmtions .ireater than 'I pp·r,Jl, er· met,;ls d\;:rta ,mn/nr PNA data greater than ,he-. probable effect conc-€-r:tration as defined in MacDonald P.t /:lJ., ZODD{MacDom1ld ot .:i!'., 2000. Dsvelc,fHTie rit a d Evi;iluation cf Consc11sus-13ased Scd irr,ent Ot.al ity Guidelines for Frcsl'lwator l:!cDs>•starr.s. Arch. Enviro11. C.:mxim. ToxiCTI I. 39. 20-.31), F.idditional sediment testing wi!.I be required to evaluate the newly exposea sediment quaflt)' · This ,;edimE;,n' esting dara wll be usecl to evaluate po'hmtial irnpacts to surface 'Nater a"usiQn.il.iLl

uses from the newly exposed sedirnont, as d~nnE=< in Part 4, 'Nate· Qualit:t Stai dl.:irds, pran,ulgated under Part 31, Water Resources PrntAc:tlon, nf t '"NRFPA. If this a,jdi··onal testing is re-quired, WRl1 fieFri !j,tfifif will f,or,vard sedimG!1t data ;:.an;:ib •7.;.,7 unde· tflfs paat to tho Laikes l:!rie, Huron, and s ,Jperior Unit Chief, WRD, DEQ, fo r rs-view, ~ne.ly5i!'l, and furt:her d'.rection .

7. The 8.oplicant fc:,r,•,ards the sediment .?.r 21iyG:is results to \ •\,RD fieJd 3taff.

8.. V./RD fi.~ld staff ~OiM',:m:ls t 'lG sediment anaJ,:f>is data for review as foll::i-.o,'S:

"'· From S.11a1µ:,; 6c1-b, abovi3', to Duane Rosk.oskey, 0'M1ARP, D·E:Q, C,11sti1t1tian Hall, Laming, M ichiga .

I)_ from StGp 6ci, abll"VEc!, ta 1:he; lakes Erie, Huron, mid Supsrfo,r U , t C'hiai , WRl1, DEQ, Constitlltion Hal l, Lam ing, Michigari. H-e 'J•/RD Unit C.1ief wi ll ins.trt1ci 1J\l'RD 1e ld st9'ff as t,o the next step.;, ioasecl on tho test rosu s.

D.. C.\iVMRr Lansing staff evalu~tcs tha Cl'ata from Steps 6a-b. at:o,,e, ,md deto r•nin,=l:; clisposa·1 req uirsment5 as one or more of the fo lfowiny and notifiE:!s ·1NRD 1eld staff of tile dispcssr requirement opliur ,s:

a. in~rt and su r!Atil P. fnr 11nrestrict.etil upland dis;o ::i.sa !

b. c site d ispos::i I with d (}an cover and Restrictiv.i Covenant

i:. munid p.::i[ ~a!id wash,i i.FJn-dfil l or USACE CDF

10. If the pm p,::i!ie.d dredge prcject is permittable , \!\;',RD 1.ild staff drafts the 19ermit ·,1.-idh 1iH3 clisp,:,sa l req ui -errn:ml optior ti and other requirements needod •a be proter.tivP. of ue~ig ated uses ;;no fowards to the appll r.atit, Hr,rl upr:l<'ltes Cl\•VPIS.

11 . T e app.lic.int s8locts a disposal option., (XLmtersigns the dl"clff pGrmit, and ;etlirn~ t () WRD tield staff tor issll,'.;r.cs . If tll-e c'isposal upti' on is on-si:e w i1h .R.e;,!rictivc Coveria ·,t, ~o\lRD f'eld s.taff v,il l wit hold final ex.ecuticr of the pc·'lll· until e raco dab e Declaration of Restrictive Covon~nt rutm is r-BC'R.tved , If ano:ile r d isposal o :::tion is salacted, WRD field staff i5sues me perir. it if the proposed pr;,jeG\ i'"' pen11itt.a.o-le. As ap,p lic~1blG, l/VR.IJ fie.Id .-:;!-affforwar<l5 :lie recordable fon11 to Duane, Rosh.u:,;h.;.:,', -OWMRP. D:Q, Constitut ion Ha ll , L.ai:sing, M id1igo1 r1.

90 | P a g e

I DEQ f' 01..ICY AND fl R:>CEDlJR~

is , I .,ieot Dredge Se<liment Review Number: 09-0rn

12. ·wnere :,.pplicable, OWW:RP Lilct\Sjng sta'f executes th,17 rc,corda hie, Dot:! ;;Jr;;itio-ri of Re-raictlve Govenant and forw11rds a copy to vVRD field st2ff for GIWP IS updaie ~nd to the o1.Pf)t tlf)t lal~ oourJy grovemment office for fir 1: · rei:.:orui11g, Onc:e th:e recorded term has tocn mrumoo, 0\'1/MRP L,1ri~lt1g staff -retains tha or1g1n~I am1 rorNf:'lr'-1~ H :;<ip~r or the recorded fom, to WRD field staff for G.IWPIS upda1c.. ·

13-, Wher.i sp~l=ble, t1ie V',-'HlJ updeiles Cl'vVl-'lS that im executed m,d recorded Res,trbtive Coven.mt ,_,,ai, rccc:lvud, whar.-i applicable, ._1in,:f add.; r,.- h~rd (mpy to the file,

I .

t'lpp ove-1:

91 | P a g e

Micf1j!,"lc1t1 De.;ia rtm en'. of Environmer.tal QLIaJity

DREDGE f;f[")lroJlF:NT RFVIE'N FLOW CHART

'!'ES

YES

~=GI N HERE

Is m~lP.rlal ts..;; 1g <l l51)n,,;e,I <.>f: in .i munl,:lp;,I , ,~ d w;dt• lc1wjrill, or i,. , , ·u.s. Ann:,Cor1~~ .:if En£ir,019rl Conti ~ [Jisoosel 1-,;~lllt{, nr ii; It t:e?ng lsft on-P: 1e· \"1'. ll cwm c) :)'L'~I" ~ "«1 r ~~;lrir;ti 'i' t! Covcn:, nt?

Has tt-P- aµplicui: prc,Jlded appr:,v,1d t<'e':UtHl (!Qiu h.:~,s chon 10 YQ-5.!'5 c-id w'li:h

,-,,,._c,1,5 sedirra-.:s are c: ei 17

[);,~;, l:l CQ. e,:;!ff<; r :hr: '.lPplic'1nt haNo kno'llledge ~hft'! !he .aite is cr rrey re

c>111 ;;,n1Inatetl'I

lo;, t he prajec-: .'.l'redga •10.' u1t1e ,greal~r 1Mn 1.,llllll ,:ut ix: y,i ,.is lnt,.I'?

pm;;,grilph: .\lot Clasi;.'.fied BI to Ccd.c1minant Gtt1t1J1.s'?

92 | P a g e

Arsenic fnfor,mation to Support Dredging Materiaf Decisions Based on Assumed Natural Arsenrc ConoentraUons in Stream Sediments & Soils

U.P. West Central Area

March 2013

b ::q U.P. West Cenirnl Area

2E2] L P. 80 IJIIH, as l Th LI m b Areri

~ L. P So OlwcsUl.rc;;i

~ 0th;, Co ntie~

other Co unties o J,tside the ffl ree naturafl~/ ele-vall::!{j ar~as use -current Default Ars€1 .io Bflckground 5.8 mg/kg

L. P. Southwest Area 2:22] Acc:e ptable Dr~dge P ojec;t

l:lackgrcu nd = 10 mg,'Kg

-

r•Jichiqar Departmen· of E11v1rnnmenta l Qualrty

D-~­&-.:l

L, P. Southeast Area

L

93 | P a g e

Appendix E – Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes and Citizens Advisory Committee Letter of Support

94 | P a g e

Lower MenominoG Ri'var Area of ConcQ,rn Tech11lcal A.dvlso-ry Comrni'ttee Meeting August ?4th, 201 B, 1 :00 - :3:-00 pm CST

WUNK 8e.rvice Genter, 1'01 N Ogden Rd, Peshllgo, W I Mir. 1~t,,,~ prer-,.,ired G:ly I .ourel I ~ '.

Meeting Objecti\'e5 • The AC disi;;u5s,e5 the re\fised draft Degradation of Benihos l:lUI removal dcJC1urn~nt

and approves moving fa r.va rd with sm kehold fl ' 11i::i>1iflw prn1::ess he TAC discus.ses the draft Restriciions on Dred;:iinq BUI removal document and

ap-pro11es moving forward with stal<e llol'{Jer 1:~view process • Tim TAC disDusses thi:: draft 2015 IRAP SMus Report • Tho TAC is updated on Nie status of U1e fish Consumption BUI • The TAC is updated on ADC ha.bitlt restoration and monitoring projects

Attendees Sha:roJJ 13,:iker (MDEQ) , Cheryl Bougie {\i'IJID NR), Mike Bryant {USEPA-GLNP:J), Steve Chay (USFI/VS}, Mil<s Danotri::i {ViJDN R) , David Halfmann (WDNR} Laurel aat {V,/DNR}, Co11or Neal (USEFA), Tarnmi:e Paoli (WDNR), \lie f'lappas {WDNR}

lntrnductio11s a11d rnviGW of the a99nda

Draft Deg1radartlotl of Benthos BU.I removal package - Laurel Lasl (\NDNR) and Sharon Baker (MDEO}

• Laurel went over c:h!mg-e3 since la:it draft responding to TAC and EPA comments

., Added !able of (.-ont:ents, but did not add executive summary

., TAC :; u pported execlrtive Sll mma ry. so La Lire I wil I add that for pL1blic review draft

., Two draft: sediment remediation s,ite s u rnmal}' tables discussed al last meeting ha·.r-e been combined info one tab le (rn both Benthcs andl Dredg.ing BUI documents}

•· Sharon suggested adding Ansu I arseni,c salt pile clean up to t~blfl

• Li:n.1re I sh~ red draft TAC letter of support for BU I rcmava I packag ...

• TAC supported moving forward with BUI removal, bot dec.fded l'lot to provide letter of support (meetlng1 ml1H-1tas wlll i.;uftlce>

• Propo::;ed' sched ule for review and BUI .re.moval ;.i • r on ig ht, CAC reviews and approves {l'ette ot sup port) o Re,1iised draft out fo r pub liic con 1T1t'l11t Septembs r 8" -22roi

" \.'•.rill pos. on WDNR AOC websil.e • \WINR will sll::lnd anr101.,!rn::.err1er1ts vi1a e-moil a11d GovlJeliveiy: CAC membe:s

will contact local p<1pers and rndio 5tation • Shairon-lMDEO announceme,11 1 will point lo 11\IIJNR sile

• S,md comments to L" u rel c Public tr1in a lso provide inr)ut at CAC Ope n Hou~e Sepl:emb,~r 151n

95 | P a g e

._ BU I docum ents will be ,available for review

• DUI fact st1eet and feedback. forms

Plan to respond' to c:-..ormnenre arid submit final packag,e to EP!'.\ by Scplcinbor 30 1t

Restrictions on Dredging BUI mmov.al package- Che{yl Boug:e (WDNR)

" Ghery1 provided over'liew of draft D mdlge Man agflment Pla n / Restric-tio n 5 on LJred.;Ji n g 13U I remova I pa r,kage

• Only area in AOC witl1 dredge res'lricticm; is along shoreline I ear Boom Landing-­

ma ctiVli! core mi:l l b,mfor at \'VPSC s i!e ( not prio1fty area for navigation;:i I <l'redg i n g}

• TJ\C member.. asked q lle5tio.ns and provideo. input on draft

• Mike D-\Jl/ill USACE dredge tlirning basin again? Clieryl'-Yes, iflwhe.ri ni:iAded in

futme . Sand cover is 2 ft below aulhorized de pth, w i ll wt biii a p,robl1:1m .

• Dave H-What is th ickriess of Tyco s.and cover? Cheryl-12 in sand cover

• Need mo re information on Green Ba~, pa int s lud,ge scit~Sharon wi.11 send le Cheryl

• -Sharon-Have her s.ecrelary review docrnn ent before final •,er~iu 11 i5 routed to EP.A, for concurrence

• Tammie-Tyco bought out by .lohn!'.nn Con trols, rnight .restrlt in name change (late r)

• TAC suppOt"ted moving foiward with BU.I removal,, but dei;;ided not to provide­letter of support (m~atlng minutes will suffice)

• Pro pose ::l re,Jjgw schedule· is same n5 fur tie nthos l:l U I (see above), except c,111 take

lo 11gc3r to finalize and s;;,nd lo EPA f,or concurrence

2015 RAP Status Report-Sh~ron Ba.ker ;\n<I ~ Urt! I ·.,::;l

• Draft out for ski keho Ider rcvicv,·-tod ;:i ~1 (2-•f") is deadline for comments Laure I b rmIg l1t current draft and cJ<iscribecJ dicllltJt! ~ ii I re5pu m;e to comments

• TAC m ernbe.rs d isCL1ss.ed draft and provided orie editing comment

• TAG supported d'ocL1m ent

Re-strictrons on Fbh Con5umption BUI updaoo - Shamn Baiker arn L,rnrel I A!'it

• MDEO {Joe Bohr} and MilHHS (Mich,el le Bruneau) cc-rnp leted revised fish

r:o n sum pti1.111 report and wh it,e pa per

We wi ll refer to these ciocumen:s in tl1e BUI mrnoval pad(aglii

4 We plan to 1nove forward v,ith th is BU II for patontia I romova I later this year or early next year

S,outh ChantH!I H~bltat Prnject Update - Laure l Last and Cheryl Bougie

• Aquatic Ccological Servio;;,s (AES} began on-site v,ork August 17~·, • CondI1c:ting herblc:de 3ippl.ice1iio11s and various project startup items • Plan to b .1 substantia lly complete by October 31 ~1, wifh possibly t.onm add it onal

plan ti rig:; in sp ring Monitoring and maiintemmce pe1rior:t through 201!'.l

96 | P a g e

Menokaun'*I Harbor Pr~jact Upda.te- Cheryl Bougie and La urel Last

" Aquatic Ecological Servirns {AES) is conducting maintenance of original project aroa • Monitoring and nmi ntcmmoo oriod through 2018 " AE6 is ell&~ vmrting on controlli1i g irwru;iv,fil platl ls in atldiiio11al reslorn.lio11 zone east

~n<J ~o,11fhE'!c1st (l.f nnoinal project area ( slna available fundln!J)

Lower M'anomrm~a River Fish PaScsaga Updala - Mi Ice Donofrio ('oNDr~R} • Co111mc"o,r hired for dawn stream pa~sagc at Monominoo Dam

• Construction has started , and should to be con·plete by November

• Mike and Paul Radzikimis (.ECRE) will 110.st t.ibl.,. at AOC Open House

Island Rookery Habitat Enh1nmement Project update - llaurel Last

• Shared 20·16 project summarJ handout from Ecology & Env[ro11ment (E&E} • l::::&c will host a table at the AOC Open House {t:,eptember 15u·,)

,. Discussed poten!iial island project to ur ror Gf\C and T/\C members ,-i \'Voci< af Open Ho1,1s9 corwon kmt for o t-of-town folks ,-, r..rmld ir:;;:,, FishP.riE'!s bo~t~ o La.1rel will coordinate with E&.E_, Mike D, and Cheryl

Fish populationiS reference site monitofing update- Lacffe l Last

• Ben Uvaas (\1VDNR) volunto01·od to analyzg fish monitori11g data from lower

Mellomim~e Ri•JE:!I, PE:?~hlitio River, arid E!5va11~l.Jo1 Ri~r t(J del~llnir1.;- whelheI target species are meeti n_g popu lationlrecruitment objeclive~

·• 'Nh 1:m Sen has completed an a lysi5 , Lamel will ,oonv,ene f ish team to d.iscuss res Ldts a 11d decide ne)(t s e.ps

Other New,; • AOC Open House 13-8 pm September 15ij' a.t IJV•l-M,ari11e toe! • l•ilenekaunee Hamor tom 5 pm before the Ope~ House • \i'•/aterfrnnt C~ aJl up planned for September 17'h wi II lfkely be p-osiponed unti I next

.s,pring (CAC to discuss tonight)

• Proposed expansion of restricted area around Ma ri11ette Mari11e Corp. Shipyard­Lau re I passed a rolJnd prorosa I

Futur e Agenda Items an d Next Meeti n g1 Date •· Next n1eetirig date-did not diSCll 5S , bl1t Sharon and La lLrel will plim a-s needed.

• Pute.ntial Agenda Topics for m:Ix.t meeting o Degradation of Bonthos BU I reinav.:i I prog ros.Gisl:atus ,, Re!. rir:;tio n s 011 r>redarng AU I removal prog res!:-/status

~· Re~tri crlio n 5 on Fish Con surnption BU I ,_, 201 5/2.0·16 RAP Update n Updates on .habitat and monita r,ing projects

97 | P a g e

Cont.ict infonnation l...au;el Last, Wisconsi1 DNR Laurel. last@~visoonsin,,gov 920--B62-M03

Mrchael Bryant, EPA Arc .i of Conce rn T ask Force lead-er Bryant Michael@epa ,gov 312-fi.SB-52.66

ONLINE RESOURCES [PA. - h tip :1/www .epa.-gol/lg rtl.akes.laoc/menon, ines/indsx.htm I

Sharon Baker. Miclhigan DEQ Bakers 9@mich igan. gov

517-284-o::>44

MD EQ - I llp://www. michiga11. gov(d'eq/0, 1607. 7-135-3-3 13 3677 15430 5 [}88- ,00. htm I

Vl.•'11N'R - http ://d11 r.wi .gov/top ic/qreatlakes/menomin ee. fitml

CAC - h ttps ://www .fa cebo ok. oom/menomin @€uiv@ raoc

2014. ~p Update availab le hl.lp://dn r .wt govttop icfg r@atlak@stdocuments(Me n ornrnee.2014RAPIUpdate.pdf

2013 F&W Plan available http:/fd n r .wi ,gov/lo pic/g r-eatla kes/docume ntsJMenomineo201 3 F ishAm;lWi dlifeP,lan, pdf

98 | P a g e

Lower Menominee River Remedial Action Plan Citizens Advisory Con mittee.

The Lower Me=minee River: A Great Lakes: AJ"ea of CoITTIDB!'n

Launal Last Lawetr Menominee 1Rii.<er AOC Coordinator Wiseon.sin Department at Natural Resources 2Q84 Shawano Ave Green Bay. W I 54313

Sharon Balcer L-Menominee Riva- AOC Ooordinator Constitulioo Hal ,6FS 525• West Allegan IPO IS:01(30473 Lansing, M r 48009

Suh~: Support fur- Lower MenDllllinee River AOC Resbiciioos an Dredging BUI removal

Dear Ms. last and Ms. :Baker:

The L-~ inee IRiva-Al"ea of Concem (AOC) C~ Advisory Committee (CACI giipports 'the elfurt:s of lhe, Wisconsin De_pariment af Nahlral Resources (WDNR) :an!d the Michig;:m Department cf !Environment.al Quality IMDEQ) to R!mOVe ,the Resmctions on O,edgjng Beneficial U se Impairment jBILII} from lhe Lower MenomiJlee Riller AOC.

The LCJM!I" Menominee Riva-AOC community has partnered with local, slate. :an!d federal agencies. busin.esses, and IIOlunleetS IJ!,\!!lf lhe yea,s le clean u,p lmic sediments in lhe AOC. Sediment remediation projects have been oompSeled at 1he Green B.ay paint sluclge site, ihe Wisconsin f>,ublic Ser..ice Corp. ,coal tar site, the Ansul!Tyco arsenic site, aoo Meneka:un,ee Hamor.

The projects are being moni:lored according lo fheil" approved p&ans and are meeting lhelir respective goals. trl adcfiljon, sediment assessmen.15 in lhe Lower Scott Flowage and IRio V-115-ta SFol..llQh show· lhat no remediation is needed a t i!hose, .sites. A Dled!Jie Managemen Plan h3S been developed and is cuJFenUy under ,review: Th erefore, the sediment contaminalicm tt,at was causing the dredging res,bic:tions in ·the AOC has been adcfJ:eSS-ed and l<!!!imratioo terge'ls for-11:tis imp.amen! have been met 'We concur thal. lhe Resiric'iians on Dradgjl'lil impairment has bee'll adeqLJate2y addiessed ,and we a:,;e p-epared to celebrate the iemoval of this B:UL

We. a,ppreciate that the WD'NR, MDEQ. EPA. and olheJ pElftrler:s have done lo help adlieve lhis goal .

Keith West CAC Wisoor11Si!n Oo-Chai:r 1k@ ms.1@ywg.ffly

Merli; !Erickson GAG Michigan Co-Ol:lair

merid5wa(Q)flqvdftenctecr mm

99 | P a g e

Appendix F – Open House News Release, Eagle-Herald 9/10/16

100 | P a g e

EH Extra: DNR seeking public comment Page 1 of I

DNR seeking public comment

.MARINETTE - The Wisconsin Departm.ent of atural Resources is inviting the pub! ic to review and comment on the ,proposed removal of lWo beneficial use impairments listed for the Lower Menominee Rivet Atea of Concern. fofonnation about the proposal will bti presented at a public meeting Th'UI'sday. Steve Galarneau, director ofDNR's Office of the Great Lakes will be keynote speak.er at an open.house hosted by tbe Lower Menominee Rive,r Area of Concern Citizen,s Advisory Committee from 6-8 p .m., at UW-Marinettein llie cafeteria 750 W . .Bays.bore St. The eve.at will provide an overview oftbe work bciog done to restore the waterway and an opportunity to ask questions about the proposed removal of the two impairments. A walking tour of the Menekaunee J;--larbor Restoration Pr~ject will take place at 5 p.m. before the open house. To join in the tour, meet at the parking rot southwest of the harbor off Ogden Street. lnfmmation about the hnpairrnen!s and an explanation of the progress that bas been made as pari- of ongoing restoration. efforts can be found on DNR's website,dm.wi.gov, by searching "Lower Menominee River." ihe documents for public comment that describe the proposed removal can be found athttp://dnr.wi.gov/topic/gr,catlakes/menominee.btm l. People may submit comments to Laurel Last, 2984 Shawano Ave., Green Bay, WI 543 13 or law-e1.last@wisconsin.gov by 5 p.m., Sepl 22. Questions about the draft removal packages may be directed to Last via email m to 920-662-5103.

http:/ /ehe>.:tra.com/PrintArtic!e.aspx?aiq= 34979&uid=-2:21bfc0d-2200-4d89-9390-9c6ec5., , 10/03/2016