Community Involvement Team Effort (CITE)
Meeting Minutes
January 24, 2006
Participants:
Joel Baldwin – Hitchcock Design Group
Dave Behrens – U. S. Steel
Frances Beverly – Gary Resident
Dorreen Carey – City of Gary
Robert Casselberry- U. S. Steel
P. Daniels – Gary Resident
Allen Evans – Grand Calumet River Task Force
Lin Kaatz Chary – NWI Toxics Action Project
Rodney Littleton – Groundwork Gary
Elizabeth McCloskey – U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Rick Menozzi - U. S. Steel
Ken Mentzel – U. S. Steel
Kay Nelson – Northwest Indiana Forum
Tammy Ohl – U.S. EPA
Shaik Quadri – URS Corporation
Charlotte Read – Save the Dunes
Jeff Rey – U. S. Steel
Mark Rupnow – U. S. Steel
Alex da Silva – IDEM
Andrew R Smith – Grand Cal Task Force
Michelle Wanto – URS Corporation
Minutes taken by Michelle Wanto
Page 1 of 16
Rick Menozzi with U. S. Steel welcomed everyone in the group to the January meeting of
CITE. Rick stated that he serves as the program director for the U. S. Steel Grand
Calumet River (GCR) sediment remediation project, as well as the Director of U. S.
Steel’s Remediation Group.
Rick Menozzi with U. S. Steel stated that a post card inviting Gary residents and others
who have historically expressed interest to the CITE meeting was sent in advance of this
meeting. Charlotte Read stated that she would like to ask that U. S. Steel continue to
send newsletters informing the public of ongoing Corrective Action activities. Rick
stated that U. S. Steel will send newsletters in the future, when there is sufficient
information to provide to the public.
Rick Menozzi stated that no members of the CITE group have provided comments
regarding the September 22, 2005 meeting minutes. Charlotte Read stated that she did
not have comments, but had a question regarding the dredging activities in the C-Lot
Lagoons. Charlotte asked what was done with the dredged material from the C-Lot
Lagoons. Ken Mentzel stated that currently, the dredged material has been placed in
geotubes for dewatering. Once the material has been dewatered, it will be characterized,
and disposal options will be considered based on the characterization. Lin Kaatz Chary
asked what would be done with the water from the dewatering. Ken Mentzel stated that
the water would be returned to the Lagoons.
Rick asked if any other CITE members had questions/comments regarding the September
22, 2005 CITE meeting minutes. No additional comments were received. The group
approved the September 22, 2005 meeting minutes.
Rick Menozzi then updated the group on the status of several topics from the previous
meeting. Rick addressed the City of Gary’s concern regarding the sloughing of the river
bank between Buchanan Street and the Ambridge Mann Park area. Rick stated that U. S.
Steel’s engineering contractor continued work addressing the status of the river banks.
Page 2 of 16
Lin Kaatz Chary asked if U. S. Steel has identified any new PCBs. Rick Menozzi stated
that no additional analytical study has been done on the GCR sediments. Upon further
clarification of Ms Chary’s question, Rick reported that we did not identify any new
PCBs in the material removed from the south bank of the GCR near the Coke Plant. Rick
further noted that the work is complete.
Charlotte Read asked for an update on the status of the TSCA Permit. Rick stated that
EPA has provided comments and U. S. Steel has accepted the comments to the CAMU
permit modification. Rick stated that U. S. Steel will submit to EPA one additional minor
comment, but Rick stated that he expects EPA approval soon. Rick stated that much of
the permit modification was withdrawn.
The original modification allowed for the
placement of remediation wastes (including TSCA regulated materials) into CAMU Units
1 and 2. Rick stated that based on comments received, and review of the Phase I RFI
data; U. S. Steel has made a decision to request placement of PCB contaminated wastes
only into Unit 1 of the CAMU. Unit 2 will receive non-TSCA remediation wastes. At
this time, U. S. Steel believes that it will be possible to manage any remedial measures
accordingly, pursuant to the permit modification.
Rick Menozzi then discussed the revisions to the CITE charter. Rick stated that U. S.
Steel has incorporated comments received at the last two meetings. The new revisions
were provided in redline/strikeout format. Rick asked if there were any questions or
comments regarding the revisions. Rick stated that he believed that the revisions address
the issues discussed at the previous CITE meeting, and captured the thoughts of the
group. Rick asked that any additional comments be brought to the next CITE meeting.
U. S. Steel will seek approval of the charter revisions at the next meeting.
Dorreen Carey stated that there were several “new” faces in the crowd and asked Rick
that everyone in attendance introduce themselves.
The following, in attendance,
introduced themselves.
Rick Menozzi - U. S. Steel
Mark Rupnow – U. S. Steel
Page 3 of 16
Dorreen Carey – City of Gary
Tammy Ohl – U.S. EPA
Lin Kaatz Chary – NWI Toxics Action Project
Charlotte Read – Save the Dunes
Kay Nelson – Northwest Indiana Forum
Alex da Silva – IDEM
Elizabeth McCloskey – U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Michelle Wanto – URS Corporation
Ken Mentzel – U. S. Steel
Dave Behrens – U. S. Steel
Rodney Littleton – Groundwork Gary
Andrew R Smith – Grand Cal Task Force
Allen Evans – Grand Calumet River Task Force
Shaik Quadri – URS Corporation
Jeff Rey – U. S. Steel
Rick Menozzi reviewed the agenda for the meeting which included an update on
corrective action activities as well as an update on the status of the Grand Calumet River
(GCR) dredging project and an update on the status of the CAMU permit modification.
Jeff Rey will present with an update on the status of the restoration activities.
Rick Menozzi introduced Mark Rupnow with U. S. Steel. Mark Rupnow summarized the
ongoing RCRA Corrective Action activities at Gary Works. Mark stated that the RCRA
Corrective Action encompasses the 4,000-acre site and consists of nine Solid Waste
Management Areas (SWMAs). The SWMAs break the plant into smaller geographic and
operational divisions, and are usually related to business processes at Gary Works such as
the Iron Producing SWMA and the Coke Plant SWMA.
Mark Rupnow stated that since the last meeting U. S. Steel has continued to work on the
East Side groundwater pilot study. Mark stated that IDEM has approved U. S. Steel’s
application to treat the groundwater at the Coke Plant biological Waste Water Treatment
Page 4 of 16
Plant (WWTP). U.S. Steel has moved forward with the installation of the pilot scale
system. The extraction wells for the system have been installed and piping and electrical
work was completed in December. The extraction system was not designed to operate in
cold weather, therefore, the system has not been operated and water has not yet been sent
to the biological WWTP. Mark stated that it is anticipated that the system will start-up in
early spring, perhaps by the next CITE meeting, depending on the weather.
Mark stated, that since the last CITE meeting, U. S. Steel has begun installation of the jet
grout wall at the Vessel Slip, which will be discussed in detail later in the presentation.
Mark additionally stated, that since the last CITE meeting, U. S. Steel, has submitted the
Iron Producing and the C-Lot Lagoon Phase I Investigation reports to the US EPA.
Mark stated that the field work for all of the Phase I RFIs has been completed and all of
the reports have been submitted to the U.S. EPA.
A total of 1,984 borings were
advanced as part of the Phase I investigations. Nearly 4,000 samples were submitted to
the on site laboratory and over 2,300 samples were submitted to the off-site laboratory.
The project took nearly 19 months to complete. U. S. Steel used a mobile lab in order to
provide rapid turn-around-times, and used multiple drill rigs, at times employing three
drill rigs simultaneously, to complete the work. Over 50,000 manhours were expended
on the field work, which does not include hours spent on office tasks such as report
writing. The work was completed with zero injuries and one minor incident. Mark stated
that the completion of the Phase I RFI work provided the U.S. EPA all of the necessary
data to complete the human health EI determination for Gary Works.
Mark presented a figure depicting the locations of all of the Phase I borings at the Gary
Works facility. Mark stated that the figure was mostly complete, although some data was
missing from the East End SWMA. Mark pointed out that the boring coverage is fairly
comprehensive.
Mark indicated that the larger areas on the figure, without boring
coverage, generally corresponded to the locations of HWT-2, and HWD-5 as well as
building locations.
Page 5 of 16
Mark presented a summary of the Phase I Investigation findings. Mark stated that arsenic
was generally detected across the facility, and may represent a background condition.
Mark stated that additionally, lead, manganese and thallium were detected at a small
number of locations. Dorreen Carey asked what numbers will be used to determine if
arsenic represents a background condition. Mark stated, that for the purpose of the Phase
I investigation, all results were compared to site specific critical values. The critical
values were calculated using conservative assumptions including risk factors of 10 -6
Mark stated that the final work will likely use risk factors of 10-5 or 10-4
Mark presented a summary showing the number of SWMUs/AOCs with CV exceedances
at each of the SWMAs. Mark stated that a number of SWMUs/AOCs in the Central Mill
SWMA and the Iron Producing SWMA had exceedances of the site specific critical
values.
Mark Rupnow stated that arsenic exceeds the site specific critical values at many of the
SWMUs. Mark stated that arsenic is generally not associated with operations at Gary
Works, with the exception of some wire mill operations. Lin Kaatz Chary asked if areas
of historical operations were investigated.
Mark Rupnow stated that the Phase I
investigation included the investigation of historical operations and processes.
Mark Rupnow stated that both the Central Mill SWMA and the Iron Producing SWMA
had a number of areas that exceeded the site specific critical values. The constituent that
most frequently exceeded the critical value was benzo(a)pyrene.
Mark stated that
benzo(a)pyrene is a combustion byproduct and can also be associated with the Coke
Plant.. Charlotte Read asked if investigation activities were conducted in the vicinity of
HWD-2. Mark Rupnow stated that HWD-2 has been previously investigated, and was
not included in the Phase I investigation activities. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected above critical values at a very
small number of SWMUs/AOCs and were not detected above critical values at any of the
SWMUs/AOCs at the East Lake, West End, or C-Lot SWMAs.
Page 6 of 16
Mark Rupnow then discussed ongoing activities at the Vessel Slip Turning Basin
(VSTB). Mark stated that the VSTB silt curtain on the east side of the slip had been
replaced.
The new curtain was designed differently from the previous curtain and
consists of two separate sections (an upper and a lower curtain arrangement). U. S. Steel
is hoping that the design changes will work better with the significant wave action and
freeze thaw cycles that occur in the VSTB.
Mark Rupnow stated that U. S. Steel is also trying to take a more proactive approach to
preventing dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) from entering into the vessel slip.
U. S. Steel has begun installation of a jet grout wall along a 300 foot section of the land
side of the sheet pile wall from the pump house to the boat house. The jet grout wall
consists of a vertical wall approximately eight inches thick. The installation procedures
for the installation of the grout include drilling every three feet and injecting grout at
relatively high pressures (approximately 4000 psi). The installation is being conducted in
a double bow tie pattern. The grout is installed from two nozzles at a slight angle. The
grout extends outward approximately three to four feet. The installation points have been
designed to allow for overlap of the grout panels to form a continuous wall. Mark
presented a sketch depicting the bow-tie pattern. The grout wall is being keyed three feet
into the top of the clay layer and installed continuously up to the ground surface. The jet
grout wall is being installed between the wakefield wall and the sheet pile wall. The
wakefield wall consists of an oak timber wall installed in 1906. The sheet pile wall was
constructed in the 1930s.
Dorreen Carey asked why U. S. Steel did not install a slurry wall. Mark stated that a
slurry wall would require excavation of a trench. Since the work is being done between
the existing sheet pile wall and the wakefield wall, there is not sufficient space for
excavation activities. Mark stated that U. S. Steel believes that the installation of the jet
grout wall is a proactive approach to preventing DNAPL from entering the vessel slip.
Charlotte Read asked if the jet grout wall is being installed in the clay or just to the top of
the clay. Mark Rupnow stated that there is sufficient pressure to install the grout and key
Page 7 of 16
it into the first three feet of the clay. Dorreen Carey asked how U. S. Steel can be sure
that the grout is being installed into the clay. Mark Rupnow stated that borings obtained
prior to installation of the wall confirmed the elevation of the soil/clay interface and that
these measurements are used to establish the starting point of the injection grouting.
Lin Kaatz Chary asked how long the jet grout wall would last. Mark Rupnow stated that
the contractor will not give a specific life expectancy, however the wall has a
permeability of 10-7-; and a life expectancy of 30 plus years is anticipated. Lin Kaatz
Chary stated that 30 years is not a very long lifetime. Mark Rupnow explained that the
jet grout wall is simply a stop gap, and that U. S. Steel will continue to investigate and
deal with the presence of DNAPL.
Mark Rupnow stated the installation of the jet grout wall is complete with the exception
of a 39 ft. section. Mark stated that during installation the sheet pile wall has shifted and
has moved anywhere from two to five feet at some locations. Mark stated that the bottom
of the sheet pile wall has moved out and the top of the sheet pile wall has moved in.
Mark stated that the movement of the wall represents a substantial failure of the soils that
the sheets are keyed into. In response, U. S. Steel has halted installation of the jet grout
wall.
A structural and geologic analysis of the existing sheet pile wall has been
conducted and it has been determined that the toe of the sheet pile wall must be
stabilized. U. S. Steel is currently planning the installation of a rock buttress. The rock
buttress will consist of rock fill and will be placed at the bottom of the sheet pile/lake
bottom interface.
The rock buttress will extend up approximately 10 feet to
prevent/minimize further movement of the wall. The base of the rock buttress will
extend approximately 35 feet and the top will extend approximately 20 feet. The leading
edge will have a slope of approximately 1.5 to 1. U. S. Steel has submitted permit
applications to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, IDEM and the DNR. The DNR has
issued a permit and it is believed that IDEM and the Army Corps will issue permits in the
near future. U. S. Steel anticipates that installation of the rock buttress will begin within
a few weeks.
Page 8 of 16
Mark Rupnow stated that after installation of the rock buttress, the contractor will return
to complete the 39 foot section of the jet grout wall.
Dorreen Carey asked if any test sections of the jet grout wall were installed prior to the
installation of the complete wall. Mark Rupnow stated that two or three test sections
were completed, and the test sections were excavated to evaluate the effectiveness of the
installation technique. Dorreen Carey asked about the timing of the installation. Dorreen
asked how U. S. Steel proceeded after installation of a section, if U. S. Steel waited for
that section to set, prior to proceeding to the next section, or if U. S. Steel immediately
went to the next section.
Mark Rupnow stated that initially, work was conducted
immediately, however, minor movement of the sheet pile wall was observed, and so, the
contractor modified his procedures so that after installation of a section, his crews
proceeded to another area, installed a different section, and then returned later, after the
first section had set-up to install adjacent sections. This process allowed the grout to set
and provided structural stability, prior to the installation of adjacent sections. Charlotte
Read asked if U. S. Steel had anticipated the movement in the sheet pile wall. Mark
Rupnow stated that U. S. Steel had not anticipated the movement of the sheet pile wall
and that the installation contractor had indicated that the procedures were safe to grout
the space between the two walls. In hindsight, Mark stated that perhaps the installation
contractor should have investigated what would happen if the installation nozzles turned,
and instead of injecting parallel to the sheet pile wall, injection was perpendicular to the
sheet pile wall. Charlotte Read asked if the silt curtain remains in place. Mark stated that
the new silt curtain remains in place. Charlotte Read asked if U. S. Steel will finish the
39 foot section of the jet grout wall. Mark stated that installation of the jet grout wall will
be completed once the rock buttress is in place. Kay Nelson asked if the sheet pile wall
will straighten when the rock is dumped. Mark Rupnow stated that the rock will not be
dumped, but rather will be carefully placed with a clamshell. Mark further stated that the
placement of the rock buttress will not move the sheet pile wall, but will serve to stabilize
the wall to prevent further movement.
Page 9 of 16
Charlotte Read asked about the status of the sediment removal along the Grand Calumet
River (GCR). Rick Menozzi of U. S. Steel updated the group on the progress of the GCR
sedimentation remediation project. Rick stated that U. S. Steel has identified sediments
along an approximately 5,000 to 6,000 foot stretch of the GCR in which non-native
sediments may remain. This stretch of the GCR represents just a portion of the original
5-mile stretch that was dredged during the remediation project. Rick stated that U. S.
Steel probed the GCR to determine the extent of the remaining non-native sediments,
however, the results proved somewhat perplexing and did not provide any answers. U. S.
Steel then conducted a bathymetric survey in order to obtain more definitive results. The
survey was performed from transects four to eleven. The results of the bathymetric
survey indicate that residual sediments remain in place, within discrete areas, after the
completion of the original dredging project. U. S. Steel is currently evaluating the results
of the survey internally and with contractors to determine the next course of action. Rick
stated that he believed that U. S. Steel was close to being ready to meet with the EPA to
discuss the results and plans for addressing the residual sediments. Rick stated that U. S.
Steel has committed to removing the non-native sediments and plans to take action to
resolve any remaining issues.
Lin Kaatz Chary asked how the remaining sediments were originally missed.
She
additionally asked if the sediments were new or were in fact simply uncovered. Rick
stated that this question has been asked and while he is not able to give a definitive
answer they appear to be non native sediments that were not removed during the original
dredging operation.. Lin Kaatz Chary asked if Rick was able to determine how much
non-native sediment remains. Rick stated that at some points an inch or two may remain,
while at other points more than one foot remains. Dorreen Carey asked if the sediment
depths are consistent. Rick stated that no, in fact it appears rather hit or miss and pockets
of material remain in some areas. Rick stated that verification of project completion
required probing the river bottom every 100-feet and that this is likely how the pockets
were originally missed, as the spacing was not close enough to identify material between
the verification locations.
Page 10 of 16
Rick Menozzi discussed the current air monitoring results at the CAMU. Rick stated that
three air-monitoring stations are operated at the CAMU, one on the west side and two on
the south side. Air monitoring results are reported for the west sampling station (Station
1), and as an average for the two south sampling stations (Stations 2 and 3). Rick
discussed the results at Station 1. Benzene has not been detected above notification
levels since dredging was completed. Rick stated that the benzene results at Station 1
continue to be below the notification level.
A few benzene hits were detected in
September (below the notification level), however, there is no apparent reason for the
detections and the results are again trending well below notification levels. Lin Kaatz
Chary asked what the margin of error is for the results. Rick Menozzi stated that he was
unsure, but that the samples are analyzed at an accredited laboratory, and the reporting
would be similar to that for any such laboratory. Rick then discussed the naphthalene
results for Station 1. Rick stated that naphthalene has exceeded the notification level
several times since the completion of dredging operations including October 2005,
several times in the summer of 2005. Rick again stated that there is no clear apparent
reason for the exceedances. Rick stated U. S. Steel monitors the wind direction and has
not been able to draw any clear conclusions based on the wind direction information.
Charlotte Read asked how frequently air samples are collected, and specifically asked if
samples are collected monthly. Rick stated that, although difficult to see on the slides, in
fact, samples are collected weekly, generally around mid-week.
Charlotte Read asked how much water remains in Unit 1 and Unit 2 of the CAMU. Rick
stated that no standing water remains in Unit 2 of the CAMU. Small amounts of standing
water remain at the north end of Unit 1 of the CAMU. Rick stated that U. S. Steel,
following a review of the data, did not identify a trend in the notification level
exceedances, and therefore, did not initiate any action to prevent future notification level
exceedances. Rick stated that an exceedance was reported for the week of September 2,
another exceedance was recorded the week of September 10 and the wind direction at the
time of these exceedances was from the south. Charlotte Read stated that as there is no
longer a water cover on the CAMU, it will be interesting to see if the notification level
exceedances are related to the water or if they are associated with the material in the
Page 11 of 16
CAMU. Rick stated that Unit 2 of the CAMU has not had a water cover for some time,
and that in fact U. S. Steel was able to drive vehicles on the surface of Unit 1 during the
placement of the PCB impacted materials from the south bank of the GCR into the
CAMU. Lin Kaatz Chary asked if driving on the surface creates fugitive dust issues.
Rick Menozzi stated that when such activities are undertaken, engineered controls are
implemented. Mark Rupnow stated that when vehicles enter the CAMU, the surface is
wetted to control dust. Rick Menozzi stated that CAMU air monitoring Stations 2 and 3
have not had any exceedances of notification levels for benzene or naphthalene.
Rick Menozzi discussed the operation of the wastewater treatment plants. Rick first
talked about the project specific water treatment plant (PSWTP). The PSWTP has
operated for 93 weeks with no permit exceedances. Rick then stated that the chemically
assisted clarification (CAC) plant, which was previously used to treat water from Unit 2
of the CAMU, has been out of operation since April 2004, when the bulk of the
supernatant water from Unit 2 of the CAMU had been removed. Rick Menozzi stated
that the leachate collection system at Unit 2 of the CAMU is operational and the system
conveys leachate to the PSWTP. Rick stated that the PSWTP now treats both supernatant
and leachate from the CAMU. Rick stated that the CAMU leachate collection and
treatment systems have been working well.
Dorreen Carey asked how U.S. Steel intends to manage the surface of the CAMU.
Specifically Dorreen asked when U. S. Steel plans to vegetate the surface of the CAMU.
Rick Menozzi stated that this is a difficult question to answer, as U. S. Steel is currently
determining a course of action to address remaining non-native sediments in the CGR.
Rick stated that plans for vegetation of the CAMU will likely be deferred until the next
phase of the dredging project is determined. Rick stated that in the meantime, U. S. Steel
continues to conduct air monitoring in the vicinity if the CAMU. Additionally, the
surface of the CAMU is being vegetated naturally, and a great deal of plant growth can
be observed.
Page 12 of 16
Dorreen Carey asked if particulate monitoring is being conducted in the vicinity of the
CAMU. Rick Menozzi stated that modifications to the TSCA permit will require real
time PM-10 monitoring. Rick further stated that the proposed plan would rely upon the
results from PM-10 monitoring to establish notification and action levels. In addition to
PM-10 monitoring being applicable for monitoring particulate emissions, another
advantage is that PM-10 monitoring results will be provided in “real time” rather than
waiting 2 to 3 weeks for laboratory validation of results. U. S. Steel will also conduct
bench scale testing in order to calibrate and correlate the PM-10 results. Dorreen Carey
asked what these sampling results would be compared to. Rick stated that a background
concentration would have to be determined, which will be determined after the permit
modification is issued. Dorreen Carey asked when the permit was expected. Tammy Ohl
with the US EPA stated the EPA is currently in the process of finalizing the permit
modification. After the permit modification is issued, U. S. Steel will have 90 days to
submit additional plans. Dorreen Carey asked when the permit modification will be
issued. Tammy Ohl stated that at this time she believes that the modification will be
complete before the next CITE meeting.
Dorreen Carey asked if the modification will
be draft, or will the public have additional opportunity to provide comments. Tammy
Ohl, with US EPA stated that at this time the modification will be final.
Lin Kaatz Chary asked how background concentrations will be determined, as
determination of a background concentration can be highly subjective process. Lin Kaatz
Chary stated that she questioned where a background would be taken, as the toll road is
so close and she questioned the use of sample results from near the toll road in
determining an accurate background. Lin Kaatz Chary further indicated that she was
concerned about the methodology for how background would be measured and what
impact surrounding industrial facilities and the toll road would have. Rick Menozzi
stated that U. S. Steel will take all of these issues into consideration, and will work with
US EPA in development of the PM-10 background.
Charlotte Read asked if the notification levels and action levels currently in place for
benzene and naphthalene will be modified. Rick Menozzi stated that these levels would
Page 13 of 16
not be changed.
These levels were determined based on air models and represent
concentrations that are protective of a child receptor located at the nearest residence
(approximately 700 feet away).
Rick Menozzi updated the group on the status of the transfer of the 32-acre parcel. Rick
stated that U. S. Steel continues to have discussions with the National Park Service
regarding the transfer. Rick stated that the last he had heard, the discussions were
progressing, however, the parcel has not yet been conveyed. Rick stated that he would
continue to keep the group updated.
Jeff Rey updated the group on the status of the ongoing restoration projects. Jeff stated
that a considerable amount of restoration work is ongoing in accordance with the NRD
Consent Decree. The schedule of activities for each of the areas has been revised in
conjunction with current and ongoing activities. Jeff stated that the Oxbow tract is a
38.5-acre parcel located between the toll road and the GCR, south of the former
American Bridge facility. At the Oxbow tract U. S. Steel has completed girdling and
herbicide treatment on woody exotic species with a diameter greater than four inches.
Additionally, woody exotics with a diameter of less than four inches have been cut and
chipped. The Bobby Douglas parcel is approximately eight acres and is located off
County Line Road between 12 and 20 on the Lake County side. Jeff stated that at the
Bobby Douglas parcel U. S. Steel has completed girdling and herbicide treatment on
woody exotic species with a diameter greater than four inches. Additionally, woody
exotics with a diameter of less than four inches have been cut. Jeff Rey presented
pictures depicting areas prior to and after exotic species removal. The pictures show a
significant change in the density of the vegetation.
Jeff Rey also discussed activities at the 32-acre parcel. Jeff stated that some material has
been removed from the former firing range. Charlotte Read asked if the old cars have
been removed from the parcel. Jeff stated that the cars were removed some time ago.
Jeff stated that U. S. Steel is awaiting transfer of the 32-acre parcel to the National Park
Service.
Page 14 of 16
Jeff Rey and Rick Menozzi were asked about the status of the beetles used for purple
loosestrife mitigation. Rick stated that beetle monitoring has been conducted and the
observations have met U. S. Steels expectations.
Additional monitoring will be
conducted in the spring. U. S. Steel has not been able to locate any of the weevils during
the initial surveys, however, this is not unexpected and U. S. Steel will wait to determine
the effectiveness of the weevil release.
Rick Menozzi asked if there were any questions. Rick was asked if U. S. Steel has
conducted any further work on the bank of the GCR between Buchanan Street and the
Ambridge Mann Park area as it relates to the community. Rick stated that U. S. Steel
has completed an engineering evaluation and has identified areas that require additional
stabilization U. S. Steel is continuing to move forward. Rick stated that he hoped to be
able to provide additional information at the next meeting. Rick further stated that any
stability measures would probably involve some permitting requirements. U. S. Steel is
continuing to look into this and to develop stabilization plans.
Rick Menozzi was asked about the status of the permit modifications. Rick stated that U.
S. Steel has received the final draft with edits from the EPA. U. S. Steel has reviewed the
draft internally and plans to submit a few minor changes. Tammy Ohl with US EPA
stated that US EPA will finalize and issue a “Response to Comments” document.
Tammy stated that if this occurs prior to the next CITE meeting the response to
comments will be sent to anyone who provided comments.
Charlotte Read asked for information related to the proposed land use for the east end.
Tammy Ohl stated that this would be available in the Land Use Designation Plan, which
has been placed in the repository. Charlotte Read asked if this document covers the
buffer zone. Tammy indicated that this document includes information relating to the
entire facility.
Page 15 of 16
Rick Menozzi proposed that the next CITE meeting be held on April 25, 2006 from 1:00
to 3:00 in the afternoon. The next CITE meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 25,
2006 from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM at the Gary Public Library-Main Branch. The proposed
agenda is as follows:

Welcome, introductions.

Approval of the January 24, 2006 Meeting Minutes

Old Business

Update on Corrective Action

Follow-Up Grand Calumet Dredging Project

Update on Post Dredging Restoration Work Plan

Set next CITE Meeting Date and Agenda
Page 16 of 16