The URL can be used to link to this page

Bickford Transformer Processing Facility October 31, 2005 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Bickford Transformer Processing Facility, New Lisbon, WI The City has been recently notified by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources that the City of Dubuque sent equipment containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) to the former Bickford Transformer Processing Facility in New Lisbon, Wisconsin, and that the City may have some potential liability with respect to the remediation of the Bickford site. The City of Dubuque has been assigned to a group of users who are being asked to contribute $1,000 to the remediation. In return for payment, the City of Dubuque will receive a Release and Covenant Not to Sue from the current owner of the Bickford site, the City of New Lisbon, Wisconsin, that waives future claims against the City arising from environmental contamination at the Bickford site. Such payments will allow the Utility Group to avoid Wisconsin DNR enforcement action which would be expected if the site is not cleaned up under voluntary basis. The Utility Group will pursue its rights and remedies against users who fail to respond to the request for payment. Corporation Counsel Barry Lindahl is recommending that the City enter into this agreement which includes the Release and Covenant Not to Sue. I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council approval. ____________________________________ Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM/jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager BA.L,E . A R R Y I N D A H L S Q CC,CD O R P O R A T I O N O U N S E L I T Y O F U B U Q U E M E M O T: Michael C. Van Milligen O City Manager D: October 17, 2005 ATE R : Bickford Transformer Processing Facility, New Lisbon, WI E Mike: We have recently been notified by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources that the City of Dubuque sent equipment containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) to the former Bickford Transformer Processing Facility in New Lisbon, Wisconsin and that the City may have some potential liability with respect to the remediation of the Bickford site. A copy of the DNR letters is enclosed. A group of utilities who also sent transformers to the Bickford site has voluntarily organized and prepared a remediation plan for the site. A summary of the activities of the Utility Group is set out in the September 29, 2005 letter enclosed with this memorandum. The total remediation project costs are estimated to be in the range of $700,000. The Utility Group has worked to assign a fair share of the remediation costs to each party, like the City of Dubuque, who used the Bickford site. There were over 400 users who shipped varying amounts of PCB- containing equipment to the site. The City of Dubuque has been assigned to a group of users who are being asked to contribute $1,000 to the remediation. In return for payment, the City of Dubuque will receive a Release and Covenant Not to Sue from the current owner of the Bickford site, the City of New Lisbon, Wisconsin, that waives future claims against the City arising from environmental contamination at the Bickford site. Such payments will allow the Utility Group to avoid Wisconsin DNR enforcement action which would be expected if the site is not cleaned up under voluntary basis. The Utility Group will pursue its rights and remedies against users who fail to respond to the request for payment. In return for the remediation, the EPA and the Wisconsin DNR will provide the property owner with a No Further Action letter. Neither the EPA nor the S330,HVP,300MSD,IA52001-6944 UITE ARBOR IEW LACE AIN TREET UBUQUE T(563)583-4113/F(563)583-1040/balesq@cityofdubuque.org ELEPHONE AX EMAIL Wisconsin DNR have incurred any additional costs for the remediation. It therefore appears that the City of Dubuque’s potential liability will be extinguished by payment of the $1,000 contribution to the remediation costs. I have discussed this matter with Jane McAllister, our environmental attorney with the Ahlers Firm, and she concurs that payment of the $1,000 in return for the Release and Covenant Not to Sue would be advisable at this time. I recommend that the enclosed Agreement which includes the Release and Covenant Not to Sue be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Enclosure cc: Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Don Vogt, Public Works Director }O /3//05 D~~~E ~ck~ -)' -~o c; . :) MEMORANDUM September 27,2005 TO: Barry A. Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Don Vogt, Public Works Director ~ SUBJECT: Wisconsin DNR Letter FROM: INTRODUCTION The purposes of this memorandum and its attachments are to provide information and request assistance in responding to the State of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources. DISCUSSION Accompanying this memo are copies of correspondence received from the State of Wisconsin's Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) this week. John Klostermann and I do not recall, nor have any records showing, that we received the 2002 letter. It is our recollection that we did arrange for the disposal of one transformer from the f1oodwall's Kerper Boulevard pumping station sometime between 1993 and 1995. Arrangements had been made with the assistance of Interstate Power Company staff, and as a result, we used the same firm Interstate used for disposing of its transformers. Our purchasing records from that time period were ruined by water and vector conditions at our 925 Kerper Boulevard facility and were disposed of a few years ago. We are checking our old floodwall files and the Finance Department is checking its purchasing records. In the interim, we may want to do some sort of official response asking for more information - specifically how/why they have our name and address. Also, if the Bickford Inc. facility is where our transformer was sent in @1994, and it didn't close until five years later, why WDNR thinks our single transformer was not properly disposed of long before the facility's closure. ACTION STEP I would appreciate your thoughts and assistance with this matter. CC: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager Attachments State of Wisconsin \ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WISCONSIN DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES Jim Doyle, Governor Scott Hassett, Secretary Scott Humrickhouse , Regional Director Wisconsin Rapids Service Center 473 Griffith Ava Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494 Telephone 715421-7800 FAX 715421-7830 September 21,2005 Dubuque, City of Water Department 925 Kerper Blvd. Dubuque, IA 52001 Re: Bickford Transformer Processing Facility, New Lisbon, WI To whom it may concern: Attached is a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources letter dated April 18, 2002, which was sent to electric utilities and other entities that sent equipment containing PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) to the above-referenced site. Further review of Bickford's business records has shown that you shipped PCB- containing equipment to the Bickford Site. PCBs have been released into the environment at the Bickford Site. This letter notifies you of potential liability that you may incur or have incurred with respect to the Bickford Site. This letter also notifies you of potential response activities at the site, which you may be asked to ["mance. Since the closure of the Bickford facility, the Department of Natural Resources has been monitoring the efforts of a voluntary group of utilities to organize and implement a cleanup plan. This group has made a commendable effort to get to this point, but there are known potentially responsible parties that are not participating financially. The Department has a strong interest in wanting to see the site remediated and the case closed. Additionally, there appears to be an interest by private enterprise to purchase the property and provide employment and tax revenue to the county. The Department is strongly encouraging your participation in ongoing efforts to finance the cost of implementing the cleanup plan Please be aware that if the remediation process is not completed soon, the Department and possibly USEP A may commence enforcement action against those who shipped PCB-containing material to the Site but have not contributed financially or otherwise to the remediation effort. Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 715-421-7821 ormichae1.miller@dnr.state.wi.usontheInternet. W~;( Michael L. Miller Waste Management Specialist Attach cc: Dave Lundberg, WCR (via e-mail) Debra Johnson, LEGIS (via e-mail) Tony Martig, Region 5, USEP A (via e-mail) dnr.wLgov wisconsin.gov Quality Natural Resources Management Through Excel/ent Customer Service o Prtntedon -.. '''"' State of Wisconsin \ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WISCONSIN DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES Scott McCallum, Governor Darrell Bazzell, Secretary Scott A. Humrickhouse, Regional Director Wisconsin Rapids Service Center 473 Griffith Ave. Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494-7859 Telephone 715-421-7800 FAX 715-421-7830 April 18, 2002 Subject: Bickford Inc.- Transformer Processing Facility _ The Next Step I To Whom it May Concern: As you probably !mow, Bickford, Inc. has been closed since Jan I, 1999. In the fall of 1999, a majority of the utilities who had equipment at the facility for processing at that time, voluntarily joined together to remove and properly manage their material in the most cost effective manner. The Department Was impressed and appreciative of the voluntary efforts shown thus far by all of those involved. Since that time, there has been some activity to liquidate assets such as core cutters and the chopping line.. As of . today, all moveable assets have been sold and removed from the building. It is now time to move on to the next step. The Department has the option of requesting the release of the Closure Proof of Financial Responsibility and utilize this money for the proper closure of the facility. As you may !mow, this is a long process and may likely cost more in the long run. If the actual closure costs exceed the amount set aside, the Department will make up the difference and initiate cost recovery activities. It is my understanding that many utilities and cooperatives are or may be interested in participating in the closure process on a voluntary basis in order to control and possibly reduce closure costs and hopefully avoid later cost recovery actions. The purpose of this letter is to provide you an update on this situation and to request a response on your intention to participate in the next stage of the closure process. In June of2000, Tony Martig, USEP A, provided a work plan outline on what should be performed for proper closure of the facility. A draft work plan was then developed for Chuck Bickford by Envirogen in July of2000. A copy of the draft work plan has just been submitted to Tony MartigiEPA forreview and comments. I will be performing a similar review. Once our comments are incorporated in a revised work plan, closure activities can commence. The Department will, of course, consider alternative work plans proposed on a timely basis by other participating parties. Please discuss this issue with your clients/company and respond to me, in writing, no later than April 26, 2002. I would recommend that some dialogue occur amongst responsible parties to determine who could take the lead role in coordinating this effort. An alternative to individual responses could be a single response identifYing who will be taking the lead role, a proposed work plan if different that the Envirogen proposal, timetable for implementation of the work plan, and any other information determined necessary. The Department will determine the next step it will take based on the responses received. While the Department would prefer to handle this matter on a cooperative and voluntary basis, it will pursue legal remedies against responsible parties if necessary to secure compliance with applicable legal requirements. Quality Natural Resources Management Through Excellent Customer Service ~ Prinledon Recycled Paper This letter does not contain an exhaustive list of potential responsible parties in tbis matter. If you feel there is a past user of tbe facility that should be provided a copy of this please provide me tbe name and contact and I will do so. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 715-421-7821 or MILLEM@MAILOl.DNR.STATE.WI,US on tbe Internet. Sincerely, WEST CENTRAL REGION Michael L. Miller Waste Management Specialist . cc: Central Files, W N3 Don Grasser, Wisconsin Rapids Tony Martig, EP A-Region 5 11 DEWITT ROSS & STEVENS" I 1\ W I' I " M OapltoJSquBre OtflGa Two East Mtfflln Stnlet Suire 600 Madison, WI 53703-2665 T., 808-256-8691 Fax 808'252-9243 Wll:llOlll" BOOO Excelsior Drive Suite 401 Modi"", WI 53717-1914 Tijl508~8J1-2100 Fax 606-831.2106 Melro MllwElukee OffJce 13935 Bishop's Drive sun. :roo Brookflold, WI 53005-6605 Tel 282-754'2640 Fax 262'754-2645 www.dawlnross.cam Please respond to: Direct line: Email: Capitol Square Office 608-283-5601 db@dewlltross,com September 29, 2005 City of Dubuque Water Dept. 50 West 13th St, Dubuque, IA 52001 RE Bickford PCB Site, New Lisbon, Wisconsin Dear Bickford Site User: You recently received a letter from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") with notification that you have been identified as a potentially responsible party for environmental contamination at the Bick10rd PCB Site in New Lisbon, Wisconsin, I am writing on behalf of a group of utilities ("the Utility Group")' that have prepared a remediation plan for the Bickford Site, The purpose of this letter is to (1) briefly describe the history of the Bickford Sile, (2) describe the Utility Group's actions to date and the Group's proposed remediation plan, and (3) notify you IIf the amount you are expected to pay for cleanup of the Site. Your prompt response to this letter is necessary to avoid pllssible legal action The Bickford Site The Bickford Site was used tor the recycling of electric transformers and other electrical equipment from approximately 1988 to 1998, The business ceased operations in late 1998, The owner, Bickford, In~" apparently insolvent, essentially ahandoned the Site, leaving PCB-containing electrical equipment on-site and without completing closure requirements mandated by the DNR and the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"). I The members of the Utility Group are Northern SIMes P"wcr, AIBa.lIl Energy Corp" Minnesol.. Power, DTE Energy, Union Eleclric Co., Commonwealth Edison Co" WPS Resources Corp" MidAmerican Energy Company, and the Bickford Site Co-op Group (2R cleelrie co-ops from Wisconsin, Minnesollt and Michigan). PlnO'd IHJ 90: II 900G-90-100 DEWITT ROSS & STEVENS~ L . W I" I 1\ U City of Dubuque September 29, 2005 Page 2 In 1999, several utilities (including some members of the Utility Group) voluntarily coordinated removal of most of the PCB-containing equipment at the Site. This action addressed DNR and EPA's immediate environmental concerns, but did not deal with pre-existing environmental impacts or attempt to satisfy regulatory closure requirements. Due to the insolvency of the site owner, the DNR in April 2002 sent a letter to approximately 50 entities that had then been identified as having sent PCB-containing equipment to the Site. The DNR demanded that they undertake the work necessary to complete the closure requirements, including conducting a site investigation and addressing PCB impacts above regulatory standards. You did not receive a copy of this letter because the DNR had not yet identified you as having sent PCB-containing equipment to the Bickford Site. In response to the DNR's demand, the Utility Group was organized. An exterior site investigation performed in the summer of 2003 by the Utility Group's environmental consultant, RMT, Inc., demonstrated that there were no PCB impacts outside of the building. In the fall of2003, the Utility Group hired a contractor to remove and dispose of all remaining debris and waste in the building. In February 2004, RMT completed an investigation ofthc building's interior designed to identify areas with PCB impacts PCB impacts above regulatory limits were found in the concrete floor throughout the building and in dust samples collected from horizontal surfaces at several locations. In the summer of 2004, RMT tested cleaning agents at the Site in order to determine whether they could lower PCB detects in the f100r below the EP A's cleanup standard of 1 part-per-million ("ppm"). The tests showed that the cleaning agents could not consistently reduce the detects below the 1 ppm standard. These results suggested that our remedial options for the floor were to either (1) remove the floor, or (2) clean and then encapsulate the floor with an epoxy finish and assume the long term risks associated with the continued presence of PCBs in the floor. After soliciting proposals from contradors for each of these options, the Group elected LO develop a remedial plan that involved removing and replacing the floor. The cost of this approach was only slightly higher than the alternative, and it eliminated all impacts that might be the source of continuing liability. vI lEO' d W~ 90: II 9002-90-100 DEWITT ROSS & STEVENS" I. ~ W 'I" M City of Dubuque September 29, 2005 Page 3 At the request of the Utility Group, RMT prepared a proposal offering a guaranteed fixed price for coordinating all work necessary to prepare and implement a remediation plan based upon removal and replacement of the floors and to prepare all reports and documents necessary to secure a closure determination from the ONR and EPA. RMT has offered to provide the requested services for the fixed price of $404,000 The Utility Group is currently evaluating the proposal. After factoring in other necessary costs, the Group estimates that the total cost of implementing the remediation plan will be approximately $470,000. In addition, the Utility Group to date has incurred approximately $230,000 in out-oI~pocket costs to bring the project to where it is today.2 Therefore, total project costs will be in the range of $700,000 A portion of these costs will be covered by certain funds held by the ONR. At the lime Bickford, Inc, received DNR permits for the Site in the 1980s, it was required to provide financial assurance that closure requirements would be completed. Bickford satisfied this requirement by pledging a certificate of deposit to the DNR The CD now has a balance of approximately $130,000. The DNR has taken these funds due to Bickford's failure to satisfy closure requirements The DNR has agreed to release the funds to the Group if closure requirements are satisfied. As the foregoing suggests, the DNR has exhibited a cooperative and appreciative attitude toward the Utility Group's efforts to date. However, as indicated by the letter you recently received from the ONR, the ONR is likely to take enforcement action against entities who sent PCB-containing materials to the Bickford Site if the site cleanup is not completed. Financing the Cleanup Plan The Utility Group believes a voluntary, industry-led cleanup of the Bickford Site is in the interest of all users of the Site, Such an approach would allow all of us to avoid the cost of litigation with the ONR as well as contribution litigation among site users. Moreover, because of the large number of potentially responsible parties CPRPs") involved, cleanup costs can be spread among many parties and each party's individual contribution can be minimized. :I This figure does not include additjonaJ costs individuaJlIlembcrs of the Utility Group llitve incurred in connection with the Bickford Site. PI/PO'd Wl;I LO:! r 900e-90-100 DEWITT Ross & STEVENS" I. 1\ W I I ~ III City of Dubuque September 29, 2005 Page 4 A voluntary solution to the Bickford problem is possible, however, only if each PRP contributes its fair share of site-related costs. The Utility Group will begin implementation of the /inal plan within the next 60 days if you and others pay a fair share of cleanup costs. Over the past several months, the Utility Group has worked to assign "fair share" payments to each party who used the Bickford Site. The Group was able to identify site users from voluminous business records ..- amounting to more than 30 boxes -- found at the Bickford Site. These records indicated that you were among the parties who sent PCB-containing equipment to the Site. The records also provided evidence of the type and volume of material each user sent to the Site. From our cursory review of the records, the Group realized that preparing a precise count of the units each of the 400-plus users shipped to the Site would he extremely time consuming and that the cost of such an effort could not be justified by the cleanup costs at issue. Therefore., the Group retained Madison attorney Warren Day to review the business records and to assign users who shipped PCB-containing equipment to the Site to groups based upon a general review of each file. Our goal was an allocation process that achieved rough j us lice, recognizing that a more precise allocation process would come at a price that few of you would be prepared to pay in light of the amoun ts at issue. Enclosed is a copy of Attorney Day's final report As explained in the report, Attorney Day assigned each user to one of five groups, with Group 1 consisting of high volume users and (',roup 5 consisting of low volume users. You have been assigned to Group 5. You can obtain a copy of your file (at your expense) by contacting Dean Veneman of Capitol Copy & Imaging LLC at (608) 256-2679 or dean@capcopy.net Upon receiving Attorney Day's report, the Utility Group successfully recruited to the Group all of the entities listed in Group I (the highest volume group) who were not already members. The Group then established "buyout" amounts for the remaining groups (i.e., Groups 2 through 5). In setting the amounts, the Group took into account a variety of factors, including each group's relative volume, the total number of users and their distribution among the various groups, and the likely rate of response from each category (recognizing that some users would not be located and others were now defunct). The Group established the following buyout amounts: Group 2: Group 3: $15,000 $10,000 10/! 0 'd "' ""0 SOO'-90-10~ DEWITT Ross & STEVENS" 1. ~.,y ~ I 10 101 City of Dubuque September 29, 2005 Page 5 Group 4: Group 5: $ 5,000 $ 1,000 Iiaving been assigned to Group 5, your buyout amount is $1,000. Enclosed is an invoice for your buyout amount. Please make your check payable to the "DeWitt Ross & Stevens S.c. Trust Account" And mail your check with the enclosed invoice to: Bickford Site Utility Group c/o Dennis P. Birke DeWitt Ross & Stevens S.c. 2 East Mimin Street, Suite 600 Madison, WI 53703 In return for prompt payment of the amount due, you will receive a release and covenant not to sue from the current owner of the Bickford Site (the City of New Lisbon) that waives future claims against you arising Irom environmental contamination at the Bickford Site. Payments from you and other PRPs will also enable all of us to avoid DNR enforcement action, which is expected if the Site is not cleaned up on a voluntary basis. The Utility Group will pursue its rights and remedies against users who fail to respond to this request The DNR's project manager for the Bickford Site, Michael Miller, has been carefully monitoring our progress. We hope, and expect, that you will do your part to complete this voluntary industry-led cleanup. Please contact me if you have questions. We look forward to receipt of your payment. Sincerely, S & STEVENS '.c. irke DB:dvz Enclosures t> !/SO 'd W~ LO:!! SOOG-90-lOa WARREN J. DAY Attorney at Law Day Law Ollke 2010 IIllwklnsoD Road Oregon, WI 53575 (6418) 877-1369 .>mall daylaw@altglobaJ.nel DA May 15, 2005 TO Atty. Dennis Birke, Coordinator ofBickfi>rd Site Working Group FR. Atty_ Warrell Day, Reviewer RE Findings of Review of Bickford Files and PRPs The Bickford Site Working Group has asked me to function as a Ileulral party to classify potentially responsible parties ("PRPs") at the Bickford, Inc. site ("Site") in New Lisbon, Wisconsin for pUrpOses of allocating site cleanup costs. 111;S memorandum describes my review of Bickford customer files and sets fOlth my recommended c1assificatiOIl oflhe PRPs.' Backeround 13ickford,lnc. ("Bickford") operated as a metal recycling busilless from at leasl 1987 until early 1998 when it closed due to bankruptcy. in the course of its business, Bickford recycled or otherwise handled, among other things, electrical system equipment and matelials, including transformers, oil, wire spools, capacitors, pad mounts, drums of PCB-con tam in at cd debris and other items. Bickford broke-up lmnsformer units into scrap components, shipped units to final disposal, sold reusable items and material and separated and shipped low, medium and high PCB oils. After Bickford discontinued operations, the WisconSin Department ofNalural Resources ("WDNR") surveyed the Site for possible PCB contamination. The building at the Site was found to contain an extensive inventory of abandoned materials, inclUding transfonners, capacitors and other electrical equipment. At the request of the WDNR, sever,d electric utilities and a few othcr finns in 1999 cooperated in the removal of most of this material. Many of these parties also shared in the cost of removing and dispOSing of cquipment and materials at the Site whose owner could not be identified. This level of Cooperation from the parties won the approval of the WDNR. and led to this industry-led effort to complete cleanup work at the Bickford Site. Tbe Bickford Business Records During work at the Site in 1999, NOlthern States Power ("NSP") located and copied all available Bickford business records. Since that time, the records have been in the custody ofNSP's attorneys, Michael Best & Friedrich LLC. The records arc extensive, consisting of more than 32 cartons of records for over 400 customers. These files are organized by customer. ~!/LO'd W\;i La:! I 900G-90-100 Memorandum Re: Bickford May 15, 2005 Page 2 The contents of each file varies, but in my review of the files, J typically found stapled packets of records that included certificates of destruction; WDNR waste manifests; Bickford worksheets listing serial numbers, unit descriptions, weights and test results; testing lab certificates; haulers' handwritten lists with serial numbers and company/shipper name. One or more of such packets were clipped together by year, along with bi/ling slips and correspondence. r found no type of record that summarizes the overall volume and classification of material for a customer. Billing slips provide useful information, but the slips cover various services and different items. The files contain the annual summaries of PCB disposals that are required under federal.law. The summaries are organized by year and customer. While the summaries initially appear to be useful, other records in the files indicated that Dickford's auditors cllamined the accuracy of the summaries and found numerous and extensive errors, including gross arithmetical elTOfS. Therefore, I am not comfortable in relying upon the summaries. In my review of the files, I verified the Ilature of the each customel-'s shipments, i.K. hazardous materials versus non-hazardous material and electrical versus non-electrical material. In some cases, ollly an RFP or bid document was filed; in several cases lengthy contracts made up the bulk of a small tile; in many cases aluminum cans were the only item sent for processing. Method and SC:ODe of Review T"e Bickford Site Working Group asked me to classify Bickford customers in a manner that would allow for a "fair" differentiation between customers for purposes of allocating site cleanup costs. The Working Group did not specify USe of a particular methodology for classifying customers. However, I was directed not to undertake a comprehensive inventory of the materials shipped by each customer due to the time and cost associated with suchan effort. The Group asked me to develop a classification methodology that achieved "roug" justice" because it believed thar the magnitude of the expected Site cleanup costs (approximately $500,000) could not justify a costly allocation process. With this charge in mind, J first decided to eJ[c1ude Bickford customers who had shipped only non-electrical material to the Site. This seemed warranted because this material was unlikely to have contributed to the PCB contamination at the Site. r also eliminated Bickford customers (actually vendors) who, according to information in the file, had only transported materialfrom the Site. This resulted in the elimination of94 "customers," about 20 percent of the files. Most of these files were very small. With respe<-'t to the remaining files, I quickly concluded that counting the actual number of units was simply impractical. Not only would it have taken an inordinate amount of time, but the varying types and sizes of materials would have made counting impossible without a complicated system for weighting the various items. For example, the size of transformer units varies from 5 KVA (containing a few gallons of oil) to 1,000 KVA (containing as much as hundreds of gallons of oil). Some units were shipped drained; some were leaking and arrived in vl/80'd W~ 80:]! 9002-90-100 Memorandum Re; Bickford May 15, 2005 Page 3 drums; some were recycled fur reuse. Drums of debris may have been merely transferred to final disposal, unopened. Drums of oil could have been re-shipped for burning or forwarded for further processing. Calculating all this for each customer, over 12 years of operations, is simply not feasible. Therefore, 1 started my review with the assumption that the thickness of a customer's file bore some relation to the volume of material that cu~1omer sent to the Bickford Site, i.e., that, as a general proposition, a customer with a 10 inch file was very likely to have sent far more electrical equipment to the Site than a customer whose file measured less than one inch. I then quickly reviewed each file to determine whether the documentation supported my assumption. I believe this review process addressed situations where, for example, the file contained paper unrelated to shipments to the site or where a customer with a "thin" file actually sent many (or very large) units. To further differentiate between customers (especially those with thinner files), 1 engaged in "quick counting." For example, in a cursory review of any file, certificates of destruction ("CDs") or WDNR manifests- both of which signaled the shipment of hazardous material _ typically provided the number and types (but not size) of the shipped units (e.g., transformers, drum, capacitors, etc.). I used quick counts to determine a very rough estimate of the volume of the material shipped. In conducting such quick counts, I weighted "large" transformers and in several cases placed PRPs that shipped such units in a higher class. For example, a few industrial customers and integrated utilities (which own substation transformers) had shipped transformers ranging from 333 KV A to over 1,000 KV A, but few other units. By weight, such large units could be the equivalent of 200 small transformers, thus warranting a higher classification. I did not consider the concentration of PCB in material shipped when c1assitying customers. WDNR and USEP A have specified use of a cleanup standard at the Site of one part per million PCB. Therefore, any company sending electrical equipment to the Site could have contributed contamination requiring remediation. Cl8llsification GroupiDgs I decided to classify customers into the followin!!i five groups: Group 1: Customer- that shipped very extensive volumes of materials to the Sile, including large su bstation transfurmers. Group 2: Customers that shipped hundreds of units, primarily transformer units of 5 to 25 KV A, but some very large substation transformers, capacitors and other related equipment. Group 3: Customers that shipped apprOlcimatelyl 00 units, or one or more large units. 1'1/60 'd WtI 80: r 1 900e-90-100 Memorandum Re: Bickford. May 15, 2005 Page 4 Group 4: Customers that shipped between approximately 20 to 100 units, and sometimes fuwer, but with one or two a large units. Group 5: A de minimis class for customers that shipped fewer than 20 units. The Group must decide whether it is feasible to try to collect anything from this class. J want to reitemte that my volume counts are very rough and were based upon a quick and cursory review of the files. I make no claim to infallibility. Nevertheless, I believe this methodology has produced a reasonable, fair, simple and expedient c1assitication of the Bickford customers for cost allocation purposes. Attached is a listing of customers showing my recommendations. Sincerely, I(/~. WarrenJ. Day Attorney at Law t> 110 I'd W~ SO:!! SOOe-90-l0a BICKFORD SITE RECOMMENDED PRP CLASSIFICA nONS GrOUD I Runestone Electric Association Sauk City Utilities Shawano Municipal Utilities Stearns Electric Cooperative Stoughton Electric & Water Utilities Todd Wadena Electric Co-op Tomahawk Power & Pulp Company Waunakee Water & Light Comm'n Wyandotte Municipal Utilities Interstate Power Company Iowa Public Service Upper Peninsula Power Company Wisconsin Public Service GrOUD 2 Copper Range Company Crow Wing Cooperative Dairyland Power Cooperative Dynex Industries Manitowoc Public Utilities Madison Gas & Electric Olter Tail Power Company GrOUD 3 ABB Power T & D Co. Appleton Papers Inc. Beltrami Electric Cooperative Berlin Foundry Burlington Northern Railroad Carlton County Power Cooperative Consolidated Papers Dakota Electric Assoc. Goodhue County Electric Co-op Green Bay Metro Sewer Hibbing Taconite Co. Howley Utilities, City of Kaukauna Electric & Water Dept. Lake Region Co-op Electrical Assn. Marshfield Electric & Water Dept. Medford Electric Utility Mille Lacs Electric Cooperative Noble Cooperative Electric Pittsburgh Pacific Co. Plymouth Utilities Pope & Talbot Reedsburg Utility Comm'n Richland Center Municipal Utility River Falls Municipal Utility v! /l J 'd W~ 50:!! 900e-90-l0a GraDO 4 AC Reorganization Trust Alexander Properties Appleton Water Dept. Arrowhead Electric Cooperative Badger Expo Belmont Municipal Light & Water Utility Benson Electric Benton Light &. Water Utility Board ofUght & Power, City of Marquette Boscobel Utilities Brodbead Water & Light Comm'n Central Iowa Power Company City of Harmony Utilities City ofRusbford Utilities City of St. Charles City of St. Peter Cloverland Electric Co-op Columbus Water & Light Dept. Cuba City Light & Water Plant DepL ofthe Army Elkhorn Light & Water Ely Public Utilities Evansville Water & Light Dept. Fennimore Municipal Utility Freeborn-Mower Electric Cooperative Gresham Municipal Water & Electric Hibbing Public Utilities Hustisford Utilities J & D Enterprises Inc. Jefferson Water & Electric Dept. Kandiyohi Cooperative Electric Power Assn. Kiel Utilities La Farge Municipal Utilities Lake Head Pipeline Lake Mills Light & Water Dept. Madison Metropolitan Sewer District Menasha Utilities Merrillan Electric & Water Utility Mosinee Paper Corp. Mount Horeb Utilities Muscoda Light & Water Comm'n P IIG r 'd New Glaros Municipal Light & Water New Lisbon Municipal Light & Water New London Utility Comm'n North Star Electric Cooperative Northern Electric Cooperative Oconomowoc Utilities Oconto Falls Water & Light Comm'n Osage Municipal Utilities Pardeeville Public Utilities Pete's Repair Pfizer Inc. Pioneer Power Electric Co-op Prairie du Sac Electric Dept. Presque-Isle Electric Cooperative Reclassification Services Reichhold Chemical Rice Lake Utilities Sheboygan Falls Utilities Shullsburg Electric Utilities Stratford Water & Electric Dept. Sturgeon Bay Utilities Sun Prairie Water & Light Comm'n Trempeleau Electric Two Rivers Water & Light Dept. U. S. Transformer Union Station Assistance Corporation Washington Island Electric Cooperative Waterloo Water & Light Comm'n Waupun Public Utilities Wisconsin Dells Water & Light Wisconsin Rapids Water & Light 2 Wf;! 60:!! 9002-90-100 GrOUD 5 Allied Processors Inc. American Brass & Copper American Crystal Sugar Company American Hoist & Derrick Company Argyle Utilities Bakers Electric Balco Metals Bangor Municipal Utility Baraboo City Water Works Beatreme Foods, Inc. Buttchen Electric C, G, Bretling Manufacturing Capital Sand & Gravel Co, Cashton Municipal Water & Light CAT (Bickford) Centuna Municipal Light Dept. Chippewa Valley Tech, Coli, City of Arlington City of Gilbert City ofHoricon City of Mason City City of Maust on City of Mount Iron City ofNaperville City of Peterson Municipal Dept. Clinton, City of - Dept, of Parks & Rec. Colonial Bakery Cooper Power Industry Cooperative Light & Power Assn, Cornell Municipal Light Dept. D, E. Smith & Assoc, Dane County Regional Airport Defense Reutilization Service District No, I Tech. School Domain Inc, Don's Repair Dubester, Gary Dubuque, City of Eagle River Water & Light Dept. East Central Electric Assn. Elmhurst Utilities, City of Elroy Electric & Water Utility FDL Foods P I IE 1 . d Federal Aviation Assoc. Federal Cartridge Corp. Fischer Company Flexsteel Industries Frucon Construction G, E, Medical Systems Gardener Barn Equipment Gardening & House Plants (St. Mary's Hospital) General Telephone Grey Iron Foundry, Inc, H. Samuels Co., Inc. Hallett Construction Co, Harding Electric Hartford Utility Dept. Hazel Green Light & Water Utility Heibult, Dave Holicon, City of Institute of Paper Chemistry Interstate Parks J 0 Compressor Service Jagemann Plating James Cape & Sons Jerry's Electric Juneau Utility Comm'n KCMR Radio Station Kimberly-Clark Kirsh Foundry Knoebel Construction, Inc. Koppers Industries, Inc. Land O'Lakes, Inc. Lanesboro, City of Lans Lasch Steel & Recycling Layda Motors Lemberg Electrical Contractors Lodal Inc, Madison Mutual Housing Assoc. Manitowoc Engineering McLeod Coop, Medalists-A1len-A-Hosiery Menominee Tribal Enterprises Mid Central Electric Inc. Mineral Springs Corporation Mint Meadow Farms, Inc. Moorhead Public Service 3 WfJ 60: II SOOG-90-100 Group 5 (coot' d) Moraine Park Technical College Morse Electrical Inc. Nashotah House Nelson Engineering New Glarus Nursing Home New Holstein Public Utility New Richmond Utilities New Ulm Public Utilities North American Refractories North Star Steel Northland Cranberry Northwestern Wisconsin Electric Company Owens-Illinois Glass Page Electric Peiper Electric Pfizer Specialty Minerals Inc. Phenix Door Company Power Tran Radio KOEL Reedsburg Lanes Royster Feeds S. C. Shannon Company Saga Communications Sam Allen & Son, Inc. Sauk Co Higthway Dept Seneca Foods Corp. Shawano Paper Mills Sheep (Wright-Hennepin Electric Coop.) Siemens Soldiers Grove, Village of Sommerset, Village of Soo Lines Railroad St. Croix Central Schools St. Peter Public Works Stadium Arena Stephenson, City of Thilmany Pulp & Paper Company c/o International Paper Torrance Casting, Inc. Transformer Technology U. S. Government - Defense Reutilization U. S, PCI (pollution Control) V I Iv! 'd Unimin Company Vanert Electric Company Village of Butler Village ofLomira Village of Randolph Village of Slinger Volk Field Volken-Brunswick Warner Electric Warner Electric & Brake Water Works & Light Company Wausau, City of Westby Electric & Water Utility Westminster Company WEZW Radio WFRV TV 5 Whitewater, City of WIGM - Radio Wild Rice Electric Coop. Winnebago School #225 Wintergreen Ski Area Wisconsin Broadcasters Association Wisconsin Dairies Wisconsin Gas Wisconsin Public Power Inc. (WPPI) WJFW 12 Wm. Lans & Sons WVCY TV 30 WVRQ 4 W\I 60:! [ 900G-90-100 BICKFORD SITE (lTIUTV WORKING GROUP INVOICE Date: September 30, 2005 To City of Dubuque Water Dept. 50 West 13th St. Dubuque, fA 52001 DESCRIPTION: AMOUNT DUE: Allocated Share of Environmental Cleanup Cost, Bickford PCB Site, New Lisbon, WI $1,00000 Please make check payable to "DeWitt Ross & Stevens Trust Account" and remit payment within 30 days to the following address: DeWitt Ross & Stevens S.C. Attention: Dennis P. Birke, Esq. 2 East Mimin Street, Suite 600 Madison, WI 53703 1'1/90 'd Wi! LO:! I 900<;-90-100 AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into as of this ..." /5 day of August, 2005 by and between the Bickford Site Group]; Wisconsin Power and Ught Company; Interstate Power and Light Company; DTE Energy; Minnesota Power, a division of ALLETE, Inc.; Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation, and Northern States Power, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy; WPS Resources Corp. and its subsidiaries; MidAmerican Energy Company; Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE; and Commonwealth Edison Company (hereafter referred to collectively as the "Group"); the City of New Lisbon, Wisconsin ("City"); and the Northland Group of Companies, Inc. ("Northland"). WHEREAS, the City recently purchased and now holds legal title to the property at 960 South Monroe Street in New Usbon, Wisconsin at which Bickford, Inc. operated a metal recycling business (hereinafter "Bickford Site" or "Site"); and WHEREAS, the City intends to lease the Bickford Site to Northland; and WHEREAS, prior to the City's purchase of the Bickford Site, polychlorinated biphenyls ("PCB" or "PCBs") were detected in the building located on the Site ("Bickford Building" or "Building"); and The Bickford Site Group is an unincorporated association consisting of Adams-Columbia Electric Cooperative, Alger Delta Cooperative Association, Barron Electric Cooperative, Bayfield Electric Cooperative. Benco Electric Cooperative. Central Wisconsin Electric Cooperative, Chippewa Valley Electric Cooperative, Clark Electric Cooperative. Dunn Electric Cooper~tive. East Central Energy, Eau Claire Energy Cooperative. Great River Energy Cooperative. Jackson Electric Cooperative, Jump River Electric Cooperative, Oakdale Electric Cooperative, Oconto Electric Cooperative, Ontonagon County REA, Pierce-Pepin Cooperative Services, Polk-Burnett Electric Cooperative, Price Electric Cooperative. Inc., Ricbland Electric Cooperative, Rivedand Energy Cooperative. Rock County Electric Cooperative Association, St. Croix Electric Cooperative, Scenic Rivers Energy Cooperative. Taylor Electric Cooperative, Tri-County Electric Cooperative and Vernon Electric Cooperative. WHEREAS, the. Group,thi:oligh its environmental consultant, RMT,mc.. ("RMT"), has prepared a remediatiOn plan to address the PCB impacts in the Bickford . Building; and WHEREAS, the City has requested that the Group implement the remediation plan at the Bickford Site; and WHEREAS, the City intends to undertake certain improvements to the Bickford Site and Building before leasing the premises to Northland; and WHEREAS, the City's contemplated improvements may require coordination with the Group's implementation of the remediation plan; and WHEREAS, the Group and the City desire to memorialize the terms and conditions under which the remediation plan will be implemented. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth below, the parties mutuaIly agree as follows: 1. Remediation Workplan. The Group shall implement a remediation plan that addresses the PCB impacts in the Bickford Building to the extent necessary to satisfy the requirements of 40 C.F.R 9 761.61. The City acknowledges that it has reviewed and evaluated the Group's proposed remediation plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment A. The City authorizes the Group to (a) implement such workplan as approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("USEP A") and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources ("WDNR"), subject to changes and modifications set forth in Attachment B (hereafter collectively the "Remediation Workplan"); and (b) to alter, modify and change the Building as necessary to implement the Remediation W orkplan. Unless agreed in writing, the Group shall not be responsible for any work at the Bickford Site that is not described in the Remediation Workplan. -2- 2. Site Access. The.City shall permit the Group, RMT and. their dUly . authorized representatives, agents, contractors, and subcontractors to enter upon and have . unfettered access to the Bickford SIte and Buildfug for the purpose. of impIementIDg the. . Remediation Workplan. During implementation of the Remediation Workplan, (a) the City sha1l prevent unauthorized persons from accessing the Bickford Site or Buildfug, and (b) the City and Northland shall be responsible to ensure that any of their employees, representatives or agents present at the Bickford Site comply with all applicable health and safety plans and requirements and the Group's and RMT's site access authority. 3. UtilitieslInsurance. The City, at its cost and expense, shall (a) supply the electric power and water necessary for implementation of the Remediation Workplan; and (b) maintain property and casualty insurance on the Bickford Building during implementation of the Remediation Workplan. 4. Disposal of Waste and Demolition Debris. The City shall be identified as the generator of any waste emanating from the Bickford Site in connection with the Remediation Workplan, provided that all such waste shall be disposed of at a landfill or disposal facility licensed to handle such waste. 5. City Improvements. (a) On or before August 1,2005, the City shall provide the Group with a written description of: (I) any improvements or modifications to the Bickford Site or Buildfug that the City intends to undertake before the Group's implementation of the Remediation Workplan is complete, and - 3- (2). any requested changes or supplements to the Remediation. Workplan related tqtheCity's planned improvements or modifications. to. . .the Building. (b) The Group and the City shall use their best efforts to develop a mutually agreeable plan to coordinate the simultaneous implementation of the Remediation W orkplan and the City's improvements and modifications identified pursuant to Paragraph 5(a) above, provided that: (1) implementation of such City improvements and modifications shall not (in the judgment of the Group) delay or unduly complicate implementation of the Remediation W orkplan; (2) the City shall bear any and all cost and expense related to such improvements and modifications; (3) the City shall enter into a written agreement with RMT addressing any additional WOIX, cost or expense attributable or related to such improvements and modifications; (4) the City shall not utilize any contractors at the Bickford Site other than RMT aud its contractors and subcontractors during implementation of the Remediation Workplan without the prior written consent of the (}roup; (5) the City shall not undertake or commence any improvements or modifications to the Bickford Site or Building until after completion of the Remediation Workplan unless the requirements of this Paragraph 5(b) have been satisfied; and -4- (6) Any improvements or lllodifications to the Bickford Site or. Buildiog undertaken by the Cityor Northland prior to completion of the . Remediation Workplan (as. defined in paragraph 6 below) sha11be at. the sole risk of the City or Northland. 6. Completion of the Remediation Workplan. The Remediation Workplan shall be deemed completed upon receipt of notification from the USEP A andlor the WDNR that the applicable requirements related to PCB impacts have been satisfied. 7. Release. Effective upon completion of the Remediation Workplan, the City and Northland, and their respective employees, agents, representatives, officers and officials, successors and assigns (collectively the "Releasing Parties"), hereby fully and forever release and discharge the entities identified in Attachment C (including entities added to Attachment C subsequent to execution of this Agreement, but before completion of the Remediation Workplan) and their respective past and present officers, directors, shareholders, employees, agents, subsidiaries, parent corporations, sister corporations, affiliates, representatives, successors and assigns (collectively the "Released Parties") from any and all claims, demands, rights, liabilities or causes of action of any kind or nature, known or unknown, developed or undeveloped, discovered or undiscovered, for response costs, property damage, expenses, personal injuries, losses, fines, damages of any kind or any other form of relief, includiog equitable relief, which the Releasing Parties may have now or may hereafter acquire arising from or relating to the following (collectively the "Released Claims"): (a) the release or presence, or alleged or threatened release or presence, of any hazardous substance or waste (as defined in any applicable -5- federal or state law) at, upon, iil or under the Bickford Site. or the Bickford Building; (b) the Remediation. W orkpIan and ariy work, actimi or. actiVity related .... thereto performed in accordance with the Remediation Workplan; (c) the condition of the Bickford Site or Building upon completion of the Remediation W orkplan in accordance with this Agreement; (d) The City improvements referenced in paragraph 5; and (e) Injuries to persons or property arising out of the presence of City or Northland personnel at the Site prior to completion of the Remediation Workplan 8. Covenants Not to Sue. The Releasing Parties hereby covenant, with respect to the Released Claims, that they (either individually or jointly) (a) will not hereafter sue, or seek to have joined or named as a party, any of the Released Parties in any judicial or administrative action, matter or proceeding to which the City or NorthIand is now or may in the futore become involved in connection with the Bickford Site or Building, whether as a party or otherwise; and (b) will not pursue, either directly or indirectly, any insurance carrier of any of the Released Parties, in their capacity as insurance carriers of the Released Parties, for costs of defense or indenmification against losses or damages relating to any claims in connection with the Bickford Site or Building. 9. No Assignment of Claims. The City and Northland warrant and represent that they have not assigned any portion of any claim or claims they have or may have relating to the Released Claims. 10. Notices. Any notice to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effectively given if (i) delivered personally, (ii) seut by prepaid courier or -6- registered mail or (iii) sent by telecopier ot similar means of ele.ctromc..cOIi:iIiiunications . addressed to the party to whom it is.to be given at the address. asshown.below (or to such. other addreSs as each party may, from.time to time, designate in wrioog): . . ifto the City: Ed Kaelin City Administrator P.O. Box 218 New Lisbon, WI 53950 Email: nIadmin@mwt.net ifto the Group: Dennis P. Birke DeWitt Ross & Stevens S.C. 2 East Mifflin Street, Smle 600 Madison, WI 53703 Email: dblaldewittross.com ifto Northland: Wesley Fenster The Northland Group of Companies, Inc E5982 Churchill Road Reedsburg, WI 53959 Email: wfenster@thenorthlandgroup.com 11. No Admission of Liability. Neither this Agreement nor the Group's undertakings in connection with this Agreement or the Bickford Site shall be construed as an admission of any liability whatsoever by any of the Released Parties. This Agreement shall not be admissible in any litigation or proceeding, including litigation brought by or concerning third parties, except to enforce this Agreement or otherwise afford the Released Parties of the protections of this Agreement. 12. Consultation With Counsel. Each of the parties hereto acknowledge that, in entering into this Agreement, it is relying on its own judgroent, belief and knowledge, and that of its attorneys, and that this Agreement has been read and -7- understood by them before signing: This. Agreement is not based on. any representations by the Group except as stated herein. 13. .. Relationship of Parties. . This Agreement does not create a partnership, or. joint venture and/or principal and agent relationship between or among the parties hereto. 14. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by all parties. 15. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid or unenforceable, the balance of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect 16. Law. This Agreement shall be interpreted under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. 17. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the parties with respect to its subject matter. 18. Authority to Sign. Each of the undersigned represent that they have been fully authorized to enter into this Agreement, including, in the case of the City, authorization by the City Council. 19. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed and delivered in any number of counterparts. When so executed and delivered, each counterpart to this Agreement shall have the same legal effect as if one copy of this Agreement was signed by all Parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be . executed as of the day and year written above. City of New Lisbon, Wisconsin B, ~.~~~ Title: ~ - 8- ..By: ....:Title:.. ~~ , 'By: Title: .3iJPEllvH",I2.. wlfTErz. (lVltl-'ry,lw/t6Te /l/6-Il1T. , . , DTE Energy By: Title: Wisconsin Power and Light Company By: Barbara A. Siehr Vice President Customer Operations Interstate Power and Light Company By: Vem Gebhart Vice President Customer Operations -9- Northland Group of Companies, Inc. By: Title: Minnesota Power, a division of ALLETE, Inc. By: Title: DTE Energy BY:~~~O~~*~ Title:~\l\:SO" of" 't\e~\;,.{,..,\ Wisconsin Power and Light Company By: Barbara A. Siehr Vice President Customer Operations Interstate Power and Light Company By: Vern Gebhart Vice President Customer Operations - 9- Minnesota Power, a division of ALLETE, Ine. By: Title: DTE Energy By: Title: By: B ara A. Siehr Vice President Customer Operations By: Vem Gebhart. Vice President Customer Operations -9- . Northern States Power, . a Wi sin Corporation, By: P lridak. Vincent Vice President Northem States . Power Company, Minnesota Northern States Power, a M~ta Corporation, d/b/a! Xcel Energy By: ~ _lCul.L-- P 'cia K. Vincent Vice President Northern Stales Power Company, Minnesota Commonwealth Edison Company By: Title: Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE By: Title: MidAmerican Energy Company By: Title: -10- 9- 1-05;11 :21AM; ;6305766351 # 2/ 2 , -.:J' Northern States Power, a Wisconsin Corporation, d/b/al Xcel Energy By: PatriCiaK. vincent Vice President-Northern States . . Power Company, Minnesota Northern States Power, a Minnesota Corporation, d/b/a! Xcel Energy By: Patricia K. Vincent Vice President Northern States Power Company, Minnesota comm~alth Edison Company By: :f;h.f1 ~ Title: M (;)1"15'.11- - ~M. ~eriwJ';"n Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE By: Title: MidAmerlcan Energy Company By: Title: - 10- .. Northern States Power, . a Wisconsin Corporation, d/b/a! Xcel Energy . By: ..:PatriiiiaK Vincent Vice President.Northem States . Power Company, Minnesota . Northern States Power, a Mmn~.ct.. Corpcration, d/b/a! Xee! En,l'rgy By: Patricia K. Vincent Vice President Northern States Power Company, Minnesota Commonwealth Edison Company By: Title: Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE BY:~/~~ . Title: I//' f.Kv".",,,,,,..w; ~~ f"M./t'>( MidAmerican Energy Company By: Title: - 10- . Northern States Power, . a Wisconsin Corporation, d/b/a! Xcel Energy By: ..1>atricia.k. Vincent Vice PresidentNorthem States . Power Company, Minnesota Northern States Power, a Minnesota Corporation, d/b/3/ Xcel Energy By: Patricia K. Vincent Vice President Northern States Power Company, Minnesota Commonwealth Edison Company By: Title: Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE By: Title: MidAm1c:n Energy Company B~~....v-<l. ~ I Steven C.Guyer Title:Director of Environmental Services - 10- ... wp~..corp. . anll subsidiaries .~~ . By:, <_ ~ . . EdwaroNewllilUl .. . . .. Director ofEnvironmei1t31 Services Bickford Site Group, an unincorporated association consisting of Adams-Columbia Electric Cooperative, Alger Delta Cooperative Association, Barron Electric Cooperative, Bayfield Electric Cooperative, Benco Electric Cooperative, Central Wisconsin Electric Cooperative, Chippewa Valley Electric Cooperative, Clark Electric Cooperative, Dunn Electric Cooperative, East Central Energy, Ean Claire Energy Cooperative, Great River Energy . Cooperative, Jackson Electric Cooperative, Jump River Electric Cooperative, Oakdale Electric Cooperative, Oconto Electric Cooperative, Ontonagon County REA, Pierce-Pepin Cooperative Services, Polk-Burnett Electric Cooperative, Price Electric Cooperative, Inc., Rich1and Electric Cooperative, Riverland Energy Cooperative, Rock County Electric Cooperative Association, St. Croix Electric Cooperative, Scenic Rivers Energy Coop . ve, Tayl Electric Cooperative, Tri- County lectric perative and Vernon Electric Coop 've. By: Title: - 11 - . . .,' . ....... ,.......... .. , . ... ....... .. .........-... ...... .' . ..... ...."........h....... .. H' ATTACHMENT A II!!ll Integrated Environmental Solutions 744 Heartland Trail 53717-1934 P.O, Box 8923 53708-8923 Madison, WI Telephone: 608-831-4444 Fax: 608~831-333<4 www.nntinc.com April 5, 2005 Mr. Tony Martig (DT-8J) U.S. EPA-RegionS 77 West Jackson Blvd Chicago, IDinois 606lJ4.3507 RE: Site Remediation Work Plan Request for Approval Bickford Facility New Lisbon, WISConsin Dear Tony: Enclosed please find one copy of the Site Remediation Work Plan for the Bickford Facility. in New Lisbon, Wisconsin for your review, conunent, and approval. Currently, the group involved in the clean-up is in discussions with the City of New Lisbon regarding the remedial action and final site close-out. As you know, the City and property owner Charles Bickford are very interested in returning the facility to productive use. The goal . of.the remedy proposed herein is to aIIow the facility to return to active status without the need for use or deed restrictions. We would appreciate your prompt review of this plan. We are prepared to begin remedial action upon receipt of your approval If you have any questions, please contact me at 608-662- 5487. ark A. Osten, P.G., P.H. Senior Project Manager Ce: ',Mr. Dennis Birke - DeWitt Ross, and Stevens (9 copies) .Mr. Michael Miller - WDNR (1 copy) l:\WPM5N\PJT\lJO.062~6\OS\L000627605.oo4.00C OW4Jll5 - Integrated Environmental Solutions 744 Heardand Trai153717~1934 P.O. Box 8923 53708-8923 Madison, WI Telephone: 608-831-4444 Fax, 608-831-3334 www.nndnc.com April5,2005 Mr. Michael Miller . Waste Management Specialist Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Rapids Service Office 473 Griffith Avenue Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin 54494 RE: Site Remediation Work Plan Request for Approval Bickford Facility New Lisbon, WISconsin Dear Mike: Enclosed please find one copy of the Site Remediation Work Plan for the Bickford Facility in New Lisbon, Wisconsfu for your review, comment, and approval. .Currently, the group involved in the clean-up is in discussions with the City of New Lisbon regarding the remedial action and final site close-out. As you know, the City and property owner OIarles Bickford are very interested in returning the facility to productive use. The goal of the remedy proposed herein is to allow the facility to return to active status without the need . for use or deed restrictions. We would appreciate your prompt review of this plan. We are prepared to begin remedial action upon receipt of your approval. If you have any questions, please contact me at 608-662- 5487. ark A. Osten, P.G., PH. Senior Project Manager Cc:' . Mr. Dennis Birke - DeWitt Ross, and Stevens (9 copies) Mr. Tony Martig - U.S. EP A (1 copy) f:\ WPMSN\PJT\00-06276\05\UlOO627605-OO3.0OC MiTJt/ll5 744 Heartland Trail (53717-1934) PO Box 8923 (53708-8923) Madison,WI Telep/1ol1e (608) 831-4444 Fax (608) 831-3334 ,. Site Remediation Workplan Bickford Facility New Lisbon, Wisconsin Prepared for Submittal to the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources April 2005 , RMY, Inc, Fi1Ull 1:\ WPM5N\P{T\CJD.C627fi\Il5\ROOOtiz7ElJS.ooJ.DOC OUlOSRMT.'"I:'. AlIIf.ia/III Reww.I "1 M' :.1) '.ill' It: 1.1, " ";11 ~Jl mi ;~ iji " ~ ~ ~ I ~ m it ;~ ~I 'j t.f ~ " r"I! M " ;,{ ~ ill if i i, , ! , , 1~ r,.,. j ~ ,f,;?j ~ ,. Table of Contents 1.. . Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Site Background......................................................................................:..............................1 1.2 Previous Investigations ........................................................................................................1 1.3 Project Objectives ..................................................................................................................4 1 " 'j J .j ,j :;; ~ ~ 'I ~i !~ N 2 Approach ..........................................................................~...............................................................5 2.1 Key Issixes...............................................................................................................................5 2.2 Inventory- of PCB-impacted MateriaIs................................................................................6 2.3 Remedial Actions .........;........................................................................................................7 2.4 AS[ Oeaning and Removal.....:........................................;..................................................8 2.5 Removal of PCB-impacted Materials.................................................................................. 9 2.6 Soil Removal..........................................................................................................................9 2.7 Concrete Floor......................................................................................................................10 2.8 Site Oeaning Methods........................................................................................................10 2.9 Management of Remediation Waste...............................................:................................. 10 2.10 Confirmation Sampling Methods .....................................................................................11 2.11 Analytical Methods and Quality Control ........................................................................12 2.11.1 Laboratory- and Methods.......................................................................................12 2.112 Quality Control.......................................................................................................12 11 " "l: ., '1 '~ ;/ ., i 3. Field Documentation and Chain-of-Custody Procedures .......................................................13 3.1 Field Documentation ..........................................................................................................13 3.2 Chain-of-Custody Procedures ...........................................................................................13 j .1. 4.' Reporting ........................................................................................................................................15 5. Health and Safety Plan......................................................................;...........................................16 6. References .......................................................................................................................................17 RMT. Inc. 1:\WPMM/\PfT\Q0.06216\05\R0006276rJ5..ODl.DOC 4/5105 i FinRI Apri/2005 List of Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure .4 Figure 5 Site Locator Map Site Plan Map West Building Floor Sampling Locations and Results and Proposed Confirmation Sampling Locations East Building Floor Sampling Locations and Results and Proposed Confirmation Sampling Locations Daily Progress Report (Example) RMt Inc. J:\WPMSN\PfTl,00-06Z16\05\R0006:276OS-OOJ.DOC 4I5IDs ii FinRl Aprl/2005 - f;l ,f., , 'I 'JII 1" ii' l,t , ,rJ( 'l' 1:1 'I L' ~ ! J: '/ Ii il II :/ Iii I' -,' .','1 "~II .' Ii ., II ~ Section 1 Introduction 1.1 Site Background The Bickford, Inc., facility is located in New Lisbon, Wisconsin (Bickford site). Historically, the facility was used for the recycling of large metal electrical transformers. The operation salvaged metals from electrical equipment from utilities in Minnesota, Wisconsin, l1linois, Michigan, and Iowa~ Th.e property is currently zoned as industrial, and the facility is located in an area of mixed commercial and residential properties, at 960 Monroe Street on the southern side of the city of New Lisbon in Juneau County, Wisconsin. The facility is in the southeast ~ of the north~est ~ of Section 17, Town 16 N, Range 3 E (Figure 1). The site layout and main site features are shown on Figure 2. Figure 2 shows three site buildings, including an office, the West Building (pre-1988), and the East Building (circa 1988). The interiors of the East and West Buildings are the subject of this workplan. The site is owned by Charles Bickford. The investigative and remediation activities are being conducted by a volunteer group of members ofXCEL Energy, WlSconsinPower and Light, DTE Energy, Minnesota Power; and several cooperative utilities (the Group). The Bickford facility is now empty of equipment, and no activities are being conducted on the property. When the facility was active, some of the e!ectricaltransformers received at the facility were drained of oils and other dielectric fluids, and some were not. Some of the oils and dielectric fluids contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) ranging in concentration from 0 to 50 ppm. There is no evidence that the facility handled PCB equipment with concentrations in excess of 50 ppm. Low concentrations of PCBs from the reclamation processes have been found on the equipment and in the building. 1.2 Previous Investigations The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A) and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) conducted an on-site inspection in May 2000. In response to early concerns of poor housekeeping within the facility, wipe sampling was conducted within the building in December 1999 by Northern States Power. Results of the sampling indicated a few PCB concentrations above 10 flg!100 em2. In June 2000, the USEP A issued a draft closure workplan, The Group worked with the USEP A and the WDNR to implement a characterization strategy to identify the extent of PCBs in the buildings that would require remediation. The RM1: Inc. l:\WPMSN\PfT\OO-0W6\0!i\RllOt'Q7605-OOl,DOC 4ISI05 1 Final April2005 II ~ j >.! ,i:" ~i ~ ; ~ j 1 ): ';1 1.1.' ,. ~ : , .L , ~, . L .n i., " Il II 1;. ~ :t 'j '~ ,. I !l t; ~i I 1 Group has taken the lead in addressing the site cleanup. The USEP A and the WDNR are partners in these closure activities. SpecificalIy, sampling at the facility to date consists of the following: · Collection and analysis for PCBs of 40 wipe samples from the buildings' floors and various electrical components in December 1999 by Northern States Power Company; analysis was done using ASlM D4059-861, EP A Method 600, and EP A Method 3540. · Collection and analysis for PCBs of seven equipment wipe samples from the "Copper Chopper" by Envirogen, Inc., on April 25, 2000. · Collection and analysis for PCBs of 15 wipe samples from a variety of equipment by Erlvirogen, Inc., on May 2, 2000. · Collection and analysis of 38 samples from the buildings' exterior (asphalt, concrete, and grass areas) and one wipe sample from the steel plate covering the floor drain in the West Building by RMT, Inc., in May 2003. Results of this effort were reported in the confirmation PCB sampling and pilot-scale cleaning report (RMT, 2004b). · Collection and analysis of wipe samples by XCEL Energy, Inc., as part of a preremediation building housecleaning in October 2003. Results of this effort were reported in the Building Interior Characterization Report (RMT, 2004a). · A general housekeeping and cleaning of the building were conducted in November 2003. This event included removing scrap metal, appliances, and general refuse, and sweeping and vacuuming the floors and accessible surfaces. Samples were collected of the soil below the damaged wall area, the AST sludge and oil, and soot/dust on some of the overhead beams. Results of the sampling were included in the Building Interior Characterization Report (RMT, 2004a). . · RMT submitted a workplan to complete characterization of the building interior (RMT, 2003) in November 2003 that was approved by the USEPA and the WDNR in DecetIjber 2003. RMT implemented the workplan with extensive sampling of the building in December 2003 and the results issued to all parties in Febru<ny 2004 (RMT, 2004a). · RMT conducted a pilot-scale cleaning at several areas of elevated PCB concentrations to demonstrate if cleaning using traditional cleansers would be effective. Results of post- cleaning samples suggest that, while concentrations were markedly reduced, some samples remained above the cleanup standard. RMT also collected confirmatory samples around and beneath a "hotspot" where PCB concentrations exceeded 100 ppm. All confmnatory samples collected around and beneath the "hotspot" were <1 ppm. Results of these activities were reported in the Confirmation PCB Sampling and Pilot-Scale Cleaning Report (RMT,2004b). RMr, Inc. J:\wPMSN\P]T\00-D6216\05\ROOa621605-orn.OOC 4/5105 2 FinRl Apri12005 .if II '. 'i Ii i' ;! !i .. ~ ,!! ij .~ .if :1 " .j; I. .,; i' 'f ;'1 r I' Ii Ii " , ,. " ,. ,; " .j! , di " '~ .,I! J :1. :I! " .i, ,.j: 'I it, ;if :ii !i! II'; ";) 1 ~ >I, il; Ii \ II ~ ..,~ The results available from sampling prior to 2003 indicat.ed that low levels of residual PCB contamination (ranging from <111g/l00 em' to 2111g1100 em') were present within the buildings' interior, on building floors, and on some of the reclamation process equipment (Envirogen, Inc., 2000). The analytical results of the May 2003 exterior site characterization were presented in a July 2003 report (RMl', 2003) issued to the USEP A and the WONR. The report concluded that the soil, asphalt, and concrete areas sampled on the property otitside of the buildings are not impacted by PCBs at concentrations above USEP A cleanup levels (1 mglkg [1 ppm I). Samples collected from the roof drains and the foundation footing drains also showed that PCBs were not present at concentrations above the target cleanup levels. The report concluded that no further action is required for the building exterior. ii t; ~ j Oiaracterization activities of the interior of the facility conducted by the Group included the removal of equipment and materials, general site cleanup, and extensive sampling. Wipe sampling results have shown that PCB concentrations on most (98%) nonporous surfaces are below the USEP A cleanup criterion of 10 f'g/l00 em', although one of the waJI fans and an exhaust collection hood in the former cutting room have residual PCB concentrations slightly above that level. Approximately 40 percent of the concrete floor samples indicate concentrations of PCBs in excess of the cleanup standard of 1 ppm. The locations of these higher results appear focused to key production areas of the facility, but are randomly distributed within those production areas. In addition, the West Building contains two discrete areas of concern: (1) dust that has accumulated on overhead beams, and (2) an area of soil at a .portion of a damaged exterior waJI. Concentrations of PCBs in these smaJI areas also slightly exceeded the cleanup standards. The USEP A has agreed that remediation of the buildings' interiors Is warranted and has agreed to review this Remediation Workplan and assist in obtaining certification of closure from the USEP A Regional Coordinator (Tony Martig, personal communication; December 2004). J i t\ '0 ~l "I '~ 'I '11 ., f <,; Given the results of the pilot cleaning, the Group decided that a strategy of complete removal of the concrete floor is the most prudent and cost-effective alternative for that portion of the building. The Group also decided that the few pieces of equipment with elevated PCBs, and like pieces of equipment, would be removed. Surfaces within the building would also be cleaned, even though those surfaces have PCB concentrations below the cleanup standard. RMl' was retained by the Group to complete this Workplan to obtain agency approval to enact . this cleanup. .~, .~: j! , J; ~ + RMT, Inc. 3 . t { ,li t, ~.' ~: J:. Ii ~I! ~~ , ~; l" ~. !i Ii The City of New LIsbon continues efforts to find a new commerciaVindustrial tenant for the former Bickford site. While a suitable tenant has been identified, site closure remains a priority to return this property to beneficial reuse for the community. 1.3 Project Objectives The focus of this Workplan is to describe the proposed methods and procedures to be used to complete the remediation of PCBs in the "buildings' interiors and in the discrete area of soil where the exterior wall was pushed off the foundation. To complete this effort, remedial actions will be conducted in conformance with regulatory requirements and accepted industry practices. " }I i! i.i.: '! t This Workplan has been developed to accomplish the following objectives: . To provide a basis for approval of cleanup activities in accordance with 40 CFR 761.61(c), which requires written approval of any PCB cleanup activity. The Group requests that written approval of this W orkplan by the USEP A be granted within 30 days of submittal. . To conduct a safe, complete, and cost-effective PCB remedy for the Bickford facility that will allow the facility to continue use as a commercial property. The remedy will include cleaning the buildings' interiors, removing most of the concrete floor and several pieces of equipment, removing a smal! area of soil outside the West Building, and replacing the floor in both the East and the West Buildings. . To implement a defensible confirmatory sampling program (prior to installation of the new floor) to demonstrate completeness of the remedy. . To prepare a remediation documentation report for submittal to the agency that will support a no further action determination and allow the facility to retorn to beneficial reuse. 'I:' 1 ~ ';1 4 I "I I i ;! ;1 :J ). RMT: Inc. I:\WPM5N\P}T\oo.D6276\OS\RD00627605.ooJ.DOC 415105 4 Final Apri/2005 , , ..; : ~ 1 q Section 2 Approach 2.1 Key Issues RMf has identified several key issues that we believe are important in accomplishing the project objectives. These issues, and RMT's approach in addressing them, are as follows:' ., Issue 1. Characterization activities to date are sufficient for remediation. The agencies have received and accepted our characterization results and conclusions for the interior and exterior of the facility. With agency involvement, this cleanup is not subject to the self- implementing cleanup provisions described in 40 CFR 761.61. . Issue 2. PCB cleanup of the interiors of the buildings is only required for those areas that exceeded the cleanup criterion specified in 40 CFR 761. This Workplan addresses the removal and disposal of materials and residuals that have concentrations of PCBs in excess of the USEP A's standards, or as a conservative measure, thus deemed to possibly contain PCBs based on the site conceptional model. This includes removing wall fans and,heating elements, and conducting a general cleaning of both buildings using a high-efficiency particulate air (HEP A) vacuum in combination with the wet-wiping of surfaces., Characterization activities suggest that only the following portions of the buildings require remediation as PCB remediation waste (40 CFR 761.3): Two PCB-contaminated nonporous items (one wall fan and the cutting room exhaust vent) Dust on ceiling support I-beams in the furnace mom (West Building) A small area of soil outside the West Building Most of the floor in the West Building and approximately two-thirds of the floor in the East Building An aboveground storage tank that was used to temporarily store transformer oil that contained PCBs (defined as a PCB Article in 40 CPR 761.3), which will be removed and properly disposed . Issue 3. Confirmation samples will be used to demonstrate the suitability of the, buildings' return to commercial use. This Remediation Workplan includes a confirmation sampling plan for approval by the USEPA that will adequately document the post-remedy PCB concentrations at the site indicating that the condition of the facility is acceptable for commercial use. This will be memoria1ized in a final construction documentation report presented to the USEP A and the WDNR for obtaining certification of the adequacy of the remedial action. If 'I i -l ,I 'I ,/ "I Ll ',I !:. Li :, :I i" ",/ !'! .i f 'I J ;.j :, "j " ji " J i ~ ~ I L " j= 1!1 jll f 11 ji ,{ ;. 1:1] ,! Ii ~ W ~ " Final Apri/2llOti \' ;'1 ~ RM1: Inc. I;\WPMSN\PJT\OO-D6276\05\.RD00627605-COl.DOC 4/5105 5 2.2 Inventory of PCB-impacted Materials Characterization activities discovered that very few nonporous surfaces had PCB-laden soot and dust. Those PCBs were typically fOlmd in areas with heavy accumulations of dust. Several samples with porous surfaces exceeded 1 ppm. .;! ;1 'I ~ I I' I il' I: The following is a list of items or areas at the site, along willi the associated concentrationS (based on the December 2003 results), that have PCB concentrations exceeding the cleanup criterion of 1 ppm for porous surfaces or 10 flg!100 em' for nonporous surfaces. These items/areas will be removed and disposed. Summary of Results of Samples Containing PCBs East Building (109 total samples) l 'j , :1 ,I H :.\ Wood suIH:eiling of Porous 1/1 bathroom Concrete floor Porous 8/21 Concrete floor' "hot or' Porous 2/10 Oil in ASf Oil 1/1 Slud in AST Slud e 1/1 Cutting room exhaust Nonporous 1/1 hood Total 14/35 2.15 ppm "l! .~! i , f .1 1.01 to 5.42 4.18 to 130 (Q 8.0 m 35 19.22 flg/1oo em' .il I ;j ,J , (I) The 130 ppm value was not confinned by sUbsequent sampling. West Building (76 total samples) 'i f"t 'f Concrete floor Concrete floor '''hot ots" Dust on wood sub-ceiling of break room Dust on ceilin su rIB Dirt around sealed floor drain Soil outside the section of shed-out wall Exhaust fan hpusin Total Nonporous 1/1, 2.7ppm 'il " :'1 :i 'I " " 'i :J 'I :', Porous Porous 2/2 1/1 10.38 to 12.84 m 5.6 ppm Non oraus 1/6 17/34 14.84 00 em' RMT, Inc, J:\WPMSN'\PJT\lIO-06276\OS\R000627605.ooI.DOC 4/SJOS 6 Final Apn12005 r' ii" n ,2.3 Remedial Actions The proposed remedial actions will be sequenced to maximize efficiency and minimize the potential for spreading residual PCBs. 'I"fui remediation will take place as follows: . Task 1 - General cleaning and tank removal Remove sub-ceiling above the offices and break room in the West Building and the ' bathroom in the East Building. Stub-off any utilities found at the nearest junction point. Remove the entire bathroom in the West Building. Remove and dispose debris beneath loading dock in the West Building. An aboveground storage tank (measuring approximately 10 feet high and 20 feet long) in East Building shall be pumped of residual oil and sludge, and cleaned. The oils (pCB concentration of 8 ppm) and sludge (pCB concentration of 35 ppm) shall be removed and properly disposed. After cleaning, dispose of above ground storage tank. Oean the jib cranes in East Building. Remove the overhead heating elements. Remove the wall exhaust and ceiling circulation fans. Remove the exhaust fan, hood, and ductwork in the Cutting Room in the East Building. . Task 2 - Removal of concrete and contaminated soil Excavate and remove approximately 2 cubic yards of soil where the interior wall was pushed off of the floor slab in the West Building. This soil shall be excavated and placed in a roll-off container, analyzed for PCBs, then appropriately disposed. Remove the concrete floor except for the loading dock, offices, and break room in the West Building; and the truck well, Cutting Room, and Storage Room areas in the East Building as indicated on Figures 3 and 4. Assum,e that the floor is approximately 6 inches thick with steel mesh of no greater diameter than 'h inch. No concrete structural support footings will be removed, so that the structural integrity of the building will remain intact. Remove any electrical wiring and plumbing found in the floor up to the nearellt interconnection point at the wall and the building exterior, as applicable. Minimize dust to the extent practicable. Collect and analyze sub-concrete soil samples as described herein. Dispose of concrete and sub-concrete material at a municipal solid waste landfill in accordance with NR 500 roles as a non- TSCA solid waste or special waste. f , ,:1' " 'I ,1 J l I 'n " ~% i'; ij "I:. ..1 ;.\ " 'i I I ;1 .'( ! i ! , " I ! :, " i 'I il , H ;1 II ',ii, .' r Final AprU 2005 i: i,' ;;. ,; i' " II RM1: Inc. 1:\WPMSN\P1T\D\)-()lj276\OS\ROOOttt160S-00J.DOC 4151D5 7 · Task 3 - Vacuuming, cleaning walls and ceilings plus confirmation sampling HEP A vacuum horizontal surfaces of the walls and ceiling, including structural beams. . ' il .~ 'I if 'I :i ,il Oean the ceiling, walls, structural elements, and appurtenances using wet-wiping with a !'Olution of Penetone 122" (or equivalent) and water. Wet-wiping will be conducted using dampened sponges and/or rags so as to minimize excess liquid. Used cleaning materials will be collected and disposed at a municipal solid waste landfill in accordance with NR 500 rules as a non- TSCA solid waste or special waste. The sub-floor will be protected from receiving potentially PCB-contaminated dust and cleaning Iiquids during this cleaning work. Disposable plastic sheeting may be used to mitigate such occurrence. · Task 4 - Replace concrete floor and stub-in needed utilities Replace the concrete floor with a concrete material that is similar in quality, thickness, and finish to the preexisting floor. Assume that the floor is approximately 6 inches thick with steel mesh of no greater diameter than 'h inch. Stub-in needed utilities. · Task 5 - Site housekeeping, and final close-out inspection The floor area shall be cleaned of accumulated dust and debris and waste will be properly disposed at a municipal solid waste landfili in accordance with NR 500 rules as a non- TSCA solid waste or special waste. Dispose of the disassembled stack located outside the West Building at a municipal solid waste landfill in accordance with NR 500 rules as a non- TSCA solid waste or special waste. Dispose of any remaining remediation-derived wastes and equipment from the above operations in accordance with applicable laws. Oeaning and demolition 'wastes will be disposed at a municipal solid waste landfill in accordance with NR 500 rules as a non- TSCA solid waste or special waste. Patch walls damaged by the concrete removal process. Patching will be done with materials that are similar in quality to the adjacent surfaces. { "I ;,'1 I: ~ f f I :1 I ! I I ! j I .1 , I "~I J ; 2.4 AST Oeaning and Removal Any oil and sludge remaining in the AST in the East Building is to be pumped out, and the tank cleaned and removed. The residuals (oil and sludge) will be transported by Onyx Special Services located inMenomonee Falls, Wisconsin, as a non-TSCA waste to Continental Cement Company, in Hannibal, Missouri, for incineration. The tank cleaning and removal will be ::/ ,; , r L Final Apri/2aos ;,' ;1 l' " RMr, Inc. l:\WPMSN\PfT\llO-Oti276\OS\R00062TfllS.COl.OOC 4IS/OS 8 conducted by certified tank removers. Documentation of the management of the oil, tank, and sludge will be provided in the remediation documentation report. 2.5 Removal of PCB-impacted Materials The PCB-impacted materials (listed in Subsection 2.2 above) will be removed and disposed of as municipal solid waste or spedal waste at the Seven Mile Creek municipal solid waste landfilJ in Eau' Oaire, Wisconsin. The management plan for remedial waste is detailed in Subsection 2.9 below. ~ : " " Instead of being cleaned, several wooden features, including the sub-ceilings above the bathroom in the East Building, offices, and break room, and the entire bathroom structure (walls, ceilings, fixtures, etc.) in the West Building, will be completely removed. Only the , plywood ceiling contained PCBs above the standard; however, the entire bathroom is to be removed as a further measure of protection since the wall surfaces are considered porous. Similarly, the exhaust and circulating fans, the overhead heaters, and the exhaust hood and the associated ductwork will be removed and disposed. This includes items that were sampled and found to be below the cleanup levels. Again, removal of such equipment is being conducted as a protective measure. Demolition will be conducted in a manner that minimizes the production and resuspension of dust. The dust minimization may include vacuuming dust on the surfaces before removal. !; , L l. 2.6 Soil Removal A soil sample was collected from an area outside and adjacent to the West Building foundation where the wall had been pushed'out. The sample was impacted with PCBs at 2.7 mglkg. As a precautionary measure, the soil near the impacted sample will be excavated. Soil will be eJ(cavated to a depth of 1 foot below grade up to 3 feet from the building using a backhoe or similar piece of motorized equipment with supplemental handing shovel as needed. The ,excavation will be approximately 10 foot long. The proposed area to be excavated is shown on Figure 3. I I j ,I I I I ,I I -/ I An estimated 2 cubic yards of excavated soil will be stored and disposed as special waste. The soil will be collected in roll-off containers or drums and disposed with the concrete (see below). The excavation will be sloped to grade and seeded. Sample locations will be staked for 'reference. The excavation will be extended at a later date if concentrations are found to exceed Ippm. :/ , Final .ApriI200s -j] :..~ " ~. RMT,lnc. l:\WPMSN\PJT\rHUJ6Z76\llS\ROOOli%76llS-OOJ'.DOC 415105 9 I i I I I I I I I I I I I I t I f , r 2.7 Concrete Floor Approximately 40 percent (21 of 54) of the concrete floor samples exceed the 1 ppm cleanup criterion (including "hot spot" samples). The samples that exceed the cleanup level tend to-be randomly distributed in certain former production areas and missing from others. Therefore, larger, continuous portions of the floor without PCB concentrations above 1 ppm will be left in place. Since any PCB contamination would have occurred in the floor slab which is adjacent to, and on top of, the structural concrete footings, the structural footings will also be retained. The areas to be left in place are shown as shaded areas on Figures 3 and 4. The areas of floor in the West Bllilding that will not be removed include the offices, the hallway adjacent to the offices, the break room, and the loading dock (see Figure 3). The areas in the East Bllilding that will not be removed include the loading dock well, the cutting room, and the northeastern portion of the storage room (see Figure 4). The impacted concrete will be sawed, broken (i.e., with a jackhammer), and removed along with any incidental sub-concrete material. The removed material will be managed as special waste as defined in Subsection 2.9. 2.8 Site Oeaning Methods While none of the nonporous wall or ceiling wipe samples collected during the site investigation indicated PCB concentrations above the cleanup criterion, nonporous surfaces (metal walls and structural features, and plastic-backed wall and ceiling insulation) will be vacuumed and wet-wiped as an additional protective measure. The vacuuming will be done using high-efficiency particulate air (REF A) vacuums. The dust and debris collected with the vacuums, and the used filters, will be placed in plastic bags, and sealed and disposed of as detailed below. Following the removal of the dust and debris, the surfaces will be wet-wiped. The wet-wiping entails the use of a solution of a concentrated cleaner (Penetone" 122 or equivalent) and water. Sponges or disposable towels will be used to wipe the walls, ceilings, lights, and structural beams. Drop cloths will be used ~ contain any excess cleaning solution that drips off the surfaces during cleaning. Drop cloths and cleaning materials will be disposed of as municipal solid waste as detailed in Subsection 2.9. 2.9 Management of Remediation Waste Remediation waste is expected to include bulk materials, such as concrete, bagged and sealed dust and debris, wood, drywall, heaters, fans, metal ductwork, disposable gloves and other personal protective equipment, and general products used for cleaning and to collect and _ handle environmental samples. Transportation of the remediation waste will be completed by licensed waste haulers using methods approved by regulation. The ';"'aste will be placed either in roll-off boxes, or in the case of the concrete, into a dump truck directly for shipping. RMT, Inc. J:\WPMSN\Pfl'\00-06276\QS\ROl10621605-OOJ.DOC 415RJS 10 Final Apri/2005 Bulk investigation-derived wastes will be disposed in accordance with 40 CFR 761.61(a)(5)(v)(A), which allows for disposal at a"... facility permitted, licensed; or registered by a State to manage municipal solid waste subject to part 258 of this chapter." The Seven Mile Creek Landfill in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, is a licensed municipal waste landfill in the state of Wisconsin, permitted under 40 CFR 258; therefore, it meets this requirement. RMf has no knowledge that any materials with PCB concentrations in excess of 50 ppm were handled at this facility. If any waste is deemed unsuitable for disposal at the Seven Mile Creek facility, an appropriate alternative will be selected. II [I ;1 .~ " G5 c ;II m fi Remediation waste management, transportation, record keeping, and disposal will be done in accordBnce with appliCable sections of 40 CFR 761, NR 157, NR 500, and the NR 600 series of the Wisconsin Administrative Code. 2.10 Confirmation Sampling Methods Confirmation sampling is required to demonstrate that PCBs are restricted to the contaminated areas of the concrete and have not migrated into the underlying soil. No confirmation sampling is required for nonporous surfaces since the few impacted surfaces are to be removed. Confinnation samples will be collected from sub-floor material below locations where concrete sample results indicated PCB concentrations greater than 1 ppm. These original sample locations were selected during the characterization phase using random selection techniques as prescribed in 40 CFR 761 Subpart P, and at "hot spot" areas that were visibly stained. In addition, three soil samples will be collected from the soil excavation area. Samples from these slime 27 locations will be collected for confirmatory analyses, including QNQC samples. The proposed confirmation sampling locations are shown on Figures 3 and 4. The proposed nwnber of samples from each area are summarized in the following table. Proposed Confirmation Sample Summary :i i Ii II ~; , i' East Building West Building Soil/Other Total 10 11 3 1 1 1 (MS/MSD) 11 12 4 27 .j ., :1 Samples will be collected with single-use disposable scoops. The samples will be placed in bottles that have been appropriately labeled and that have been supplied by the analytical laboratory. ",: I I i i .1 . :1 :i RMT, I.e. 1:\WPM5N'\P]T\0Q.Ql21fj\OS\RllOO627'll5.oo.J.OOC 4IS/05 11 " i Fi""l Apn12OD5 The confirmation sample results will determine if the PCBs penetrated through the floor and if additional remediation is required. In the event that PCB concentrations greater then 1.0 ppm are fourid in the sub-floor material, the material will be excavated in lifts of approximately 6 inches deep in the lo-foot by lo-foot area of the sample grid. 1he excavated soil will be handled as special solid waste as described previously, providing the PCB concentrations are below 50 ppm as expected based on site history and previous samples. Additional confirmatory samples would be collected at the base of the excavation and will be submitted for analysis with an expedited turnaround time (TAl) to facilitate the demolition/construction schedule. I ,I . , , ,I ,: 2.11 Analytical Methods and Quality Control 2.1Ll Laboratory and Methods Sample analysis will be conducted by a laboratory cerlifIed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to perform PCB analysis by EP A Method SW846 8082- In order to meet data quality objectiVes, PCB co_tralions will be reported in parts per million (by weight), and the required detection and reporting limit will be less than 1.0 mglkg (1 part per million [ppm]) PCB for porous samples. Samples may be analyzed with an expedited TAT as necessary. :'1 , I ii I j 2.11.2 QualityControl Sampling will follow established QA/QC procedures, as follows: Samples will be properly collected, preserved, and packaged for shipment and sent to the certified laboratory with a separate signed Chain-of-Custody Record enclosed in each sample cooler. Field duplicate samples will be collected at the rate of one sub-floor sample for each building. Field duplicates will be collected in the same manner as the primary samples. Field duplicates will be identified as a field duplicate and numbered sequentially. Field staff will maintain a log of the field duplicate samples that identifies the appropriate sampling location. One matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate will be collected and analyzed. Basically, , the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate consists of a separate duplicate sample that is co1lected and handled in the same manner as the primary samples. 1he laboratory will spike the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate with target analytes and will analyze them following specified procedures. Final . Apn12005 j I 1 I I 'I i :i I 'I I ". J :'1 .., 'j J 1.1 RMT.Iru:, l:\wPMSN\PfT\oo-o6276\OS\lWOO6276(tS.O(lJ.DOC 4ISffJ5 12 ~._~ ~d:'_~_ ,.......:..,~tf;.w~'0k.;:."'..;,~:;O>7.M.':l~"";,'.:,'"'-";:.:,';~iCJ;,::v,U.'~~'h:,,;j..j:,.~';':;~j; ,~~(,._.~..,~,~~:,;;:.:.;" ..'~. i I 1 Section 3 Field Documentation and Chain-of-Custody Procedures 3.1 Field Documentation RMT field staff will use digital photography and a field log book to document remedial activities. Daily reports will be prepared that summarize the work completed each day, the staff and equipment present, and the volume and type of materials removed from the site. A copy of the daily progress report is shown as Figure 5. of I . j J ~I I j J i 'I I I ! , i A log will be prepared for each confirmation sample collected. The log will contain the date, time, and location of the sample collected. The log will also contain a description of the physical properties of the sample. Confirmation sampling locations will be marked, and the locations measured and recorded relative to existing site features. When the confirmation sampling results indicate that the impacted materials have been removed, the replacement . . concrete floor can be installed. . 3.2 Chain-of-Custody Procedures The possession of samples must be traceable from the time of colle~on through the use of chain-<>f-custody procedures. Specific Chain-of-Custody Records must accompany sample shipping containers to document the transfer of the shipping containers and samples from the field to the laboratory receiving the samples for analysis. The procedures that RMT will implement are as follows: . Prepare sample containers and labels. . Identify and label each sample in the field with indelible ink. . Complete Chain-<>f-Custody Records in the field to inc!icate sample identification, number of containers filled, sampling date, sampling time, sample collector's name, and sample preservative, if applicable. . . Pack shipping containers with samples, Chain-<>f-Custody Records, and ice. Each set of sample containers to be shipped together in a single shipping container is assigned a Chafn- of -Custody Record, which travels with the shipping container. . Seal and ship containers to the laboratory. Common carriers or intermediate individuals are identified on the Chain-of-Custody Record, and copies of bills-of-Iading are retained. RMT.. Inc. 1:\WPMSN\'rn0ll-06276\05\KDIlO6276OS..oo:1.DOC 4/~ 13 Final April2005 · Receive and check shipping containers in the laboratory for broken seals or damaged sample containers. If no problems are noted, then samples are logged into the laboratory, and the OIain-of-Custody Record is conipleted. The person relinquishing the samples to the facility or agency should request the representative's signature acki.owledging sample receipt. If the representative is unavailable or refuses, then this is noted in the "Received By" space. · Include copies of the OIain-of-Custody Record with the analytical data. If an error is discovered on a sample OIain-of-Custody Record, then the person who made the error should correct it when possible by crossing out the incorrect information and inserting the correct information and initialing and dating the correction. 'This procedure applies to words or figures inserted or added to a previously recorded statement. RM:!;IIU:. J:\Wl"MsN\PJnD0-06276\DS\RCIOllliZ1fOS.ooOOC 4I5IOS 14 FilUl/ Apri/2005 I { ." IS c :u m . ....-/' i Section 4 Reporting The site remediation data will be compiled in a construction documentation report that is consistent with the requirements for content detailed in NR 724, Wisconsin Adminisirative Code. The report will include text and figures that summarize the remedial measures and tables that summarize the results of the confirmatory sampling and analysis. It will also include field sample logs, daily progress reports, photographic documentation, laboratory reports, and any applicable quality assurance/quality control documentation. The finaI report will be presented to the USEP A and the WDNR as evidence of satisfactory cleanup of the Bickford facility. The report is intended to be the supporting record that the USEP A and the WDNR will use to certify .that the site is then in a condition appropriate for commercial use.. RM1: lnc. 1:\WPMSN\PJT\<<UJn16\al'\ROOam'6I1S.(lQI.DOC 413105 15 Final Apn12005 .1 ! J i, Section 5 'lIealth and Safety Plan RMT subscribes to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)- and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A)-mandated health and safety standards. Because of the wide range of potential exposures for our employees, RMT must make conservative judgments as to potential health risks. The services outlined in this Workplan are offered on the basis of providing Level D health and safety protection (coveralls, safety shoes, hard hats, and eye prOtection only). If additional protection is required to perform these servioes, then the appropriate. protection will implemented before proceeding with the work. The site-specific Health and Safety Plan has been completed and will be available during all field activities. . RMT, Inc. 1:\WPMSN\,,",tJO.06m\t.5\ROf:I06:Z16Q5..oo1.DOc 415trJ5 16 Final Apn12005 i il \. " 15 c ;>J m (J) f I ,., Section 6 References Envirogen. 2000. Closure support consultation prepared for Bickford, Inc., New Lisbon, Wisconsin. Prepared by Envirogen, Ine., Pewaukee, Wisconsin. July 14, 2000. . RMl'. 2003. Additional site characterization, Bickford, Inc., facility, New Lisbon, Wisconsin. July 2003. RMl', 2003. Site characterization workplan. RMl', Ine. November 2003. RMl'. 2004a. Building interior characterization report. Bickford Facility, New Lisbon, Wisconsin. February 2004. RMl'. 2004b. Confirmation PCB sampling and pilot-scale cleaning. Former Bickford Recycling Facility, New Lisbon, WISCOnsin. September 2004. USEP A. 1999. Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Subpart 761. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) manufacturing. processing. distribution in Commerce, and use prohibition. Iune 28, 1999. USEP A. 2000. Protocol for conducting environmental audits of facilities with PCBs, asbestos, and lead-based paint reguJated under TSCA. Prepared by the USEP A Office of Compliance, EP A 300-B-00-OO4, March 2000. RMT, Inc. I:\WPMSN\PlT'lIO-OIS216\OS\RD006Z7605.00I.DOC 4J5JOS 17 Final Apri1200s . . . . Ii ~I I~ ~~ II .~ ~ If li.;; f . c 4 It ~~ Ji . . 8940 . .~ ~ ";<': I.Ij " -.J.-..._" . -l '( Cl ~ Q: STATE LOCA11ON SOURCE: BASE MAP FROM NEW USBON NORTH AND SOUTH 7.5 MIN. USGS QUADRANGLES. o r 2000' , 1000' ~ IfMl BICKFORD JNC. FACUTY NEW IJS8ON, WISCONSIN ....... EM APPROVED EM PROJECT NO. FllE NO. DAlB 627lilM01_ ....... 2005 ME\'ERHOC lIN> 621.... SITE LOCAllON MAP FIGUIIE 1 {'-~_~"""""'~;:":=,:f.ol:.>_'''''''''.""".,>.,..,,,.:~..,~_ _~,~,',,':.""' -....J I . i . i . ; . i r i i . L., ( I~ ~ ._IU.....lt,j tf!~~:g .... o' ~'''''''''''''''_''''''"'''_.'''''''''''''':''''''''''-''''''''-''''''''' . I ) 5 ~ ~ \ . .' I . i i ! i . i . i i i . ! i ! I . ; . . I ~. ~ ...~~.......; ". .....,. .,;j"..; .. . . ! .......<.VO.Z;fO:lk.. . '-...,.. . ~,,!~Il<. J ......... . -"''''oJ- . L I. ">.<. i ~.c. . ./..,.... . r....... i ...t^-~: ...., . . I i r . .( I i r S : I d J : ~ : jIg I ,/ : ~ : J w ! ~i ~ t : ~ : 00 .,. ~ I ! . ~. : ! . . i i! J . S : .i , :: : I ! I~ i I ~ . I liii I . ~- I I . : liS i ! ~~ ! i . i . . !i ~f .~ =" . ti II ! (O,~f.Ls) liJ,J)IlS';O!lNOII .E I "Z.. - , j ! o . ~ ~ i! . n o 5 h Q Z .. " ~ ! i :0 ! 5~ 6~ 'if~. of "" iill o. !'l" d a l & U . .;; ,~: !~Ih !i bin gun ~ ~ L lull. if ill... P" LI;j iiil I' k t i i . ~ ! 1I I Ii I !~ ~ ~~ z ~ _10..'........1.1 -.. .IJ.'W '-'."-"OIlj.,., """""'-.u',., "~'~'l.""..~ nofl'Jli.n"S.'K.U'll'........ "_1 "'~".......OM"".,...\t:lNCl'!;n... _~..... ...... ........!.~.~~~UO'\R~:_ ..':!~ .,:! & ~... ~ ~ ~~~ m~~ ~ ~~f. ~~ ~ b~ ~~~ 12 ~~ .. ~~ :::~ I~ ~~i. ~mu ~~ ~i il ;il~ ~I!~ ill ir ~i . ~i ~~ ~I ~~llllni ~IH. 11 ~ ~ ;Is! ~!HI ii ~i iim Ii 3~~~ i~~ i~ ~~ c .c;.c ~~~m ~~ ~m ~ g ili ii~ is .dl ~~i ~; d Z~.~.-I.. .......: I.CU "'"""""""",OlS.... z ~. . ~ ~ s ~ ..~ j g~' .f ~ z .I~!!i ~ . Ii a i 8~ . 2 8 . ...~ ~ i a ~~ ~ is .~ ~~ ~ ~ i &%11 81 al ::;~ ...It ue ~ . <!) . . ~..-----.. .--..... ~ i" I .0 . ~ ft....1 g.... .. =" I.. ~. ~ ~.I ..JO' - .. . :" '.:i' 'J ..... ...... ..... .l. . .~i!!. ..6..... .. . .<" '. ". .~. "~~ i." :_ '. '.. .Go" g..~ i.. .' . '. .. .iffl ;iz; . .. . .c 3~'. . . 'i~':;~~ ""Ii .. "li D~ ... O. ".;II l- .....g5ill~1. fill 18 II II .S . f._ Yl g~ j: Ii .~D. "I . ;::"'a: I . ~. ~ I ~ . '-::2[..- r r ~ " '/ i (" 5! ~2. t I af ~3 i~E ~at ~~ DOOR J rf b E ,I! a~ '--" .. ......~U_.., _16..1.......,., ...~!!,t...~.!":.!~ oJI>OlO.. J." ~~ I rr ~f i~ rf b _ Ii Iii illll \ I d n! e!- i ;; . li ~ I ! jl !I)i uo. ~ ~ I J~ ._J.J........,I.'.~ .~t~;.":;';: t :!l~:!~ J I Uol'UO~ m.n....'"lII.\sn-...l'J~_J..... "hl.~L~~~~.atDI:.':_~ .~~ !l I ~ ~ g ~ .. a: o~ . ~g " ~ ~~ ~I' ~9- !:iw,~ I"' ~ .. Ii n;i~ .~~ Ii ,,~ ~i .Ii ~I! ~~;; ~I ~j i!~!i i;; u;~ ~~ .~- .~~~ ~~ =~ ~~ ~. . '~~i!!~" ~~ Z~ _5 .. . .5 ~~[I;~ ~~ ~g ~~ ~!ll ~~ a 5S a- ~ ~ iis Ii iiii illl ~. Z.; N"" ..; on ~ ~ .g .~ i,''- ~ ~. -'::I: . 0 I. "'i ..... ..1 ~ '0 I.. ~q I' 1.1 ~Hi . @ .. ~ . . . ~ 0 ~ ~ $ ~ t ! ~ ~ ... - -- _011*.......'" .,."lHl.u....I>J ..........._tr. ...OIIlG".......1t1 tt'n'i'L'5-~<ll _iii .. ~--~- .2... -"- I & i' ~I elt I: gt - . - 'fi! ~i;q itl!.;::::.It! i . -- ." :! i ~~;r :Vt . ~.o ~ jj . .. - ': · r( f" t .. 'i 111- =q A. . ~I::o i~ 1\ ., !~ I~ ~~ ( !I ~ ~~ ii 5 ~ z ....... .u......OU.,jJ\l ._.........cOU'.-v UIlp'lJIIa4'..a.....'" . 'IiF.'~. .. .. . ...... -. dl i i'f~~ 1ft ">o:af' 'al.i ..... '!'~b' 5'" ..~. i '.. . 6~ w:.. i. -:: '<u IIl'z.c" . ,,' ":1 ~o: . r.~ ;~!~~ a '. ~; =11 it ~ :~; !~ pI; _' : 01 j . ~! f ", . . .1 ~ It-l.uo_ ....~..'.....,..".'1tI'IJ~_I.... ,Ai_IN\SO\fUIQ"'" -.,UW 5tJlll1~8lI11l'_""""~ ..'."....... WI DAIL Y PROGRESS REPORT PROJECT NO.: CLIENT: DATE: Rpt#: Pg.#: PROJECT: Bickford Facility Site Remediation New Lisbon, WI CONTRACTOR: Onyx REPORT PREPARED BY: Pete Chase PROJECT MANAGER: Mark Osten TIME ON-8ITE: TIME LEFT SITE: DAY s 0' WEATHER: TEMP.: WIND: HUMIDITY: STATUS OF PROJECT IN RELATION TO SCHEDULE: CONTRACTOR'S WORK FORCE (include subcontractors): EQUIPMENT AT SITE (identify in use or idled): MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT DELIVERED: DESCRIPTION OF WORK IN PROGRESS (chronological fonnat): NOTICES TO CONTRACTOR: REQUESTS FROM CONTRACTOR: FIELD PROBLEMS AND NON-CONFORMING MATERIALS OR WORK: MATERIALS REMOVED (description and approximate volume): Figure 5 (page 112) 1:\WPM5N\PJT\(XHI6216\05\ztlOO627E05-002.0OC 3/3ClI2llOS PROJECT NO.: CLIENT: PROJECT: Bickford Facility Site Remediation DATE: Rpt#: Pg,#: DAILY COMMUNICATIONS: '" I TIME: NAME/REPRESENTING: SUBJECT/COMMENTS: A~ION (IF NECESSARY:) NAME/REPRESENTING: I TIME: SUBJECT/COMMENTS: ACTION (IF NECESSARY:) NAME/REPRESENTING: I TIME: SUBJECT/COMMENTS: ACTION (IF NECESSARY:) Figure 5 (page 2/2) I:\WPMSN\PjT\oo.D6276\OS\Zlll106276l>>-OOOC 3J3O(lOO5 . . . ,'.'. . . . '. .. " .. ... . . " u .. '._ ".' . '" .. . .... . ..... ."...... ......."", ...-. . .......... ".h. '" ..... ". ...... . .... .. ...... ... ATTACHMENT B Dennis P. Birke . From: Sent: :To: S~bJect: M"rtig.Anton@epamail..~pa.9ov . Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:~ PM . . .. . . . ..... .. . Mark Osten; James. Wedekind; db@dewittrosS.COm;M~aElJ:.Milkir@dnr;state,lA'i.us. Bickford Work Plan . ... . . 1 have reviewed the Site Remediation WorkplalJ for the Bickford Facility dated April 2005... I.belleve the .. remediation may commence in accordance with Sections 2 through 5 of the workplan, however, with conslderatlon of the comments below on Section 2. I will begin to prepare a letter of approval of the workplan, considering the comments below, for signature from my management and an approval under the Federal PCB regulations, 40 CFR Section 761.61(c), of the cleanup verification sampling and disposal based on as-found concentrations. Comments on Section 2 of the workplan: 1. The comments below conslder that although certain sampling procedures were accepted for characterization samples, s!Jch as wipe samples of surfaces that do not meet the definition of non-porous surfaces and a large grid spacing, those procedures may not be accepted for cleanup verification sampling. 2. . identify the disposal facility for all the fans and vents. The fans and vents that had detectable levels of contamination should be vacuumed and washed prior to disposal. ,East Building 3. Storage room floor: Post cleanup verification core samples should be collected of the remaining floor (on the north side) using a grid spacing of one sample for every 400 square feet, with no composltlng. . Existing core samples may be used. As an alternative, the floor may be removed. 4. Bathroom floor: The entire floor or the entire floor covering should be removed. Wipe samples in areas where PCBs were detected will not be accepted as cleanup verification samples for surfaces that do not meet the definition of non-porous surfaces, such as vinyl tile, wood, any painted surface, or concrete. 5. Tank room: Were the dock lifts sampled? 6. Tank room floor near truck well: Post cleanup verification core samples should be collected of the remaining floor using a grid spacing of one sample for every 400 square feet, with no composltlng. Existing core samples may be used. As an alternative, the floor may be removed. 7. Truck well floor: Post cleanup verification core samples should be collected of the remaining floor USing a grid spacing of one sample for every 400 square feet, with no composltlng. ExIsting core samples may be used. As an alternative, the floor may be removed. West Building 8. Break room floor: The entire floor or the entire floor covering should be removed. Wipe samples in areas where PCBs were detected will not be accepted as cleanup verification samples for surfaces that do not meet the definition of non-porous surfaces, such as vinyl tile, wood, any painted surface, or concrete. 1 9. Main room floor drain: The drain should be fully investigated to verify that there Is no f!J.rther contamlna.t1on Inside or arol,Jnd the drain. 10. .Main room, south wall near shredder: Aftervacuumlng;:wet washlng,anddrying, post cleanup verification samplingshCluld be collected USing a grid spadng of one sample. . fi)revE!rY..411.0.S<Juare feet, with no composltlng; Wlpe safT1pl~miiybetJ~ed. .......... .. .. .... . . . . .. 11;. .Main. room, steel wall supports.: .. After vaauumingl' wet washing, . . ..and drying; post cleanup verification. sampling should be collect~d using a grid.spaclng of one sample for every. 400 square feet, with no compositing. Wipe samples may be used. 12. OffIce 1 and 2 floors: The entire floor or the entire floor covering should be removed. Wipe samples in areas where PCBs were detected will not be accepted as cleanup verification samples for surfaces that do not meet the definition of non-porous surfaces, such as vinyl tile, wood, any painted surface, or concrete. 13. Shower floor: The entire floor or the entire floor covering should be removed. Wipe samples In areas where PCBs were detected will not be accepted as cleanup verification samples for surfaces that do not meet the definition of non-porous surfaces, such as vinyl tile, wood, any painted surface, or concrete. If you have any questions or would IIke'to discuss the comments In this message, please call me at 312-353-2291, or reply to this message. . Tony Martig, Toxies Program Section 2 Dennis P. Birke . From: Sent: To: . c,,: . S\jbject: Martig~Anlon@epaml!i1.~pa;gQ\t.:. . Thursday, July 28, 200:; .1:53 PM . James Wedekind .. ..... ... .. . db@d!'Witlross.com;MJChaE!'i.MiU.er@dP.r,smle,wLus;Mark:OsteP.:.. Re: Bickford Work Plan .. - All, 'Responses to James questions are below. Please reply or call me if you would like to discuss the further. Tony 312-353-2291 1) We can proceed with our remediation, providing we include your comments Into our scope. Correct There will be no further submittal, other than a response letter from us concerning your comments. A response letter concerning the comments Is not necessary. Upon completion of the cleanup and closure of the facility, Including the completion of the verification sampling, I would like a report of the results of all the final cleanup veriflcatlon samples including sample type (wipe/core), location, and results. <:oncurrently, you are preparing your Written approval as per 761.61 (c)(2) that will be signed by your management Correct. 2) The fans and vents will be disposed like all other debris at the Seven Mile Creek Landfill (a Subtitle 0 landfill). We will clean them as requested. OK 3) As for your statement "Existing core samples may be used." I assume you mean we layout our grid and if a previous sample falls within a grid element that result can be used to satisfy a sample from that element. Is that correct? Yes, your assumption Is correct. 4) The dock lifts have not been sampled. I assume you want them sampled after cleaning as well? Yes. They are painted steel, I assume a wIpe sample would be sufficient for each lift? A wipe sample would be suffident. Painted surfaces are actually considered porous surfaces and normaliy we do not accept wipe samples of porous or paInted surfaces for verification samples. However, In considering the number, location, type, and results of all the samples collected so far at the facility, we will accept wipe samples of the lifts. S) I assume the "Tank Room floor near truck well" refers to the fringe of floor that surrounds the well that is not to be removed? Correct. This must stay if we decide to keep the well Intact as it is actually the wall of the truck well. can we Indude this as part of the 20x20 grid we use for the truck well? (Note: the truck well walls were sampled). Yes. 6) I propose a 2000 grid for the 400 sq. fl:. sample grid. With a grid of these dimensions, we will end up with some smaller grid elements around the perimeter of the areas. .Can we make combine these Into elongate rectangles to get a 400 sq ft area? Yes. 7) The Cutting Room floor is OK as Is? Yes. 8) The floor drain will be removed with the floor. We will collect a sample of the material beneath the drain and visually Inspect the drain line and sample if there is staining or any other visual/olfactory evidence of release. You should collect a sample from the draIn line regardless of visual/olfactory evidence of release. 9) Please clarify the area that is comprised as "the South Wall near shredder". I may have been mistaken with this phrase. My concern Is the detection of PCBs In various samples on or near the south wall of the west building: sample A2S-3 of the wall, FanfVent 5, FanfVent 6, steel ceiling suppor above shredder, and steel wall support above shredder. Even though some of these samples were relatively low, I think cleanup verification sampling should be done In areas including each of the samples to ensure cleanup of the PCBs. The extent of the area sampled could be based on results of existing samples and new verification samples, but, at a minimum, veriflcation sampling should be conducted of the areas at and around each of the sample locations I Identified In this point. 10) Please clarify how you envision placing a grid on the wall supports. On paper, layout all the exposed surfaces of the wall supports, calculate and total the area of the all the exposed surfaces, and divide the total exposued surface area 400 sq.ft. to determine the number of samples 1 to collect on the wall support. Collect the samples at equally distributed locations. For Instance, if the total ~p~d s\J1face area is less thal) 400 sq.ft., collE;!,ct at least one samplE;! pE;![ wa,l.I. support. If the total exposed surface area is 800 sqJt., collect two samples of the-waHsupport spread .outevenly.' " ..Ja'mesWedeklnd , "<James. Wedeklnd@ rmtinc.com> 07/27/200501:44 PM To Anton Martlg/R5/USEPA/US@EPA cc , 'db@dewittross.com, Mlchael.Mlller@dnr.state.wl.us, Mark Osten <OSTENM.MSNPOST2.MWDOMAIN~rmtinc. com> Subject Re: Bickford Work Plan Tony, Thanks for conducting a thorough and complete review of our work plan. Here Is a summary of my questions that rd like to talk to you about: 1) Just to clarify the Introductory paragraph - we can proceed with our remediation, providing we Include your comments Into our scope. There will be no further submittal, other than a response letter from us concerning your comments. Concurrently, you are preparing your written approval as per 761.61 (c)(2) that will be signed by your management. 2) The fans and vents will be disposed like ali other debris at the Seven Mile Creek landfill (a SUbtitle 0 landfill). We will clean them as requested. 3) As for your statement "ExIsting core samples may be used." I assume you mean we layout our grid and if a previous sample falis within a grid element that result can be used to satisfy a sample from, that element Is that correct? 4) The dock lifts have not been sampled. I assume you want them sampled after cleaning as well? They are painted steel, I assume a wIpe sample would be sufficient for each lift? 5) I assume the ''Tank Room floor near truck well" refers to the fringe of floor that surrounds the well that is not to be removed? This must stay if we decide to keep the well intact as It is actually the wall of the truck well. Can we include this as part of the 2Ox20 grid we use for the truck well? (Note: the truck well walls were sampled). 6) I propose a 20x20 grid for the 400 sq. ft. sample grid. With a grid of these dimensions, we will end up with some smaller grid elements around the perimeter of the areas. Can we make combine these Into elongate rectangles to get a 400 sq ft area? 2 , 7) The Cutting Room floor is OK as Is? a) Th~ floor drain will .be removeP with the f1Q9r. . We will colleq: a sample of tOe materi<l.1 beneath. the d!1lln . . and visually inspect the drain line and sample if there is stalni[lg.orany othervislJal{olfactoryevldell!=eof: rElease. 9) Please clarify the area thatls comprised as .!'the South Wall near shredder". . ];0) Please clarify how you envision placing cl!;jr)d ortthe \Vansuppo~; .. ... ... ... . u u .. Ail !implied response to these items and a folioi:V~up~leph~n~ ci!rwersation \VcHiiilbeapp~atelf,AQili~; u thank you for your assistance, ... ..... .....u. .. James Wedekind Senior Hydrogeologist RMT, Inc. 744 Heartland Trail Madison, WI 53717-1934 (608) 662-5469 - direct (608) 831-4444 - office Outgoing messages, along with any attachments, are scanned for viruses prior to sending. NOTICE- This email may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient Any review or distribution by others Is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete all copies. 3 ) ~, ... ...'...... .................. . .... ..... . . .. ............. .-... ........ . '. - . . ... . ..... .- -. ATTACHMENT C " ::/ . .M:innesota Power, a dhdsion of ALLETE, mc.. . . .DTE Energy . . WisconSin Power and Light Company . . . futetstate Power and Light COmpany . :NoiihemStates Power, a WisconSm. . ... Corporation, d/b/aJ Xcel Energy. Northern States Power, a Minnesota Corporation, d/b/aJ Xcel Energy . CommonweaIth Edison Company Union Electric Company d/b/a AmerenUE MidAmerican Energy Company WPS Resources Corp. and subsidiaries Adams-Columbia Electric Cooperative Alger Delta Cooperative Association Barron Electric Cooperative Bayfield Electric Cooperative Benco Electric Cooperative Central Wisconsin Electric Cooperative Chippewa Valley Electric Cooperative Clark Electric Cooperative Dunn Electric Cooperative East Central Energy Eau Claire Energy Cooperative Great River Energy Cooperative Jackson Electric Cooperative Jump River Electric Cooperative Oakdale Electric Cooperative Oconto Electric Cooperative Ontonagon County REA Pierce-Pepin Cooperative Services Polk-Burnett Electric Cooperative Price Electric Cooperative, me. Richland Electric Cooperative Riverland Energy Cooperative Rock County Electric Cooperative Association St. Croix Electric Cooperative Scenic Rivers Energy Cooperative Taylor Electric Cooperative Tri-County Electric Cooperative Vernon Electric Cooperative ITo Be Supplemented Mter Execution Per Paragraph 7 of the Agreement]