March 23, 2006 - Public Forum Q & A

Interim Response

1. Would the ongoing efforts be considered a cleanup or remediation and what is the difference between the two?

Response from EPA: The word "remediation" is just a fancy word for cleanup. The on-going efforts are considered a cleanup.

EPA makes a distinction between two types of cleanup. There are interim or removal actions, which are cleanups that are deployed quickly to bring a release under control and to maintain or restore public health and safety. Examples of this type of cleanup at the site are the collection trenches, signs, and fencing. There are also long-term or remedial actions. These are cleanups that provide more permanent and comprehensive solutions for contamination at the site. This is what we are working toward at this site.

2. Does the collection system prevent cement kiln dust contact with groundwater?

Response from EPA: No. The collection system is intended to collect water after it contacts kiln dust.

3. What will happen if the lake levels rise above the current collection trench?

Response from CMS: Based on the location of the collection lines, CMS believes it is highly unlikely that lake levels would rise enough to cover the lines.

4. Can CMS guarantee that the new collection line will not plug like the old system did? Are any contingency plans in place to prevent the leachate from entering Little Traverse Bay if the collection line is shut down again?

Response from CMS: Knowledge gained from the construction and operation of the original collection line has and will be implemented in future collection lines - for instance, the installation of multiple clean-out areas to help keep the lines open and operating, increased monitoring and scheduled maintenance. Also, water trucks can collect leachate should a line become plugged and unable to pump.

5. Can the piles of cement kiln dust be permanently removed?

Response from CMS: Theoretically they can but CMS does not believe removal would materially reduce the risk at East Park while it surely would increase traffic and accident risk. For instance, at East Park:

• There is a total of about 360,000 cubic yards of CKD located in East Park
• This equals approximately 18,000 truckloads making a left turn out of the park to haul away the CKD.
• There is increased risk associated with handing and preparing the CKD for travel over the road.
• There is increased risk associated with bringing in the fill dirt that would be necessary to make the park useable.
• It is not certain where the CKD would be disposed of.

6. It seems as the current situation only receives negative press, how are the accomplishments of the cleanup being communicated to residents and in the media throughout the state?

Response from CMS: CMS is communicating project progress via monthly - and in some cases more often - updates with residents, township meetings, Tip of the Mitt personnel, public presentations when requested, responding to media inquiries both locally and out of our Jackson office, and through a website established especially for the project.

7. How can the public participate and become involved in the decisions made with regard to the cleanup efforts?

Response from EPA: The first step is to remain informed. Local environmental groups and the local media have demonstrated a willingness to be the first in line to keep local citizens informed. Local meetings will continue to be held on a periodic basis. CMS Energy has established an office and web site and has other community information sources available. MDEQ and the local health department have local or nearby offices to address questions and issues. U. S. EPA has site-related documents in the local library and on a public web site, where questions may be posed and comments expressed. Tip of the Mitt Watershed has offered to play a major role in transferring public concerns to all parties involved in the cleanup and local citizens are encouraged to contact any of the cleanup agencies directly, if they wish.

8. Where does the water collected by the interim response collection trenches go? After the collected leachate is treated, where is it trucked?

Response from CMS: The leachate collected at Bay Harbor and East Park that is trucked off-site is neutralized and filtered on-site and then transported for disposal at a Class I Injection Well located in Johannesburg that is operated by Northeastern Exploration, Inc. The well installation, operation, maintenance and waste approvals are independently regulated and monitored by both the US EPA and the MDEQ. The Ground Water Protection Council site link: www.gwpc.org contains unbiased technical and regulatory information about Class I injection wells. The Northeastern Exploration, Inc. website at: http://northeasternexp.com/ also provides information about the facility.

9. What is the current pH?

Response from EPA: Recovered leachate pH varies from location to location. A pH value of 11.8 was recorded at West CKD; 8.7 to 9.1 were recorded at Pine Ridge Court; 8.9 was recorded at Guardrail Seep; and 10.7 to 10.8 were recorded for Seep 2. The Seep 1 collection line has a pH value of approximately 12.8.

10. How often does MDEQ check the wastewater treatment plant?

Response from DEQ: The DEQ Water Bureau staff inspects the wastewater treatment plant once or twice per year.

11. Is water treated before being discharged from the Petoskey Wastewater Treatment Plant into Lake Michigan (metals removed)?