THE GREAT LAKES

October 30, 2015

Chicago, Illinois

Midwest Environmental

Compliance Conference

Cameron Davis

Sr. Advisor to the Administrator

U.S. EPA

THE GREAT LAKES

American Society of Landscape Architects

THE GREAT LAKES

COSEE

WHERE WE’VE BEEN

• Through the 1800s and early 1900s, deforestation

• Overfishing

• Habitat Loss

• Rapid Urbanization

• Lamprey

• Water flow obstructions

WHERE WE’VE BEEN

• Into the 1960s and 1980s, toxic pollution

• Eutrophication of Lake Erie

• Power plant development

• Rapid land use change

• Invasive species

• Into the 2000s, threat of water diversions

• New generation of toxic pollutants

• Plastics

• Toxic algae

POLICIES FOR ADDRESSING THREATS

• Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement-1972

• Clean Water Act (US)

• Canada-Ontario Agreement (Canada)

• Great Lakes Water Resources Agreement-2008

• Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, including the Great Lakes Legacy Act (US)

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement -2012

GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE ACTION PLAN

• Presidential Campaign Issue – 2007-2008

• Today has enormous bipartisan support

• Addresses five “Focus Areas.”

• Under each Focus Area are:

• Objectives

• Commitments

• Measures of Progress

GREAT LAKES GOVERNANCE

Binational

• International Joint Commission

• Great Lakes Fishery Commission

Federal

• Great Lakes Senate and House Task Forces

• USEPA, USDOI, USACE, etc.

• Environmental Canada, Department of Fisheries & Oceans, etc.

State & Provincial

• Council of Great Lakes & St. Lawrence Governors & Premiers

• Great Lakes Commission

GREAT LAKES GOVERNANCE

State & Provincial

• Council of Great Lakes & St. Lawrence Governors & Premiers

• Great Lakes Commission

Municipal

• Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative

Tribes & First Nations

• Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission

Other

• Academia, business, environmental, education, etc.

THE GREAT LAKES OF THE FUTURE

• Energy

• Water Demands

• Ramifications of Food Production

• Climate Change

• ?

2015 Marcy Twete, Division Manager, Corporate Responsibility, Americas

October 2015

Industry engagement in the Great Lakes region

11/9/2015

About ArcelorMittal

• The world's number one steel and mining company, with more than 222,000

employees in more than 60 countries

• Recognized leader in all major global steel markets, including automotive,

construction, household appliances and packaging, with leading R&D and

technology, as well as sizeable captive supplies of raw materials and

outstanding distribution networks

• An industrial presence in 19 countries exposes the company to all major

markets, from emerging to mature

• ArcelorMittal values scale, vertical integration and product diversity:

– 38% production in the Americas

– 46% production in Europe

– 6% production in other countries such as Kazakhstan, South Africa and

Ukraine

13 @ArcelorMittalUS

ArcelorMittal in the United States

With 27 facilities serving key domestic markets, ArcelorMittal USA is a

vital component of the company’s global footprint.

• 27 facilities in 13 of the United States

Mines, integrated facilities, mini-mills

and finishing operations

Produces flat, long, tubular and tailored

blank products

Serves auto, appliance, construction,

container, pipe and tube, and

machinery markets

• 20,000+ employees

• 16.3 million tons raw steel production

• 20 percent of U.S. raw steel capacity

• $2.1 billion in direct economic impact

$8.3 million in community investment

ArcelorMittal’s vision for

corporate responsibility

Investing in

our people

Making each and every

person working on our

behalf feel valued.

Making steel more

sustainable

Using our expertise in steel to

develop cleaner processes and

greener products.

Enriching our

communities

Our presence plays an

important role in all the

communities in which

we operate.

This is all underpinned by transparent governance.

ArcelorMittal will transform tomorrow by

@ArcelorMittalUS

Steel: the sustainability challenge

16

We have to contribute to making a more sustainable future

possible. Our 10 sustainable development outcomes are a

compelling, practical and demanding way to do this, from the

way we make steel and use resources, to how we develop new

products, and support our people and communities.

10 sustainable development outcomes

11/9/2015 17 @ArcelorMittalUS

Outcome #5:

Trusted user of air, land and water

18

Case study:

On-site restoration in Burns Harbor, Indiana

11/9/2015 19 @ArcelorMittalUS

Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore

20

• National Park System

• Authorized by Congress in 1966

• 15,000 acres

• Save the Dunes

Case study:

On-site restoration in Burns Harbor, Indiana

11/9/2015 21 @ArcelorMittalUS

Burns Harbor ecosystem restoration

and land conservation initiative

• Partners

• Goals

– Increase wildlife diversity and restore dune ecosystems

– Engage employees in conservation stewardship

– Enhance opportunities for employee wellness activities

– Engage our local community in stewardship and partnership

on the restoration site

Case study:

On-site restoration in Burns Harbor, Indiana

11/9/2015 23 @ArcelorMittalUS

Case study:

On-site restoration in Burns Harbor, Indiana

11/9/2015 24 @ArcelorMittalUS

Case study:

On-site restoration in Burns Harbor, Indiana

11/9/2015 25 @ArcelorMittalUS

@ArcelorMittalUS

Case study:

Public-private partnership focus

Public-private partnership

• ArcelorMittal

• US Environmental Protection Agency

• US Fish & Wildlife Service

• USDA Forest Service

• National Fish & Wildlife Foundation

• National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration

Results: Sustain Our Great Lakes

226 grants: $49.0 million

Grantee match: $50.0 million

Total conservation investment: $99.0 million

• ArcelorMittal funding: $5.2 million since 2008

• Remain the single corporate funder on the project

• At the table for all grantmaking decisions

ArcelorMittal’s investment has leveraged

other funding at a ratio of 18:1.

28 11/9/2015 @ArcelorMittalUS

Thank you.

@ArcelorMittalUS

usa.arcelormittal.com

corporate.arcelormittal.com

GLLA NRDA Project Updates

Beth Admire IDEM Office of Land Quality/Natural Resource Damage Co-Trustee

2015 Midwest Environmental Compliance Conference, Chicago

October 29-30, 2015

Marriott Chicago O’Hare

8535 W. Higgins Road

Chicago, IL 60631

Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Ship Canal

Background • 38 km (23 miles) long stream in Northwest Indiana.

• 165 km2 (64 Miles2) drainage area includes the cities

of East Chicago, Gary, Hammond and Whiting,

Indiana.

• Connected to both Lake Michigan and the Illinois

River.

• Globally rare dune and swale ecosystems with

wetlands, forests, savannas and prairies.

• Aquatic Biota – wetland plants well documented, fish

and amphibian records from early 1900s, no benthic

macroinvertebrate data until 1960s.

• Impaired for 12 (originally all 14) of the listed

Beneficial Uses (BUs).

• The entirety designated as failing to meet multiple

Indiana water quality standards.

• CONSUMPTION ADVISORY FOR ALL FISH

FROM THE GCR/IHSC.

Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Ship

Canal Historical Impacts • In 1978, International Joint Commission designated the GCR as one of 43 Areas of Concern

(AOCs) located on and around the Great Lakes.

• Initially listed for all 14 Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) (2 have been removed).

1. Fish/wildlife consumption

2. Tainting of fish/wildlife flavor

3. Degradation fish/wildlife populations

4. Fish tumors/deformities

5. Wildlife deformities, reproduction

6. Degradation of benthos

7. Restrictions on dredging activities

8. Eutrophication or undesirable algae

9. Beach closings

10. Degradation of aesthetics

11. Degradation of phyto/zooplankton

12. Loss of fish and wildlife habitat

Very Quick Intro to Natural Resource Damages

• What are natural resources? “…land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water,

groundwater, drinking water supplies, and other such resources.”

(CERCLA 101(6) and 1001(20))

• What is NRDA? A process for identifying and documenting injuries;

quantifying injuries and losses, selecting restoration projects.

• Authority: Clean Water Act, Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensations and Liability Act (CERCLA), Oil Pollution

Act of 1990).

• Who are the Trustees? State, Federal, Tribal, Foreign.

• Mission and goal: Protect and restore resources that have been

injured by releases of oil or hazardous substances, compensate the

public for lost services.

• Damages are based on cost of restoring, rehabilitating, replacing or

acquiring the equivalent of the damaged resources and diminution in

value of those natural resources pending restoration.

GCR/IHC NRD Settlements

• MIDCo I & MIDCo II – 250 Acres, $200,000

• Ninth Ave. Dump – $28,260

• Energy Cooperative, Inc. – $200,000

• U.S. Steel – Restoration, 248 Acres, $1,000,000 (monitoring)

• Grand Calumet River Restoration Fund – $7,100,000

• Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor – 328 Acres, $63,000,000

• Bankruptcies:

– Uniroyal - $84,500

– US Reduction - $87,549

– LTV - $13,298,963+

IDEM-October 2015-Kevin Miller

Remediation and Restoration Objectives

• WBGCR Reaches 3, 4, and 5

– Source control, removal of CSOs from Johnson and Sohl Avenues

– Remediation of contaminated sediments

• WBGCR Reaches 1 and 2 - Roxana Marsh

– Dredged portions of river and wetlands; capped with suitable materials to

achieve acceptable remediation goals and aquatic habitat feature

– 1.3 river miles and over 25 acres of riverine wetlands

• EBGCR - Kennedy to Cline Avenues

– 1. 8 mile stretch

– Removed abandoned RR and natural gas line

– Dredge, restore, cap portions of the river and wetlands

• Reaches 6 and 7 - Stateline Project

– Removal of contaminated sediment from river and adjacent wetland shelves

West Branch Grand Calumet River

WBGCR Reaches 3,4 &5

• Oct. 2009 – Sept. 2011

• 55,000 cy Excavated

• 94,000 cy Sequestered

• 149,000 cy Remediated

• ~ 2 million pounds contaminated

removed/isolated

• Total cost - $78,782, 232.85

WBGCR - Roxana Marsh

• July 2011 – April 2012

• 232,000 cy Excavated

• 345,000 cy Sequestered

• 577,000 cy Remediated

• ~5 million pounds contaminants

removed/isolated

• $27,573, 781.50

Photo 2013 – by SulTRAC

WBGCR Reach 4 diversion

structure – Great egret

Photo 2013 – by SulTRAC

WBGCR Reach 4 post dredging and CSO basin construction

WBGCR Reaches 1 and 2 – Roxana Marsha

WBGCR – Roxana Marsh GLLA Project

Roxana – Remediation begins Roxana – Restoration in place

Photo 9-18-2012 – by SulTRAC Photo 12-07-2011 – by SulTRAC

East Branch Grand Calumet River

• October 2012-September 2015

• Estimate 1.2 million cy

contaminated sediment remediated

(400,000 removed/800,000 capped)

• ~77 acres riverine wetlands

restored

• Remediation phase started April 22,

2013

• Total cost: ~$84,875,626.81

• Local share: $29,706,469.38

EBGCR – GLLA Project Site

EBGCR – before EBGCR – planned restoration

Photo – 12-7-2011 – by SulTRAC Drawing – 9-28-2012 – by SulTRAC

Photo -2013– by SulTRAC

EBGCR – geotubes pad construction

Photo – 2014– by SulTRAC

EBGCR – dredge

Photo – 2014 – by SulTRAC

EBGCR – dredging and capping wetland D

EBGCR – invasive species control shelf wetlands

Photo – 2014– by SulTRAC

EBGCR – l DuPont NA, Black Tern Site, Seidner, and Beemsterboer

EBGCR – Black Tern Site (fka Resco Marsh)

Photo –2014 – by SulTRAC

EBGCR – Black Tern Site (fka Resco Marsh)

Photo – 2015 – by SulTRAC

EBGCR – killdeer, recently planted/seeded area

Photo – 2015 – by SulTRAC

EBGCR – wetland D seeding/planting

Stateline Project

• PA signed October 9, 2012

• Estimate 82,000 cy contaminated sediment to

remediate (12,000 removed/70,000 capped)

• Remediation scheduled to begin October 2015

• Estimated cost – $14M

Photo – 2014– Wodrich

WBGCR – Stateline GLLA Project Reach 6

Photo – 2014– by Wodrich

WBGCR – Stateline GLLA Project Reach 7

Monitoring Activities in 2013

• 20 sites in the GCR/IHSC and Grand Calumet Lagoons plus one reference site on

the Little Calumet River.

• Fish tissue for contaminants determination.

• Fish community assessments (U.S. Steel sediment remediation reach in the east

branch of the GCR).

• In situ water quality parameters (pH, dissolved oxygen (D.O), % D.O. saturation,

specific conductivity, temperature, turbidity).

• Habitat Quality – QHEI

• Invertebrate community

– Multi-plate artificial substrate samplers (Hester-Dendy).

– Multihabitat (MHAB) shoreline sampling.

• Surficial sediment chemistry

• Sediment toxicity

– Chironomus dilutus – 10-day test at all sites, 58+ day at other.

– Hyalella azteca – 28-day test at all sites, 42-day at remediated sites.

Acknowledgements

• IDEM Office of Legal Counsel

• IDEM Office of Land Quality

• IDEM Office Water Quality

• Indiana Department of Natural Resources

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

• U.S. EPA GLNPO

• Shirley Heinze Land Trust

• The Nature Conservancy

• Save the Dunes Council

Information/Questions

• U.S. Department of Interior NRDAR -

http://www.doi.gov/restoration/index.cfm

• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration DARP -

http://www.darrp.noaa.gov/about/nrda.html

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Superfund -

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/nrd/nrda2.htm

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency – GCR NRDA -

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/es/ec/nrda/GrandCalumetRiver/index.html

• Indiana Department Environmental Management – NRD Program -

www.idem.IN.gov/4131.htm

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – GLLA -

http://www.epa.gov/glla/

• Beth Admire (317) 232-8584 badmire@idem.IN.gov

EMERGING

GREAT LAKES ISSUES Risk and Opportunity for Great Lakes Industry

Midwest Environmental Compliance Conference

Chicago Marriott O’Hare, October 29-30, 2015

Kathryn A. Buckner, President

Council of Great Lakes Industries

OUR MISSION

To promote the economic growth and vitality of the

Great Lakes region in harmony with its human and

natural resources (sustainable development).

63

WHO WE ARE

• Members: US and Canadian industries committed to

sustainable development in the Great Lakes region.

• Purpose: Formed in 1991 to create a “seat at the table”

for industry in regional policy development.

• Tax exempt: Organized under Section 501(c)(6) of the

US Internal Revenue Code.

64

CORE PRINCIPLES

65

Sustainability

Multiple perspectives

Data and science

PRIORITY ISSUES

(1) Excess nutrient discharges

PRIORITY ISSUES

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (Annex 4)

Great Lakes Advisory Board meeting 10/7/15

PRIORITY ISSUES

(2) Aquatic invasive species

• Enter the Great Lakes through

ballast water, canals, trade in live

organisms, recreational vehicles

• 20 out of 180+ non-native species in

the Great Lakes pose risk of

significant harm

• Asian carp, sea lamprey, others

• $$ millions in prevention and

response

• Industries most impacted by AIS

• Power generation

• Sport and commercial fishing

• Industry dependent on shipping

• Industrial facilities that self supply water

• Public municipal water supplies

• Tourism and recreation (boats, beaches, birdwatching)

PRIORITY ISSUES

• Chicago Area Waterway System

• Connects Great Lakes with Mississippi River

• USACE => short-term solution (one-way)

• Advisory Committee => long-term solution

(2-way)

PRIORITY ISSUES

Graphic: www.michigan.gov/dnr

PRIORITY ISSUES

(3) Chemical pollution

Graphic: www.glri.us

Photo: www.cee.mtu.edu

Photo: Alliance for the Great Lakes

PRIORITY ISSUES

• Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (Annex 3)

PRIORITY ISSUES

(4) Energy

Graphic: Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, www.capp.ca

Canadian and US Crude Oil Pipelines – Actual and

Proposed

Photo: Detroit Free Press

Photo: www. blogs.scientificamerican.com

PRIORITY ISSUES

(4) Energy

Ontario Power Generation Bruce Nuclear

Generating Station, Kincardine, ON

Graphic: http://www.stopthegreatlakesnucleardump.com

OPPORTUNITIES

(1) Define and promote the “Blue Economy”

OPPORTUNITIES

(2) Promote regional sustainability

Photo: National Geographic

Photo: www.bluemountaincenter.org Photo: Washington Post Photo: The Detroit News

OPPORTUNITIES

(3) Engage in and inform regional policy development

• Great Lakes are a shared resource.

• Great Lakes governance is complex.

• Numerous issues exist that impact industry.

• Various opportunities to build the regional economy are gaining

traction.

• Industry is a critical voice in these developments.

Council of Great Lakes Industries

Kathryn A. Buckner President

kabuckner@cgli.org

Ana Sirviente, PhD Program Development Director

asirv@cgli.org

Dale K. Phenicie Technical/Project Director

dkphenicie@cgli.org

Amelia Szmansky Member Services

amelia@cgli.org

79

3600 Green Road, Suite 710, Ann Arbor, MI 48105

734-663-1944 | www.cgli.org