Badger Oversight Management Commission

Minutes (320 KB)

                                                    Badger Oversight Management Commission
                                                                       Draft Meeting Recap
                                                                       November 21, 2013

The Badger Oversight Management Commission (BOMC) convened at the Sauk County Law Enforcement Center, for a regular meeting on Thursday, November 21, 2013.

Chair Wenzel called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.  Staff affirmed compliance with Open Meetings Law.

Attendance:

Others Present.  Donna Schmitz, Mary Carol-Solum, Mike Carignan, Craig Schlender, David Sarify-Cox, Curt Meine, Gail Lamberty, Kevin Olson, Jayne Englebert, Craig Caflish, Alison Duff, Dan Stien, Donna Stehling.  

Motion by Will, seconded by Poelma, to adopt the agenda for the September 19, 2013 meeting.  Motion Carried.   

Motion by Poelma, seconded by Will to adopt the amended minutes from the August 15, 2013 meeting.  Motion Carried. 

Public Comment: 

Alison Duff announced a presentation on her BOMC project with the Nelson Environmental Institute, on Tuesday December 3rd at the Sauk City River Arts Building.  Invited everyone to attend.   She introduced Dan Stein as a wildlife biologist interested in connecting/involving students on projects at Badger.   Bill asked that she provide details to Steve. 

Donna Stehling informed BOMC that there is a substitute teacher for Theresa Kreutzman and that they work together.

Presentation:

1.  Presentation by Lori Huntoon, Hydrogeologist.

Lori presented 17 slides about her background and soil and ground water issues in and around the plant.  Explained that one part per billion (ppb) is equivalent to one drop in an Olympic size swimming pool.  She discussed known contaminated areas in the plant and expressed concern that all the contaminants have not been removed.   Provided an example of one of the waste pits.  The top 20 feet was excavated and capped.  The problem is that a minimum of 90 feet of material which was previously identified in Army reports as contaminated remains in place on the site in multiple waste disposal areas.  The concern is that the groundwater is moving through this contaminated material. 

She provided a cross section of the plant that showed bedrock and groundwater movement to the southeast.

She provided a map indicating ground water wells, red indicated sampling was above enforcement standards and blue points indicated sampling points above preventative action limits.  The Army asked and received approval to reduce the frequency of well sampling.  She provided details that showed seasonal fluctuation in water quality that may not show up in annual sampling.  She expressed concern that it was too soon to go to annual sampling.  She stated that her technical review identified   that all the contamination was not fully documented.  The plumes were not consistent.  Natural attenuation was not acceptable because the primary sources of all the contaminants have not been removed.  Also expressed concern that there was no sampling east of the river.  Groundwater can go under the river.  This area should be studied. 

Questions were taken.

Is DNR reducing water sampling?  Less sampling, concerns with what  levels of contaminants could occur in the water wells without detection if sampled annually or in many cases not sampled at all.  Increased detections occurring in wells that had not seen detects of contaminants in years previous.  Concerns that public input not taken on the issue of reduced sampling.

How often should sampling occur?  In order to provide sufficient oversight to protect public health, Sampling should occur quarterly. 

Are there other methods on containment?  Discussed barriers.  Presented an analogy of a landfill without a liner.

How should the soil be removed from the 90 foot waste pit?  Discussed excavation techniques and reasons for not removing all the contaminated material. 

Discussed the plumes.  Not all the contaminants have been found.  Groundwater not defined.  Data not matching up or comparable.   Contamination found in bedrock wells, how did it get in the bedrock? 

She explained that seasonal randomness is common in well sampling.  Expressed the continued need for quarterly sampling with regard to residential water supply wells to ensure public safety.

What are the costs of water sampling?  Discussed costs and variables.

Discussed the contamination at the waste pits.  Would have to excavate a large area to remove all contaminated material.  Concerns that not all the contaminants removed.  Contaminants still in place.

Discussed other options to excavation.  More engineering needed. In situ treatments discussed.   Discussion that the analysis of all six isomers of DNT is needed to define extent of contaminants in the soil, and to evaluate the sources of the concentrations of the minor isotopes that have been detected in the groundwater.  Current contaminant concentration maps are needed, comparing monitoring wells and water supply wells with similar screened depths.

Laura will make Lori’s report available.

New Business – Commissioner Reports:

1.  Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.   DNR lands will be open for the deer gun season, no limit on numbers, and no sign in required, like last year.  Dairy forage(USDA) grounds not open for hunting.  Signs will be up.

Concrete Slab testing discussed and material brought to landfill.  Soils sampling followed standard procedures.

Snowmobile trail discussed.

Plan for disposal of asbestos?  DNR will go through private contractor for disposal.   Contaminated areas are fenced may be opened up some day.  Other landfills will have a management plan.  DNR has a map of contaminated areas.  Hunting map will show closed areas because of safety concerns.  Gene reminded the DNR that the  Army is responsible for future contamination, not DNR.  Gene asked the DNR to review details of agreement.  John talked about comments.

John, DNR, presented 2 handouts .  One a summary of public comments and the other a summary of public input.    Summary matches up with what everyone has read in the paper.  6 pages of summary.  Comments about conflicts and the master plan.  Concerns voiced over skipping steps.  John: DNR  will not miss steps.  Preferred alternative same as master plan.  Will be a detailed plan and impacts.  Next step is an initial draft plan.  30 day comment period should be longer, ample time for comment.  DNR will hold future meetings on plan.   Alternative 4 was considered.  Next step is the draft plan to be introduced in spring of 2014.  Don summarized; public comment period, 2 days of public meetings, then a master plan draft reviewing comments and make adjustments.  Posted to Resource Board  30 days before board meeting.  Then final draft to the DNR Board. 

Shooting range and ATV track in plans for future?  Will public input include these topics?  DNR did not know. 

Discussed Mark Aquino’s  position on badger plans.  Concerns that BOMC not being heard.  The Sauk County Board voted for the Reuse plan.   

Discussed how the name “Sauk Prairie Rec. Area” came about.   Part of a definition?  John said the the department must designate land into a category.  A rec area is different than a park.  A rec area is  unique in that it can establish zones and control the number of people in those zones.  Allows for a better experience.  A rec area can allow for multiple use zones.   Each zone can be classified and have different land managements.  Normally, the management is focused on habitat.

Gail thanked John and had one request.  She is not familiar with the terms discussed regarding the plan.  Her request was to have John outline the steps for creating a plan.    John will create the steps for the process and  forward to Bill and Sauk County.

Question, does the Bong Rec area  allow for shooting ranges ?  John, yes.  How many rec areas allow shooting ranges or ATV trails?  Discussed, unsure.  Questions on the process.   Discussed how to present the plan.   John, some people will be disappointed , can’t make everyone happy.  Dave,  BOMC a perfect venue to communicate ideas.  Dave asked the  DNR come back to the Commission on what direction the DNR is going.  Too much time invested.  Dave again inquired, what direction is the DNR going?  BOMC wants to know the direction first. 

Gene explained the BOMC legal framework of the Commission (BOMC) which the DNR is part of.  DNR  also has a responsibility to  come back to BOMC.  Gene recommended the DNR  read the  Bylaws and keep BOMC posted and come back to the group.

Multiple people speaking wanting the  DNR to follow BOMC plan.  BOMC wants to be a partner.  Pleas to follow Badger reuse plan and  take the comments  to John’s superiors on maintaining the partnership.  

Donna Stehling: We have 15 years invested in the Badger reuse plan.  Should not be a free for all at this point.  The BOMC wants to work with the DNR. 

Gene: The MOU is in place.

2.  Town of Merrimac.   No one present, no report.

3.  Town of Sumpter.   No one present, no report.

4. Ho-Chunk.   Randy stated that Ho-Chunk was reviewing road conditions and locations.  Status has not changed.  BIA direction uncertain, comments or support from BOMC most likely would not be useful.

5. Sauk County.  No Report

New Business – Committee Reports: 

1.  Executive and Finance.  No Report.

2.  Planning and Land Use.  No report.

3.  Education and Outreach.   No report.

4.  Ad Hoc Committees.    No report.

New Business – Stakeholder Reports: 

Bluffview Sanitary District.  No one present, no report.

Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger (CSWAB).     Laura, had one thing to report, private well testing.  The Army submitted a well testing plan in May and received plan approval in September from the DNR.   This plan received no public comment.  No public outreach.   She was disappointed.   Of the   75 wells tested,  55 will be tested less frequently, of those, 25 will not be tested at all.  Concerns that less frequent testing will be harmful to those residents affected since test results have varied seasonally.   Laura noted ground water exceeded limits outside of landfill.   Certain Department staff told not to talk to Laura.  Discussion on who from the DNR said not to talk to Laura.  She feels targeted.  She appealed to the EPA and to Representative Pocan’s office.  Laura asked the DNR  for clarification.  No discussions in the  community about well testing.  No public process for people who drink and use this water.  Disrespect for the people with private well water.  Laura: people I know affected. 

Sauk Prairie Conservation Alliance (SPCA).  Dave provided a follow up to Alison Duff’s request to attend the Final Badger AAP Project Results, Tuesday, December 3rd , 6:30 pm, at the River Arts Center Gallery.

Wisconsin Wildlife Federation (WWF).   Don mentioned he had 2014 calendars.

Badger History Group (BHG). No report.

City of Baraboo.  No report.

UW-Baraboo/Sauk County.  No report.

New Business – Liaison Reports: 

1.  Army.   No Report. 

2.  USDA.    Rick explained USDA policy not to allow deer hunting on their property.

Other New Business Items: 

1.Continued discussion of the strategic planning/paid BOMC administrator/budget priorities.  Bill met with Brian Simmert and Kathy Schauf.  Asked for their thoughts.  Dave stated concensus needed  to begin the process to look at future of role of BOMC.  How will we achieve mission?  Begin to facilitate education and outreach.  Need to start rolling on things,  begin to develop budgets, see financial reports.  Need to know allowed activities.  Start talking about projects.  Create  brochures.  Look at endangered species.  Lot of things we can be doing.  Lots to be done.  Let’s get going.  Group discussion of funding restrains,  what restrictions are on the funding?  Start applying funds towards projects.  Discussed projects.  Need overall direction.  Need outline on how to proceed.  Start talking on future projects.  Bill not ready to act,  other work needs to be completed.  Bill, the Master plan is still one year away.  Gene, let’s start the discussion of  projects before  the master plan is adopted.  Have projects ready to go once the plan is adopted.  Need to be ahead of the game.  Discussion on how the  BOMC fits in to get things done.   Donna described working  with various students at Badger and need for supplies and learning materials.

2.Update on Chair Wenzel’s interview with BOMC members.   

3.Discussion and possible action to allow the Sauk County Pheasants Forever Chapter 97 to become a member of the Badger Oversight Management Commission, as a stakeholder.  Bill read Craig’s letter and addendum letter.  Craig’s organization creates and restores grassland habitat for upland game birds, grassland nesting birds and other wildlife .   Happy with the reuse plan.  Large undertaking to get rid of invasives and restore to prairie.  Educational opportunities.  Outdoor activities for youth,  6-17 years old.  Potential conflicts discussed and no conflicts found.  Full support of National organization.  Bill asked for discussion.  Should have vote by commissioners.  Called for the vote.  Written request of mission in support of reuse plan.  Other stake holders had to follow.  Consistent process?  Must be sensitive to the reuse process.  Read  Bylaws of stakeholders.  Charter to implement reuse plan.  A motion by Will to have Sauk County Pheasants Forever Chapter 97, (Craig Schlender, President) become a stakeholder member of the Badger Oversight Management Commission, seconded by Randy.   Motion carried unanimously.    See goals described in the MOU and the Intergovernmental agreement to the commission for authority to appoint.

4.  Next meeting date.   January 16th, 3rd Thursday, 6:00 pm.   Sauk County Law Enforcement Center.

5.  Public Comment.  People welcomed Craig.  Kurt public input discussion.  New group to table because of goals of reuse plan.  Committed.  Goal is the reuse plan. 

Motion to adjourn by Randy, seconded by Will Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:12 pm.   

Minutes by Steve Sorenson