transmittal email for third modification to south …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. after...

67
From: Catri, Cindy Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 6:00 PM To: 'Bill White' Cc: 'Chet Myers'; 'Jay Borkland'; 'Christopher Morris'; Dierker, Carl; Owens, James T.; Lombardo, Ginny; Williams, Ann; Tisa, Kimberly; Marsh, Michael; Colarusso, Phil; LeClair, Jacqueline; O'Neil, Kelsey Subject: RE: Third Modification of South Terminal Attachments: Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS # 565833 2 of 2.pdf Sorry, here’s the attachment. From: Catri, Cindy Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 5:48 PM To: Bill White Cc: 'Chet Myers'; Jay Borkland; Christopher Morris; Dierker, Carl; Owens, James T.; Lombardo, Ginny; Williams, Ann; Tisa, Kimberly; Marsh, Michael; Colarusso, Phil; LeClair, Jacqueline; O'Neil, Kelsey Subject: Third Modification of South Terminal Here’s part 2 of the Third Modification to EPA’s Final Determination for the South Terminal Project. 1

Upload: others

Post on 09-Feb-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

From Catri Cindy Sent Tuesday September 30 2014 600 PM To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Jay Borkland Christopher Morris Dierker Carl Owens James T Lombardo

Ginny Williams Ann Tisa Kimberly Marsh Michael Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline ONeil Kelsey

Subject RE Third Modification of South Terminal Attachments Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2pdf

Sorry herersquos the attachment

From Catri Cindy Sent Tuesday September 30 2014 548 PM To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Jay Borkland Christopher Morris Dierker Carl Owens James T Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Tisa Kimberly Marsh Michael Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline ONeil Kelsey Subject Third Modification of South Terminal

Herersquos part 2 of the Third Modification to EPArsquos Final Determination for the South Terminal Project

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 1

Sediment Volume and Disposal Locations

Destination of Dredged

Material

Material to be Dredged E Qj

t 0 z 1 ao 9 1 ~ middotshy ao 0 middotshy0 ~

1a -s I 0

VI 1 ao 9 1 ~ i 0 0 middotshy0 ~

c t

middoto z 0

~ ~ ~ 1

0 -~ a 1

~ ~ OLU

0

5 0 = -e ~ r c Qj 0

~~ ou

~ 0

5 0 a 0

OU-3 Hot-Spot

Capping

Mitigation Area 92500 - 92500 Disposal

Offshore at

CCDSRISDS 15000 92500 90000 122000 319500

Winter Flounder

Mitigation Area 60000 12000 2000 146500 220500 New Bedford

Marine

Commerce

Terminal 8000 7000 134000 149000 Former

Dartmouth

Finishing Site - 45800 45800 Capping of CAD

Cell1 27500 - 27500 Disposal at CAD

Cell2 27000 6900 33900 Disposal at CAD

Cell3 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 2500 8500 239600 Capping of

Borrow Pit CAD

Cell 25500 25500

Totals 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 10500 90500 65000 274300 92500 27000 6900 236500 122000 1153800

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 2

Major Federal Substantive Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

(ARARs)

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requiremen~s Table 2

ARARs for EPAs Third Modification to the South Terminal Project1

Federal Requirement2 Status Synopsis Action to be Taken Clean Water Act Sec 404 (33 USC sect 1344) 40 CFR Part 230 Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material ( 40 CF R Part 230231 and 33 CFR Parts

320-323)

Applicable Prohibits discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the US except in compliance with the requirements of the sect 404(b )( 1) guidelines

EPA has re-evaluated the impacts of additional dredging and blasting pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the inforniation provided in those submittals EPA has determined that 404(b )( 1) guidelines will be met as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC sect403 et seq 33 CFR Parts 320-323) Section 10

Applicable Prohibits the obstruction or alternation of any navigable water of the US except as authorized after a finding that the activity is not contrary to the public interest

EPA has re-evaluated the Public Safety requirement of section 1 0 for impacts from the additional blasting After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the information provided

1 Only those ARARs modified by this Third Modification are included all other ARARs identified in ARARs - Table 2 in the Final Determination are still in effect

This Table includes all major federal substantive requirements (ARARsTBCs) related to this Third Modification to the Final Determination Additional federal requirements have also been identified and are included in the Administrative-Record for this Project State substantive requirements are referenced separately in the Administrative Record and can also be found in Appendix D to the Final Determination Finally some federal requirements are implemented by the State These are referenced in the Administrative Record middot

2

1

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 2: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 1

Sediment Volume and Disposal Locations

Destination of Dredged

Material

Material to be Dredged E Qj

t 0 z 1 ao 9 1 ~ middotshy ao 0 middotshy0 ~

1a -s I 0

VI 1 ao 9 1 ~ i 0 0 middotshy0 ~

c t

middoto z 0

~ ~ ~ 1

0 -~ a 1

~ ~ OLU

0

5 0 = -e ~ r c Qj 0

~~ ou

~ 0

5 0 a 0

OU-3 Hot-Spot

Capping

Mitigation Area 92500 - 92500 Disposal

Offshore at

CCDSRISDS 15000 92500 90000 122000 319500

Winter Flounder

Mitigation Area 60000 12000 2000 146500 220500 New Bedford

Marine

Commerce

Terminal 8000 7000 134000 149000 Former

Dartmouth

Finishing Site - 45800 45800 Capping of CAD

Cell1 27500 - 27500 Disposal at CAD

Cell2 27000 6900 33900 Disposal at CAD

Cell3 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 2500 8500 239600 Capping of

Borrow Pit CAD

Cell 25500 25500

Totals 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 10500 90500 65000 274300 92500 27000 6900 236500 122000 1153800

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 2

Major Federal Substantive Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

(ARARs)

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requiremen~s Table 2

ARARs for EPAs Third Modification to the South Terminal Project1

Federal Requirement2 Status Synopsis Action to be Taken Clean Water Act Sec 404 (33 USC sect 1344) 40 CFR Part 230 Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material ( 40 CF R Part 230231 and 33 CFR Parts

320-323)

Applicable Prohibits discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the US except in compliance with the requirements of the sect 404(b )( 1) guidelines

EPA has re-evaluated the impacts of additional dredging and blasting pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the inforniation provided in those submittals EPA has determined that 404(b )( 1) guidelines will be met as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC sect403 et seq 33 CFR Parts 320-323) Section 10

Applicable Prohibits the obstruction or alternation of any navigable water of the US except as authorized after a finding that the activity is not contrary to the public interest

EPA has re-evaluated the Public Safety requirement of section 1 0 for impacts from the additional blasting After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the information provided

1 Only those ARARs modified by this Third Modification are included all other ARARs identified in ARARs - Table 2 in the Final Determination are still in effect

This Table includes all major federal substantive requirements (ARARsTBCs) related to this Third Modification to the Final Determination Additional federal requirements have also been identified and are included in the Administrative-Record for this Project State substantive requirements are referenced separately in the Administrative Record and can also be found in Appendix D to the Final Determination Finally some federal requirements are implemented by the State These are referenced in the Administrative Record middot

2

1

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 3: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Destination of Dredged

Material

Material to be Dredged E Qj

t 0 z 1 ao 9 1 ~ middotshy ao 0 middotshy0 ~

1a -s I 0

VI 1 ao 9 1 ~ i 0 0 middotshy0 ~

c t

middoto z 0

~ ~ ~ 1

0 -~ a 1

~ ~ OLU

0

5 0 = -e ~ r c Qj 0

~~ ou

~ 0

5 0 a 0

OU-3 Hot-Spot

Capping

Mitigation Area 92500 - 92500 Disposal

Offshore at

CCDSRISDS 15000 92500 90000 122000 319500

Winter Flounder

Mitigation Area 60000 12000 2000 146500 220500 New Bedford

Marine

Commerce

Terminal 8000 7000 134000 149000 Former

Dartmouth

Finishing Site - 45800 45800 Capping of CAD

Cell1 27500 - 27500 Disposal at CAD

Cell2 27000 6900 33900 Disposal at CAD

Cell3 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 2500 8500 239600 Capping of

Borrow Pit CAD

Cell 25500 25500

Totals 8600 10500 2000 118500 89000 10500 90500 65000 274300 92500 27000 6900 236500 122000 1153800

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 2

Major Federal Substantive Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

(ARARs)

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requiremen~s Table 2

ARARs for EPAs Third Modification to the South Terminal Project1

Federal Requirement2 Status Synopsis Action to be Taken Clean Water Act Sec 404 (33 USC sect 1344) 40 CFR Part 230 Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material ( 40 CF R Part 230231 and 33 CFR Parts

320-323)

Applicable Prohibits discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the US except in compliance with the requirements of the sect 404(b )( 1) guidelines

EPA has re-evaluated the impacts of additional dredging and blasting pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the inforniation provided in those submittals EPA has determined that 404(b )( 1) guidelines will be met as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC sect403 et seq 33 CFR Parts 320-323) Section 10

Applicable Prohibits the obstruction or alternation of any navigable water of the US except as authorized after a finding that the activity is not contrary to the public interest

EPA has re-evaluated the Public Safety requirement of section 1 0 for impacts from the additional blasting After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the information provided

1 Only those ARARs modified by this Third Modification are included all other ARARs identified in ARARs - Table 2 in the Final Determination are still in effect

This Table includes all major federal substantive requirements (ARARsTBCs) related to this Third Modification to the Final Determination Additional federal requirements have also been identified and are included in the Administrative-Record for this Project State substantive requirements are referenced separately in the Administrative Record and can also be found in Appendix D to the Final Determination Finally some federal requirements are implemented by the State These are referenced in the Administrative Record middot

2

1

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 4: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Table 2

Major Federal Substantive Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

(ARARs)

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requiremen~s Table 2

ARARs for EPAs Third Modification to the South Terminal Project1

Federal Requirement2 Status Synopsis Action to be Taken Clean Water Act Sec 404 (33 USC sect 1344) 40 CFR Part 230 Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material ( 40 CF R Part 230231 and 33 CFR Parts

320-323)

Applicable Prohibits discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the US except in compliance with the requirements of the sect 404(b )( 1) guidelines

EPA has re-evaluated the impacts of additional dredging and blasting pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the inforniation provided in those submittals EPA has determined that 404(b )( 1) guidelines will be met as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC sect403 et seq 33 CFR Parts 320-323) Section 10

Applicable Prohibits the obstruction or alternation of any navigable water of the US except as authorized after a finding that the activity is not contrary to the public interest

EPA has re-evaluated the Public Safety requirement of section 1 0 for impacts from the additional blasting After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the information provided

1 Only those ARARs modified by this Third Modification are included all other ARARs identified in ARARs - Table 2 in the Final Determination are still in effect

This Table includes all major federal substantive requirements (ARARsTBCs) related to this Third Modification to the Final Determination Additional federal requirements have also been identified and are included in the Administrative-Record for this Project State substantive requirements are referenced separately in the Administrative Record and can also be found in Appendix D to the Final Determination Finally some federal requirements are implemented by the State These are referenced in the Administrative Record middot

2

1

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 5: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requiremen~s Table 2

ARARs for EPAs Third Modification to the South Terminal Project1

Federal Requirement2 Status Synopsis Action to be Taken Clean Water Act Sec 404 (33 USC sect 1344) 40 CFR Part 230 Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites for Dredged or Fill Material ( 40 CF R Part 230231 and 33 CFR Parts

320-323)

Applicable Prohibits discharges of dredge or fill material into waters of the US except in compliance with the requirements of the sect 404(b )( 1) guidelines

EPA has re-evaluated the impacts of additional dredging and blasting pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the inforniation provided in those submittals EPA has determined that 404(b )( 1) guidelines will be met as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 USC sect403 et seq 33 CFR Parts 320-323) Section 10

Applicable Prohibits the obstruction or alternation of any navigable water of the US except as authorized after a finding that the activity is not contrary to the public interest

EPA has re-evaluated the Public Safety requirement of section 1 0 for impacts from the additional blasting After careful review of the Commonwealths submittals and based on the information provided

1 Only those ARARs modified by this Third Modification are included all other ARARs identified in ARARs - Table 2 in the Final Determination are still in effect

This Table includes all major federal substantive requirements (ARARsTBCs) related to this Third Modification to the Final Determination Additional federal requirements have also been identified and are included in the Administrative-Record for this Project State substantive requirements are referenced separately in the Administrative Record and can also be found in Appendix D to the Final Determination Finally some federal requirements are implemented by the State These are referenced in the Administrative Record middot

2

1

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 6: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements in those submittals EPA has determined that the Project meets these requirements as long as the conditions and mitigation measures set out in the Final Determination as modified and this Third Modification are met

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 15 USC sect2601 et seq PCB Remediation Waste ( 40

CFR sect76161(c))

Applicable This section of TSCA provides risk-based cleanup and disposat options for PCB remediation waste based on the risks posed by the concentrations at which the PCBs are found

EPA has determined that disposal of the identified additional lt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment as long as the conditions in the Second Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix E of the Third Modification) are met

Navigation and Navigable Applicable Unlawful for any person to Additional dredging and blasting Waters 33 USC 408 impair the usefulness of any sea

wall bulkhead jetty dike levee wharf pier or other work built by the United States unless permission is granted based upon a determination that such occupation or use will not be injurious to the public interest

will not adversely affect the hurricane barrier as long as the conditions in this Third Modification are met

2

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 7: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSbt f R taJor e era u san 1ve eqmremen s Endangered Species Act Applicable Species currently listed on the EPA has re-initiated consultation to 16 USC 1531 et seq Endangered Species list could

potentially be affected by the Project

evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting EPA has concluded for the reasons discussed in the Third Modification that while the Project including the additional impacts may affect the Atlantic

sturgeon as long as the Commonwealth fully implements all the conditions set out in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and mitigation measures it is unlikely to adversely affect the species The National Marine Fisheries Service concurred with EPAs conclusion andreshyinitiation of consultation was not necessary

Essential Fish Habitat Applicable This Act establishes procedures EPA has re-initiated consultation Assessment under the designed to identify conserve with NMFS to evaluate the impacts Magnuson-Stevens Act 16 and enhance essential fish of additional dredging and blasting USC sectsect 1851 et seq habitat for those species

regulated under a federal fisheries management plan Consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service must be conducted

EPA has determined that the additional impacts would not have a significant effect on EFH provided that the Commonwealth complies with the conditions in the Final Determination as modified and the Third Modification and fully implements all of the proposed minimization and mitigation_

3

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 8: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Mo4ification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Major Federal Substantive Requirements measures NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Applicable The Act requires consultation EPA re-initiated consultation with Act 16 USC sect661-677e with the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) andor the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as appropriate and the fish and wildlife service of the state to be undertaken for the purpose ofpreventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources

NMFS under this Act to evaluate the impacts of additional dredging and blasting on fish and wildlife resources protected by FWCA EPA concluded the additional impacts would not have a significant adverse effect on the fish and wildlife resources provided that the mitigation measures included in the Final Determination as modified and the conditions included in the Third Modification are satisfied NMFS concurred with EPAs conclusions and re-initiation of consultation was not necessary

National Historic Preservation Act 16 USC sect470 36 CFR Part 800

Applicable

Section 1 06 of the Act requires that Federal agencies consider in consultation with other interested parties the effects of their undertakings on historic properties prior to the undertaking and determine whether the undertaking adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect

EPA reviewed the Commonwealths submissions and determined that the undertaking would not alter EPAs determination set forth in Appendix G of the Final Determination that the work described in the Third Modification will not affect historic properties

4

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 9: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification For South Terminal Project Table 2 New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

M Fd lSb RaJor e era u stantlve eqmrements

these properties The following properties were identified two paleosols a shipwreck and the Palmer Island Light Station

Executive Order 12898 shy To Be Considered The Executive Order among Certain areas located within or Federal Actions to Address other things requires to the along the truck access route (Route Environmental Justice in greatest extent practicable each 18) have been identified as Minority Populations and Low- Federal agency to identify and environmental justice areas Traffic Income Populations 59 Fed address as appropriate noise and air impacts are expected Reg 7629 (Feb 16 1994)

-

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its prognims policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations and to ensure such programs policies and activities are conducted in a manner that ensures that such programs middotpolicies and activities do not have the effect of subjecting persons (including populations) to discrimination because of their race color or national ongm _

to be minimal however the Project Construction Management Plan includes measures to minimize construction-related impacts A 1500 foot perimeter around the blasting areas has been delineated Vibrations from blasting impacts are expected to be minimal and adequate public safety measures including notice requirements and vibration monitors are contained in the Project Operational Blasting Plan

5

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 10: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix A

Cover email to the Commonwealths September 25 2014 Submission

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 11: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Catri Cindy

From Chet Myers ltcmyersapexcoscomgt Sent Thursday September 25 2014 313PM To Catri Cindy Bill White Cc Dierker Carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair

Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject RE Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening Attachments Haii-MCEC letter for EPA PDF Attachment 0- Areas of Increased Environmentallmpactpdf

E-Mail from Ed Leblanc- USCG pdf Attachment B - COMMISSIONER 03 LETTER TO EPAshySOUTH CHANNELpdf middot

Hi Cindy

Sorry Doing the best we can

Attached please find the access letter to the Radio Tower property owned by Hall Communications (for la

As you stated we have submitted information for lb

For Item 2 If you reference Attachment 0 from MassCECs 72514 initial submission to EPA (attached then approximately 22000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the dark blue and light blue areas and placed into CAD Cell 3 Approximately 2000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the northern end of the orangegold area and approximately 5000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the red area and placed into CAD Cell 3

For Item 3 The jurisdictional issue appears to be slightly complicated We present the response from the USCG on the issue (email from Mr Ed Leblanc USCG is attached

For Item 4 The letter and supporting runs provided by Captain Bushy (attached to MassCECs September 12 20141etter to EPA support that the vessel can be brought into and exited from the facility safely Captain Bushy stated that I can report that with a high degree of confidence that an adequate margin of safety exists in the proposed wider channel under the conditions referenced above and thereby recommend regulatory approval and construction of the widened channel to proceed The supporting documentation shows modeled docking passages within the revised 300 foot wide channel The runs show a 300 foot wide deep-draft channel dredged to -30 MLLW The docking is conducted utilizing two tugs on the bow of the boat (the Reliance and the Resolute) and a tug on at the stern of the boat (the Rainbow There are 8 runs Each run begins with a sheet the Pilot completed assessing any issues with the run the printouts are then sequential backing runs would show the berthing area on the first page and show areas further from the berth on the second page approaching runs would show the areas further form the berth on the first page and show the berth on the last page if the run was completed

Of the runs included with Captain Bushys letter five of eight runs were backing runs (backing from the terminal to the Federal Turning Basin and three of the runs were approaching the berth The runs were successful if the vessel remained within the 300 foot wide channel Based on the results of these runs Captain Bushy has concluded that the methodology for approaching and departing the terminal based on the 300 foot wide channel contains an adequate margin of safety given certain environmental parameters Environmental parameters are set for every vessel entering any port and include time of day tide conditions current conditions and wind conditions

Given these restrictions (which are specific to but nonetheless normal for any vessel and any port) Captain Bushy believes that the vessel can be brought to and taken from the berth safely If the vessel could not safely back a turning basin would be required This condition was noted in previous letters from the Northeast Pilots Association Captain Bushy is aware of the statements made by the Pilots in these letters but has stated that the adjustments made by

1

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 12: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

MassCEC are sufficient Therefore Captain Bushy is not recommending a turning basin nor does MassCEC believe that a turning basin is necessary

For Item 5 We are still working on the first blasting report We apologize for its delay but hope to get a copy of it out to EPA today or tomorrow

Thanks

Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA 0211 o

if APEX

0) 617-728-0070 x5411 M) 617-908-5778

Follow Apex on tand Like us on il Privacy Notice This message and any attachment(s) hereto are intended solely for the individual(s) listed in the masthead This message may contain information that is privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure Any review dissemination or use of this message or its contents by persons other than the addressee(s) is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful If you have received this message in error please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the message from your system Thank you

From catri Cindy [mailtocatriCynthiaepagov] Sent Thursday September 25 2014 937AM To Chet Myers Bill White Cc Dierker carl Williams Ann Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny LeClair Jacqueline Colarusso Phil Subject FW Additional Information Requested - Channel Widening

We need the information below as soon as possibleany idea when you will provide it (Note we have received the revised workplan for the Radio Tower parcel (lb below) and are in the process of reviewing it)

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday September 17 2014 506PM To Chet Myers Cc Bill White Dierker Carl Marsh Michael Tisa Kimberly Lombardo Ginny Williams Ann Colarusso Phil LeClair Jacqueline Subject Additional Information Requested -Channel Widening

Hi Chet

Thanks for taking the time today to discuss MassCECs September 12 2014 submission As a follow-up from tha discussion below is the additional information EPA requested

1 With regard to the Radio Tower parcel a EPA is still waiting for some documentation showing site control or a grant of access to MassCEC and b A revision of the Radio Tower Remedial Work Plan that includes EPAs most recent comments (provided

on 8282014) and new provisions that discuss the changed use of the Radio Tower parcel from an ancillary property to one that will support high loading capacity and the components of the cap that will be placed on that property Also please describe how this parcel will be integrated with the main terminal facility You were also going to check whether or not RCRA hazardous waste was present on the property and if so how it would be managed

2 Please provide a breakdown in cubic yards of the various source areas of the 30000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that will be disposed of in CAD cell 3

2

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 13: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

3 A clarification of both the Coast Guard and the Northeast Pilots role in setting conditions for vessel use of the navigational channels

4 A summary of the modelling results including how those results support Captain Bushys conclusion that a 300 foot wide channel provides an adequate margin of safety assuming all conditions set by the proper authority (Coast GuardPilots) are met and that support the conclusion that no southern turning basin although requested by the Pilots is necessary Also please confirm that the model runs included in the September 12 middot2014 submission are for a 300 foot wide channel at -30 MLLW

5 A summary of the results of the most recent blasting event authorized by EPA on August 20 2014

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 14: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix B

EPAs August 20 2014 Approval with Conditions for Additional Blasting

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 15: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region 1

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 BostonMA 02109-3912

Via Electronic Mail bwhiteMassCECcom and bull I bull

First-Ciass Mail

I

August 20 2014

Bill White Director Offshoremiddotwind Sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 53 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Req~est for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting NewBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhanced Remedy- SOuth Termi11al Project

DearMr White

EPA has r~viewed MassCECs request dated July 25 2014 for additional dredging and blasting activities to widen the currently authorized 225 footwide channel to 300 feet with a uniform depth of l3o MLLW and to eliminate the currently authorized 100 foot wide tug channel1

MassCEC has also requested that the blasting associatedwith the expanded middotchanmiddotnel work be conducted prior to September 1 2014 ftnseveral reasons including the continued presence of blasting equjpment in the area the fact that clean overburden material has not yet been dredged vyitllln the proposed blasting areas and the project con~ruction schedule

Given the compressed time period EPA agre~d to ~evlew the requested modification in two phases with a review of blasting first provided that MassCEC submitted sufficent information for EPA tomiddot determine that without further dredging the requested blasting actlvi~ies assodate~ withthe expanded channel Will not result in greater depth or Width in the channel beyond tt1at which is already authorized by EPA in its Second Modification On Allgust 14 2014 MassCEC provided further inforniation and based on that informatio~ a~d as explained below EPA has determined that the requested blastingwiU not alter the currently authori~ed channel configuration This letter representS EPAs deterliiin(iltion only as to the blasting portion of~he request EPA is reserving its cfetermination asmiddot to the addltjonal drecfging portion

1 The 225 foot wide chan11el and 100 foot wide tug channel were authorized in EPAs Second Modiflqrtton ofthe South Termina~Project issued on September 30 2012 middot middot middot

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 16: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

of MassCECsmiddot request A subsequent determination as to the expanded dredging request will be issued ata later date

Because the requested blasting will occur during certain time periods of restricted in-water work established to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) concerning this request

In its submissions MassCEC describes the additional blasting to be conducted in ~reaslocated completelywithin the authorized navigational channel the tug channel and associated side slopes of those channels Blasting is proposed in two areas along the western side of the navigational channel and in one larger area in the tug channel with several smaller areas located in the southeast corner of the tug channeL A m~p of the blasting areas is attached as Attachment 1 The average thickness of the rock is approximately three feet with approximately eight feet at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume ofthe rock ~o be removed is approximately 3000 cubic yards over an area of approximately 27000 square feet It is anticipated that the blasting will require approximately 60to 80 holes and that each hole will be loaded within a range depending on the actualmiddotdepth of rock from approxirriately68 to 82 pounds with a maximum charge weight per delay limited to 136 pounds The entire blasting event is estimated to be completed in thrE1e to five days but could take up to one week The request goes on to state that this blasting is necessary to enable the widening and deepening of the approach channel through future dredging if authorized middot

To ~ccommodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review of the blasting request and coordination with NMFS EPA forwarded MassCEcs July 252014 submission toNMFS while EPA conducted its own review of the July ~5 and August 14 2014 submissions which included weekly blasting reports and monitoring results from blasting events in 2013 and 2014

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS E~A has determined that the proposed bla~ing alth()Ugh larg~r than the single event that occurred in March 2014 is smaller than the series of blasts that MasseuroEC conducted in the winter of 2013 In addition the proposed blastin~ will occur in the same general area as the 2013 blasting although one of the proposed areasmiddotwithin the tug channel is approximately 66 feet closer to Palmer Island light Station and another within the tug channel is approximately 56 feet closer to the monitoring station on Palmers Island (both are within a 1300 foot radius of the proposed blasting event)

The Commonwealth has proposed that blasting occur prior to September 1 EPA has determined thatblasting during this period andinto the early part of September has the middot potentiJI to impact the outward migration middotof anadromous fish and the endangered Atlantic sturgeon w_ich may be foraging in the area Boththe 2013 and 2014 blasting events whichshyalso had potfmtial impacts to aquatic llfe2 were conducted in accordance wit~ requirements for1

2 The 2013 blasting event _occurred from October 2013 through January 2014 also a time period during which outward migrating anadromous fish may be present in the Acushnet River etnd the Atlantic sturgeon may bjmiddot

2

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 17: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 202014

a fish d~errent system a fisheries observer on site and middotmonitoring formiddotfishpre- and postshyblasting~ In addition all ~ntaminated sedimentwas remcved prior to ble~sting but clean overburden material remained in place during blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was obs~rved as a result of those blasts To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevens andtheFish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) th~ fish deterrent middotsystem (includingsilt and bubble curtains) fisheries observer e~nd monitoring planmiddot must be in placemiddotand the dean ovetbJJrden must remain in place during blasting EPA believes that middot additional controls are not we~rranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to minimize impacts to EFH By email dated August 18 ~014 NMFS agreesmiddotthat no additiOnal consultation on EFH is necessary (Attachment 2) Though Atlantic sturgeon could be presentmiddotin the Acushnet River EPA believes a re-initiation of the Erdangered Species Consultation is not warranteq as this activity ~ould riot poseany risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS Wemiddotbasethis conclusion on the acoustic~modeling results including the Commonwealth~s confirmation ofthe acoustic modeling results as it applies to itsmiddotcu~rent requestJor blasting 3 the prior successful (no significant fish mortalitY) biastil1g events the continue~ presence of clean overburdenand the continued use ofafish deterrent syStem (including silt and bubble curtains) fishery observersmiddot and the monitoring for the presence of fish pre- and post- blasting By email dated August 15 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs conclusions and concluded that no further consultationmiddot or coordination is nece5sary See Attachment 3

EPA also reViewed the Vibrationsrecorded in the blaSting reports taken pursuantto the Vibration Monitoring Program during the 2013 and 2014 blasting events AIJ readings fromshybothevelitswere below the allowablelimitsmiddotfor historic residential ancf other structures middot (including Palmer Island Light Station and the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document

Because Qf the shi~ lf1 two prQposed bla~ing locations closer to the Light StCition and ~he Vibration ~onitor e~nd because the JSOO blasting r~dius has now moved-2QO feet further north4 inclusive of Palmers Isfan~ EPA requestecf MassCElt to eith~rmiddotupdatemiddotor confirm the information and conclusiqns reached by GZA its contractor in its September 11 2013 memo concerning the anticipated impact of the additional proposed blasting on the Palmer Island Ught_Station5 Using adjusted factors based on the actual monitoring data GZA calculated the anticlpatecf vibration levels at the Light Station for the prqposed blasting to range from 009

middotforaging in the area The 2014 blasting e~nt occurred on March 24 2014 during the spawning season of winter ~~- 3 See respon~e to EPA question No6 in letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscec to Elaine Stanley

EPA middot 4 See AttachmentF of letter dateciAugust 14 2014 from Bill White MaS5CEt to Elaine Stanley EPA 5 GZAmiddotinmiddotits Septer11ber 11 2013 memorandum (AR 549037) estimated the maximum estimatd ~bration or peak particle velocity (PPv) was 0034 inches per second (insec) for the 2013blasting or 15 times lowerthan the lt05 Insec allowable maximum vibration for the protection of plaster structures (See Ma~achusetts Building Code (Explosive Regulations) atS27 CMR 1309)

3

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 18: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Bill White MiSSCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

insec for an82 pound charge per delay to 012 insec for the maximum 136 pound per charge delay which is significantly below the limiting vibration level of lt05 insec See GZA memorandum dated August 13 2014 attached ~s Attachment 4

Finally because the light Station isowned and maintained by the City of New Bedford MassCEC also provided a letter from the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission dated Augu~t-11 20146 which states The HOC is s~tisfiedwith tf)e precautions instituted to protect adjacent str-lctures including the recently renovated Palmers Island light Station instituted by MassCEC to dateand is not opposed to the additional blasting middot

EPA has cons~dered the calculations performed by the Commonwealths consultant and the July 25 and August middot14 2014 submissions from MassCEC In light ofthis information and the actions that have been taken and will continue to be taken in accordance with the conditionsmiddotseto~t in EPAs September 16 20131etter to Brona Simon State HlstorJcmiddotPreservation Officer and below in this letter to avoid effects to historic properties EPA has determined thatmiddotapprov~l of this proposed blastilg request will not change its conclusion set out in EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project that this Project will not affect the Palmer Island light Station See Attachment 5

In addition with regard to potential impacts to the New BedfordFairhaven Hurricane Barrier MassCEC provided two en)_ails from Michael Banchard US Army Corps of Engineers (USACEs) that reflect that USACE has no objectionsto theadditiolial blasting workmiddotprovided the work Is done following tlle same protocols established in our previous 33 USC 408 approvalletter7

See Attachment 6

As a result ofits review and after coordinating with NMFS EPA determines that the requested

additional blasting continues to meet the substantive requirements of all identified federal

ARARs in EPAs Second Modification of the South Terminal Project and accepts the States

determination that the additional tllastingcontinues to meet the substcfntlve requirements of all identified state ARARs8as long as the following conditions are met

1 The middotadditional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs July 25 and AuguSt 14 middot 2014 submissionsmiddot (with approximately 60- 80 boreholes with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of136 lb per borehole) ~nd includes a minimum 25 millisecond delay betweencharge detonations

6 See Attachmeft H to letter dated August 14 2014 from BillWhite MasSCEC to Elaine Stanley EP~ ~e Attachment E to letter dated Allgust 14 2014 from Bill White MassCECto Elaine Stanley EPA USACEs 33

usc 408 approval letter aiiq subsequent clarifications maybe found in the administrative record for theSecond Modification for the South Teqninal Project at AR ~40345 AR547288 ancl AR 547269 8 See Attachment I of letter dated August 14 2014 from Bill White Masscee to Elaine Stanley EPA

4

7

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 19: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional BlaSting August ~0 2014

2~ For compliance with TSCAi all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed

in accordance with EPAs prior determinations for South Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation andmonitoring measures required for prior blasting events as lttescribed in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources induding water quality monitoring the fish deterrent system (including sift and bubble curtains) a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-bla~ing except as modified below

a Condition No 1 A final blasting plan must be submitted to and approved ~Y EPA before blasting commences

b Condition No2 Blasting shali only be conducted in the_locations depicted on middot Attachment B of the Commonwealths August 14 2014 letter to EPA (See Attachment 1 of this document) the remainder of this condition is ~ot applicable to the current blasting n~quest

c Condition No7 The second paragraph ofthis condition is not applicable to-the ~

middotcurrent blasting request -

d Condition No 8 No more than 136 pounds of explosive per delayed charge

with a minimum time delay of 25 milliseconds between middotcharges shallbe used middotand

e Condition No 13 To protect the Hurricane Barrier blasting must also be conducted consistent with the emaif dated August 1~ 2014 from Michael Bachand USACE to Chet Myers (see Attachment 5)

4 lrriplernent all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for p~or blasting events as described In EPAs Second Modification for impact on land structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer Ught Station and the hurricane barrier

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and mariners required for prior blsting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEmiddotc provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar tothe weekly bl~sting reports provided from prior blasting events

This requested blasting work represents only a portion ofthe Commonwealths requested modificati_on to EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will review the Commonweaiths request for additional dredging to middotwiden and deepen the navigational

channel and eliminate the tug channel in a separate documentthat will incorporate this

determin~ion concerning blasting EPAs Second Modification for the South Terminal Project

can be fou~d on New Bedford Harbor Superrund Site web page httpUvwwepagovnbh

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 20: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Bill White MassCEC Request for Channel Widening and Additional Blasting August 20 2014

If you have any questions please contact ~inny lombardo at (617 918-l-754 or Cynthia Catri at

(617)-918-1888

Very-truly yours

James T Owens Ill Director Office of Site Remediation and Restoration

cc via ~lectronic mail Brona Simon mhcsecstatemaus cmyersapexcoscommiddot jborklandapexcoscom ehineslemessuriercom cmorris MassCECcom dierkercarlepagov tisakimberlyepagov williamsannepagov marshmikeepagov middot colarussophilepagov catricynthiaepagov lombardoginnyepagov

6

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 21: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

I Attachment 1

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 22: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

0

c

==~ middotamiddot~

APEX-shy c - bull

----shyFIG-1

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 23: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

middot~

Attachments 2 and 3

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 24: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Galidrner Arnun

From Sent

catri bull Cindy Wednesday August 20 2014 214 PM

To Gardner Ann middot middot Subject FW FW Response to Questions -8-14-14- MajsCEC RElquestfor Wider Clianneishy

Modification tQ Firial Detennination for the South Terminal Project AttaehmGms= removedtxt middot

From ColaruSso Phil Sent MondayAugust 18 2014 239PM middotTo catri Cindy Williams Ann Dierker Carl Subjm FW FW Response to Questions~ 8-14-14 MassCEC R~uest for Wider Qlann~l- Modification to Final Deterniinatlon for the South Terminal Project

Ori EF1 consult~tion from NMFS

From Ch~optaer Boelke- NOAA Feder~l [malftochristopherboelkenoaagovl middot Sent Monday August 18 2014 224 PM middotTo Colarusso Phil SubjectRe FW Response to Questions -8-14-14 MassCEC Requestfor Wider Channel- Modifi~tion tomiddotFinal Determination for the South Terminal Project

Phil- Per our djscussion we do not believe that this additional work requires a re-initiatio~ ofthe EFH consultation We believe that the request for deepening of the proposed channel from -14 io -30 will result in a perinanentloss ofadditional ~r flounder habitat and will require additional compensatory mitigation PI~ let me know ifyou would like to discuss further

Cliris

On MonAug 18~ 2014 at 1008 AM Colarus8oPhil ltcolarussopbilepagovgt wrote

I Chris

I ~

Ill be around this afternoon and we can discuss

Phil

From Christoph~r Boelke- NOAA Federal (mailtochristopherboelkenoaagovl Sent Monday AugUst 182014 954AM To Colarusso Phil

1

I I I

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 25: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Subject Re FW Response to Questions- 8-1~14- MassCEC Request for Wider Channel- Modification to Final Determination for the Somiddotuth Terminal Project

Hi Phil - got your message about New Bedfltgtrd Have meetings until noon but can I call around 1 Seems middot like the responsesmiddotmiddotare focused arOund bl~ting is there any other information about the expansion ofthe channel from -14 to -30 or do you consider that aJready to have been addressed in the earlier EFH ~sessnient

I

i I

On Fri Aug 152014 at 1156 AM Christine Vaccaro- NOAA Federal ltchristinevaccaronoaagovgt wrote

Hi Phil

Sony missed your call yesterday I looked over the information you middotsent andtbave tQ agree _thatJ dont think this modification will_create any new effects for ESA-listed species that have not previously been considered So yes your determination that po re initiation is necessary is on target

Let me know ifyou nCecl more than email verification of this and we can see about issuing another letter We may need you to send something just re-itefll~ng y~mr determination middotShould be a quick tunlaround~ middot middot

Cheers~

Chris

Chris Vaccaro 1 Fisheries Biologist Pngtte_cted Resources Division

1 NOAA Fisheries

middot~ middot middotGloucester MA middot ~ I Phone 978-281--9167

1 Email christinevaccaronoaagov

On Thu Aug 14 2014 at 429 PM Colarusso Phil ltcolarussophil(a)epagovgt wrote I

r Chris Chris

2

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 26: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

r1 Per my voicemail Here is some ofthe supporting information for the states requeSt for their latest modificatiOn the request to do the blasting is the most time sensitive part of the modification Based on ~ their use ofthe fish deterrent systetn smaller cbatges limited area needed for blasting and recent blasting success (no fish kills) we feel that allowing them to blast between now and September 1 represents a ~ il minimal nsk to ESA EFH and species covered under Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act thns reinitiation of consulttion 1s not warranted Please let me know ifyou need any additional information and ifyouconcur middot middot with our de~ermihation middot middot

jl 1 Phil 1i

II From Chet Myers [mailtocmyersapexcossoml I

~

Sent Thursday August 14 2014 249PM To Dierker Carl Lederer Dave Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elain~ WiUiams AnnCoiarusso Phil JSa Kimberly Catri Cindy ~Michael Cc Alicia middotBarton Jay Borldand Eric Hines(ebineslemessuriercom) Christopher Moms Christen

1 Anton paUlcraffeystatema~ Bill Whitebull

Subject Response to Questions- $-14-14- MasscEC Request for Wider Channel- ModificatiOn to Final i Detennination for the South Tenninal Projectmiddot

I Imiddot

l

I

IImiddot HiCarL ii

I

II II

II I

1 On behalf~fBill White from MassCEC attached please find MassCECs response to EPA questions issued withi~ ~e-mail dated July 312014 EPAs questions were associatedwith a fonnal request to EPA for a modification t() the Final Determination for the New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal Projectfor ~dening the channel to allow safe access to the Terminal middot

II I

I

i I This submission is a follow-up to our meeting on Monday July 14th at EPA Region 1 our phone j conversation on July 16th and our initlalformal submittal to EPA onJuly ~5 2014I

i The~ version (with attachments) is called URe~ponse to EPA Questions 8bull14~14 w-Attachmentspdf and has been uploaded to Apexs Document Management System (due to size restrictions)

1

jli f middot I

Iil Apexs Docullle~t Management System can be ~ccessed through the followingl

bullmiddot

i Ibull

3

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 27: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

I

ID

i I

Password

I If you have any issues accessing the document please feel free to contact me

Than~ so much for your helpJ

IphetMyers16 Apex Companies LLC 125 Broad Street 5th Floor Boston MA02110 0) 617-728-0070 5113 M)617-908-5V8

H

Building Sa~ Together FoUowApex on Dam~Ulce ~onD

Privacy Nbull This ~ge and any aitachmen(il) hereto are intended IICiely for thelndlvidual(a) listed In the niasthead This message maY contain infonnation

that is privileged or otheiwise ptOtectecl flom disclosure Any review diSsemination or use d this mes8198 ar it$ content$ by persons other than the addressee(s) iS strictly prohibi1Bcl and maj be unlawful If you have _received his messagein error please notify the sander by relum ~~-mall andmiddotdelete the message flom YQIrsystemThankyou middot middot middot middot middotmiddot middotmiddot - middot bull- middot-bullmiddot middot _ middot middotmiddot

Christopher Boelke

Field Offices Supervisor

Habitat Conservation Division

4

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 28: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Greater Atlllntic Region

NOAA National Marine Fisheries 8ervice

iI I 978-281-91Jl

I

I I httpYtwwnmrsnoaagovI

I I

I l

Christopher Boelke I

Field Offices Supervisor Habitat Conservation Division Greater Atl~cRegion NOAA Natiopal Marine Fisheries Service

978-281-9131

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 29: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Attachment 4

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 30: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Chet Meyers John IVIcAIJister Greg Dolan (Apex Companies LLC)

Alexander Haag ~ carchedi (GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc)

3373407111em-01

~- August 13 2014

AnalysiS of Blast Monitoring Data at Palnier Island- Anticipated Impact ofAdditional Proposed Blasting at Palmer Island Ughthouse middot middotNew BedfCtd Marine CommerceTerminal New BedfOrd ~chusetts

~ FJG-1 Palmer Island Vibration Data Analysis

GzA GeoEnVi11X1mental Inc GZA) prepared thismemQl8rtdum in accordance wfthmiddotyoUr request-to evaluate an(f an~ vibration mon~g data colleCted dUring~ blasting CC)nducted for the New BedfordMarine COmmerce Tenninal between October 24 2013 and January 11 2014 and on MarCh 24 2014 GZA has summarized and tabulated VIbration monitoring data collected on Palmer Island The data includes

Vibration Data - Distance Of the Blast Area to the Vibration Monitor

Q see vibration monitor location MP-1 on attached figure) - Peak VedJr summiddot(PVS) recorded bY the vibration monitoring equipment (SelsmograpttJVIP-1) Tune of Seismograph Measurement - Contractors Predicted Vibration Level

o (PVS- as repQrted in the daily blast ieport) - ~middots Cslculated Vibration Level based on Pislance and ChargeWeight

o (PVS-based on conservative calibration of the propagatiOn model to the collected blast data) Blastina Data middot middot

Biast Number Approximate Blast Tillie Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (lbdelay) Total Holes 8~ Total ChSrge Weight

~ an the evaluation of the recorded data and conservative caiibration of tfle propagatiQn middotmodel GZA estimatecttheanticipated vibrafiOn JeveJ atthe Palmer Island Ughthouse based on

- the closest diStaiICe Of newpreposect blasting to the frghthouse (13oo ft minimum distarice)tJe overall and locai maximum propoSed charge weights to be used for additional blasting required for ~channel widening (1361b per delay and 821b per delay ~

As a result of the analysis the anti~ VIbration levels at the Parmer Island Ughthouse (009 to 012 insec) are significantly below the fmiting vibration level for historic structures (05inlsec) middot middot middot

We~~ this memo addresses the current needs of your pnlject Should you have any questions please feel free to contact Alexander Haag or David Carchedi at401-421-4140

JIGeo337340dyb~07Mem-lttidoCIC

0 Page 1

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 31: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

bull -=flolshy --t---~alll

= IIIU bullbull--shy

D

bull 1 -

~-ra

a~-

--shy ______ _

__---middot llASl ltiiUl--shyur-_1 =-=-~ -middot-middot I

~~~~~------)

PEX _ubull- c --shy--shy----

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 32: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

----

New ledfold Maline Cornmene Termi~l New 8edfvrd Mlssachvsets GlA Joblr 3373407

UV2I2013 UIJIII20l3 141233 7 um2013 120022 42 Z2 1l2I20U 113015 1130 31 U4yenJll oocs 155155 1550 42 11 m UN2013 OIM3 948(8 9-A7 42 23 1W2013 ()036 141127 1410 900 42 24 1001 -1lN20U Cl04 JAJ627 lA07 1435 42 s llD U7raquo13 ooM 9-3SOO 1427 9-35 42 36 1092 U7liJ13 ()048 GM 1)(114 155905 14l6 1100 42 12 344 lll1l013 0090 0038 1$03(Jg 1417 1500 102 2121 UJt2013 0049 0031 131403 1417 1314 42 38 1436 ll122013 0048 Q029 140705 1440 1407 42 27 1014 1ll3I2013 oan OG3S 143707 lA69 1435 82 42 1724 UlA2013 ll063 DIM3 102~ 1484 1025 102 31 2111 U1512013 ()OQ 130t21 15U 1310 82 50 2559 UW2013 DQS7 umos 1537 1305 w 6l 1lW20U NB-019 cum l552llaquolt 1545 1550 82 31 1701 UU2013 NB-020 Ooamp 9-2701 1431 925 82 37 1194 U20ilOU ou Cl049 Cl04S 1424Q 1415 1423 42 33 1246 U21liJ13 Nl-022 0064 oos 14SIGO 13M 1456 62 n 136amp U22liJ13 N8-QZ3 oon OJM6 US100 1502 1130 82 80 3100 U2liZOU NS-024 oon 004 93309 1474 9-30 82 43 2046 1l2II20U N842S oan DOI7 9mOI 1471 900 82 7S J970 1l171l113 NI-GH 00amp6 Q074 13t06 1374 131 062 19115 U2II20U NB-027 D059 Q037 104447 lAU 1044 52 l9 118 ll3QfW3 0062 OJlS7 130207 1431 1302 52 35 1S70 UU2D13 N842t 0096 Cl04 1So43 1570 1543 142 28 2535 1212013 NampOO 0070 OC88 ~ 1595 900 142 33 3347 1242013 Na431 0064 Q049 94101 1591 940 w 55 4209 12512013 ~ 0058 0182 114007 1566 1140 102 65 4148 l1II30U NI-OU 0051 IUB2 9A204 1536 940 102 54 3J87 127lJU Q4Be bull Ooamp1 004 105103 1510 10-51 102 56 4233 129I1JJU HI-CBS CI070 oozt 13=4557 lA8S 1346 122 42 2944 UWraquoU OJMI omamp 90100 11127 900 82 lO 1720 12UlOU -oJ7 ooss oo23 J025411 14114 1024 82 59 2811

DOM 101058 1154 lOlO 82 J9 22511 1213lOU Q040 12UID3 (1047

oos 90557 1310 905 42 33 1316 oos 90557 1351 1541 42 13 5211 UW20U oJ1 0042 121312013 Q040

OOS1 900-51 1289 900 42 6 192 12142013 Nll-042 0040 01)3amp 90058 1337 1250 42 2 14 l2l6I2013 Namp-043 00411 Ool9 9012a 1444 900 52 lA sa 1217liJ13 Na-044 00411 oo5l lSJOSS 1193 1Sll 42 35 lA10 12lii20U Nl-045 0040 a 0032 9-2124 1353 921 42 33 1326 12li2013 Namp(M6 0040 oo26 10-SL-(19 U99 1051 42 35 1450 122012013 NB-047 0051 oo27 1L-DIS7 13411 lL-QI 62 55 2250 12l21liJ13 N~ 0040 0044 133756 1320 1337 42 55 2230 122312013 NB-048 0041 OQS2 130153 1291 1300 42 30 1240 122412013 H8-0SO 0043 0031 75115 1261 751 42 9 298 1227liJ13 NampOSl 0077 OWl lO(JgSI 1233 1009 82 -65 3530 1228l1tl13 Hl-052 0065 OQS7 90l01 1244 901 52 60 2560 12lOI1lJ13 NIHI$3 0075 DOS2 1419511 1259 918 82 31 1S82 12lOI1lJ13 NB-454 0082 oosa 141951 U73 1419 82 17 754 U3li2013 NPrOSS Oo84 oog0411 93156 U41 931 82 57 3054 U3li2013 Ool1 ~ oan 93156 1076 1409 82 10 410

12rJJJ14 0092 0108 90041 1064 900 82 34 1828 112014 0062 D037 14SL1ll 1297 1450 52 63 2526 l42014 01)62 141302 U71 1413 82 42 2204 16(2014 113559 1127 1135 82 411 2392

114154 62 34 1348

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 33: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

New Bedford Marine Commercgte T~rmiMI New Bedford MlsAchustts GZA Jobl3373407

Distance Approxirute

Time --to Monitor

llastTIIIII

0052 0060 llA154 123 1548

0064 0 103249 1261 1032

ooss 064 0074 103249 un 1558

0068 0080 Oo7S 164438 1196 1208

0073 0087 0082 164438 1126 1644 Oo43 0032 90056 1606middot 900

0040 90056 1609 1440 164155 1644 900 95926 1583 958

CWNII Predict Vs Actull

Maximum lb$delly

42 62 42

62 62 52 42 42 34

Total Holes

todecl

4

40 9 33 12 24 20

15

Tocal Pounds todecl

lA8

1860 318 1346 504 838 670 400 464

CWN8 Correllation 51 H 55 II -L3

GZA Predict Vs Aaual 145 GZA Corrallation ~

ASSUME MAXIMUM CHARGEWBGHT PER OBAY ATQOSEST DISTANCE- PRpound01CTVIBUnONS ATPAlMEJt UGHTHOUSE

==_---~Predlct~~PVS~---- IPercant of MA BWiclirc Code Value (051nsec) I I 0120 I Lbull 2o=-~-----_---J_

I o086 I

Measured vs Predicted Vibrations Palmer Island H=SS beta = -13

1700

1600

lSOO

c

a ~1~ 1

~1300 I Q

uoo

1100

1000 0 002 004 006 ooa 01 ou

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 34: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Attachment 5

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 35: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

0~202013 1358 FAX 617 727 5128 MASS HIST COMM ~ 001004

-bull

The Commonwealth of MassachUsetts William FranCis GalVin~ ot the Commonwealth middot

Massach~tts Histo~Cotnmistion

Fax TransmiHal Memorandum

middot _lt =~ middotf f~ffrS) - 6~(LtJ

eo~~nC$bull Mmiddot~ ttJo[ ~t3 plusmna middotLPAmiddotmiddot bull I

ote - io-~ vs

bull 0

bull bull

bull J

o

Ifthismiddotc~municatiort has bn re~ed in mor please notify us Immediate~middot

220 Morrissey Bowc-arltl Boston Massachusetts 02125 0

let (617) 727-8470 middotFax (617) 27-~t28 middot Websi~ 1111WW$Cltemaussecmhc

spMS Doc 10 550577

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 36: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

09202013 13 58 F_AX S17 727 5128 middot MASS HUT COMM ~-002middot004

UNiTED STATES ENVJitONMENlAL PROTEcTION AGENCY Regiou 1

S Post Offiee Square Suite 100 Bostoa MA 02189-3912

BECEIVED~ber 16 2013

SEP 1 e 2013Brona Sittlon State Historic Preservation Officer MASS~ HIST c0MMMassachusetts Historical Commission 220 MOirissey Boulevard middotreg ~~ql Bo~MA02125

Re South Termioal Project New BedfOrd Harbor State Enhanced Remeiiy

Dear Ms siulon

On May 20 2013 the Conlinonwealth of~tts submitted a lequest to1he United States Enviromriental Protection Agency Regionl (EPA) for approval pfa $econd Modification (the Second Modifi(lmion to the AgCJle)s Novem~er 19 2012 Final Deterurlnation for the South TenninaJ Project (the Final Detertnination) The

middot middot CominonweaithSletter requested that the Agency appmW among o~modificati~ the inclusion ofblasdng as arock removalmetbod As part ofits pre-coDStnlCtion middotinvestigationsmiddotthe Commonwealth deteimined that blasting inthree specific areasmiddotin the New Bedford Harbor ebannel between Palmers ISlaad and the shoreline at the temliDal location Would ~e ~ssary to construct the bulkhead wall of the terminal ~ility middot

EPA is in receipt ofyour September 6 2013 letter concemlng the lalmer Island Light Station (the Light Station)t a historiopropertyJistedmiddot on the National RegiSter located within tbe po~ area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Projectamp$ conteinplate4 by the propose4 ~dModification More specifically the Light Station is located on PatmetbullsIsland which is at the outer edge ofthe tsoo foot zone where potential middot middot vibrations may Occut from blasting Blasting wu noi addressed in EPA~s November 19 2012 FipalDetermination AccQrdingly the Light Station was neither mclwiefin the shyCommonwealths previous historic property assessments nor addressed in our September_ ~8 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the proposed Sotith Terminal Project will not affect bistoric properties As a result yom ~ 6 2013 letter encour3sed EPA to detimnine whether or-not blasting has the potential to affect the Light House

In a September 11 2013 memorandum from the Commonwealth~s eontractors insuppon ofits request to allow blasting GZA OeoEnvironmerital Inc presented the modeled shyanticipated ~um vibration for the Light Stlltion structure that could potentially resul~ from tbiplannedbl~gpro~ bat Daxim~ estimatM vibration or peak particle

bull bull bull bull bull J bullbullbull

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 37: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

08202013 1358 FAX 617 727 t128 middot MASS HIST COtUf llj003004

velocity (7PV) was0034lnsec as calculated using a staDdard engineeriugeqution and sUe-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 1309 ~

mgulates allowable maximum vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are based with a COIJSelVative factor ofsafety upon extensive go~ lllliversity arui-engineering research which has estabJished the~mld ~ ofvibrition so as to ptevent ~andto~ the safcty ofthe pUblic and the protection ofproperty aqjacent tothemiddotbtast area The most cbnsetvative limit established in the MassachUsetts Building Code for PPV to ensure the protection of structures with plaSter is~ltOS insecmiddot As such thePPV estimated fortbe LigbtmiddotStation as

a nult ofthe proposedblasting is approximately lS times lower thaD Jhe all~le maximmn vibration for potential damage to plaster structures A copy ofOZA GeoEnvironmental Incs September 112013 memorandum is included as Attaclunem

A

middotEven with tbis margin ofsafety the Commonwealth bas inclUded additional measUres to ensure1hat1he Light Stltion is protected from blasting impacts In particular in middot partnership with the New Bedford Harbor DevelopmentCcmmissiODmiddot the - middot

Comntonwealth oooducted extensive pre-blast photographymiddotand a video ofthe tight Siation to _establishmiddotpre-blast conditions and will take post-blastphotographs ana a Video ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions -The Commonwealth will also

middot middot Conduct public iDfotmational tlleetmgs to descnbe the blas$g eventamp The Massachusetts Clean En~Center will-also conduct a ~on middotstrwrtural review

_ofthe Light Station A descriptiOn ofthe-additional~ ls inC~ in_a September 10~-20i3Ietter rom the MassachUsetts ciean anergy Center to Carl Diedter EPA- ~as Attaoent ~ middot middot

r

Inaddition -thC CommonWealth Will take real--time measwements oftheactwd vi1nations ~ cluriniblasting to confinn modellilg results~ middotIn the unlikely went that aetualmiddotmiddot

middotvibraions exceed modeling results and~r bnpacts are detected during implementation of the Pioject as acondi1ion ofits approval BPAwill RqUire the Cmmilonwealth to prcrricle imrnediaje notificltion to EPA ~AgencyWill immediately engage in middot consultation with the Massachusetts HiStoricalComniission the Commonwealth 8ilcl the CityofNew Bedford to discuss~and implement measures to avoid minimizeor mitigate -~ impactsto the Light Station middot

-- I

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNevv Bedford On September middot132013EPAreceivedaJetter-ftont-NewBedfordMayorJohi1Mitchellaclcn~ the hiitcric value ofthe Light Station tD the City BDd ciescnbinS ~Citys view ~the modeliug performed by GZA Inhis letterbull the Mayor expressec1 his beliefthat the Connnonwealths efforts aieappropriate to give the pubHc confidenie that themiddotblasting will bull place the lighthouse injeopmly~ A carr1middotofMayor Mitehells September 13 201~ letter is attached as AttaChment C middot ~

EPA has considered the blast mode1iDg pcentfbrmed by the Commonwealths ConsUltantthe September 10 2013 letter fromthe Massachusetts Clean Energy Center the ~ber 13 2013 letter from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell Blld your letter to EPA

2

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 38: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

0820middot2013 1400 FAX 817 727 5128 MASSmiddot HIST COMM ~004004

dated September 6~ 4013 llllight ofthis modeling and the amons that 1fill be taken toavoid effflds to historic properties in aceotdaa~e with 36 CFR 8004 EPA has coaduded that approval ofthe Second Modificatioa will not afleet historic propeRties If~llave any questiollsreprding tbis finding contictLeAnn Jensen at (617) 9ls-um

It is EPAs Understanding that the Commonwealth through theMass~husetts ampecutivemiddot Qffice ofFnergy and EnvironmentalAffairsand the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center has a strcmg interest in~With the modifications to the Project including the blasting program tomeet project timelines Therefore we ~Quld appreciate it ifyou

middot could infonn us at yoUr earliest convenience whether you object to our determiDatiolJ and would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later ~sweek tQ discuss any remaining issues middot

In any event in accordance with the Advisory Council ltgUanen at 36 CPR 8004 please respond within 30 days ofyour receipt of thiS letter Ifwe do not hear from you within thi$ time period we will assumemiddottbatyau concur with the Agency1s findng and ~Uproceedwith om final decision concerning the Commonwealths Second Modification Subject to the provisions contained in 36 CFTfSeCtiltgttt80013 for treatmg historic properties discovered dmin~J~J)lementation ofthe ~ject

smiddotlD~lyI ro~middotUR~ENC~~-~~~)~~ 1~1 21 middotBRON4SIMON middot 1k BfCf

middot STTE HISTORIC ~ ~sT Owens W middot PESERVATION OFFICER

MAS~~ Jsms Direct9r Office ofSite Restoration and Remediation ii)TORIL ~ COMMISS~H

i i

cc Bettina Washington Wampanoag Tnbe ofGfiyhead (AquiDDah) bull RAmona Peters Mash~Wampanoag Tribe middot i Victor Masone MassachusettS aureau ofUnderVaterArchaeOlogical Res~ GaryDavis Jr~ Executive Office ofEnergy and BnviromnentalA$irs Chet Myers Apex Companies LLC LeAnn Jensen US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency~~gion 1

3

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 39: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

bull bull _ bull middot--middot bull J

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Oftice Square Suite 1 00 Boston~ MA 02109-3912

September 16 2ot3( I

BroDa Simon middot_ SbullHistoric Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Bo~MA 02125

Re South Temrin81 Proect ~ New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

middot Dear Ms Simon middot middotmiddotmiddot

On May 20 2013 the Commonwealth ofMasSachusetts submitted a request to the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1 (EPA) fot approval ofa

middotSecond Modification (the Second Modification) to the Agencys November 19 2012 middot middotFmal Determination for the South Terminal Project (the Final Detenninationmiddot1~ The middot

Commonwealths letter requested that the Agency approve among other modificatio~ the inclusion ofblastingM atock removal method As part of its Pre-construction shy

middot inveStigations the ~on~tJl detemiliied that bla$ting 1n three specific areas in th~ New Bedford HarbOr chaimel betWeen Palmers Island and the shoreline at the-termin~ location would be necessary to construct the bulkhead wall ofthe terminal facility

EPA is in receipt ofyom September 6 2013letter concerning the Palmer lsi~ Light middot Station (the-Light Station) a histOric property listed on the National Register lOcated wi~ the potential area ofaffect ofthe South Terminal Project as contemplated by the middotproposed Second Modification More-specifically the Light Statio~ is located on middot Pabners Island which is at the outer edg~ of~e 1500 foot zone where l(gttentiil Vibrations rnay occur from blasting Blasting was not addressed in EPAs Novmtber 19~

2012 Final Detennination Accordingly the Light Station v--as neither included iil the Commonwealthspreviotis historic property assessments nor addressed in our September 28~ 2012letter to you concerning the Agencys determination that the _propostQ South

middot Tenninal Project will not affect historic properties~ middotAs a resul~ yoilr September 6 2013 letter encow-aged EPA to detennine whether or not blasting has the pot~tial t()lt ~ectth~ Li~House - - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

In a september 11 2013 Jlleinorandum from the CcnmnonwealUJs contractors P1 SllpJ)Ott ofits request to allow blasting GZA GeoEnvironmerttal Inc preserited the model~ anticipated maximum vibration for the Light Stationstructuremiddot that could potentially result ftom the planned blasting program That maximum estimate4 vib~tion or peak particle

(

SDMS Doc ID 548545

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 40: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

velocity (PPV) was 0034 insec as calculated using a standardengitieering equation middot and site-specific information The Massachusetts Building Code at 527 CMR 13~09~ regulat~ allowable maximwn vibrations from blasting activities As noted in the code allowable limits are bas~ with a conservative factor ofsafety ll)On extensive middot government university and engineering research which has establi~d the amount and character ofVibration so as to prevent~ge and to insure the middotsafety ofthe publicmiddotan4 the protection ofproperty adjacent to the blast area~ The most conservative limit established iil the Massachtisetts Building COde for PPV to ensure the_protection of structures with plaster is lt05 insec As such thePPV estimated for the Light Station as a result of the proposed blasting is approximately I 5 times lower than the allowable ma(inn~m vibration for potential damage to plaster structWeSmiddot A copy ofOZA middot GeoEnvironmental Inc middots September l120q memOtandwil is includedas Attachment A

Even with this margin ofsafety_ the Commonwealth bas included additional measures to ensure that the Light Station is protected from blastil)g impacts In particular ~ partnership w~th the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission the Commonwealth coilducted extensive pre-blast photography and a video ofthe Light $4tionJo establish pre-blast conditions and will take post-blast photographs and a videltgt ofthe Light Station to document post-blasting conditions The Commonwealth will also cond4Ct public intblIregtionalmeetingsto describe the blasting events Themiddot ~~husettsClean Energy Center will also conduct a pre-cOnstruction structural review of the Light Suttion A descriptionof the additional measures is included in a September 10 2013 letter froni the Massachusetts CleanEnergy Center to Carl Dierker EPA and attached as Attacbment B middot

ln addition the Commonwealth will takereai-time measurements ofthe actual-vibrations generated duriQg b~ to confirm modeliQgresults In the unlikely event that actqal middot vibra9ns exceedmodeling results ~or impacts are detected during implementation of the PrQj~t as acondition of its approval EPA Will requi~ the Commonwealth to middot provide immediate notification to EPA The Agency will immediately engage in consUltation with the Massachusetts Historical Commission the Commonwealth and the City ofNew Bedford to discuss and implement measmes to avoid minimize or mitigatemiddot potenlial im~ to the Light Station

The Light Station is owned and maintained by the City ofNew B~ford On Septembermiddot 13 4013gt EPA rcceived a letter from New Bedford Mayor John Mitchell acknowledging ~ehistoric value of the Light Station tp tl1e City and describing the Citys view of the modeling performed by GZA In his leuer the Mayor expressed his belief that themiddot Common~ths efforts are appropriate to giv~ the pubUc confidence that the blasting middotwill not place the lighthouse injeopardy A copy ofMayor Mitche11s September 13 2013 letter is attachedbullas Attachment C

I

~PA has considered the blast modeling performed bythemiddottommonwealths consultant ~~September iO 2013 lett~ from the Massacllusetts Clean Energy Center the September 13 2013 lener from New Bedford Mayor Mitchell and your letter to ErA

2

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 41: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

middot middot dated S~ber 6 20l3 rmiddotn ~of this modeimg and the actions that will be~ to avoid effect$ to histotit p~perflfs ina~corda~ Witllmiddot 36 CFR 8004 EPAhas eondudfd bat approval ofthe SecondmiddotModif~eation wiD nohUTect bi$toric properties Ifyou have any gu~ons regarding this finditlg contact LeAnilJensen at (617) 918-1072

It is EPAs understanamgthlitthe C01nmonwealtb through the MaSsachusettS ~xecutive om~middotofEnergy and EhvitQ~tai Affairs and the MassachuscttsCiean ~y Center

h8s a strong int~inptoceedingwith tlle modifications to the Proj~ inCluding themiddot middot bl~ progrUn tomiddotmeet proJect tim(tmes Therefore~ we woWd apprceiate it ifyou could inform us at your earliest convenience it~ you objecfto our determiDation

-~-would be happy to meet with you and the Commonwealth later this weekmiddotto disCli$5 any remaining issUes middot

Attachments

cc Bettina W~gton Wampa110ag Tribe of Gayhead -(Aquirinah) middot Ramona Peters-~Wampanoag Tn~ Victor Masone MassachusettS Bureau ofUndenvater ArcbaeologiCalltesources Oaey Da-vis J~ ExecUtive Office ofEnergy and Enviroiupental Affairs Chet MyetsApex Companies LLC

middotmiddot LeAnn Jensen US Environmental Protection Agenc Region 1 middot

3

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 42: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

MemOmiddot TOI Chet Meyers Jchn McAJ)ister (ApexGompanie8 UC)

From Diane Baxter middotDand C8rciiedl (GZA GeoEmiron~ lric)

File= 3373404 Mem()5

Date September 112018

Re Elastiilg lrn~ on the Palm~ iSatd ~ouse New BecifordMarine Commeroe Termli181 New BedfOrtl Mass2chusetts

GZA ~entail~ (GZA)is Pteased to PrOVdeylt)u wth this mem~ on blasting ifTIPSCIS to thePalmer lslald ug~ o bull

middot Blasting Umitations

Blasting limitcilions ~ve ~en irnPQSed onth~ Gon~ fgr tJlisproj~ in thebullBia$TJngSpeciflcatlon tq limit the impacts ot blasting on acfJaeent structureL The lifuitS are~ on the ~ssachusettsBulkfing Code 527 CMR 1300 Explosives Th8 cQde requifCH that vJJ)~ons meaaured if Peak f1trticle Vel~ity (PPV) in units ofmiddotlnches per s8c0nd taD below levels recornftl~cte(f by theus Bureeu ()f ~ines as fOllows middot

e fitStoric Structu_res PPvlt05 irlsec o A8$idential Structures In Massachusetts PPVlto~a insec G Other $truqur~ PPVlt2-Q insec

Based on years of data it hall been sh_own ~ Vibrations mampa$UJed beQw the readings listed above are unlikely to result in damage to the respective structuresbull

GZAs Blasting Impacts Report

GZA has perfomied an extensive studY on the impacts Of blaSting for this prpjcentt on ad~ structures (GZA RepOrt Assessment of BJ$ingJmpacts to the New BedfordmiddotFalrhavenmiddotHurricane Bar1ier ~w Be4ford Marine Commerce Terminal New Bedford Massachusetts October 2012 revised August 2013) As a result we are able to produce esWnates of the anticipated vibrationsforstructUr~ that are ~various ~ancss (rom the nearest b~l~tion The ~Ufition utilized to determine the potential vibrailon impact Is middot

PPV =H X [ 0 I (SQUARE ROOT OF WU ~ Where

PPV =The Peak Particle v~ocity in i~es per-secqnd H =The Peak Particle VeloCity intercept In inch8s per second (as form utated from historic

blasting data from the Uriited States Bureau Of Mines)

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 43: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

middotB =The Stope Factor (as fonnuSted rtom hiStoric blasting data frOm th8 United States eweau of MJnesr ~ middot middotmiddot

W =Weight of ChSJge pet d8faY fn pOiirtdS 0 =Distance In feet to the-structure fn questioR

middot middotrn thts case the foDoWing vrdU88 were utUIZed

H ~r50 (tJ1e upper range of historic Unlted States eureau Qf Minbull dlta) a =~16 (the upper range of historic United States ~u of Mines data) W=2QOpeuldS the l1lampXfulum charge evaluated~ _ D =middottS$0 tet middottfle q~an~ from the nearesrdlat9$ ~ themiddotPtifmera fsland lighthouse

The results of Ills anatysl$1ndlcitas the maximum anticipated vibration at the Palmers isrand UghthoLise Is approximately 0034Jnsec 1111s value Is approximately 15 times lower than the middot racomMnded level issued by u S Bureau Of Mines and In the MA Building CQde (OSinlsec and middot

middot included In th$ Contractors requirements As a result we feel confident ~at tOe Vibration$ associated wftttbtasting

T wlQnot have an lm~

- em ~ Palmers lsl$nd

lighth~-middot middot middot

bull bull middot

middot t-

bull ~

bullPage2of2 GZA ~Septernbar 112013

I

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 44: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

55 Su~Street 9middotRoor middot BostOn MA 0~110

P (617) 315bull9355 bull F (617) 315middot9356 in~ma~ bull www~eccom

middot

middot middot ()

September 10 2013 ~ bull

~

Carl Dierker middot ~ I bullbull middotmiddot

Gen~~al~u~jmiddot middot ~ middot~ US Envirorimeiltal ProtectiQnAgency ~cm 1 bull t 5 Post Office Square middot middotmiddot Boston MA 02109-3912

Carl

Please ffud below responsesmiddotand answers to each ofthemiddotcomments and questicgtnsyou middotsubmitted via email ~ MassCEC on Sept~mber 6 2013 Additionally we were fotwarded a September 6 2013letter from the Mi11Ssachusetts HiStoric Commissio~to EPA on potentilil iinpacts to the Palmers Island Lighthouse and we have taken the lilrerty of including a response into this commu~cation

Response to EPA CommentsQuestions from email dated 962013

middot 1 EPA CommentQuestion MassCEC~s response ~o QUr question related to timing (see pages 4-5 of the MassCEC letter) s~tes U1at all ~e b~ting work will end on Nov 15 It is ~portantbulltha~ MassCEC lhderstand and acknowledge condition 2 in our June 13~ 2013letter (whiCh we have ~so 4lcluded ~ coidition 3middot in the letter we sent to~Y to NMFS reinitiatipg consultatio~) Spedfically we have s~ that EPA will need to eval~ate the fffects ofanY bWltinJ that takespla~ in one area in September before we can agree to allQw further b~ting before November 15

ResQ9nse MassCECs letter ofAugust28 2013 states that MassCEC anticipates that middotdue to thicker rock blastir+g woUld ~ tWo ~nths rather than one MassCECalso indicatedthat ifblasting~ on$epteniber 15 2Q13~t could conclude by November 15 2013 However given that MassCEC middotand USEPAare middot still working together on the blasting permit and sive-n that the contractor will peed severamplmiddotweeks to 1n9bilize equip~t prior to )lasting i~ ~ mely that blasting will extend beyond November 15 2013 Mas~CEC re~es that-it c~ot blast after the JaQuary 15 2014 time ofyear restriction AdCutio~ MaJsGEC understan~s and acknowledges Conditiqn 2 of~PAs June 13 2013letter which states $at EPAwill carefully ev~11~te t11e eftet~ ofthe ~lasting middottllat takes pl~ inmiddot the first areamiddot (the bulkhead area) prior to anowing furthermiddot blasting before November 1amp~

2 EPA CommentQuestion It would be helpful ifM~sCEC would confirm that in addition to installing silt and bubble curtains atmiddotthe--l)lastsites it iritends to install

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 45: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

- ~ middotmiddot ~middot

bull bull bull bull bull I o bull lt bull ~cbull - bullt middot ~~middot ~rmiddot -~ ~ bullmiddot

~ middot~ middot~

bull middot )middotmiddot -~ bull C ~middot 6

middot middot bull middotmiddotmiddot bull middotmiddot~~middot -=-bull bull -~ middot -~ middota an aaditiltmal Jilt~~ nprth of the_Plas~ Sitet tQ d~f~g_t centi~~middotjflt~il~~ v bullbull

anadr9irugtusfiStfromBeyb~tLflglgtQQre Nov 15 8$Ve stated ijlurJunet~ middot Jetrtr (carditiou S) middot middot middot

RCSttori$e Mass~ECCdnfi~~~titatit Willciimlj With CCnditionmiddoti1Wj~ EPJ~ ~une f3th letter on ~ibubbie ~rns roibfastirig ~tw~Ud J~r middotpdcr tc middotr~ovember rs 201middot3 -middotbull middot middotmiddot middot middot middot bull middotgt middot middot middot middot middot middot- middot middot middot middot middot middotJ- ~ bull bullmiddotbull~ bullmiddot_~~~middotbullmiddot~middot~ middot~-~ ~middot ~ middotmiddotpound_~4~~ ~- ) middotmiddot~middottbull ~ middot~middot - middotmiddot ~bull I~~middot middotg middotmiddot middot~f~oo

s ~PAConimentjQii~iknf Iiwotil~ ~helpul ifiviaSSCEG w6i11ti id1~it wllie ilie aiaditf i1at b~ted ~ltWilliie Cif sed middot middot middotmiddot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot middot middot 9 _spo t bull - bull _ middotbull bull bullbull bull middot middoti ~- bull - -middotmiddotmiddot - middot-~ ~ bull ~ tibull Response Masscnc has direCted its regritractoc to excaVate thelblat~ctocK- middot middot transfer it to th~ land ~Side Jtnd proeeso the blasted rock so that it c m he utt zed middotiJl the coristi-ltI~ri9n Qfthe JewB~rd Marine Commerce fenninaj NBMCT) rt~cEc ii1tenii~middotmiddottq u~ middotfie blasteltt rock onsite middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

- middot middot ~ 4 Pleasee-PJairt~~~-tl~$ub~tAAdvemiddot~~i~merts ofState explosiv~ middoteg~ikltio-lJ527 ~R Seption 1~middotwacA regui~~ th~ naDsortation starage ~ld ruu llingof ~lQ~~$ on 1Qn4and ves~t~ have ngtt ~en identified as al ARA1 ad not middot inchiaed in tlje sta~middots-ARARs-Jetter4middot Alteinatively please revise middot middotur ~middot anal3--sis and provicJAan acideJldum includmg these regulationampmiddot (Tgterc appars to be an intc~t ta cqmply with ~le~~reguuitions since Section 12 ofmiddottr J B~tirJPlan ~ferences ~csq regu~tions and the blasting specs (1 ~J l) aloso teq middotinJcompmiddotance With these reg-tlations) middot middot middot middot middot middot middotmiddotmiddotmiddot middot

bull middotmiddot~middot bull middot middotbull ~- ~~- middotbull bull bull ~middot i middotbullbull - ~ middot bull)

Reswnse~ The previous ARARs- 2ilaysisand the Commonwcalths~~~RS ~e- ~rimiddotmiddotmiddot did not list 527 CMR $ection 13 because MassDEP was aware at fr ~ time t ~erateclmiddot the letter that tQe co~~corwpuld be requirid middot19 f4lYmiddot c~rnpiy wi~- thi$ regulation J~steaamiddotct~andllM Uiis aij an A~~WU i$sue M~CEtgt~ nd the C~ntJ13CtOt slaii ltObl~ty ~tll the S~c e)-plosive Regulations $27 C fR 13 at d (~11 be obtainih~ an necesary ~~~~oqa~ Witlj S27 CMR 13~

5 ~~A QCgtrlmentQuestion EPA has reViewed th~ s~bmitted qpetanmiddotuat i3lastngPian middotmiddot middot

I ~ I bull

l) DOT liceusesJ)ennits (se(tlon22l) a) Expiosives S12pply nc 1) Cettificate oi itefiisttation ~eel 63013 U) Hazardous Maierid Saf~ty middotPeimit expired 4~f)j13 b) middot John Joseph I~tc middot middot ij middot cettificate ofkegisttation expired 63013 ii) Hazardous Material Safety Peniiit expircdp30ii or 20~3 iii) Truck Annual InspectiontJ expired last pelfonied for ~~cks m l r25 13

(S middot d13) middot ection middot

Response MassCEC tbrougll its resident engineer Will return middotthe OpraijfJhtil middot B~t Planto Cashznan~Wee~middotNB s~ped-reviseaizd resuhmiemiddot-ith each dthe

middot

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 46: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

highlightedpomts middotamong~~ otllet t~~co~men~ and middotrequire the eontractor to u~te thePhm prior to the ipitiao~ of lgtlas~g~ middot middot

6 Seetien 4~12 ~s missing the transportation route from explosiveamp wpplier tO middotFiSh Island

Response Ma6SCEC tllr()Jgli ~ts res~dent erlgineer will re~ the Operational B~t Plan to CashiilEIIl-Weeks NB stamped revise~ i-e~~ witllmiddotthis point highlighted amongst othertechnical eomments_ and-~- the contra~r to update themiddot Plan prior tq thejnitjaijo~ _of bJa_sting middot

7 Section 54 and 56 will need upruiting refleetS EPA conditions iil June ~d July lette~ with SOlb charge per cie~ymiddotlimit~ middotmiddot middot middot

Response I~assC~C~ through its reSident engineer vrip return the O~ratio~ B~st Planmiddotto ca~-Weeks NB stamped_ reviSe andyenesubmit With this point highligllted amongst othez technical coinmen~ and requ~ illecontractor tci update the P1ari prior to tlie initiation c)fbas~g~ middot

8 Secti9n 1~_21 Cites 527 CMR Section 13 but the actual text o the regulatiOns is mi~$mg_ middot

Response MassCEC through its reskterit engineer will return tq~ OperatiOnalmiddot BlastPlan to (a~lmlan-Weeks NB stamped c revise and resubmitraquoi with this poip~ hi~ted amqngstothermiddottechnlcal comments and require theeontractormiddotto update the Plan prior to the initia~on-of blastipg middot

Filially the Massachusetts Historic CommisslonfoiWardeg a copy -oftlleir September 6bull ~013lett~ to USEPA on the Palmers Island Lighthouse locatedin New Bedford Harbor and we wante4 to provide tile follo~_g information for your con_sideration~ MeurolSsCEgJully fq)preciates ana re~ theinlportance oftJie ~~fslslapd middot Ligh_tlto11se tQ_ the local community middotWe are working yery hard t0 insure tllatthis vital landmark is prot~ted ~rri any impacts frommiddot Jl)is projec~ middot

As you JolQw USACE regula~es the maxiAlum Viln~tiQns tl+at~e alloWable in association with the potential damage to adjacent struc~ These values are measured in Peak Particle Velocity (or PPV) and ila~ th~ t~ni~ 9finches p~r ~eccgtnd

bull Historic Structures PPVltOS insec 11 Residential Structure~ in Massachusetts PPVlt08 insec 11 Other Stmctures PPVlt20 insec

That is vibrations Jleasured below the readings listecfare unlikely io result in damage tC) the structure We have performed extensive modeling o the blasting and havehad a geotechnicalcnglneering consultant worlc on analyziil3 t)le potcm~ impacts from blasting As a result we are able to produoe eatirnatesof the anticipated vibratiOns for structures that_arelocated various distances from the nearestbla-cting_location The ~ation

~ uti]ed to determine the potentialvibratiori

im~t is shy

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 47: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

- -

bull

middotmiddotmiddot

bull P~ =fi X ( middotnbull I LS9t1~RQQt cgtFmiddot~vl ] B

~ middot

bull PPV Th~ P~Ut Pforticle ldocityj11 uiches per second - bull H =The PeakP8fficle Velociy Ultercept in inches~ second (~formulated

l~Jl hist()nc lgttastJng data frQrttth~ United Stites Bureau ofMin~s middotbull 8 The ~lo~ Fac~orJasformu~t~ Jrltnn hh~torilaquo bl~tingtl~ia ff)~middotthe

United State~rBureau ofMihes) middot middot bull middotW =Wejgpt ofehai-gepermiddotdtnay in pounds middot 10 cobull = Distaitee in feet to the Stni~Ire in qu~tion

bull bull H= 50 (the ~~r range-~fwrtericu~ted Stat~ BUreau of Min~ d~reg omiddot B ~ -16 (the upper ~e ofhistorlcUnitedStates 13lre~u ofampfltiesdata)middot bull W =2()0 ppunds tlle maXimum Charge evaluated bY o-r geotecl~11ical

cohSultant middot - bull -middot - imiddotmiddot

bull D =1350 feet tPe distan~ from tile nearetrt charge to thePalltrs Island lighthouse middot - middot middot middot middot middot middot middot middot

The re$~it of tbis an~mdica_tes that the ~aximUJn anticlpateQ vibAtiQ~ at the Palm~~ Isiand lighthouse is approXitnatelymiddot 0934 insee This Value is middotmiddot approxim~teJY lS ti1es 1~~- the middotn=commended level ~~ ty U$Acent~ As are8 we fecl cobA~enf that the7Yibrati9ns ~$0Cia~ with bla$ting Will not haVemiddot~ impact on the Palmers l~4lilthQU~ middot

-Nev~e~~ we haVE~middotrobuStmQnitorlng ~gram for the ligbthouse In partnership with-themiddot NewmiddotBcQCotdmiddotfiaibor DtWelopiPent CQmini~n we ha~-e COtr1plek-d an extensive pre-bl~t photograpnyand Viclee ofthe Palmers lsland ~ighthouse to ltiOCliJlent pre~btas~middotcqnditio~s~ Actditio~y-we are ~ittcd to middot ~ middot

~

bullmiddot A p~middotcon~truction s~~ral reviewmiddotof the Lig~thouse middot bull Rcentattirrie m~$ntement ~f1fie aCtUalVibrii~rlsmiddot genera~ duru4gmiddotb1~tin~ to

bull bullconfimibullthe middotfCSUltsof thefnodelirlg Qija ~ _ bull bull ~- bull bull -- I 2middotmiddotmiddot 0bullbull 1J q

bull Post-bli$1PHltltographYatid Video of tlJb Lighthou~ to-d~mert~-blasting middot conditions middot middot

MassCEC is fuliyengagelt~on theinlportance of the Palmers I~d Ligth~se ancJ middotbelieVe the aetions we haye c6nuiittea to wiU intrtre the integti1y of tru-1 hi$toric strut~re middot

middot bullbull t I ~ ~ ~- middot

~ ~middot

j0 bull bull bullbull bull bull ~~ -

middotmiddot middot7 middot~ ~ middot ~ middot bull ~ A bull ~ bull bullJ middot middotbull middotmiddotbull bull Imiddot bull bullbullbull

bull bull bull bull middot bull ~ ~middot

middotmiddot middoti middotmiddot-gt tbull ~ middot middot

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 48: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Asblasting is the most critical path actiVity i~r th~ p~e~ it is imperative that we move fo~ard with a final modificaticm as soon as p0$sibie middot

Thank you

Bill White Directo~ Offshore Wind Sector Devc~opment

middotI

middotmiddot~

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 49: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

middot-

CITY OF NEW ~BEDFORD middot -middot -middot - middot

JONATHAN F MJTCMLI MAYOR

bull

Stpteinber 13 2013

J~eSor owens middot~ Dltector omce otsttemiddotRestOnitlcm a ~~~~uon U$ Simronmental Protettton Aiency middot

smiddot Post omee Sq11ate suttemiddottoo middot

Boston MA 02109 middot

Re Paline($I$11Dd YJ9tbona

Dear Mr Owens

The Massachusetfs (1~ ~ergyCenter recently brOIJgbtto our atten~n middot cotresl)91ldence froJl the M8S$8chusetts HlstoricaJ Commissioncontending that

middot middot un~~rblastfng assOciatedwith the $QUth Terminal projectposes a risk to th~ ltstrnctunsl integrity ofthf P8lm~~ I~land JJgbthouse I Wrltemiddottomiddot8Xptes$tbat as the

steWard oftbe llglltbous~tlam$atfsfted with MaucBs determinatiolt which~ bas~ on~middot ind~ndent engfn~stu4f tbat ~ blasnngposes no $UCh rlsk

Weundersbl~die lt1~ ofMHCs concerns The lighthouse fs near and delr to NewBed(ord itbs sfumiddotQd for over tso years and played an indispensable

- role in epsuriqg tbe $ite p~p~fN$WB~ford~world reriowtr~mgQeet in -the196C~tury The fconlcstrUctQre fltfilctisdepicted on the Citys seal middotmiddotaverthe Jastseveralyears theCityhasdev()ted Signulf31lteflbrtand te$0urc8$_to providing publk a~andcleanlhj up ~tnets lstard itself The Ughthouse arid themiddot island

middot figure prominently in Ol1r Io~middottetm recrea~on and tourism plans We take anythi-eat tQ the lighthouse sepously middot

middot Wemiddothave reviewed themiddotengineering evaI~atlon perfonned by GZA middot Geo~roninerttal lncv a reputable engineering firm which is attached to tJlis middot ~~~middotthe~ort unequlvocallYmiddotJndlcates that the antidpated Vlbliltions frQm the ~laitlng and Qtfter ~~tedCOnstrlction aCtivities is muCh lbwer than any level tbit1HOwcl cause-damage to ttie $trUCture As noted b1 tl)emiddotreport tbe maxiiniun

middot antiCipated ~braticm at the Ugl)tbouse Is approximately OQ34insec This is appr0xlma~~tlmfj$J~tbanmiddottbereco~mended level e$lblfshed by Uni~

Stamp~BnumiddotofMJiles alld theMa5sachllSett3 Bufldlrtg COde 05 middotmfsec) ~sed on this ftrulingtbe report concludes thatmiddot-we tee contlde~t that the Vibrations assQclatechvitbmiddotbla$tlng will ncit have an bnpact qn the Palmers Island lfgh~ouse

middot~ lbull

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 50: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

To be doubly sure to avoid datri~ge to the ~gbth0l1se MassCBCinm~$middotto undertake a rigorou~ IUlderwatermoniwnng ofthe-effecf$ifany of the lasting Monitoriilg actiVities wDl include-~ asse$sment by a strumr~fengtneerduring and after blasting as w~ll as real time Vibration monitoring of the s~cture The City middot believes that these efforts ~re e1ppropriate to give tile public confidence that the Jgtlasting will not place the UghthoU$e injeopardy

We appreciateyou~ atten~onto th~s ma~ran~ the larger projeettQat is tile New Bedford Marine Commerce Terminal which as you lmow isa criticalmiddotmiddotmiddot middot infrastructure roject for e City and the Commqnw~altlt alik~ - middot

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 51: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Attachment 6

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 52: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

- -

ChetMyers

From Bachand Michaell NAE ltMich~eiLBachandusacearmymilgt Sent Thursday August 14 2014 806 AM middot To Bill White Cc Chet Myers Subject RE NBMCT Blastil)g Request U~CLASSIFIED)

Oassification UNCLASSIFIED caveats NONE

Chet Based on my diScussions yesterday with internal staff USACE will issue a communication notifying you and middotEPA of our acceptance Of the middotadditional blasting TheOilly point needing darification is hOW (email or letter) we will do It tO satisfy middotour internal middotneeds middot middot

Mike

Mlchae_l L Bachand PE levee Safety Program Manager

United StatesmiddotArtnv Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

middotConcord Massachusetts 01742 Office 9783188075 Cell 9785511656

--original Message-shyFrom Bill White [mailtobwhiteMassCECcoml Sent Thursdaymiddot August 14 2014 744AM To Bachand Michaell NAE Cc middotChet Myers Subject[EXTERNAL] NBMCT Blasting Request

Mike

Thanks for taking the time to speak with Otet and I yesterday let usknow your time line formiddot a communication frorirt~e USACE We plan to ~ake a submission the EPA today

~any thanks

Bill

Bill White Director Offshore Wind sector Development Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 63 Franknn Street BCston MA 02110 (617) 315-9330

1

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 53: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Catri Cincy middot

From Chet Myers ltcmyersfilpexcoscomgtSent Friday AIJgiJst 15 2014 ~08 AM To Dierker carl Lederer 1)8tf Lombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Williams Ann Colarusso

Phif11sa Kirnberfy middotCatri Cindy Marsh Michael middot Cc Aliciamiddot BartOn Jay Botkland Eric Hines (ehinesernessuriereom) Christopher Morris

qhristen Antonmiddotpautcraffeystatetnaus Bill White middot middot Subject middot FW Adqitional Blasting bull New Bedford Marine Commerce Termilal (UNCLASSIFIED)

Hi carl

Attached pleue find ~dditional follow-up hiformation from USACE applicable to Yesterdays submittat

Thanks

OtetMyets Apex Companies LlC

0) 617-728-0070 Xli3 M) ~17middot908-5178

--original Messag~ From Bachand Mi~ael LNAE [mailtoMichaei~Bachandusacearmymiij Sent Friday August 15 2014 84() AM To Chet Myers Cc Michalak Scott C NAE Bill White Eric ~ims (ehinesiemes5uriercom) Gregory Dolan Diane Baxter David carchedi 5usan Nilson Jay Borkland Christopher Moms (cmorrisMassCECcom) Garneau Alex R NAE Alexandermiddot Haag Michalak Scott CNAE Keegan Mi~hael FNAE Fedele Francis J NAE Macpherson John c NAE

middotSubject RE Additiopai Blasting- New Bedford Marin( Commerce Terminal UNCLASsiFIED)

ClassiflcatiQn UNClASSIFIED caveats NONE middot

Chet USACE has revJewedt~e attached additionalmiddot information and has no objection$ to the additional blasting work provided the work is doie following the same protocols established in our pr-evious 33 USC 408 amiddotpprovalletter Please coordinate middotwith USACE operatiors staff at the New Bedford Hurricane Bafier

USACE will issue a formal approvalletter however please use this email as an acceptance uritiJmiddotthe letter arrives Unfortunately 1amout of the offrce today at meetings a~dthen Qff next week The Officiai letterwill not be signed until the week of 825 at ~e earliest Should you have any middotquestions please feel free to contact me pn the mobile at the

bull I bull

nu111ber below

Regards

Michael L Bachand PE Levee safety Program Manager

United States Army ecraquorps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 54: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix C

EPAs January 22 2014 Approval with Conditions for the Substitution of Source

Material for Mitigation Measures

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 55: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Catri Cindy

From Catri Cindy Sent Wednesday January 22 2014 1225 PM To Bill White Chet Myers Karenkadamsusacearmymil Cc Sneeringer Paul J NAE Christopher Morris Christen Anton Eric Hines Gregory Dolan John

McAllister Dierker Carl Colarusso Phil Marsh Michael Williams Ann ~ombardo Ginny Stanley Elaine Lederer Dave LeClair Jacqueline Tisa Kimberly

Subject OU-3 Material

Bill

Thank you for your submittal dated January 16 that responded to EPAs questions sent to you in an email dated January 15 EPA has reviewed your responses and the data provided as well as the relevant data EPA gathered during design and construction completed to date on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell After conducting this review EPA approves MassCECs request to use clean material dredged from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell as capping material for mitigation in the OU3 pilot cap intertidal and subtidal areas subject to the following conditions

1 The clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell is used only for mitigation capping activities in the intertidal and subtidal areas of the Superfund OU3 pilot cap as represented on the map in Attachment 1 of MassCECs January 16 response

2 MassCEC is responsible to meet the objectives of the Final Mitigation Plan As such the clean material from the bottom of the Superfund lower harbor CAD cell must exhibit the physical and chemical characteristics to support the intertidal creation and subtidal enhancementuses described in the Final Mitigation Plan for the South Terminal Final Determination Such uses include enhancing spawning and foraging areas for winter flounder scup black sea bass and windowpane flounder enhancing foraging area for avian wildlife including the Common Tern and the Roseate Tern and creating horseshoe crab spawning habitat

3 MassCEC provides to EPA a newly revised table of Volume of Material to be Dredged (see Table 1 of EPAs Second Modification to the Final Determination) as well as a revised Final Mitigation Plan or a letter documenting revisions to the plan or replacement pages as appropriate to reflect the approved change

4 MassCEC continues to comply with the Final Mitigation Plan including obligations for maintenance (Section 8) performance standards (Section 9) and Monitoring (Section 10) which apply to the OU3 mitigation area as revised by the use of the Superfund lower harbor CAD material and

5 For proper disposal of the material dredged from the terminal channel and the Gifford Street boat basin which was originally identified for use as capping material for the OU3 pilot cap mitigation area identified in Attachment 1 of the January 16 response MassCEC will work with all appropriate parties including the US Army Corps of Engineers to either secure a new permit for offshore disposal modify the existing permit or dispose of the material at an appropriate land-based facility

Please be aware that EPA anticipates work on the Superfund Lower Harbor CAD cell will restart tomorrow January 23 and that the clean material dredged from the bottom is currently scheduled for offshore disposal Please contact Dave Lederer at (617) 918-1325 as soon as possible to coordinate use of this material for the above approved mitigation work

1

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 56: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix D

EPAs March 7 2014 Approval with Conditions for a Single Blasting Event

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 57: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Region l

5 Post Office Square Suite 100 B()ston MA 02109-3912 middot

March 7 2014

Via electronic mail bwhiteMassCECcom and First-Class Mail middot

Bill White Director Offshore Wind Sector Development

middot Massaehusetts Clean Energy Centermiddot middot 63 Fr8nklin Street Boston MA 02110

RE Request for Additional Blasting Event NewmiddotBedford Harbor Superfund Site State Enhancedmiddot Remedy- South Terminal Project

middotDear Mr White

EPA has reviewed MassCECs request dated February 28 2014 for one additional blasting event beyond the bl8$ting autholized in EPA Second Modification cgtf the South Terminal Project issued on September 3middot0~ 2013 Because the requested blasting event will occur after January 15 the date EPA identified in its Second Modification after which no blasting was allowed in order to protect various aquatic resources EPA has also

coord~ted with the National Marine Fisheries Services NMFS) concerning this requestmiddot

middot In its request MassCEC describes the additional action as one blasting event to be conducted in an area already authorized for blasting located immedjately along the edge ofthe terminal bulkhead The area of the rock to be blasted is approximately 50 feet in length ranging in width from approximately 2 to 10 feet and approximately 16 feet thick at its thickest point It is currently estimated that the total volume of the rockis

approximately 125 cubic yards It is anticipated that the blast will require approximately middotsix to 12 holes and that each hole would be loaded to approximately 32 pounds middotper

delay middotThe request goes on to state that this action is necessary because the prior middotauthorized blasting did not fully address a small portion of rock in this area that must bemiddot removed before constniction of the bulkhead can continue as scheduled within 15 days of the date of the request

To accpmmodate MassCECs schedule EPA expedited its review and coordination with NMFS EPA and NMFS reviewed the February 28 2014 submittal as well as blasting

- reportscontaining monitoring result$ submitted by MassCECs contractor

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 58: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

After conducting its review and coordination with NMFS EPA has determined that the proposed blast is smaller than the series ofblasts that MassCEC conducted in the same general area over the winter Those previous blastswere conducted il) accordance with requirements for a fish deterrent system a fisheries observer on site and monitoring for fish pre~ and post-blasting No significant amount of fish mortality was observed as a middot result of those blasts

This blast will occur during the spawning season ofwinter flounder To ensure compliance with Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under Magnuson-Stevensand the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) the fish deterrent system fisheries observer and middot monitoring plan must be in place Additionally we believe that risk to winter flounder from blasting is limited to a very small area around the blast zone due to the absence of a ~wim blampider in this demersal species Thus EPA believes that additional controls are not warranted and that we have fulfilled our obligation to miriimize impacts to EFH Because the blast will occur prior to the typical time period for spring migration of Atlantic sturgeon an identified endangered species EPA believes a re-initiation of the Endangered Species Consultation is not warranted as this activity would not pose any risk above and beyond what had been considered in the prior consultations with NMFS By email dated March 7 2014 NMFS has concurred with EPAs concl11sions and conclud~d that no further consultat~on or coordination is necessary

EPA has also reviewed the vibrations recorded in the blasting reports ~en pursuant to the Vibration Monitoring Program and notes that all readings from the winter blasting events were below the allowable limitS fot historic residential and other structures (including the hurricane barrier) that were identified in EPAs Second Modification document Because this is a smaller event conducted in an already approved location EPA does not believe this blasting event will exceed those allowable levels however the same monitoring program must be in place

As a result of its review and after coordinating with NMfS EPA determines that this is a minor change to its September 302014 Second Modification for the South Terminal Project and that the requested additional blasting eventcontinues to meet the substantive requirements ofall identified ARARs in EPAs SecondModification of the South middot Terminal Project as long as the following conditions are met

1 The additional blasting event remains as described in MassCECs Feb~ 28 2014letter (including a single bla5t event with 6-12 boreholes in one shot with delays with a maximum total explosive charge of 32 lb per borehole) and includes a minimucent 25 millisecond delay between charge detonations

2 For compliance with TSCA all contaminated material is removed and properly disposed in accordance with EPAs prior determinationS for ~outh Terminal

3 Implement all mitigation and monitoring measures required for poor blasting middotevents as described in EPAs Second Modification to protect aquatic resources

2

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 59: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

inCludingmiddot water quality moliitoring the fish deterrent system a fisheriesobserver on site and monitoring for fish pre- and post-blasting middot

4 Implement all impact parameter and monitoring measures required for prior blasting events as described in EPAs Second Modification for impact onmiddotland structures and in water structures including the historic Palmer LightStation and the hurricane barrier middot

5 Implement all measures for public notice to landowners and marinezs required for middot prior blasting events in accordance with EPAs Second Modification and

6 MassCEC provides EPA with a post-blasting report similar to the weekly blasting reports provided from prior blasting events

While thisrequested workrepresentsonly a minor change to its Second Modification for the South Terminal Project EPA will post a fact sheet on its New Bedford Harbor Supe~d Site web page htto~w2epa1ovnew-bedford-harbor summarizing the work

Ifyou have any questions please contact Ginny Lombardo at ( 617) 918-17 54 or Cynthia Catri middotat (617) 9181888 middot

--=-H---+- L

(o( Jame T O~ens III Ji~ector middot Office ofStte Remediation and Restoration

middot cc via electronic mail dierkercarlepagov will iamsannlalepa gov colarussophilepagov marsbmikelepagov catricvnthiaepagov lombardoginnyrepagov

3

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 60: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

Third Modification to EPAs Final Determination for the South Terminal Project New Bedford State Enhanced Remedy

Appendix E

Second Modification to November 19 2012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 61: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

Second Modification to November 192012 TSCA sect 76161(c) Determination for

New Bedford South Terminal Marine Facility

In its November 192012 Toxic Substances Control Act40 CFR sect 76161(c) Determination (November 19 2012 TSCA Determination) EPA found that disposal ofPCB-contaminated sediments containing less than(lt) 50 parts per million (ppm) intomiddot CAD cell 3 and removal of greater than (gt) 25 ppm with capping of less than or equal to (~) 25 ppm PCB-contaminated soils on certain upland areas would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met This November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

Subsequently the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination was modified on September 30 2013 (the First Modified TSCA Determination) to include removal of an additional11000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 and to increase the final maximum PCB concentration allowed onsite in upland areas of the main facility from ~ 25 ppm to lt 50 ppm without the need for confirmatory sampling EPA found that these activities would not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment provided certain conditions were met Inclusion of similar uplandmiddot remediation ofall or a portion of the Radio Tower parcel was requested at that time however the information provided was insufficient for EPA to include the Radio Tower parcel in the First Modified TSCA Determination The First Modified TSCA Determination was based on information set forth in the Administrative Record for the Second Modification of EPAs Determination for the New Bedford Harbor South Terminal Project

On July 25 2014 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (the Commonwealth) submitted a request for a second modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination to include removal of an additional30000 cubic yards ofPCBshycontaminated sediments from the navigational channel with disposal of these sediments into CAD cell 3 Documents dated July 25 2014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 25 2014 were provided in sttpport of this requested second modification More specifically 30000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediments with lt 50 ppm would be generated during the expansion of the navigational channel by 25 feet to the east and 50 feet to the west to a depth of -30 MLL W to -32 MLL W repre~ented by the red orange dark blue and light blue areas shown in the attached map (see Attachments 1 and 2)

In its requestlthe Commonwealthhas indicated that inclusion ofthese additional sediments into CAD cell 3 ~ould not require further expansion of CAD cell 3 as the additional capacity would be generated by self-compression of the sediments within CAD cell 3 and areduced volume of material was disposed in CAD cell 3 than was previously anticipated

1

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 62: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

In addition the Commonwealth has submitted and EPA has approved a work plan to address PCB contamination identified within a portion of the Radio Tower parcel as depicted on Attachment 3 Under the approved work plan identified PCBs with greater than or equal to (2) 50 ppm would be removed and PCB concentrations oflt 50 ppm would remain in-place beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap In addition the parcel would be changed from ancillary use for equipment storage to heavy load use Based on the characterization sampling conducted and the proposed excavation procedures confirmatory sampling was not proposed The approved final Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Rad_io Tower Parcel dated September 27 2014 including its attachments supports this proposed plan to address material with PCB concentrations ~ 50 ppm

Consistent with 40 CFR sect 76161(c) I have reviewed these documents regarding the proposed work and have determined that disposal of these additionallt 50 ppm PCB-contaminated sediments into CAD cell 3 and excavation and off-site disposal of 50 ppm PCB-contaminated soils from the portion of the Radio Tower parcel depicted on Attachment 3 of this Second Modified TSCA Determination with onsite disposal of upland soils with PCB concentrations lt 50 ppm beneath a minimum three-foot thick Dense Graded Aggregate cap will not pose an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment provided the following conditions are met middot

1 Unless otherwise modified below by this Second Modified TSCA Determination continuing compliance with all conditions contained in the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination (Appendix J(1) of the Final Determin~tion) as modified bythe First Modified TSCA Determination (Appendix D of the Second Modification to the Final Determination)

2 Remediation of identified PCB-contaminated soils with concentrations ~ 50 ppm and other site remediation work shall be conducted in accordance with the EPA-approved Remedial Work Plan for PCB Remedial Activities and Soil Management Plan for the Radio Tower parcel dated September 27 2014 and its attachments

3 Identified PCB-contaminated soils with greater than or equal to 2 50 ppm as depicted on Attachment 3 shall be excavated-to the depth and extent as depicted on Attachment 4 and shall e disposed off-site at a TSCA-approved disposal facility or a RCRA hazardous waste landfill in accordance with 40 CFR sect 76161(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) Confirmatory sampling shall not be required

4 A final grading plan for the Radio Tower parcel shall be submitted to EPA for review and approval prior to initiation ofgrading activities on said parcel

5 Maintenance of the ground surfaces shall be incorporated into the long-term monitoring plan to be established for the Main Terminal Facility (Condition 6 ofNovember 19 2012 TSCA Determination)

2

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 63: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

EPA Third Modification to the Final Determination for the South Terminal Project Appendix E New Bedford Harbor State Enhanced Remedy

This Second Modification to the November 192012 TSCA Determination is based on the information contained irt the July 252014 August 14 2014 and September 12 and 252014 submissions~ and the September 27 2014 final work plan and associated attachments Any proposed change(s) to work described in these submissions shall be provided to EPA Upon review EPA may find it necessary to revise this Second Modification to the November 19 2012 TSCA Determination or issue a new or further modified TSCA determination based on the proposed change(s)

eT Owens III Date Director Office of Site Remediation amp Restoration

Attachment 1 Map ofNavigational Channel Expansion Area Attachment 2 Map ofNavigational Channel PCB Concentrations Attachment 3 Map Radio Tower Parcel DGA-10 Area Attachment 4 Map ofDGA-10 Excavation Depths

3

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 64: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

25 Foot Expansion to the West

50 Foot Expansion to the East And Elimination of Tug

Channel

--14 TO -20 loiIW

-20 TO -25 loiIW

- 25 TO -28 loiIW

- 28 TO - 30 loiIW

-30 IIUW ~ DeEPER -

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 65: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

A+iaLhmllf 2

X S ae5f2 30

ULIA l AllLA NO T TO SCALE

OiTA bullL AREA NOI 10 SCAL

til~ (f)

~~ZgtO lt o~~a~

I 21lt-I ~

(]l ()~~g)l ~ ~~zmu )gt z Gl~S

zgt ~ m ur r ~ r

-- ---shy -

I ~ j nq 5 -

~ --~

~ 6 ~ ~Is ~ ~

8

n~ middot n I 6

0

-middot~

shy--shy middot~1(

a~- - ~tf[Diflo

OWNlt -Jif wtbull

m c uu

NEW BEDFORD _)MARINE COMMERCE

()TERMINAL

tgt T]

MASSACiiiJSETTS QEAN ENERGY CEWER l53 FRANWN STREET 3RO FLOOR OOSTON~ns

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 66: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

~GENQ

PROPERTY BOtJNOARY

Ill PCB SAMPlE LOCATlON

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COLLECTED AS A BUMgt DUPLICATE

25X25 GRID SURFICIAL

bull SAMPLE LOCATION (1 0) (CONCENTRATION

SHCMIlt IN PARENTHESIS) MOMTOR1NG Yopoundll

+ SOIL BORING

~ TESTftT

NOTE

1 BORING lOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX -oGA-10 M-ICH HAVE BEEN OMtnEO FROM THS FlGURE FOR BREVtTY

2 WIORATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARESHCMltINPARENTHESIS shy SHAOING INOICATES A RESUT BaON 1PPM YEUOW SHAOING INDICATES A RESULT BE~EN 1 AND 50PPM AND - SHADING INDtCAiES A RESULTS ABOVE 50PPM CONCENTRATIONS OF ADDITIONAL LABORATORY NWYSIS AAE NOT~

Jspoundss2Jg 8 bullltJgt A 2 3-8-4(~) MAP lL-shy

A-2013- 8 4(5)+ ~OI3-8 - 4( 1 ) i1A1 bull 44 ACRI _

bull bull

bull

lo

A

APEX

-~ shy----~~ shy--

wuoaaw-0 ltuz ooshyllJu51 sww w~t-z~

~ ~sect 15~sect ~~i

~~n~ ~~~ ~

~~~

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2
Page 67: TRANSMITTAL EMAIL FOR THIRD MODIFICATION TO SOUTH …pursuant to the 404(b )(1) guidelines. After careful review ofthe Commonwealth's submittals and based on the inforniation provided

LEGE_ojQ

Ill PCB SAMPLE LOCATION

M3 BLUE TEXT DENOTES SAMPLE WAS COllECTED AS A BUNO OUPUCATE-APPROXJMATE UMITS OF HOTSPOT EXCAVATION TO Z BGS

n

bull(10)

DENOTES SOIL BORING LOCATION

25x25 GRID SURFICW SAMPLE LOCATION (CONCENTRATION SHltMNIN PAAEiffiESIS)

NOTE

1 BORING LOCATIONS HAVE THE PREFIX [)GA10 WmiddotOCH HAVE BEEN a411TED FROM THS FIGURE FOR BREVITY

2 LA90RATORY DETERMINED PCB CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) ARE~ IN PARENTHESIS - SHAI)tNG INOCATESA RESULT BELOW 1PPM YEUOYJ SHADING INDICATES A RESULT BElWEEN 1 AND SOPPM AND

- SHAOINGINOICATESARESULTSABOVE50PPM CONCENTRATtoNS OF tOOtnONAL LASORATORY ANALYSIS ARE NOT SHlt)WII

APEX -----------------=---------- =~r4ctMO~~ct

middotmiddot

---middot--shy

_

11

~ ~ 3

~

bull~

A

1 ~

  • 093014 email part 2
  • Third Modification of South Terminal SDMS 565833 2 of 2