Introduction

At the evening workshop, participants divided into four groups of six to eight people and identified their concerns regarding the cleanup. Participants were randomly assigned to each group. Each person in the group listed his or her concerns and a recorder wrote them on a flip chart. Then each member ranked his or her top three concerns for getting information and education prior to selecting a site remedy. Each group then discussed their questions associated with the three to four highest-ranking concerns on the group’s list. Listed below are the results from each group.

Results

Group 1 Top Concerns

1. Potential future problems if contamination is not physically removed - to fish, to beach, to vegetation. Problems with containment-only option.
2. Are forms of natural remediation being investigated? Is H₂0₂ under consideration?
3. How will on-site work effect everyday life? Marina, park, trucks, noise, dust? Other examples, other sites? Recreation stopped?
4. Community image

• Impact of current WWTP on Bay water quality (during CSOs). Can it be separated from NSP site?
• Potential future problems if contamination is not physically removed (to fish, to beach opportunity, to vegetation).
• Are forms of natural remediation being investigated?
• Time and cost of cleanup. Will containment (low cost solution) prove effective over time?
• Perception of Ashland to visitors (bot + and -) [stigma of superfund]
• Where does waste go next?
• Opportunity to show community values for environmental protection (& image).
• Who pays for cleanup?
• What happens if we do nothing? For 5 years? Its been there a long time already
• How will on site work affect everyday life - marina, park, trucks, noise, dust

1. Human health - Dangers/effects; Drinking water - intake city water
2. Re-mediation option - choice, oversight, how/why, community acceptance, final determination - Project complete
3. Future land use - Toxicology MPG data, effects/sources
4. Price - Quality work for money

Public Health

• What can be done to protect water supply?
• What can be done to keep down vapors?
• What can be done to minimize dust and noise?
• On site treatment odors

• Keep clean up action going?
• Take phase steps to maintain access?
• Avoid offensive signage?
• Use positive messages about clean up?

• Fencing to discourage those who don’t read signs

• Protecting public health including the water supply
• Minimize time & money involved in disruption of lake front use
• Protecting public health during the interim (now) (i.e.: fencing)
• Disposal & air exposure to waste
• Financial Liability to residents of Ashland
• Protecting quality of city’s water supply
• Maximize local control over decisions
• During clean up maintaining accessibility to the lakefront
• Public safety during clean up (odors, equipment, etc.)
• Sampling of areas where creosote poles are stored
• Minimize dust and lower waste being hauled

1. Overall lake health - other communities watching, need more info to citizens (how is lake affected).
What is a healthy lake?
2. Health concerns – youth & adult, wildlife & aquatics – short term, long term, during clean up (noise, air, water)
3. Cost – how much?, who pays?, will state get involved?, if it goes to Superfund, will it become a long legal battle, more money, no clean up?

• Near shore currents, contamination movement
• What to do with contaminants
• Disruption of "normal life"
• Negative public relations - image
• Continued education & participation
• Future lakefront pollution
• Health concerns for youth
• Long term monitoring
• Cost
• Overall lake health
• Health issues associated with clean up
• Permanent clean up – quality
• Wildlife health – aquatics
• Concern for aesthetics (tourism, recreation)