United States"
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R05-88/078
September 1988
&EPA Superfund
-------
5027'2. 101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION '11. REPORT NO.
PAGE , EPA/ROD/R05-8~/078
4. Title end Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Allied Chemical, OH
Second Remedial Action - Final
12.
3. RecipIent's Accession No.
5. Report Date
09/29/88
6.
7. Author(s)
8. Perlormini Organization Rept. No.
9. Perlormini Oraanization Name and Address
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No,
(C)
(G)
15. Supplementary Notes
. 113. Type of Report &' Pe;;~d- C~ve;;;- .
I 800/000
/14.
-L-
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection
°401 M str~et, S.~.
~ashington, D.C. 2046U
Agency
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words) ,
The Allied Chemical site is located in the City of Tronton, La~rence County, Ohio.
This remedial action addresses the Goldcamp Disposal Area (GDA) operable unl~ of the
3ite. The other operacle unit, comprised of the coke plant, lagoons, and the tar 91ant,
is ctddressed in a separate remedial action.. The GDA is a four-acre disposal pit located
in a mixed industrial/ business/residential area Dounded by Third Street on the east and
the Ohio River on the southwest. Several businesses and institutions are within 100
:eet of GDA. Allied Chemical and Dye Company has owned the property since 1955. The,
GDA was a sand and gravel pit used for disposal of various chemical \vastes from three
sources between 1945 and 1977. The wastes include: anthracene residue, anthracene
salts, phthalic anhydride residue, and miscellaneous process wastes from the Tar Plant;
foundry sand containiny heavy metals, phenolics, and oils from the Dayton ~alleaole Iron
Company; and wastes disposed of by the Goldcamp Gravel Company. In 1977, All~ed decided
to discontinue use of the GDA Eor disposal of chemical wastes. Allied and :.ts
contractor, in consultation with the Ohio Environmental Protect~on Agency (03PA),
~~mpleted a closure project at the site in August 1980, ~hich involved removal af
standing liquids and filling and capping the site with clay. Subsequent hydrogeologi=
and water quality investigations indi=ated that there is ground water contamination at
(See Attacned Sheet)
i~' , Document Analysis a. Descriptors
, :tecord of Decision
Allied Chemical, OH
Se~ond Remedial Ac~ion - Final
Contaminated Media: gw, soil,
Kej Contaminants: inorganics (cyanide),
b. Identifie~/Open.Ended Terms
metals, organics (PAHs, phenols), VOCs (oenzene)
c. COSATI Field/Group
\vailabllity Statement
I 19. Security Class (This Report)
I None
21. No. of Pages
84
--- -- -..-- - -
20. Security Class (This Page)
None
22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.18)
See Instructions on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTlS-35)
-------
?A/ROD/R05-88/U78
.1lied Chemical, OH
Second Remedial Action - Final
16.
ABS'f~AeT (continued)
th~ site which may pose a threat to public health through migration. The volume of the
disposal area is approximately 300,000 yd3. In addition to this primary area of
contamination, there is a zone of nonaqueous-phase contaminants which have migrated
~through the aquifer to the underlying impermeable bedrock layer. The extent of ~~e
contaminated area is uncertain, but the volume is estimated to be 156,000 yd3. The
surface of the GDA is also a source of contamination because many s~~stanc~s ~a'12 oozej
~
up through the existing cap. The primary contaminants of conce~~ aEfect~ng r~2 s~il ~~j
yround water are voes including benzene, other organics including phenols and ?A~s, 3nd
inorganics including cyanide.
The selected remedial action for this site includes: construction 0: a slurry wall
around the disposal area from ground surface into the low permeabil~ty bedrock;
installation of a multi-media ReRA cap over the surface of the disposal 3rea; extra~t~on
and onsite treatment of ground water from inside and outside the contaLnl~enr system;
provision of an alternate ~ater supply for the Ironton Iron Company until groun~ ~3~ec
cleanup levels are met; imposition of deed restrictions to li~it fU~Jre uses 0f t~e'
'property; and preparation of a supplemental RI/FS to i1entify the e~tent and ~a~u:e ~~
the nonaqueous-phase contaminant layer with imple~enta1ion of the Agency-appr~~ed r2~eJ!
for ~his con~amina~ion, if d~fferent from tne present containmen~ a1tecna~ive. The
stima~ed present worth cost for this remedial action is $13,130,000 witj annual O&~
-------
IE:U\RATIrn Em 'lHE HtU.Isa.l Area Operable Unit of the Allied O1enical/Ironton Coke
si te, in Iranton, Ohio, developed in accordance with CERC:rA, as amended by
Si\RA, and, to the extent practicable, the National Contingency Plan. '!his
decision'is based on the administrative record for this site. '!he attached
index identifies, the itans that comprise the administrative record up:>n
which the selection of the reneclial action is based.
'1he State of Ohio has concurred on the selected ranedy.
~Ptian of the selected Reredv
'!his ranedial action is the fillal action for the Goldcamp Disp:>sal Area
operable unit, which is one of tYJO operable units for the site. 'D1.is
operable unit addresses a discrete waste disp:>sal area, called the C..oldcamp
DisI=QSal Area, and ground water contamination associated with the disp:>sal
area. '!he renedy addresses the principal threats pJsed by the Goldcamp
DispJsa.l Area by extracting and treating contaminated ground water which
has migrated from the disp:>sal area and by isolating and containing the
'WaSte diSpJsa.l area as a future source of ground water contamination. '1he
second operable unit involves remediation of the other discrete pJrtion of
the site which includes the coke plant, tar plant, and lagoon areas and
soil, sed.iment, and ground water contamination associated with those areas.
'1he major comp:ments of the GoldcaITp ,DispJsal Area rem:dy include:
,
Construction of a low permeability slurry wall around the disI=Qsal
area from ground surface into the low penneability bedrock.
Installation of a multi -media RrnA-compliant cap over the surface of
the dispJsa.l area.
Continuous extraction and on-site treatment of ground water. within
the containment systen..
EXtraction and on-site treatment of contaminated ground water outside
the containment systen until cleanup standards are achieved.
Municipal water. hook-up for in-plant ~table and sanitary uses at
Ironton Iron Inc. until ground water contaminant .levels meet specific
-------
-2-
Deed restrictions to limit fUture uses of the property on which the
di5p:>sal ,area is located.. .
Preparation of a 5UpplenentaJ. ratatial investigation and feasibility
stUdy to identify the extent am nature of a secondary source of grOUl1d
water contamination (non-aqueous phase SUbstance layer) and to develop
and evaluate remedial alternatives for the secondary source, and
implerent the Agency apprOVed NAPS re:nedy, if different from the present
containment alternative.
D::claration
. 'Ihe selected re:nedy is protective of human health and the environrrent,
attains Federal and State requirerents that are applicable or relevant
and appropriate to the remedial action, is consistent, to the extent
practiCable, With the N:P, and is cost effective. This renedy Utilizes
pemanent SOlutions and alternative treatment (or resource recovery)
technologies to the maxim.nn extent.-practicable. Portions of this renedy
satiSfy the statutory preference for remedies that anploy treatment that
reduce toxicity, Irobi Ii ty, or volume of cont.amina:ots as a principal
elenent ~ A principal threat at the site, ground water contamination,
will be addressed through treatment Which pemanently and significantly
reduces the toxicit.y, Irobility, or VOlume of the existing ground water
contamination. However, another threat, the di5p:>sal area itself, \v'ill
be addresSed through containment rather than treatment. Because of the
disp:>sal area size; the fact that there are no on-site hot 5p:>ts
representing major sources of contamination; the diffiCUlties in
implenenting' an excavation and treatment renedy; and the high cost of
incineration, it is not practiCable to excavate and treat the disp:>sal
area.
Because this remedy will result in hazardous SUbstances renaini.ng on-site
atove health-based levels, a review will be conducted no less than once
every five years after ccmnencerem: of reneclial action to ensure that the
ranedy continues to provide adequate prQtection of human health and the
environment. .
v
949 frt
'Date I I
,!
Valdas V.
Regional Admin' trator
-------
nFrT~m SU-M\RY
I.
Site Narre. Location. am DescriDtim
'D1e Allied O1.aniCal/Ironton COke site is located in the City of
Irontan, Lawrence Cotmty, Ohio (Figure 1). '1he site is comprised of
the area occupied by the coke plant am lagoons, the Tar Plant, and.
the GOldcamp DiSpJSal Area (Figure 2). '!he site has teen divided
into two operable units, one to address the coke plant, lagoQ.T)S, and
the Tar Plant areas, and the. other to address the Goldcamp DiSp:)sal
Area. (GI::F>.). 'Ihis Record of Decision addresses the GIj\ operable unit
of the site. .
The GOldcarnp DiSpJSal Area. is an approximately 4 acre clispJSal pit
which extends nearly 40 feet 00wn fran ground surface. '!he GI:F>.. is
presently covered with soil an:i secured from p.lblic access by a
fence.
.
E is located in a mixed industrial/bUsiness/residential area of
I nton. It is OOunded on the east by 'Ihird Street anj on the
so rest by the Ohio River. '!he GI:]\. is not located in a. floodplain.
Several businesses and institutions are within 100 feet of the GIJ.i\.
The ground water near the GDl>.. occurs in the alluvial sand and gravel
aquifer and discharges to the Ohio River. The ground water is of
pJtable quality. According to city. Officials, private residents use
mtmicipal water which is draMl from the Ohio River. The City of
Ironton water intake is awroximately 1.8 miles downstream fran the
GD.i\. The nearest ground water user is Ironton Iron Ire., located
approximately 1000 feet north of the ~.
'!he rrajor surface water 1:x::dy in the area is the Ohio River. '!he D'1io
Ri ver is used extensively for traI1Sp:)rtation, drinking water, and
recrea.tion. The Ohio River is also used for the discharge of treated
industrial and nunicipal waste.
II..
Si te Historv am EnforcarEl1t. kti vi ties
A. OperatiOnal History:
The GlJ\" a fonner sand and gravel pit, was used for disp:Jsal of Tar
Plant process chanical wastes during the pericd of 1945 to 1977. The
di5p:)sal site receiv-w wastes fram three sources durin:J its
operational history. The wastes included:
o
. .
Anthracene residu.e, anthracene salts, phtJ1alic anhydride residue,
and miscellaneous process wastes from the Tar Plant. '!he
dittillation rottans from the production of phthalic anhydride
fran naphthalene are a listed hazar:dous woste (K024) based on
~thalic anhydride and 1,4-naphthoquinone content.
-------
%
3
<4
c:
C
FI G U R E
SITE LOCATION MAP
SCALE
PREPARED FOR
r
o
.
10
,
20
~
30 MILES
ALL lED - SIGN A L INC.
MORR ISTOWN, NEW JER SEY
W,} INTERNATIONAL
~ TECEN:)LCGY
'. Ca;:POi:ATION
-------
,-- -
/:
I ,
I: )
r
,'" \V YI\ NOK r S Tllfr T
.. . . I.:, , .~\ ref M f T f R r R 0 A 0
I .., 'Cf:Mf~fRi, , '0 /h~ , .
'UH'DGf;", ''''I~':'~~' /U,S, ROUTE 52
" '...,..'J'", , ,
.', ',..,.'/ I """'\ ~t, \"\ I, \ ~.,,~~ "-
.1 .,. , I I (.. , ....
-,-.. --', , ~" /" ' ">9 \ "'. ',. """
.'f"".""" 'I~";,.,\' ,~~t' ~-,...;.~.~~~ '
":-"':,, , '--"""~,; '" '''''''X''''' ,'LA(jOONI\~~~-: .--..,; :-,,'
. ' ,,' ,,', I ...:~, " '" ',( V \ d... ~ - - "
",-. ,-..:, , ' ,""~,:,..~~:-:,., ,~~='.:g~,~LAGOON" No,' 2 't' :,:"",-...:
, '" ' . , , '1\'" \ f'" .. - ,/'\' ~ ' , ~ ., , ........ ~ '
:"~ ~ > ,I :.\ L' ~\'~,-\J~':"-~~.>~~ '~l'AGO'ON'."~b,:) ,1.~~'-:i
' () " , '" " ,',,"'.\,,". I' '., I ,,' ');;0... 'f ' ''''_..,.,
Ii ~- ' " '. : .:' ";,::><'4~~I,~~~I,'" /I~;\ 8) '~' '\-l ~ ~'~ON No, 5 \:-1' ", ',> ~
o ,", - '-col<;t;\,'.'\ :11,.,") ."..u" " , . \,...,.... " ;. I \\1.1 " ;
- '. ",.' ~~',. -" ,.' . 'to .. '-
',.. Q: :,' ;,1",.,', t' PlAft4fS\''-',,', ,:-"...0,: \' , "\~
. . ~. . ..... '. ", . , '..', . \. '."~~. - O. . , . ",'
' , .', ",,,, , "',, ':, '"t))~\;,:1 .LAGO, N. No.' '.;"
, . 6' ;',' ~I~: ',>" ,~'~:~~'!~~,S\~:;~~~,~~,:~~ 'RONTON COAL CO: \,,< J RD, STREE T
'" . '.'" _lORA'N:'.:,-,:~:",~-,:,;~~,I,\:~~a'i ' ,,',' _."":-'-"=\ ~".., BR'DGE
I rUlIlolI ).. """'~" S r REf r, '1("" :--:~:, ~' : .)r...,~ .... '. '-, .~ ...--:
" - J1 !, ' 0'\' ".. I r, I;'};:'"": 'J , ' " .' ,'-_":k_.~;:-"
11'1111 , 1- ,', i .. >,~' '.--' " ~-.., I"
r - , ... » . -' A I :', ,.-.. . ~ l.. .. . .
111 ' , "'" 'T " .. "," 'I 1 '
\. lJ' --, n' :::. :,' ";'I:~"''I':'o~, :',':'..< ....... !-:,', ,,:. , ;' ~. "']/--:. I' .' .
, " ' . r" ,~: i. \; ~','),.'., ' ' "I~~' """ ,'/) .'.':',1 ,,' , -": ---.'<,
, "I' ' . ,", , J~' STR fET ' ,; ,_..- -... " .-
, .. ~-- '.' _& . JI .....
, ," ~---:::::-:--:-'-.~ 0' COAL GROVE
," ro --- ..~-~ , . ,Wfll F'ELD
'::~" _"IL------ , TAR PLANT ~
.. "'~ '\ , "J
-. GOtnCAMP \ 'lOW OH,O R'VeR V
IJ, S ,. 0 S 1\ l A RE A .- \ -.-- - ~..." :+
"
i
.!.:
'101..
011'0 STATE
ROUTE 243
"
"
j
if' fl II' ,."
.,
'l
".
,~+
"
,~
","".....,.,... "..' """'ltll'" fI'
'':'\'''0' ".'"'-'1'1.." """111111.... I"
"1(1".,.,. "~h1. )',1.. I'.~",,, ..
.,0' -... 'f'.... .
0''''.'_40-
,
,
SCALr
~
o )00
~
.000 , " ,
'IGURE2
PLAN 0' pnOJECT ARCA,SIH
80UNIJAII'ES ANI! 1<1.
(;COC,HIII'IIIC lOCllfllII/S
'~I PU(O '0.
AlU'O CORPonATION
MOHR'S lOWl/, tlrW JI fj~[ Y
"-
,
,
rn INTrANATIOtlAl,
Tl!:"", 'I.H;',
-------
-2-
o Foundary sand from Dayton Malleable Iron CCIT1paI1y' (n:JW the location
of Ironton Iron, In:.) containing heavy metals, Fhenolics, am
oils. '
o Wastes di5pJsed by the Gola:aInp Gravel COITp3l1y.
The ~ was originally tw'O tract.s of land: 11.63 acres were orig-
inally owned by Marting Iron and Steel Company, which was 'sold to
Margaret V. Goldcamp on December 5, 1938, and 0.04 acre adjacent to
'Ihird Street originally owned by Ashland Iron and Bridge Company,
which was SOld to Henry 1. Goldcarrp on August 8, 1943 (Title Insur-
ance Company of Mirmesota, 1955). Allied Glenical and Dye CCiTpaI1y
signed an option agreanent for the dispoSal site on M3.rch 30, 1955
(Wallunr, 1982) and later p..Irchased the property in June 1955
(Prop:rty Deed, 1955).
In 1977, Allied decided to discontil1lle use of the GDA for diSPJsal of
chanical wastes and to rerrove the ponded water, diS!=OSe 'of it usir..g
an outside disp:>siu. canpany,'-and COv-e!" the rerraining waste.
Allied and its contractor in consultation with the Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (O~) dev-eloped a plan for clcsure of the GJi\.
The closure in::luded, rerroval of standing liquids and filling and
capping of the site with clay. '
The c 10sure of the GI:1\ began with the water reroval in the late
spring of 1979. The filling operation began in N:JVember 1979 but was
~ed due to weather conditions on Decemt:er 21, 197.9 and resumed
in M3.y 1980. The disp:>sal site closure project was canpleted in
August 1980. ' ,
B. CERCI.A Rerov""al 'At:::ti vi. ties :
The U. S~ Environmental 'Protectio~ Agercy (U. s. EPA), under authority
of CER::IA or the SUt=erfund ~, assigned the Allied O1eniCal/Ironton"
Coke site in Ironton, Ohio to its NatiOnal Priorities List (NFL) of
hazardous waste sites in SeptEJnber 1983. 'I'he assignrrent of this site
to the NFL was rrede at the request of the OEPA, based on resUlts of
several hydrogeologic and water quality investigations conducted at '
the site during the p:riOd fran 1978 to 1983. The results of these
investigations indicated that ground water contamination exists at
the site and through migration zre.y FOse a threat to the 'p.lblic
health, 'Welfare, and environITel1t. The site was NJ. 167 on the
original NFL.
In August 1983, D'App:>lonia Waste Managenent Services, Inc. (acquired, ,
by IT effective r1arch 1984), was retained by Frost and Jacobs for
~
-------
-3-
Allied to design and llnplerent a remedial investigation/feasibility
study (RI/FS) for the Ironton Coke site. A. site assessment was
performed in O:tober 1983 by IT prior to initiation of the RI/FS.
'DUs assessrrent highlighted. ~ential contamination problems based on
a conpilation, review, and evaluation of existing site-specific data.
'!he RI was then designed on the basis of the results of the ccrrpleted
site. assessment and in accordance with guidelines sp:cified by the
U.S. EPA and OEPA. Fhase I of the RI was initiated. in late O::tober
1983. During discussions with the U.S.. EPA. arrl OEPA. in November
1983, the scq;:e of work for the RI/FS was IT'Odified and expanded. At
that t:ilre, the contract with Frost and Jacobs for COITpletion of the
RI/FS was transferred to Allied COI1X>ration. (Allied) .
Negotiations between Allied, U.S. EPA., and OEPA continued during 'the.
pericd in which IT carx!ucted Phase I of the RI (O:tober 1983 to April
1984) and cuJ..m:i.nated on April 13, 1984 with. the signing of an
Administrative Order on Consent. The Order rE::quired Allied. to .
complete the RI and. p:rfonn. the FS in accordan:e with the RI/FS work'
plan approved by the U. S. EPA and OEPA. '!he work plan was
incoq:orated at Exhibit A of the Order.
A report of the initial site .assessme.'1t and, the Phase I RI was
sut:Initted to the U.S. EPA and OEPA in April 1984. Review of these
sutmittals and discussion of the details of the Phase II RI work plan
occurred between April and June 1984. IT conducted the Phase II
field investigations between mid-June and mid---<:£tober 1984 and
Completed the draft RI report in February 1985. Subsequent to review
and. evaluation of the draft RI reI:Ort, the final RI rePJrt was .
.su1:mi tted in July 1986 (IT, Final Report - Raredial Investigation,
July 1986). Phase I and II RI activities included surface and
subsurface soi 1 sarrpling, ground and surface water sarrpling, waste
characteri zation, surface geq:t1ysical testing, limited air Sanpling,
and extensi VB ground water Irodeling.
After completion of the RI, a decision was made betW'eeI1 the U.S: EPA;
OEPA, and Allied to sutxJ.ivide the Ironton Coke site into two operable
uni ts during the dev~lopnent of the FS documents. The two Operable
uni ts have been identified as the Goldcarrp D:lSPJSal Area (GDA) and
the COke Plant/Lagoon Area (CPI.A). 'The ~ op:rable unit includes
the diSPJsal area itself and all other areas which have been impacted
by the disp:>sal area. '!he CPIA operable unit inCludes the rena.inder
of the si te a.nj all other site-impacted areas outside of the
influence of the GU\.. The GI:i\ FS was completed in August 1988..
In addition to the twu operable units, Allied is conducting a reroval
aCtion under an Administrative Order on Consent signed in M3rch 1987
by U. S., £PA, OEPA and Allied. 'D1eOrder provides for the rcrroval of
tanks and their contents located on the coke plant portion of the
-------
-4-
C. CERCIA Enforcanent ~ivities:
Allied Signa]. conducted the site RI am GLP\ FS in accordance with'an
Mministrative Order on Consent betW'eerl Allied, U.S. EPA, and OEPA.
Allied continues to conduct the FS for the CPIA operable unit under
the same April 1984 Order.
, .
Allied is a..Lso conducting a retDVal action at the coke plant IX>rtion
of the site in accordance with a March 1987 COnsent Order between
Allied, U.S. EPA, and OEPA.
U.S. EPA sent special notice- letters for the GJa. ranectial action to
Allied-Signa]. (as- owner/operator and generator) and Am:ast Industrial
Coq::oration (as generator) on August 8, 1988. A 60-day roratorium on
reredial action ccmren:ed tIp)11 receipt by Allied and Am:ast of the
special notice letter.
If U.S., EPA receives a "gOOd faith" Prop:)sal within the 60-day
period, the roratorium will te extended an additiOnal 60 days.
III.
Q:mmni tv Relations HistoIT
U.S. EPA and OEPA have conducted the COITtTU.Inity relations activities'
at the site. several fact sheets have been distributed to keep the
cormumi ty infOnned of the site acti v"i ties. A plblic meeting was held
in Decenber 1986 to present the findin:3's of the ReneWal
Investigation. -
In accordance with crnc:rA section 113, U.S. EPA plblished a notice in
a local newspaper the week of August 1, 1988 announcin:3' the
availability- of the ~ FS and PrOFOsed Plan, the date and tirre of
the plblic meeting, am the duration of the fOrnal p..Iblic COImEnt
period. 'The announcerrent. also included a brief analysis of the
proposed. plan and altema~i ve P1ar:-? that were cOnsidered..
~
- .
A reasonable p.Iblic CCITrrleI1t Feriod of rrore than th~ 21 days r~ired
by the N:P was established fran August 8 to 5eptenber 6, 1988. A
public meeting was held on August 16, 1988 at the Ohio University,
Ironton CarT1pl.S in accordance with CERaA Section 117. A transcript:
of that meetin:3' is contained in the Administrative Record for the GDA
Operable Unit. The Resp:msiveness SllrmB.ry contains a resp:mse to
each of the significant corrrnents, criticisms, and new data sutrnitted
in written or oral presentations. This Record of Decision serves as
the statenent of the basis and p.Irp:>se of the selected action for the
-------
-5-
IV.. ScoPe an:l Role of OPerable Unit
'!he GI::F\is one of two operable tmits for the Allied O1enical/Ironton
. Coke site. '!he other operable tmit addresses the coke plant, lagoon,
and Tar Plant areas of the site and the areas contaminated by these
IX>rtions of the site. Because the GI::F\ is a discrete disIX>sal area
separate from the coke plant/lagoon areas and has different migration
. pathways and receptors, Allied, U. 5. EPA, and OEPA agreed it' wOS best
to study the IX>tential GI::F\ reneciial alternatives separate from the
other IX>rtions of the site.
'!he GI:!l\ is a major p:)rtion of the site. The gr01.md w'ater is the main
contaminant migration pathway of concern at the GI::F\ and therefore,
migration of contaminated ground water is a principal threat at the
GI::F\ .
v.
Sl.mm:ITv of 5i te OJaracteristics
'!he GDA is a former sand and gr~vel pit used for the diSIX>sal of
hazardous substances from the Tar Plant and a nearby iron foundry.
. The disp::>Sal area is located wi thin an approxwtely aD-foot layer of
sand and gravel alluvial material. Ground water is found in the sand
and gravel tmi t from abJut 35 feet beneath ground water surface to 80
feet (b€drock level). 'nle oottorn of the GDA is approximately 40 feet
beneath ground surface. In 1961, the Greenup Dam was constructed on
the Ohio River raising the river level, and hence, the ground water
table. This water level rise caused the ground water level to be
elevated abJve the rottom of the GDA wastes. Figure 3 depicts the
present subsurface cond;i tions at the ~.
Ground water in the sand and gravel unit roves west toward the Ohio
River with a northerly component toward the pumping Ironton Iron Inc.
prOduction wells located approximately 1000 feet north of the GDA.
'!he sand and gravel aquifer is underlain by canpetent, relatively
:impenneable bedrock.' .
As part of the RI, roni toring wells and soil rorings were installed
near and through the GDA to determine the site characteristics. .
Figure 4 depiCts the location of the sanpling p:)ints. Tables 1, 2 I
and 3 indicate contaminant levels found in the soil and ground water
at the referenCed locations. '!he contaminants of concern are
benzene, phenolics, naphthalene, IX>lynuclear aromatic hydrocarrons
(PAHs), cyanide, aim-onia, sulfide, and chloride. '!he Rr ReIX>rt .
should be referenced for a fuil discussion of site characteristics.
Midway through the FS, additional f:ield work was conducted to collect
information for refinement of the remedial alternatives under
-------
f.JORFOL/( 0
\VESTEI?N
nl\'LWI\Y~
. ~~
APPROXIMA TE EXISTING
GROUND SURFACE
'.
01110
-IIIVEI? -'l t
I'
. I
-'--" --7
:;=s-'-~"'~-~r-
, .... GDI\ WI\STE, r ',' .' ""', ':,,' !."'~'
. , 40' . . . .. ~
. . PIT' '...1 ""'"
. .., .' , . .
- . .', ""0 '. I ..' ~,. ~ ". ,
., ' , .",' -.'.. . . .'
145' SAtin & GRAVEL' '.' '." "". . .
ArIUlrER
-- r,f.~~
tJ5' Unsaturate~ Sand & Gravel
.f .'".'
,,'\"
-'~
~-. -
. 't¥/.¥/-¥/~ .
BEDROCK
Figure 3
';1111 ~IIIJ~II" fLln!
-------
L II It ,\,' ~... / -
STkCfl . . I: '\ ::......_~ / j/
[-_____m_~J l_n_~~J\ r-:i~~ )~/
[------------J [------- -f~-\\ 0" ~,.~~=~~. ,/
STlifET - 'n nl r-- ,-:;---- r---,
T-51!) I'-LJ-':I L--~-----, I I
I III ----..... L
I' "I (/ :000 '.c=r-_I I 000
I ~I I o~ 0 000-
~I I g 00000
. Iftf"'-J I I ~ ouoo
---- ~ L J V.v 0
----," I I --,- . ~ (1)000
\\ I " - I \ 0 0000
" \ In,... ,If)' \ '-/0 0 000
d ,L.rJ/ll.A I (j)O. . "PPW"~OOO
\~....~;'J / J r---\ 0 .00
".;-/J-I~ -'7 \. /./ 00 ~ . ,..~
~ // 0 ..-~- 00 ~'
-~ ~~ ~ .
- a-7 - , ....
f{\l\ ~+-!;~~
6\ ~ k ~-+-t":t:!.~-+..--+-.
IJ' . --'t-H",-~ -------
.~~~~-,.,.~_. --:::==------- ..,
-..- ~ ~ . --:=-- ----
-t-~ -- --
~~==---::::=.:=::::::-,~s ftfW-/4 ..'
::::::==-1-45 ------
'-40 .-----..
---
\-
:-~ JL )
; =_~?9L__--___-_J r=~---',
' n______-J [-----------] \
r~: -
I~.:. 1IC.&0 I P
,. ] I I
- , . L--.
I --_J I
:t --~-- n
L
J
'1;
3,d
;=
r
00
o
MW-20 0 0
0°
[
J
~.~.
-"
~
OHIO
RlvtR
lEGEND
. .
tAW.l
~ GOlDCAMP ~SPOSAlAREA
MONITORING WELLS.
IIC'7
e IROrITON IRON CORPORATION
PRODUCTION WELLS
,./
.., TAli PLANT GROUND WATER
MONITORING WELLS
TWill.'
. TAR PLANT PRODUCTION WElL
11./
~ BORINGS
'......,. (u"",o"""u,..,
-. f f''''''''.'''''''1 '.'M"f"
,.,-.......".. '..t.......,
NOTES:
I. t.4W-6 IS I!lOO HET
NORTIIEAS1 Of 101"'-2.
2. SH flGUHE 1- 4 fOR
SECTION A-A'
SCAtf
~
o 200
. I
400 rUT
, IGuRE 4
PLAN AND lOCATION Of SITE
UONITORING WClLS AND BORING
'H['..,.[O '011
AlllEO - SIGNAL IIIC
t.lORRISTOWN. NEw JERSEY
rn (NHI/NATIONAL
rrCHNOLOGY
-------
'TABLE 1
SAMPLE NO. DEPTH OF SA.'1PLE TOTAL CYANIDE PHENOLI CS BE1;Z::~;:: ~;'.?:i 7HA :'::~;2
(it) (mg/kg) . (mg/kg) (rr.g/kg) (r.o:g/kg)
MW-IC-S 18.5-20.0 NO NO ND <1.0
MW-IH-S 28.5-30.0 0.S9/NO 0.32 NO <1.0
MW"'lI-S 72.5-73.0 1.3 0.68 0.18 1.2
MW-2C-S 18.5-20.0 ND 1.2 ND
-------
TA6LE 2
SA.'iPLE NO. ANTHRACENE BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE CHRYSENE NA?H7HA:'::~;C: PP.::NA:;7E2::NE
(~g/1) (lJg/1) (ug/1) (~g/1) (;.g/1)
North End
l'!W-1H-W NO NO NO NO NO
MW-lI -W <10 NO NO NO <10
MW-1J-W <230 NO NO 1,700 <230
l'!W-2H-W <250 NO NO 12,400 <250
MW-2,I-W <500 <14 <14 12,000 <500
~T,400 ~
~"'-2J-W <240 <240 10,000 ~1 ,400
:-f,J-12H-W <35 NO NO 3,600 <35
MW-12I-W <69/<83 NO/NO NO/NO 7,500/7,400 <69/<83
MW-12J-W - <240 <10 <10 - -
12,000 <240
B-2H ~16,000 ~6,700 ~6,700 13,000 ~16,000
South End
T-6H-W ND ND NO ND NO
MW~'3H-W NO/NO ND/NO NO/ND ND/ND ND / ND
HW-3I-W ND ND ND ND ND
Note:
Water samples ~ere collected at three depths from each ~ell. "H," "I," and "J" in
the sample identification indicate increasing depth. The last sample from each ~ell
~as collected from the bottom of the ~ell at the bedrock aquifer interface.
-------
TABLE 3
SA.'iPlE NO. BENZENE ETHYLBENZENE TOLUENE STYRENE o-XYLENE
(~g/1) (ug!1) (ug/1) (ug/1) (~g!1)
North End
Mi.'-1H-W ND/<10 <10/<10 <10/<10 ND/ND ND/ND
Mi.'-1I -W ND ND ND ND ND
MW-1J-W :<10 52 21 <10 58
Mi.'-2H-W 470 440 1,400 480 990
MW-2I-W 750 1,000 . ,2,800 1,000 3,200
Mi.'-2J-W 620 650 3,500 880 1,1.00
MW-12H-W 3,700 780 24 z.o 370
Mi.'-12I-W 4,400 660 470 34 410
. MW-12J-W 5,600 890 1,000 110 1,800
T-2!:f-W 18,000 1,900 ND NO NO
South End
T-6H-W <10 ND NO ND NO
MW-3H-W ND <10 NO ND NO
-------
-6-,
B-7 through B-12 and from M:>nitoring Well MV-19 (see Figure 4). The
results are presented in Table 4. Ground water samples were
collected and analyzed from MJnitoring Wells r-w-2, MV-3, r-w-12, r-w-
14, lvW-l9, and lvW-20. 'Ihe results are presented in Table S. The
additiOnal field work confirmed that the ground water below and near
the site is contaminated with soluble and relatively rrobi Ie comp::>unds
and this contamination extends to the Ohio River with a north ,plume
extending to the Ironton Iron me. production wells. The Ironton
Iron me. production well 7 has sham benzene levels from nondetec-
able to 36 parts per billion (ppb), cyanide from nondetectable to 100
ppb, and naphthalene fram nondetectable to 17 ppb.
In addition, soil testing results indicate that the approximately
10- to IS-foot-thick -layer on top of the bedrock is contaminated
(TPHC 100 to 250 ppn).' The .intermediate zone between the bottom of
the GDA and the lower contaminated zone is only Slightly contaminated
(TPHC <17ppn). This phenomenon suggests the nonaqueous phase
substance (NAPS) contaminants have rroved through ,the sand and gravel
aquifer to the underlying impermeable layer. 'Ihe transpJrt of NAPS
is also influenced by. its viscosity and surface wetting properties.
COntaminants rove by capi llary action through aqui fer media and are
attenuated to varying degrees there. This leads to storage of NAPS
as droplets that are dispersed within the pores of the aquifer media,
even if the bulk of the migrating mass of liquid is rerroved. These
contaminants, in general, are insoluble and relatively imrobile.
'Ihe extent of the secondary source (NAPS layer) is tmcertain. From
the information gathered, however, this layer appears not to have
migrated a great distance from the boundary of the GDA. The eastern
edge of the site is the least well-defined. Shallow layers of
coritamination have been found above the bedrock in Boring B-ll and
M-l-3. Bedrock elevations are generally lower towards this side of
the site, with higher bedrock contours located in the middle of the
GDA area. Therefore, because of the limited data points in this area
and the tendency for this separate organic I=haSe to migrate towards :
10''''' points in the bedrock due to gravity, the exact boundary is .
presently not known. .
The VOlLUne of the GDA is approximately 300,000 cubic yards. The
estimated volume of the NAPS layer is approximately 156,000 cubic
~ds. .
The surface of the GDA is also a source of contamination because !T\3.ny
SUbstances have oozed up through the existing cap and IXX>led on the
surface. Based on calculations in the Endangennent Assessment, the
-------
.1. -
TABLII 4 I'n,:., I ..I
so I L ANAI.YS I sel
VOLATILI 1~800u9 SUBSTAUCB LIST COHroUNDS
P"RAHETfR CAS NUHBfR8 SAHPL! IDENTIPICATION
8-7, B-7, B-8, B-9, B-IO, n-12, HII-19, HII-V) , HII-I?,
9-12 9-17 9-14 S-IS 5-14 5-) 5-10/S-11 S-20 "lIour 1'1'
CONCENTRATION IJB'/kg b
IIcelonec 67-64-1 18 < 1,900 110 <4S <8,000/<8,000" <'01 41 <7, ')IIU J"
nenzene 71-4)-2
-------
, , "IIR" :1 ,,'
TABLH 4
(Coot i oud)
PARflHETER CAS NUMBERa SAMPLE IDENTIPICATION
8-7, 8-7, 8-8, 8-9, 11-'0, 8-12, H~-"J, H~-''J, HW-''J,
9-12 9-17 5-14 9-15 5-14 5-J S-Io/s-'I S-10 "IIIIIJ r 1'J'
CONCENTRATION IIS/kSb
l1l'thyl chloride 74-81-] <10 <1,900, <10 <45 <8,000/<8,000 <'01 <78 <7,~00 <'0
Mcthylene chloridec 74-09-2 <5.0 <940 <5.5 <2] <4,000/<4,000 <7) < I', < I . )01) I',
~-Hethyl-2-pentanone 108-10-1 <10 <1,900 <10 <45 <8,000/<8,000 <41
-------
4 1'1Ir,e 1 01
TABLE
SOIL AKAI.YSUd
SKHIVOLATILB UAZAIlOOUS SUBSTAMCS UST COHI'OUNVS
rARhHETf.R CAS NUMnfRa SAHPLE I DENT I P ICATION
B-7, B-1, 8-8, 8-9, 11-10, 8-12, I1W-I?, "II I 'J, HW-I'J,
S-12 S-11 S-14 S-U 5-14 5-) 5-111/5-11 S-2f1 AIIIIU I' 1')'
CONCENTRATION lJarkg b
Accn"phthcne 8)-)2-9 <)90 <81,000 <8,)00 1)0,000 )40,OUO 820,0110 ')6,0110
-------
, ,
TAOL.R 4 " ",: I ~ 1 01
(Conl i nued)
rI\R""'!<:T~r. CAS NUHBI!R8 SAHPl! IDf.NTIFICATION
8-7, 8-7, R-8, R-9, 0-10, "-12, HW-"J, HW-I'J, IIII-"J,
5-12 5-17 5-14 5-IS 5-14 5-) 5-10/5-11 5-10. I\IIIJIH n'
CONCENTRATION IJS/kgb
',-Chlorollni 1 ine 106-47-B <)90 <81,000 <8,)00 <21,000 <2)0,000 <',',ll ,1100 <12,OUO < 1,100,OUU 4-9 -7 <390 <81,000 <8,300 <2I,OO~ (2)0 ,UOO <440,UOU <22,OIlU 11
Hieth)'1 phthalate 84-66-2'
-------
I"'KC J
TABU 4
(Continued)
PARAMETER CAS NUHBERI 5AHPL! IDENTIFICATION
8-7, 8-7, B-8, 8-9, B-IO~ 11-12, H\.I-19, tN-19, "\.1-19,
S-12 5-11 S-14 S-15 S-14 S-) S-IO/s-11 S-10 llilUI/,. I~'
CONCENTRA T ION IIS'Iogb
1,6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2 <]90 <81 ,000 <8,]00 <21,000 <210,000 <440,000 <22,000 <7,200,000
-------
,
,
TABU 4
(Continued)
I'..r.'~ 4 ul
PAAAHf.Tf.R
CAS NUHBfRa
SAHPL! IOfNTlflCATION
11-7,
S-J2
8-1,
S-Il
8-8.
S-14
8-9,
S-I~
R-IO,
S-14
0-12,
S-)
HI4-I" ,
5-IU/5-11
. HW-19,
5-20.
tlW- I'},
AlIour I')'
CONCENTRATION liB/10gb
2-IIitrophenol 88-7S-~ <390 <81,000 <8,)00 <21,000 <230,000 <440,000 <22 ,OUO bll
"-Hi trol.henol 100-02-1 <1,900 <400,000 <40,000. <100,000 < I , 100,000 <2,100,000 /011
rhenol 108-9~-2 ',11
1,2,4-TrichlorobenEene 120-82-1
-------
TABLE 4
SOIL ANALYSIS
TOTAL KETALS
S~~PLE ID£NTIFICATION
BORING NO. S~~PLE NO.
P ';RA'1£ 7 E R
co~c::un:A7ION
{rr:g/kg)a
MW-19 S-10/5-11 Com?osite Aluminum 1.,200/3,600b
Ant imony <6/<6
Arsenic 4.0/2.9
Barium 67/61
Beryllium <0.06/<0.6
CadmiwJ <0.6/<0.6
Calcium 4,800/5,000
Chromium 9/8
Co bal t 3/2
Copper 12/12
Iron 11,000/10,000
Lead 25/33
hi . 1,100/1,000
..a.gneslum
Manganese 190/200
Mercury 0.1/0.2
Nickel 9/9
Potassium 520/460
Selenium <0.6/<0.6
Silver <1/<1
Sodium 320/370
Thallium <0.6/<0.6
Vanadium 120/130
Zin-c 67/70
&mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram or parts per million.
-------
1'''f~C 1 of 2
TABLE 5
GROUND VATER ANALYSIS
IHDICAroR PARAHHnRS
PARAMEtERS
, ,
BENZENE NAPIITIIALEUE .~
SAMPLE AHHONIA CYANIOP. PIIENOLI CS CAS NO. 11-~J-2b CAS UO. 91- 2 0- J
I DENTI FI CATION ( mg /L ) 8 (mg/l) ( mg / L) (ug/l) (u~ Il )
HW-2K 2.0 0.14 0.032 36/1.8 340
HW-2L 5.2 1.1 0.052/0. 049d 45 . 1,600
MW-2M 26.0 0.16 1.0 420 4,300
MW-JKf 0.13 <0.02 <0.005/<0.01 <12 <10
H\l-3Lf 0.09 0.09 <0.005 <25 <10
HW-3Hf 28.0 0 "4~/0. 24/0. 26e 0.018 120 <10
MW-3K 0.63 <0.02 <0.005 <12 24
/ /
MW-3L 4.9 0.03 <0.005 13 28 ~.~.~.~.~~
HW-JM 51.0 0.11 0.023 1)0 <10
HW-12K 8.5/8.5 <0.02 0.19 400 1 , (, 00
HW-12L 11.0 <0.02 0.73 15 2,bOO
HW-12M 16.0 <0.02 1.8 2,600 5,000
MW-14K <0.05 <0.02/<0.04 <0.005 .4 < 12 3J
HW-ll.L <0.05 <0.02 0.008 <12 12
HW-l~M 0.06 <0.02 0.011 <12 14
HW-19K 22.0 0.02/0.02 3.5 l/n bUO
HW-19L 18.0 <0.02 1.4 YHI 200'
MW-19H 16.0 <0.02 1.4 2/,U 250
-------
Ilage 2 of 2
. TADI.e 5
(Continued)
-
BENZENE NAPIIT"AI.ENI~
SAMPLE AMMONIA CYANIDE PIIENOLICS CAS NO. 7l-43-2b CAS NO. 91-20-J
IDENTIFICATION ( mg 11 ) 0 (mg/l) (mg/l) (ug/l) (ug/l)
H\,I-20K 0.43 <0.02 <0.005/<0.01 <12 40
H\,I-20L 1.2 <0.02 <0.005 <12 24
H\,I-20H 1.4 0.1) <0.005 <12 25
H\,I-21K 16.0 0.02 3.9 260 360
HW-21L 14.0 . <0.02 1.6 )90 220
H\,I-21H 22.0 <0.02 2.0 290 220
HW-22K& <0.05 <0.02 0.041 4) 220 / /'
--:'~-:.-~., =----~
amg/l = milligrams per liter or parts per million.
bCAS "0. i sthe Chemical, :Abstracts Service number used
. in the Chemical Ab9tra~ts Index.
Cugll = micrograms per liter ~r parts per billion.
dThe sample was analyzed in duplicate.
eThe sample contained 8 sediment \'/hich made it i~po88ible to obtain a homogeneous aliquot;
therefore, the sa~p(e was analyzed in triplicat~.
fSampled before puriing.
gField blank (proceeding decontamination of 8ample pump, deionized water) sho\,/s elevated
levels of benzen~ and naphthalene. This indicates that the stipulated cleaning procedure was
adequate to cleanse the constituents like alTmonia and phenolics, somf!\-Ihilt adequate (or ben7.r!ne,
but inadequate for naphthalene. Subsequent to H\,I-22, Well HW-) W.15 fonml'll'd and the n,'phthnlene
levels in this well show much less than H\oI-22 (-n high as compnred Lo 200 high). The purging
of Well HW-3 was thus adequate to cleanse the sample. In summary, \-liLh the exccpLion of lhe
field blank sample, all other results are represenlat~ve.
, ,.
for cataloging the indicated compound
-------
VI. .
-7-
SUmre.rv of Site Risks
An E})dangernent Assessrrent was conducted in accordaoce with the
SUPerfund Public H~ 1 th Evaluation Manual. a:tober 1986 to
detennine the baseline risk of taking no action at the site.
'n1e contaminapts of concern are benzene, 11a.P1thalene, 'phenolics,
PAH.s, cyanide, arrtronia, SUlfates, a.nj chlorides. 'These chemiCals
were selected because they are the ITDst prevalent a.nj present a
range of carcinogenicity, toxicity, and ITDbility. The four PAHs
selected as indicator chanicals using the process oUtlined. in the
SUJ:::erf~.d Public Health Evaluation Manual. a:tober 1986 are
. benzol (a)p-u-ene, benz(a)anthracene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and
chrysene.
The expJsure assessrrent examined several poteritial expJsure
pat.h'ways including, ground water, surface water (Ohio River
contamination via ground water), soils, and air. The IX>:P1la-
tions IX>tentially at risk in::lude the Ironton Iron Inc. workers
(contaminated) grourd water, those that use the Ohio River for
recreation (surface water, and the closest h.1siness, Veterans of
Foreign Wars Lcxlge (air pat.h'way). The site is capped and fenced,
so direct contact with the wastes was not considered a major
patlr...ray .
The Endangennent Assessment determined that there is a p..lblic
heal th risk from. present and future use of the contaminated. ground
water. Recreational uses of the Ohio. River do not IX>se a risk as
sampling results did not indicate a significant increase of site
related cont..arninants in the Ohio River downstream. of the~. The
rrcx:leling corducted to determine p:)tential air releases indicated
there is not a significant risk to p.lblic health fran the air
pat.h'way.
The risks are related to the carcin~enicity of PAH.s and benzene.' ..
PAHs are strong carciI).~ens, but are not v-ery ITDbile. Benzene is
not as strong a carcinogen, but is a Irobile and volatile CCiTpJund.
The groUnd water levels determined to be protecti'v"'e for these
ccmp::n.mds is 3.1 Farts per trillion total PARs and the benzene
M3.x:irm.nn Contaminant Level of 5 ppb..
The environrrental risks are from the p:>tential contamination of the
Ohio River by contaminated. grOtmd water which may result in the
biaacClIrTU..llation by fish of benzene, naphthalene, p-lenolics, and
PAHs. HOw'ever, fish tissue data w"ere not avai lable and based on
sampling results there is no statistically significant increase in
contaminant levels downstream of ~ or a, statistically significant
-------
VII.
-8-
Ie:;criPtim of AltPmat~
nJring the. FS, numerous technologies were identified and evaluated
to address the problens at the GDA. Applicable technOlogies were
then Canbined to create alternativ-es for the GDA. The alternatives
were. evaluated and screened until a sufficient number of v-iable
alternativ"'eS were left for the detailed eva.luation. Four
alternativ-es were carried through to the detailed evaluation ar..:i
include no action, an alternative Which provides containment and
treatment am several alternatives Which provide a range of
treatment of the GI:J\ wastes..
The four alternati'lleS consideted for detailed evaluation are the
fOllowing:
o
Alternative 1 - NJ Action
o
Alternative 2 - Slurry Wall and Cap, Recovery Wells Inside and
Outside of Slurry Wall, Ground Water Treatment, !-t.In.icipal
Water SlJI:ply for Ironton Iron Inc., and NAPS Investigat~on
Alternative 3 - Incineration of GDA Wastes, Slurry Wall,
RedispJsal and Cap of Incineration Residue, Ground Water
TreatIrent, Mlnicipal Wa.ter SUWly for Ironton Iron Inc. , . and
NAPS Investigation
o
o
Alternative 4 - Incineration of GDA wastes and SUbsoils,
Ground Water Treatment, Mtmicipal Water SU:pp:ly for Ironton
Iron Inc., and NAPS Investigation
The fOllowing sections describe the major cCInp::ments of each
remedial action alternativ""e. Figure 5 depiCts the four
al ternativ-es.
o't.-
"A.
~VE 1 ~ ID l>CI'ICN
The no-action alternative provides no additional rerediation,
m:mi toring, or security aCti vi ties at the site to further minimi ze
risk to the environrTeI1t or pJblic health. MY changes to the
existing environment will occur only as a result of natural
occurrences. This alternative will be considered as a base-line
for comparison with other alternatives where renedial aCtions will
-------
.'
.,.
I\L TlHNJ\TIVE
.'.."". .
::.~I":." "'~I'I'''''' 'I"".'
.\ ~ J ...... .......
, \..:~ -...--.- .---."- -,.---
I. / '" -.. . II .
-.. I."... . ~." ......... ..,., "",.," /. : ",
...,. "". . I . .
I-~ 1..... .....,1 "----- .!~ !~tl ..... ......
h ,.. I ... --.....
. ....1.. ...I"~".III'hl~"'~"'''''LI.''.'~'II....'!' 0':
. .t,.. . ".... ".'.1' 11<.,.......llu ......C . . .
I' _~-...--L_.... ,........-._-.'-0"""" f'.-"'--
I I .......'" It t.
I .
o -
.~
I'
.1.
L
110 ACT ION
AL TERNJ\TIVE
2
al. ., IUtl '0""
."'~'I /-...- .--. --- -II. '"'''''''''' ""1"
" 1.1 .. . .
., .I"'~ . - .".., Lott.....,. ,.,.""
....... '. J'----"~.~~ --_t~. ..e...... ,..,...
-- ~~:~~ /~/' "Ii\' --~_r ~.',;, r:';~:"'7" ;[ ........",~~..
1 I . '--. . -~;~;.::':"'.
...a.-wl. I-I..', I -.--.. - ~~ "_I''''''''''
. . : . . ""'''.'--'', .:. .'1' .
,. . ~' ~-( -:J-------' '.:." .:.
J";'~ -'-tL .....~ --'I ~..:._~- .
i:':~;j' I... '-.;..e:' ......... \.. -,., ,.,....-.
a,.... ~ -,.., e',,,.
SLuRRY WALL I\tm CI\P
Gf.UUIHJ WAflH T/llAI MlNT
. '..., I ,.f., ...,. '.101.
.. ., """,,", h' ',,,...,.
",'... "..1.".,.....
I\LTEUNJ\TIVE
3
.""""'" ~~.!::.. !'t""""~1 - 1"1",.'''''1' \1\11.
"I'.''''''''S ,""'''''''' ,.,.......11"
..,l.' lall '\. 111"11"'" III I'.' t'lll
'- IJ' 611""'" '.. '.'.'"1 . """.-U'I'..'"
....,.... ." ..... .."". I '''''1'' .....,
::.:~'.~"-.. ' /'....11:...'... /
~ ;~.;~ .if'=A::~:I ! j~i;:E;'H!C:i~;',:t:~':::.::.:
O".IID,.,....'I.O. . . 1- - - - _:~ '. _.~- -..
.IL~ . . T"------"~ -_..~....-. :-oo...-!i ~\. ...-..
,..",,-" .....II.r",...,..' //....."'... \. "."-
..,'11 ..".111-- w""""'''.''
-.....111 ""'''''''''11'
....,.. ...,. ""t.1I
IUIU,."..I10 .'1
GDA WASTE INCINERATIUN MW SLURRY WALL
GROUND WATEH TREATMENT
~.
AL TERNAT IVE
4
-~!..::...~.~...!.~~
,--.- '"1-.''''''''' "\11.
:::::~~.6IG~,. .
-.84'1.. . "'.. ---. .',,.,,,. 1:,..........,' ,.,\1.....
.'\11". ~ ''-'.''''1' "N,,'
."'.401 -..........."" ". . --It 1M.
, . :'::-""'1 (,,~~,"/.':'L. >:j7:1' f
-~.':~r:. .....,~t. :-:.:'"'.'.''''''~::~~.I')o.''' : ":""-., ,".'.H
r.tU~.II:.. . (~'''''.'.'''~.' --,...."..
.--, ...:' 4-'~'P'I~, ,.~ 101 ...... .. "....IUIII.~
. 0.0 . I... .~,~..': / ~lrll'''''~' ..... .",
. '!-:'J<'/"""'<"J'.~6.L . .~ '.
.".".-1 ...w...... "".U"8 ~~.
~:~~'~I" ,~7:"~":,:;.~:'" "
IUCINERATION Of GUA WASTE AND SUBSOILS
GHOUNO WATEH InEATMENT SYSTEM
Off-SITE ASII OISPOSAL'
fiGURE 5
Rfo.;I'ONS[ 4(,11""
ALHHNAIIVl:>
rll,,""111 . 'II'
---
::---:-"'0:=--'-/
-----..-.
All I[ U - "11;11111 1111.
"UIIHI51 U",,., III W .11 "',f I
m l/lrrRI/AII' 111111.
n ("II 11111 1\' ~,
CO~I'O\lAI"'"
-------
-9-
B.
~ 2 - SLURRY WAIL NID ~. REIXJVERY WELLS INSTIE NID
aJI'SIDE CF SLURRY WALL. GRaJND WATER 'IRE1\'IMENI'. MlNICIPAL ~
SUPPLY. AND NAPS. ll'NESTIGrd'ICN
This alternative is a canbd.nation of source control and managenent
of migration renedial actions. The major cClTp)nents of this
alternativ--e inclUde the fallowing:
o
Constructing a slurry wall encircling the GDA. landfill
o
Creating an inward ground water gradient within the slurry
wall wundaries
o.
Capping of the G[F.. landfill
o
Treating ground water extracted from inside and outside of the
slurry wall at a new treatment facility
o
- .
Providing a municipal water hook-up. for sanitary /p:>table use
for users of Ironton Iron me. (III).
o
M.:mi toring of site ground ~'ter
o
securing- the site from unaut..hcrized personnel and Deed
Restrictions
o
NAPS Investigation and imple:nentation of the Agency at=Proved.
renedy, if different than the. present containrrent alternative.
As .part of this alterative, a slurry wall is constructed around the
entire perimet~r (at=Proxirnately 2,000 lineal feet) of the disposal
area to create an inpervious barrier between the waste and
surrounding ground and grOt.IrXl water.
The wall extends fran ground surface to cOITp?tent bedrock,
approximately 80 feet beneath the site and it is keyed into the
bedrock. The approximately 80-foot-deep wall is constructed of
soil-bentonite. .
The exact location of the slurry wall is determined during a field
wring program conducted for p.l!1X)ses of detailed design. Borings
are drilled prior to design of the slurry wall to obtain
SUWlenental infonration on the site subsurface profile and to
obtain soi I samples for analyses. The oorings are placed at .
approximate 200-foot spacings around the site. The subsurface
profiles indicate zones of undesirable backfill materials. The
cOllected soil samples are classified at the latx:>ratory through
sieve analyses and Atterberg limits. This information, COmbined
-------
-10-
condition with respect to permeability. Classification of the site
soils also identifies the need for backfill borrow soil in the
slurry mix. Based on this in£onnation, mixtures of in situ
material and bentonite are developed. Short-term permeability
testing is performed on selected mixes. By penneating the mixtures
with water and varying the percent bentonite ar1d/or percent fines
(Le., borrow or in situ soils) a gOOd indication of actual
backfill mixes is obtained. Based on the short-term testing,
design mixes are sels:ted for final verification dtrring long-term
comPatibility testing. During this test, sample mixes are
permeated with site ground water and NAPS to sirmlate 30 plus years
of field flow. Addi t.iOnally, tmdisturbed sarrples wi 11 be collected
along the northwestern side of the site to provide in£ormation for
a site stability analysis.
Based on IT's e.xperience in designing and constructing slurry
walls, a high-level of con£idence is attained 'a£ter the completion
of the filter cake and short-term penneability te.!;iting program.
The long-term permeability tests are then conducted to con£irm the
short-term results (which indicated that the slurry wall will not
undergo chanical breakdown form 'the worst-case site leachate). At
this J;XJint (short-term)' in the testing/design program, sOund
conclusions can be drawn with respect to the effectiveness of ,a
particular design soil-bentonite mixture. In the tmlikely event
that no slurry wall mixtures p.3.$s the long-term compatibility
tests, a different engineering solution will have to be developed.
The design process allows for proper backfill mixture developnent
and long-term permeability testing under worst-case conditions.
Preliminary bentonite compatibility testing has indicated that
FedeFal 90 bentonite is suitable for use at the site. Bentonite is
delivered to the site in bulk, flash mixed, and stored in on-site
lX'nds. These lX'nds provide adequate slurry reserves in the event
that high-permeabilitY'Zones are encountered with resultant high
slurry loss. ' , ,
A preliminary stability analysis was performed to assess the
constructibility and stability of a typical soil-bentonite
wall if placed adjacent to the active Norfolk and Western Railway
line. Analysis indicated that the wall can be constru~ted if a
minimum 40-foot distance is maintained between the slurry wall and
the tracks.
The slurry trench' cutoff wall is constructed by excavating a narrow
trench (usually two to three feet wide) through the pervious layers
and keying into bedrock at approximately 80 feet. ,The trench is
excavated with a backhoe and at greater depths with a clamshell.
The sides of the trench are maintained from COllapsing by keeping
the trench filled with the bentonite slurry during ~cavation and
-------
-11-:-
excavation with bedrock, the base of the excavation is probed for
.unconsolidated material, cracks, and tX)tholes using an air lift.
Pervious material in natural depressions and sand or sediment that
settles out of the Slurry', are raroved by an air-lift p.Imp. When
the sand-Slurry mix is blown out of the air-lift p.mp and onto the
bank, the sand settles out and the slurry is drained back into the
trerx:h. In many cases, to provide an effective connection between
the wall and the rock, the contact between the two is grouted.
After the trench has been excavated under a bentonite slurry, a
mixture of soil and bentonite is placed in the trench, displacing
the bentonite slurSf' '!his backfill material is designed to have a
permeability to 10- CT1/s am to be resistant to attack and
degradation by the site materials being contained. Assuming the
excavated naterials provide a suifable backfill, slurry is mixed
with the soil on a concrete pad. Ad:litiOnal oorrow soils nay J:e
necessary for the backfill mix if existing site materials do not
provide sufficient fines. A special bulldozer is used to ~rk the
material to a srrooth consistency. The backfill is then plShed into
the trench so that the bac~ill slope displaces the bentonite
slurry fonvard. The excavation and backfii~ing activities are
phased to ITEke the operation continuous with relatively srtall
quantities of new Slurry required. to keep. the trenCh full am to
mix backfill.
. The slurry wall is rroni tored to ev"aluate the continuing
effectiveness of the wall in the subsurface envirorurent. Potential
geotechnical problems that require consideration after a slurry
cutoff wall has been installed relate to basal stability, ground
rrovanent behind the wall, ground w<3.ter lev'"el and chen.:i.stry and
Stl.rface water chanistry. '!he selection of the specific rroni toring
program is dependent' up:>n questions remaining after completion of
the detailed design and problems encountered either during or after
the construction p,ase.
A. ground w<3.ter pJrnping systen is installed within the encircled 'GI)A
to provide an inward ground wat~ gradient. This will increase the
degree of containment afforded by the slurry wall by preventing
migration of additional leachate to the outside of the wall. .
Initially, higher p.mping rates are used to lower the water table
J:ela..r the waste. cn:e this is achieved, the p..Imping is limited to
the aIrOunt of seep3.ge through the Slurry ;..<3.l1. The pumping system .
includes t"-D extraction wells and a collection systen. The wells
are construCted of four-inch-inside-diameter stainless steel,
casing. Slotted-w~ll screens with a O.OlO-inch slot size penetrate
the entire saturated thickness of the aquifer. A. 2-inch
sutIrersible p..Imp is used to PJIT1P Water from the well through 1/2-
inch PVC pipe. Each well extends awroxirnately 80 feet to bedrock.
The wells yield a Canbined a total of 1 gpn of grourd water and
wi 11 maintain lower water levels inside of the slurry wall than on
the outside. The wall is designed to withstand the hydraulic
-------
-12-
'across the wall. The collected ground water is piped to and
treated at a new treatment facility constructed on site.
Mdi tionally, the site is covered with a cap which meets standards
specified by RCRA. capping of the site reduces infiltration, thus
reducing leachate generation, and limits the rx:>tential for human
exfX)sure to site constituents via direct contaCt. The conceptual
cap design consists of the following cCJITIt;X)nents in their respeeti ve
installation order:
Gas Venting System
Geotextile
Clay Barrier' Layer - 'IWo-fOOt th~ckness of compaCted
clay
Synthetic Liner - GO-mil synthetic l'11611brane
Drainage/Filter Layer - Hydronet/geotextile
Soil Cover - Minimum two-foot thickness of soil
The gas venting system prevents the, CfCcumulation of rx:>tentially
Combustible gases beneath the finall c:over. A layer of, granular
material is placed over the existing wastes to act as a conduit
for the gases. Venting pipes constructed of 6-inch rx:>lyethylene
are placed at 200-foot centers over the area to be capped. The
bottom six inches of this piPe is slotted and is placed wi thin
the granUlar layer. A carbon adsorption unit is attached to each
vent pipe to control volatile organics and odors. A layer of
geotextile is plaCed over the granular layer to prevent soil
particles from entering and Clogging the granUlar layer.
The clay barrier layer is placed and compacted in six-inch maximum
lifts and has a design permeability of 1 x 10-7 an/s or less. This
barrier layer provides a second barrier to infiltration. The
primary barrier to downward infiltration caused by precipitation is
provided by the synthetic l'11611brane. This synthetic membrane is
GO mil high-density rx:>lyethylene CHDPE). A drainage/filter ' layer
,is then placed on top of the synthetic rnenbrane. '!his layer is
comprised of a synthetic drainage net and, a layer of filter fabric~
The drainage net intercepts and channels infiltration tq drainage
trenches around the cap and the filter fabric aids in preventi,ng
fine particles from entering and clogging the drainage layer. The
final layer of the cap consists of a minimum two-foot thickness of
soil. The top six-inch layer is capable of SUPPOrting vegetation
and protects the underlying cover components from rnoV~1t due to
winds and from ultraviolet degradation. The capping soils will be
obtained from off-site borrow areas. The topsoil is fertilized and
-------
'-
-13-
'!he surface of the cap is graded with a 2 percent slope to provide
appropriate nmoff and reduce pJnding of water on the cap.
Drainage ditches around the site will carry this nmoff to catch
basins. Since the storm water does not carne in contaCt with ariy
waste, it is diScharged directly to the river.
'!he cap is visually iI1SPeCted periodically. Maintenance includes
fertilizing and rrowing of the grass and other activities as
required. . .
Other measures provided in this alternative to limit direct
exp:Jsure to the wastes include securing the site with a fence
and placing use restriCtions on future developnent of the site.
In addition to the ground water collected from inside the slurry
wall, ground water is COllected from outside of the .Slurry wall
through a six-inch recovery well. TIle pro~sed location of this
well is shown in Figure 6. TIle well is operated at 75 gpn. TIle
collected ground water is p.nnped and transferred through a below-
grade piping systen to a new on-site treatment. \IDit.l 'The ground
water treatment conceptual design is depicted in Figure 7.
'!he location and p..mping rate of this recovery well were based on
information collected during the ranedial investigation CRr) and
the January and February 1988 field investigations Conducted by
IT. M:>deling efforts based on these data resulted in the selection
of one well p..mping at 75 gpn.
'!he selected. treatment process is aCtivated caroon. 'This systen is
used for reroval of organic COf1'1t:Ounds (Le., mainly naphthalene,
benzene, toluene, and xylenes) and cyanides from the ground water
before .being discharged to the river. Design studies are necessary
to determine cartx:m tmit size and change over rates.
Initially, ground water is p.1I11ped to an equalization tank. '!his
tank maintairis a relatively constant flow and concentration of the:
corrp:ments in the ground water before any treatment. 'The ground
water is then p..Il11ped to a dual media filtration tmit for reroval of
suspended SOlids. This is required .before introduction to the
activated carron tmit to reduce the frequency of the baCkwashing of
the activated. caroon column to prevent an excessive pressure drop
through the column. 'The effluent from the dual Iredia filter
lA new treatment systen is prO~sed' for treatment of the GDA ground
waters. However, during the detai led design phase, a combined
treatment systen for ooth the tar plant process waters and the GDA
-------
,- I L
~o -' , I I ,,' ,~~ ' ;
- .~ - " -. -_..._--_J l , .101, - ,>i~11 ---.J I, . '." I,. ~ ~ ~..... /.. ./ /-
o' -- '--~ L--~ C\-~ .,--:--~-~ I ~ "-"+-+-++~L / I .
'.. '.' ; " '1, ~ /
I ' - . . . " . , ~. .. / I
- ," , Ii- ..." .
;,. . '. ,:',' 1 MW"!' I . '. I,. t-- ~~ . ~'. ).' I
." I L______------ r___~ ~ ,. J' ---. ~'>o.' to ffi /
h ========C] r==========l-' C~--;-~ ~ , IT-'-C--<---~--~) r----~~~~--1\=r\r'b ));, ~0-.,.,=:-,,--;;~ ;/ ,
" . .: .. (. ' ' \ . . . ..; .~ .. - I r 1\ ,I.: \ I '.
'-.' " .. i .... " I J' - '.
I:::, '. J, . '~; -~IO 'ST"f~1 "-= ,,"Il'" "-II' -, -.1' ~," ." I I r . ,~ ..L ~
~. . ' ' ~. :£ ~: \,' 1 n nl ,.\ ,,- - - -, "
"u " ; .: '. 1:-: ,', L., 1'.u""hJ--~---=::::;:' 01/ .. I '
';,' ~:, I »', ' , (', L 7 "
II .' ~ ~ l, ,~," '1 P /D I ,~O I;' MODEL SLURRY ,.\ \'1 ~(..... gOO~O '6--J I......
"'-.4 I ' I. ," I.:. '. ..J VIALL. - I', I\f I ' 00 000
'" " ~ ,. , ..... ~ L--. 11Ll L_-----~-.-.- . ~ ~I ;,. 1 0, ~ Dr- .
.., !. :. 'l:::--~-' - '---- I /,'\\ .,.,,-."''' - MW.) 1'" ,,-' 0:.)(,00000
I ---::-....' ~. ./' ... .' ....... .~. I' ~ 0:0..,0<00
. : .. -,,\.. 'D ' .' ~A -. ...:.------.... L....,.. '" . ~. 0
.,~ t: !.. ~ -- ...) -- "-- -- I' ',. ~,,' -/.---- 'iA \ -t - ,.-. .;~ crOOO
:'; 't!. ~ .:.( :;..::'~:;: II!" "":.. .:. ,~' ',..t '" ~- At- ~- oJ.. 11\'1 + 1,1,_,\ \v C!J , 0000
::': -).__'::-- . . : ~I..! ~. III ~ III+- \ (0 . 000
Ci~ 'L. 'g ~ /0;;--" '~ ~ ~OQ /{~) ... ~ 4>,....r;\ .-.~~ 4. +
:; '" , : 0'0 . 'I>f, . --I- o\)w"2 4> .1. 'I' <4, ",'r"rl'-8:'-~~-- 4-',
o ~':.~~). ;..' '-io ~I ~ fi.()~ ~ ~.. ,~~'~~#'~~i';6{~~~=--~--=+ + . ... :
.... ~--~-'~~4;; 'f.~.. ~'"I' . / .~/ ~...f,~..rt~,~ ---- 4 ~ - ~...... .....
~:. ~--"""--.:..-.:::.-:: \.~...-.,..:;,:....;:;--... t '1 .\,~.~~t~~~.~....-...t~"y-::;;::'-;::=-- foIW,' ~ ~....---- .. ...... .....
r, ,.,."" ----:"'~~~~;:!,~" """,11.1fI,......~t.~~I-+-- --Of;:::;::.=- .u 4' ~ &. .
, - ---~.~.... ~~~"~ --- -- ... .b."" ...
. - . ..', 't.-~~--:..~~ I """"",:::-':':-=====~--- MW".... ~ ...., . "-
oJ I( fi' 'f ---:.--------- .1 7 ..... A. 4. ~ . ....
'h 'J' . -'-----.p "Y' ~..
~I : ~ . ~ ~ '" , .~. " "" "
:J . .~ct----:) ~ + + ~ . ~/ ~ ", ~.. .
." '/. tf. tt- .-:J-- " ----oV i- ~ / 'rR A'
~. ',;\ .. mIla RIll
,4'. ~m. ~
~' + 4' "'!. JI/ \
.~.c A
~
-------
.,...
.....
Uj
,
.
'"
n
"
()
'}
"
.,U<
'..;'j'
. >
..
. .'
8G nG..S
Orr-~ITt: 0151'05","
I- ! :
...,-
IJ:::
,:: I~
IZ-, .~
8AC~WA5H TAN~
(10.000 "GAUON5)
[OUAUZA nON TANK
(2.000 CAL)
CROUNO WA1tR
f"RO.. OU1'SI0(/'N~OE umAcnOH w£u..S
:: " ."'.. , : ;.....,..flo.. .
~ ..1 -".... ",,"', ~.. -.,fO
,- - .... - ...--.'
84C~"ASH ICn\lIc"
v
.: . ;~ :
COUTINC[UCY PLAN fOR
AMIAOIIIA Rlt.AOVAL
r---
1 SOO~~~..H:~~XlO[
.."1>1O"4CE 'ANKS
ar~
~~
1;:1:
...~
e.:.
~..
;;f'"
:>'
c~
-,
..~
~~
ca
artJ
"'",
.....
~~
5 ,
1--
I
L-
--
----
I ~OO'u" HYUHOXlO(
fUO TAUK (JOO CAL)
L-l
Z
::I
=>s:-
eiS
~~
CD,
"'.
...'"
u~
..
~r
c'
>0
"':-
u
~
r----
I
I
-I
I anu[NT O'SQuRC[
,«-<;.. .. .".
L____-
OECHLORItIA nON
sysro.,
(OISPOSABlI ACnVA1[D
CARBDII sYSTt:u)
z
~~
fl3
~~
CDI
ar-
c:G .
u.
III
O.
I:!':'
c'
>0
"':-
u
~
r-J\
-1
I
CHlOR'NAnON T-'HI(
(~OO CAL)
1.---
I
I
~=".J--
------l
I
1
I
I
1
1
CHLORIN[ ruo SYSIOI I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
CHLOIlIt.[ C"r\JHD[RS
1
1
DRAFT :
S":---~
- fiGURE 7
flOW O''''CRAU
GROUND WATER m[AJ}.I(NT SYSTEM
PREP ARED fOR
ALUCO-SIG:'-IAL INC,
IoIORRISTOWN. N[W JERS()'
m Itrr[fm~noll.u.
~ T[CIINO~GY
-------
~
-14-
is passed through the activated carbon tmi t for raroval of organics
and cyanides. '!he effluent fram this treatment tmit will be
ccmbinen with the Tar Plant effluent and discharged to the Ohio
River under existing or nOOified NPDES requirerents.2
The influent and effluent are m:mitored in accordance with agreed
up:>n requiranents and reP='rted to the agencies.
During the design of this remedial alternative, the extent and
chanical nature of the NAPS layer is defined and remedial options
are examined. If feasible and approved by the Agency, the NAPS
layer may be mitigated by the ilTplenentation of an additional
treatment renedy, o:r expansion of the slurry wall.
'Ihis alternative also provides a rrumicipal water supply and
bottled water for p:>table and sanitary use by IIC tmtil accept-
able concentrations have been reached in the grOund water.
Mdi tior1ally, site ground water is IrOni tored to confirm that
contaminant concentrations do not exceed acceptable limits.
lJI:gradient and dawngradient wells are used for the ITDni toring
program. Each well is ~led quarterly and analyzed for an
established set of site indicator parameters (Le., benzene,
trichloroethylene ('ICE), cyanide, naphthalene, anm:mia, chloride,
and benzo(a)pyrene). In addition, the ground water P='rtion of this
alternative includes properly plugging the suspect and/or unusable
IrOnitoring wells.
'ICE was detected in r-bnitoring Well M-l-19 for the first time in
the January /February 1988 Sampling. It was not detected in any
prior Sampling in any of the GDA wells. In addition, no record of
disp::>sing chlorinated hydrocar:tons in the GDA exist. Assuming the
worst conditions, TeE is included in the ground water IrOni toring
program. If during the initial IrOnitoring of ground water cleanup
program the presence of 'ICE is not confirmed, it would be deleted
fran the list of site .indicator parameters. Prior to its deletion.
from the IrOnitoring program, approval from the agencies WOUld be .
obtained .
. A supplenental RI/FS wi 11 be conducted to determine the extent and
nature of the NAPS layer and to examine remedial opt'ions inCluding
treatment. The time required to complete this alternative is.
approxilMtely two years. '!he trea.tment plant start up is scheduled
to begin up:m cOlnpletion of the slurry wall and cap
:lIf a separate discharge };X>int and NPDES pennit are required for
the new treatment unit, breakpoint chlorination will be added to
-------
-15-
installation. The ground. water clean up st..andards should. be
achieved at the III wells in five years, it will take approximately
25 years to reach the ground water cleanup levels near the site.
The total present ~rth cost of this alternative is estimated at
$13,130,000. See ~ A of this ROD for a complete breakdown
of the capital and operation and maintenance costs.
c.
~ 3 - :rn::::IN:rnATIrn OF GZ:i\ WASTE. SLURRY v!ALL. GBCUND
Wi\Trn ~'. NJD M.ImCIPAL NATER SUPPLY
,
. I
"
Alternative 3 combines treatment Of,.;the GDA wastes and contaminated
ground water with eont.a.innient. The',limajor cClT1tX>nents of this action
are: .:
o
':1
Excavation of 40 feet of Waste and 12 inches of SUbsoils
o
, ' . \
On-si te in:ineration i .
COnstruction of a retairu.ik st+ure and a Slurry wall
en::ircling the site '/
I
I
0'
o
On-si te diSIX>sal of ash
o
Treatment of groun:l water from inside and outsid~ of the
Slurry wall at a new treatment facility.
o
Providing nu.micipli and. FC>table water 5Uf:ply for III
o
lvbni toring of site ground water
o
I::eed Restrictions and si.te security
o
N\PS Inv"eStigation
In this alternative, the (Da. site wastes are excavated and incin-.
erated. Eased on historical site drawings and information
gathered during the January and February 1988 field investiga-
tions conducted by IT at the site, the av-erage depth of wastes
in the GDl\ is estimated at 36 feet and the areal extent is
awroxwtely 220,000 square feet. Therefore, the excavation
extends af:proxwtely 40 feet to 'the rottcm of wastes and the
","olume of material reroved equals 300,000 cubic l'ards.
Field inv~stigations also confirmed a secondary source of
contamination ~aused by a nonaqueous' phase substance present in
a 10 to 15 foot-thick layer above the bedrock beneath the si te.
A retaining structure and slurry wall encircles the site area to
-------
-16-
The northern and northwest em edges of the site, which are
adjacent to railroad tracks, reg:u.ire StJPFOrt during excavation.
Because a retaining structure and a slurry wall are in the same
general location, a concrete diap,ragm wall installed by the
slurry trerx:h met.h.c:xj is selected. This wall prov'ides structural
StlppJrt as well as the low penreabiUty required to limit
contaminant migration. This wall prevents migration of
contaminants from the GDA. wastes during p..mping of site ground
water while e.xcavation and backfilling operations are continuing
for a.pp~oxirrately seven ~-ears. Using this technique", a t~foot
wide trench is exCavated. :1 The trench is excavated in alternate
panels, generallr, 25-feetl'l long. By simuJ. taneously fi lUng the
excavated-trench with a ~;1t.onite clay sOlUtion as excavation
occurs, cOllapse of the SC.~l in each panel is prevented.
.1
When each panel is tOtallyl,excavated, permanent wall reinforcing
steel is then IOw'ered into :the trerx:h to the required depth. 'The
panel is then concreted us:!ng the trenie concrete technique wtlich
displaces the slurry to cO'l/Pleije the wall. The slurry is then
p.zmped back to a central n#xing 'lant and prepared for reuse in
another pgnel. M.di tionally , ing excavation stages, the wall
is supported laterally by Soil tiebacks. The tiebacks consist of
a hD1dle of steel tendons drilled through inclined sleeves cast in
the wall.
Structural walls are not necessary for excavation acti vi ties
proceedings for the eastern and southern pJrtions of the site.
Excavation cuts are at a slope of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical ~
A. soil-bentonite slurry wall is placed arou:i1d these sides of the
site after excavation and backfilling is canplete.
The excavation and incineration operations are coordinated;"
therefore, the corrpletion of the excavation is controlled by
the rate of incineration of the waste l!\3.terial. Eased on the
preliminary infornation gathered dur:lng the January/February 1988
investigation, the incinerator feed rate is expe:te;d to be ten
tons per hour~ Considering the op:rationa! diffiCUlties ard
material handling considerations, the incinerator is expected to
run approximately 7,000 hours per year. .
A front-end loader is us,ed to transfer the solid wastes fran the
staging area into the feed hOPF€r. The wastes are freed from free
water in the staging area. A metal shredder is included to handle
scrap metal debds and a srrall number (one to two) drums. If a
large mlrnber of drums are encountered, the upgraded rrOOel of
shredder WDuld be provided. This added requirement of handling
drums coUld cause reduction in the rotary ki ln ' s waste process ing
rate. The feed is then introduced by gravity into a rotary kiln
canbustion system which op?rates relow atlrOspheric pressure in a
-------
~
\
-17-
\
\
)!
'.
: I
"
contrC;>1 the tenperature and desorption/combustiof,l ~acteristics inside
the kiln. ' '/
'!he kiln ashes are cooled in a mJisture-controlled environment and conveyed
to storage where they are sampled and tested for verification of their
hazardous nature.
'!he kiln gases are incinerated in a vertical secondary combustion chamber
specifically designed to handle large variations in gas composition and
volumes.. Gases from the secondary combustion chamber are water scrubbed
and then processed throug!1 a high-efficiency air p:>llution control rrodule
capable of reroving sul:rnicron particulate matter and acid gases. The
treated gases are exhausted through a staCk. Solids are separated from the
scrubber water and can be added to the kiln ashes.
M interim ash storage facility which meets the substantive RCRA
requirenents is constructed on site for tert1p)rary storage of incinerator
aSh until the ash can be placed back into the excavated GDA. The facility
covers an approximate 12-acres and_has a capacity of 255,000 cubic yards. ,
The facility is constructed by excavating five ,feet below grade and using
this excavated material' to construct dikes around the excavation. The
dikes are approximately 13 feet in height with slopes of 3 horizontal to 1
vertica~. '!he site is lined with a GO-mil synthetic liner. A six-inch-
thick subgrade is prepared before liner installation. To reduce the risk
o~ fugitive dust enissions the ash is covered daily with a vap:>r
suppressant foam. '!his foam is typically effective for two mJnths. MY
areas exp:>sed for two mJnths or greater are covered with a synthetic cover
and a six-inch layer of soil.
.Up:>n completion of the excavation and incineration operations, the ash is
used to backfill the open excavation to grade. Initially, a soil layer
will be placed in the GDA excavation to maintain a five-foot separation
between the water table and the ash. Because the water table is
approxilT'ately five feet aoove the :tx:>ttom of the excavation, the soil layer
is approxilT'ately 10 feet thick. '!hen, the ashes are placed and compacted.
A 15 percent reduction in volume is expected a£ter the material is
incinerated; therefore, additional off-si te sui table material is used to
backfill the excavation.
After backfilling is completed, the slurry wall is installed around the
ranaining sides (east and south) of the GD?\. The slurry wall is
constructed of soil-bentonite and extends to bedrock. A detailed
description of the soil-bentonite slurry wall is provided under Alternative
2.
Additionally, ground water is collected and treated from ooth inside and
outside of the slurry wall. Details of ground water collection and
treatment are provided under Alternative. 2.
A minimum two-foot-thick soil layer covers the site. This cover is graded
-------
~
-18-
\
)
:)
, ,
If the ash is determined to be hazardotis ,1fue cap. would COITply with the
substantiv"e requirerents of RrnA. r-
Thts 131 ternati ve aJ.so provides a ITUJI'1icipal water supply and bottled water
for p)table and sanitary use by IIC' tn1til ground water quality meets
acceptable standards. The site ground water is m:>nitored to provide
information on the effectiveness of the reredial action and to COnfirm that
the contaminant concentrations do not exceed acceptable limits. The
rronitoring program is discussed in Alternative 2. Existing rronitoring
wells in the GD.~ considered suspect or nornJSable w'Quld be plugged arxl
abarxloned in accordance with the OEPA-awroved prOCedures.
A SUWlenental RI/FS will be conducted to detennine the extent and nature
of the NAPS layer an:1 to examine reTEdiaJ. options including treatment. The
ini tial year of the project includes activi. ties necessary for design, bid
preparation and contract award as well as the construCtion and set UP' for
the incineration unit, the ash storage area, the retaining wall, and the
treatment plant and recovery wells. The excavation and incineration
operations requires five years to ccrrplete and the backfilling of' the GI:IA.
with a3$h requires CID:)ther two years. . ConstruCt ion of the Sluny woJ.l
requires an additional six rronths. Therefore, the overall SChedule for
cOITpletion of Alternative 3 is eight to nine years. '!he total present
worth cost of Alternative 3 is $92,230,000. See Appendix A for a cost
breakdown of capital and operation and maintenance costs.
D.
AL~ 4 - ~crJ OF GIJA.. ~ AM) SUBSJIT.S. GRaN> W1\TER
~'!ENI'. MlNIClPAL ~ SUPPLY. MD OFF-SITE DI~ OF ASH
Alternativ-e 4 provides treatment of the GIJA source and associated ground
water. The major ccrrp:ments of this alternative include the fOllowing:
o Excavation of 80 feet of wastes and associated contaminated soils
o On-site incineration
o Off-site dispoSal of ash
o Treatment of ground water
o Providing nunicipal and p::>table water Supply for users of the IIe
wells'
o Mbnitoring of site ground water
o ~ Investigation
This alternative addresses ~~e excavation and incineration of the primary
source of contamination at the ~I., as well as associated contaminated
-------
-19-
extends 80 feet to bedrock and requires the rernJVal of approximately
720,000 cubic yards of material.
n.te to the extended. depth of the excavation, relatively restricted. working
area, and necessary protection of workers, a double wall soldier piling and
lagging technique is preliminarily selected. to maintain the open
excavation. A double structural wall is constructed. by c1ri ving two rows of
steel soldier piles around the entire perimeter of the site. The soil
~een the piles is excavated. with a clamshell. . As this material. is
excavated, lagging and struts are installed. between the walls to provide
bracing and stability. After excavating to bedrock, the area between the
soldieil pile rows is backfilled. with clean, granular fill and the fill is
C~'ed.. The detailed design of the retaining wail (or type of Wall) is
address~ during the proj.ect design phase. .
:) . .
Once the wall 1S constructed., the area surrounded by the double wall 1S
excavat.~. This approximate 220,000 square foot area is excavated down to
bedrocki (approximate elevation 475 feet mean sea level). As the excavation
proc~, an fCcess ramp is constructed into the piton the western edge of
the sit~. Th:.f.s access road is 20 feet wide with an approximate 10 percent
grade. 'l'Ihe side enbankrnent SloPes at 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. .
Dewater/lng is! also necessary during excavation, since the tottom 40 feet of
material is below the water table. Therefore, the water table is kept
below excavat~on levels by pmtping. 'D1e water collected. during this
pr~edure is treated through a tenpJrary on-site treatment unit.
Backfilling then begins on the eastern side of the sitE;:!. Clean suitable
material is placed and compacted to construct another access ramp. When
the construction of this. ramp is completed ~ the ramp on the western ed.ge of
the site is excavated.. The ranaining area is then backfilled with clean
sui table material to existing grades.
The eXcavated material is incinerated. Therefore, the time to complete
excavation is controlled by the rate of incineration. The incinerator
throughplt rate is a function of the type of nBterial being incinerated
(heating value). The exPected. throughp,lt rate of the slightly contaminated
material (i. e. , material with heating values less than 800 British thermal'
unit per pJund (BtU/lb) is awroximately 15 tons per hour while the
contaminated waste, with an average heating value of 5,500 Btu/lb, is
treated. at nine tons per hour. On average, a feed rate of 12 tons per hour
is anticipated. Allowances are rrade for 20 percent . downtime (7,000 hours
per year operating) of the system. Based on this information, it is
expected that incineration of the GI:V\ waste and subsoils takes bet\.,reen 12
and 13 years. A description of the incineration process is presented under
Alternative 3.
Volume reduction of the wastes after incineration is estimated to be 15
percent. Therefore, approximately 612,000 cubic yards of ash material are
-------
-20-
Mdi tionaJ.ly, site ground water in the vicinity of the renoved source is
collected arxj treated. One six-inch-cliameter recovery well is used to
collect the ground water. The p.mtping rate of this well is approximately
75~. The COllected water is ~ to an on-site treatlTent tmit. This
treatment lD1it will primarily consist of activated carron. Details of the
process are discusSed in AlteI11ative 2. Existing JT'OI1itoring wells in the
~ considered susp:ct or nonusable WOUld. be plugged and abandoned in
accordance wi th the OEPA-awroVed Procedures.
While ground water rerediation is continuing, users of the IIC wells are
provided with a munici...'Jal water SUWly and rottled water for :fX)table and.
sani tary use.
I
,I
I
"
Ii
:! A .supplemental RI/FS will be conducted to deternrine the extent am. nature
:,' of the NAPS layer arxj to examine reneclial options irx:lUding treatment. It
: is estilTated that the overall time. for implementation of this alternative
.: is 13 to 14 years. Excavation and incineration are the contrOlling
, acti vi ties, which by thensel ves require 12 to 13 years to cCITiplete. The
totalEresent worth cost of Alternative 4 is $218,000,000. See App:ndix A-
for, ,brea.kdJwn of the capital and operation and maintenance costs.
,
Eo I . . fied MARs arx:l 'IB:s
' .
The Federal and State appliCable or relevant requirements (ARARs) arxj other'
guideiines to be considered (TEes) are S1.IlT1rT'a.rized. in Table 6 and ccrnpared
to each of the four (4) alteI11ativ--es. The ground water clean up standards
are outlined in Table 7.
. VIII.
SUrrrrarv of CcmDarati ve AnalYsis of Al ternati ves
A.
SlIImE.rv of the lline Criteria
U. S. EPA. uses nine (9) criteria to evaluate rened.ial al ternati ves.
criteria are as fallows:
These
1)
Shon;.-Tenn Effectivenes$
, .
The assessrrent against this cri terion examines the effectiveness of
alternativ-es in protecting hum3n health and the environment during the
construction and iITplenoJ1tation periOd tmtil the res:fX)nse Objectiv-es have
been met. The time needed to achieve the cleanup. is also evaluated.
2)
Lonq-Tenn Effectiveness and Permanence
The assesSITPJ1t of altenlatives against this criterion evaluate the long-
term effectiveness of alternatives in protecting hurren health and the .
environment after resp:mse objectives have been met. The primary focus of
this evaluation is the extent and effectiv-eness of the contJ::"ols that my be
required to m:mage the risk :fX)sed by treat:1rent residuals and/or untreated
-------
APPLICA8LE OR RELlVANT AND
APPROI'MIATE Rt:qUIH/'IDHS (AHARo)
AND OTII Ell AOV I SOM I E$ OK
CUIOELINE$ TO 8E COHSIUUtEU (TeCa)a
A/'I8I O/T OF CHDiIC.u SI'EC IFIC
Hael..... ContamInant Level
(HCL)
secondary Drlnkln. Water
Standard (SOlIS)
Perllhalble Ambient Coal.
Water QualIty Criteria lor
Protection 01 Hu.an Heallh
See loutnote at end of table.
ALHIINATIVE I
NO ACTlOII
The feder.1 "CL of O.OOS parta
p~r .llllon (1'1'.) for benlene
anJ trlchloruethylene la not
achieved. -
.. J'
Chloride concentratlona do
not eeceed the U.S. EpA
luldellne of 2S0 1'1'.'
The upper 11.lt of the aulfate
ran,e eeceeda the U.S. EPA
guIdeline of 2S0 1'1'. but the
repreaentatlve concentration
doe411 not.
""lIonla concelltrat lona
eeceed the U.S. EpA
allblent loal 01 O.SO PpII.
TULE'
SUKHAIY 0' AllAh AHD TlCa
COLDCiHJ' 'USIIILlTT STUDY
llLlIID-5ICN&L/IIONTOH COli PLUrT
ALTUtHATlYI:: 2
StUHRY WALL AND CAP.
CHOUNO WAHII TREATHO/T
HUHIClpAL "ATU SUPPLY
The federal HCL of O.OOS 1'1'. for
benlene and trlchloroelhylene la
achieved In treated .round waler
and at the preaently Identified
and allected receptor (1IC-1).
NAPS layer lIay allect technical
leaalbility of .eetlni thla
atandard. Cround water wIll be
pUllped and treated unt II t"le
atandard 1M' achieved at th~ '
co.pllanc~ boundary or until
technical Inhaalbllity Ie.
de.onatrated.
Chloride la not applicable.
("No Ac t Ion" achlevea atandarda)
Treatment for aullatea not
provided. repre_entatlve
concenlratlon doea not
e eceed SOlIS.
Federal ,uldellne of' O. S 1'1'. Ie
.chleved .t the allectdd receptor
(1IC-1). NAPS layer lIay aflect
technical feaalbility of lIeellng
thla atandard. Cround water will
be pUllped and treated until thla
aland.rd la achieved at the
COllpllance bounJary ur unlll
technical Infeaalbility la
demon.traled. Treated ground
waler will .eet N~O£S aubatantlve
r~qulrell~nt..
ALTEJlNUIYE )
INCINEJlAtlOH Of GUA WASTE.
SLURRY WALL, CHOUND IIATt:JI TRI::ATHEHT
AND HUNICII'AL "ATEk SUI'I'LY
The federal HCL of O.OOS ppm for
benlene and trlchloroelhylene la
achieved In trealed ,ruund waler
and at the preaently Identllied
and affected receptor (1IC-1).
HAPS layer ..y alfect technical
fe.albility of .eetlng thla
aUndard. Croulld water will be
pUliped and tre.ned ..nt I: thla
atandard la achieved at the
cOllpllance boundary or unlll
technical Inleaalbility la
de.onatrated.
Chloride la not applicable.
("No Act Ion" achlevea Uandardl)
Trealllent for lul'atea not
provided. repreaenlatlve
concenlrarlon doea not
eeceed SIJIIS.
federal .uldelln~ 01 O.S 1'1'11 I.
achieved at the allected receptur
(lIC-1). NAPS layer may .!fecl
technical fea.lbility uf lIeellll'
thla atandard. CrouIIJ wdler wIll
be pumped and Ireated unlll Ihla
atandard la achieved al Ihe
co.pllance bounJary or uIIIII
technIcal Infea.lbllllY I.
dellollUuled. TreHad "r,;uII.I ,
waler will .e~1 N~Ot:$ .u~.la"llv"
requtrellenr..
ALTERNArtYE , --
, l~c;JNEJlUION at' CDA WAST.J/AIIIJ
~{J.!!5-OU;S ...--.fIl.!!UtiIl_IH\1t:1t
TREATMENT, HUNIClpAL II~T[H SUl'rLY,
AND DFF-S ITE DISPOSAL Dt' ASII
The federal HCL 01 O.OOS 1'1"" fur
beluene and trlchr..ro"thyl"n.. I.
achlevo!d In treated Iruund war"r
and at the pre.elllly IJo!ntlll~d
and ~Ifeclo!d,receplor (IIC-l).
NAPS hyer .ay all~ct t..~hlll~~1
fo!a.lbliity of .,,"tlng Ihl~
etandard. Croulld wato!r will b~
pu.p~d and tr..~t..d untIl this
atandard I. achlev~d at Ih..
cOllpllance boulldary ur until
technical Inleaslbility Is
dellonlC rated.
Chloride I- not appllcabl~.
(UNo Action" .chl~y~s st..ud..r.I:.)
Tr~.t~~nc for »ulf.tc~ Out
pro~lded, r"pre.elltallv~
cunc~ntra['ol' do~. not
eKceed SO'o/S.
F"d"r~1 4uld~lln" ul O.S 1'1"0 I.
.chle~~d .t th\! ..fc!~tC'J r"~.'-'II"lr
(1IC-1). NAI'S lay~r .~y ~11~rl
t..chnlcal f..a~lbllJly ul '.,'dlu,;
(hi. II.II"..,J. CrounJ w.lh:r "".11
be pump~d and t real "d unl II I hi.
lt~nJ~rd II achl"""J dl Ih"
CO-IJ1'.nce buuuJ4r'f IJr unt.'
lechulcal Inl,,~.II"lIly ..
d..:tlo".,r.ucd. Trco.ltcJ bftlUIIJ
w.lter ~III .~~( ~u~~c...'tl.~
-------
APPLICAllE OM RELEVANT AND
APPROPRIATE MUJUIR01£HTS (ARAh)
AH I) OTlt EJI AOV I SUU [S OK
CUIOELINES TO IE CONS WEll EO (TICI)
AM8IEHT OR CHD1ICAL SPECIFIC
( COt/T . )
Cuncrntratlun d~rlved Iro.
h~alth-balrd Irvrl or .~thod
d~trct lun 11.lt, vh'-Chl'~r
II IIr~Urr.
'\...- """110""" .°.1., ", f "d,o.
ALTDHATtVE I
NU ACTION
CYlnlde conerntrallanl
r.ee~d Ihe U.5. EfA
I.blenl lOll 01 0.2 pp..
Uppu 1I.it
racrrdl the
01 ). S pplO.
01 tha phenol rln,a
U;5. EfA crhuh
MIPhthliJna concantrltlona
eoc~ed Ihr U.S. EPA crlurh
of 0.69 pp..
~'
8"nlu-a-pyrrnl conClntrltlonl
e.eeed Ihr health-blled
conc~nl rlt Ion 01 O. 00) I part I
per billion (ppb).
TAIL! ,
(Cootloud)
AlTONATIVE 2
SI.UHRY WALL AHO CAP,
CROUNO WAr EJI TK EATM£HT
HUNICIPAL WATEJI SUPPLY
Federal ,uldellnr 01 0.2 ppll
for cYlnlde II Ichleyed In
Ire.Hed ground V8ler Ind It
reeeplou. NAPS Ilyrr .IY
affecl leehnlCII leallbllily
of IIcellng t~l. IIandard.
Cround VAI~r viII be pu.ped and
trc8led un(1I Ihla 8Iandlrd I.-
-ehl~Ycd at thr Co.pllancr
buundAry or untIl trehnlcal
Infeallbllily II dellOnltrated.
Fedual guldrllne 01 ).5 pp.
lor phenol la Ichlryrd In
Ireated ground watrr Ind at
Uceptoro. NAPS layer alY 1
affect technical frallbility
~t .eellng thll .t.ndard.
Cround water will br pU8prd and
treated unlll thll alln~ard II
achleyed al thr coapllance
boundary or untlt. technIcal
I~IeallbllllY II draonatratrd.
Federll guidelIne 01 0.69 pp.
lor naphthalene I. achleyed In
trealed ground vater and at
receptor.. NAPS layer aay
affect lechnlcal le.albillty
of .eellng Ihla Ilandard. .
Cround valer will be pu.ped and
Irelled unlll thla IIandard la
achleyed al Ihe co.pllanee
boundary or unlll technicil
Infeaalblilly la de.on5Iral~d.
H~lhod det~cllon Iiall of 0.005
'ppb for bdn'o-a-pyr~ne II achleYld
In Irealed IIround vater and It
r~ceplurl. NAPS layer ..y
affect lechnlcal fea.lblilly
of lIeelln!! lhls 8Iandlrd.
Cround val "r viii be P'''p~d .nd
Ir".led unlll Ihl. Ilandard I.
achieved -I lh~ co.pll'
buundAry or unlll leel
Inf~a.lbIIIIY I. dc~un~ -'~~.
ALTEilNATIVE )
INCINEJlATIUN OF CDA WASTE,
SLURRY WALL, CROUNU WAT~R THtATHEHT
AND HUNICIPAL WAT£K SUPPLY
Federal Juldellne of 0.2 pp.
for cyanIde I. achle.ed In
tre~ted .round vater Mod ~t
rec~ptorl. NAPS lay"r IIAY
affecl lechnlcal feallbllily
of .eellng thll IIandard.
Cround vat~r vIII be p~ped and
trealed untIl Ihla Ilandard II
achleyed It the co..pllance
boundary or unlll lechnlcal
Infeallblilly la de.on.tr_led.
Federal luldrllne 01 ).5 PPII
lor phenol II achleyed In
treated IIround waler and At
receptora. NAPS layer aay
altect lechnlcal leaalblilly
01 aeetlng'thll Itandard.
Cround waler will be pUII~ed and
tr~aled until thla atandard I.
achlryed at the co.pllance
boundary or unlll trchnlcal
Inleallbillty la dellon.lraled.
Federal luldellne 01 0.69 pp.
lo~ naphthalrne la achleY~d In
trealed Iruund water .nd at
rec~ptoro. NAPS lay~r a.y
- of feet technlclt feaalbllity
of .eetlnll thlo otlndard.
Cround Waler will be pumped an'"
trealed unlll Ihll otandard I.
achleyed 81 the cu..pllance
boundary or unt I I t~chnlcal
Infe.slbility I~ d~"un.tr.lr"'.
H~thod detrcl Ion 1I.1t uf U.IIU~ I'"''
for benlo-a-pyren~ Is ~chle.c'" In
treal~d Iround VUer .nd ~I
receplorl. NAPS I.yrr lO.y
arf~cl I~ehnlcal le~sl"IIIIY
of .eulnll thl. »I~n'''H,I.
Cruund w..te:r ",III ~~ 111&/"11':., .llld
IreJI~d unlll thl...tAn"'.rd I.
.chle"cd .t tltl.! ~""'.rll.'lh:-'-
bounJ..r, or un, I' h,"IIII'e-..1
'"f "".Id I bl' It., ... II"'I.I...! (,1(,""
, ,
..-
-~'~'~"'~~
ALTDIHArI VE 4
INCIN£UTlON 0' CDA WASTr. ANU
SUISOILS, CRUUNI) WArt:R
TREATMENT, HUNICIPAl WATER SUP/'LY,
A~D Off-SITE DISPUSAL IIF AS"
Fedeul lIuldellne of 0.2 PP.
for cyanide 10 achleyed In
IreJled Iround water and .1
receptors. NAPS lay"r lI~y
allecl technical f~a.lbIIIIY
of aeetlnll this standArd.
Cruund viler vIII be puap~d and
Ire.ted unlll thl. alandard I.
achleyed .t the co_pi lance
boundar, or until technlral
Infea.lblllty I. dellon.trAted.
Fed~ral ,uldellne 01 ).5 pp.
lor phenol h achlotyed In
Ireated ,round W.Ier and al
rec~ploro. NAPS lay~r aJ,
offect lechnlcal f"aslbllllY
of lIeellnll thll .IandJrd.
Cruund wat~r viiI be Pllllp~d JnJ
tre.ted until Ihls StandJr'" I~
achl~ved at th~ co.pllance
boundary Or unlll technical
Infeaolbility II d~.un.IrJled.
Fed~rAI ,"I"'ellne of 0.69 pp..
lor naphlhal~ne I. .chleYed In
t r~.t ed IIruund vlter .nd .It
rec"plors. NAPS IJ'~r 8.y
.fleet t.chnlc.1 f"a~lbIIIIY
uf ."elln~ Ihls .t~n"'.rd. .
Cruun,1 v.ter viii b~ pu,."~,,, JnJ
trcJled until Ihls SI~II"'~rJ I.
aohle."", at Ihe cumpll.no"
bUllnJ.ry ur untl' (e:chnlc..,
Inl"a.lbility I. de.un~trJlrd.
Hethud d"lecllon 111O't ul lI.t"l~
"lIb rur b~IU"-"-..yrltflt: Is .h'ht..:v,..,
In trc4t~d ~ru"..'" ""Iltr .Ilhl oJ'
r~~~lllur.. NAI'S I~,cr w..,
JII"Ct I"chnl
-------
APPLICA8LE OR REUVANT AND
APPROPR 1 A H HQUIR£HflHS (ARAR8)
AIIO OTtIUl AOVISOIlIES OR
CUIUELINES TO IE CUHSIIiUlEU (THC.)
OAC )14S-I-)2
01110 RIver Crlterl.
St.te Implement.tlon PI.n -
N..t 10n.1 (J IlIlnu Ion Syuell for
H.urdou. AI r Pollut.nt. - He..
Source Perform.nce St.nd.rd.
ACTIUN SPECIfiC
(PERfORMANCE; DESIGN)
40 cr. 264.) IU
Londlill clo.ur- requlrrllent.
.nd Po.tclo.ure C.re
100 cn Hlo. 116 .nd 2114. 111
U.e Re~trlctlon.
40 CFR 264.92-2610.99
Gtound Weter Honttorlna
OhIo Admlnl.tr..tlv. Code
w.trr Pollution Control
. )14S-I-OS(A)'(8) .
Antlde~r.d.tlon Pollc)'
(OAC)
OAC )11o)-)I-OS(A)()
Per..lt. to Inot.1I
UAC )HS-))-U4
]14S-)]-DS(A)(6)(8)'(9)
NPUES I'e rill t.
OAC JHS-IS-01
AIr PollutIon
OAC )14S-81 throu~h
)1/oS-99
Public W,t.r Supply
OAC )14S-S)-1I
JUit.rJo,"" "'..Ile Tr811.purt
See footnotc .t rnd uf t.bl~.
ALTUINATIVE I
HO ACTION
No .t.tI8tlc.II, .llnlflc.nt
cont'lIln.tlon Iroll the .It. I.
detected In the OhIo Klnr.
_b
WIll not co.pl)' vlth
100 CrR 2610. no.
WIll not co.pl, vlth
40 cn 21.4.116 end 264.111.
Will not COllpl)' vlth
40 CfR 264.92-264.99.
WIll not cOllpl, vlth OAC
Antld~aud8tlon Pollc,.
TULI ,
(Coot loud)
ALTDlNAlI VE 2
SLUIIRY WALL AHO CAP.
CROUHO WAHR TR EATHI1IT
HUNICIPAL WATt:.R SUPPLY
Ho .tul.tlc.lI)' 81&nlllc.nt
cont.mln.tlon frail the .It. I.
detected In the Ohio Rlv.r. .
Collpll enc. vlth 40 cra 264.] 10.
,. I
Co.pllenc. vI th 40 eVil 264. )to.
Collpllenc. ..lth
40 CfR 26lo.92-264.99.
Co.pll.nce ..Ith OAC
Ant Idegud.t Ion Policy.
Compll.nc. ..lth
OAC ]14S-]I-OS(A)().
COllp lI.nc. vlt h
OAC NPOES Peril It tI na.
Co.pll.nc. vlth fUKltlv.
dUlt regul.tlonl.
Coopll.nce "Ith OAe ]14S-81
throullh )14S-99.
COllplhnce wit h OAC J14S-S]-II.
UTUlI/ATlVE ]
IHCII/UlATlON Of CUA WASTE,
SLURRY WALL. GROUHO WATU TRlATHI1I.r
ANU HUNICII'AL W4tUl SUPPLY
No .t.tl.tlc.II, .I&nlllc.nt
contlllinetion froll the .lte h
detected In the Ohio RIver.
COllplhnce vlth SIP, I/ESItAP, .nd
NSPS.
COllpll.nc. ..Ith 40 crll 264. )10 If
..h retuined to pIt I. h...rJoul.
CoIII'II.nce vlth 40 Ct.R 21.4.) 10.
COllplhnce vlt h
40 CfR 2610.92-264.99.
CO.pll.nc. wIth OAC
Ant Id"lIud.tlon Pollc)'.
COllpl18nc. with
OAC )14S-)I-OS(A)(».
COllplhnc.. ..Ith
OAC NI'DES Por.lttln8.
COllpll.nce with OAC }HS.
Compllencr with. OAC }H~-III
throullh )1IoS-99.
Co"pll.ncol with UAC 114S-SJ-II.
UTERI/HI VE 4
INCINERATION Uf GDA WASa A:IU
SU8S0ILS. GROUND WATER
TREATHEHT. HUNlt:IPAL WHEN SUPHY,
ANU OFf-S HE OlSI'US4L Uf ASII
No .t.tl.tlc.II, .IKnlllc~nl
conl.mln.tlon fro. the elt" I~
detected In the OhIo RIver.
COllpll.nce wIth ~ppllc.ble SIP.
NESHAP, end NSPS roqulre~~nt..
-
Coml.ll~nce ..hh 40 C~.R 21,4. \II.
ColiI'I hnc.. wI I h
4U CfR 264.9l-264.99.
Co~pll.nce ..Ith 04C
Ant Id~g..d~1 Ion I'ollcy.
Compll.nc.. with
OAC )14S-)I-O)(A)(}).
COIII'II....c.. wi t h
OAC NI'D£S Permlttl..~.
Co..pll"..
-------
fUll ,
(Coorlouecl)
,
APPLICA8LE OR RELEVANT ANO
APPROPRIATE R£C,jUIMl:I1fNTS (ARAh)
AN 0 UTlt £II A UV I SOA I £S UM
CUIU£LINt:S TO 8t: CUNSIUU4U! (T8C.)
AlHMNATIVE I
NO ACTION
ALTERNATIVE 2
SLURRY WALL AND CAP,
GRUUND WAHR TRE:ATH£NT
HUNICIPAL WATEN SOP PLY
OAC )14S-1 I-OS
Air Nond"grod~tlon Policy
Full
compliance
OAC }1-2 I-Ol( 8)4(C)
Contrul of AI-r fats-IOIII
40 CrA 264.)40-264.)SI
Walt.. ""alYIII, Honltorlng,
In_pectlone. Ind Cloaure
40 CFle 2 ]0. 19 and 210.62
Trial Burn,
C£JICLA Off-Slu Ohpoul Polley
and CERCLA 121(d)(»
Co.pllance (or Ipent clrbun.
40 CrK 260.10
49 crR 264 "
Storage" D..orlns"'lnclneratlon
Ac t I v I t Ie,.
40 CrR 262
40 CrR 26)
c..nerator and
Crlt..rla
TrllllpOrier
Co.plianci with 40 erK 262
(or tran'purt o( regulated
qUint It lei o( Ipent clrbon
II a hallrdou, Waite.
UAC J14S-ll-0S (Particulate
HHter Ho n-o.:l1 rod It Ion)
OAC )14S- 11-01 (Vhlble Stick
lall,lonl)
OAC )]4S-I]-08 (rullltive Dult)
OAC )]4S-I]-09 (Portlculate
Emlilloni fro. Inclner.tor)
Co.pll.nce with OAC J14S-ll-08
and 3745-17-05
t
Hondegrad.tlon Polley
Particulate Hatter St.ndord.
Achlev" d".tructlon and
re.oval efficiency of 99.991
(or each principal organic
h41~rdou. con8tlturnt
Incln~r.tlon P~rfor4~nce
Stand.rd. 40 CF. 264.)40-.)SI
S6."1L" I UIII not c. .It ft
. 1.10110.
o
ALT£IINATI V£ )
IHCfHt:AATION OF GDA WASTt:,
SLURRY WAll. GROUND WAHII TAEATHt:NT
AND HUt/lCIPAl WATt:!! :;U~~LY
Co.pllance wllh Air
NOlldegrldatlon Policy.
Co.pll.~ce with OAC )14S-01.
COllpllance wit h
40 CFR 264. )40-264. HI.
COllpllance with
40 CFa 210.19 and 210.62.
Co.pllance If alh Is hal.rduuI
and for Ipent clrbon.
Co..pllince w II h 40 crlt 260. 10
Ind 40 CFR 264.
4 26J
COllpllanc.. with 40 crlt 262
and 40 CFR 26 J.
H&t
COllpllance wllh OAC JHS- 11-0S,
01. 08, 4 0'1.
WIll achieve 99.991
efficiency fur de.tructlun
and r~Guy.l 01 or~.lllc
h.l~rduu. con~tltuel'tl 10
Inclnerot Ion.
11111 ...et.
ALT£JINATI VE 4
IHCIH£IIArION or GDA \lASH AHO
SUBSOilS. GROUND WATEK
TRE:ATHLNT. HUNICIPAl IIAT£JI SU~nY,
"AND OFF-SIH OIS~USAL or ASII
Co.pllance wllh Air
NOlldelrodatlon Po IIcy.
COllpllanee with OAC )14S-U1.
Co.pllanee wllh
40 CFR 264. )40-264. H I.
COllpllance with
40 CFR 210.19 and 210.62.
r.O.IIII.nc~ II ..sh 1:11 h"~.Jr"'uus
alld for _pent corban.
COllpliance ..I th 40 cn 1 bU. IU
Mnd 40 CfA 264.
Co.pllallce wlth 40 CrA 211l
and 40 CrR 26).
CUllpll~lIr" ..Ith UAC 11~S-ll-~"
01. UII, 4 0'1,
11111 lehl~.e ' ' ..,.,t
efflcl~IIC1 (ur d~Hru."tJ.,,,
.nJ fe:f8uv.J1 o' "r".auic
h~t~rJuu. ctln~lllu~'llj II,
111-: I n~ r..e IOn.
-------
fULl 6,
(Contlnuecl)
APPliCABLE OR RELEVANT AND
"'ROPRIArE REQUIREM~TS (ARARe)
AND OTitER ADVISORIES OR
IIOELINES TO liE CONSIDERED (nCa)
ALTDINATI VE I
NO ACliON
ALTERNATIVE 2
SLURRY IIALL AND CAP,
CRaUND WATER TREATHrnt
HUNICIPAL IIATER SUPPLY
Radioactive Materiala
ConcentratIon In Spent Carbon
-.. "
11111 co~ply If applicable
concentratlona exceedecl.
DOt transport Regulations
~9 CrR 171-113, 111 " 118 If
Co~blned Radioactive Concentra-
tion or CollectIon Hedla
EKceeda 0.002 "CI/gram
.,:,;:: .
Ohio Regulatlona for NARHa -
OAC )101-10, 11, " )8 If
lead-210 eKceeda O. I "CI/gum
on Collection ~dla
SOz Em lulona
,batantlve requlrementa of ARARa, not ad~lnl~tratlve requlre.enta, 8..at be met for on alte actlona.
.n - not applicable.
,e Appendl. E for deacrlptlon of pertinence of ARARa and TIICa.
ALTERNATIVE)
INCINERATION OF COA IIASTE,
SLURRY WALL, CROUND WATEK TREATHENT
AND HUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY
,. I'
11111 comply If applicable
concentratlona exceeded.
11111 meet applicable SOz
e.laalon limit. If S02 la
e"pected to be a co.b..~tlon
product.
UHRNATIVE 4
INCINt:IIATlON OF.FDA IlASH: AIIU.
SUBSOILS, CRQUND WAT[K
TREATHUIT. HUNICIPAL WATER SUI'I'LY,
AND OFF-SITE DISPUSAL UF AS!!
11111 comply If applicable
concentratlona exceeded.
11111 meet .ppllcdbl~ SOL
e~ls,lon 11~lts If SO! Ij
exp~cted tu b~ .. cu,"bu.t 1011
product.
TBCa are not prollulgared r"gular Ion. and have! no ..d..lnl~tr.t Ivo: r"qlll re'.""1 ,.
Demonstrations of technical infeasibility of meeting ground water cleanup standards must bop
-------
TABLE 7
U.s. ENV1RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
GROUND WATER STANDARDS
PARAMETER
TREATMENT LEVELS
Anunonia
Chloride
0.50 mg/2.a
2~0 mg/i.b
0.2 mg/2.c
0.3 - 3.5 mg/i.d
0.005 mgft e
0.69 mg/i.f
0.005 ug!i.g
Total Cyanide
Phenolics
Benzene
Naphthalene
Benzo-a-pyrene
a"mg!i." equals milligrams per liter or parts per million. The indicated
value is a U.s. EPA estimated permissible ambierit goal based on humaA health
effects. The estimated permissible ambient goal based on ecological effects
is 0.01 mg/i.. These goals are not regulatory standards.
bThe indicated value is a U.s. EPA Secondary Drinking Water
This value is based on aesthetic water quality, not health
relating to public acceptance of drinking water. SDWS are
enforceable but are incended to serve as guidelines to the
Standard (SDWS).
standards,
not federall y
states.
cThe indicated value is a U.s. EPA toxic pollutants water quality criteria
for the maximum protection of human health.
dAs indicaced, 0.3 mg/i. is the aesthetic water quality level for controlling
undesirable taste and odor, while 3.5 mg/£ is the criteria establi~hed for
the protection of human health.
eThe proposed value in Federal Register, Volume SO, No. 21~, November 13,
19a5, Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is
0.005 mg/i..
fThe indicated value is a U.s. EPA estimated permissible ambient goal based on
. health effects. The estimated permissible ambient goal based on ecological
effects is 0.05 mg/i.. These goals are not regulatory standards.
g"ug/2." equals micrograms per liter Or parts per billion.' This value
represents the current instrument detection limit.- The actual 10-6 cancer
-------
-21-
3)
Reduction of Toxici tv. M:>bi Ii tv or volume
The assesSITeI1t against this criterion evaluates the anticipated perfoI1TE.I1ce
of specific treatment technologies. This evaluation criterion addresses
the statUtory preference for selecting remedial actions that anploy treat-
nent technologies to peI1TE.I1ently and significantly- reduce toxicity-,
lTDbi Ii ty, or volt.nre of wastes. .
4)
ImPlementability
The implenentabi Ii ty criterion addresses the technical and administra-
tiv-e feasibility of implementing an alternative and the availability for
various services and rraterials required during llnplanentation.
5)
Cost
Cost evaluation of each alternativ-e includes consideration of capital costs
and annual operation and maintenance costs. The accuracy provided by these
cost estirrates ranges from plus 50_percent to minus 30 percent. ,~present
worth analysis is also cO~ed, allowing al.l remedial action a'lternatives
to be compared on the basis of a single figure. The cost figures rray
increase dep:nding on the' actions required to mitigate the ~S layer of
contamination.
6)
Compliance wi th MARs
", .'
This evaluation criterion is used to determine how each alternativ'e
corrplies with applicable or relevant and awropriate federal and state
requiranents (MARs). Sev~al tYJ;es of requiranents that SUperfund actions
may have to corrply wi th include arnbient- or chemical-specific requirements
which set health- or risk-b3.sed concentration limits, performance or design
requirenents that set controls on activities related to ITEnag6T1eI1t of
hazardous substances or contaminants, and siting requirenents which set
restrictions on activities depending on the characteristics of a site or
its imrecliate environs. In addition, the alternatives are also assessed
against other infonration in the form ot advisories, criteria, and
guidances that are rot ARAR.s but have been identified by the agencies as
criteria to-~onsidered (TEe) because they have been determined to be
necessary to ensure protection of huIren health, and the environment and are
appropriate for the site.
7)
Overall Protection of HtJm;m Health and the Environment
The assessrrent against this criterion describes how the alternativ-e, as a
whole, protects and lTBintalns protection of human health and the environ-
ment. The overall assessment of protection is based on a canbination of
factors previoUSly- assessed under other criteria, including long-term
-------
-22-
This evaluation focuses on hJw a SF€Cific alternative achieves protection
ov"'er time arrl how site risks are reduced. The evaluation alSo indicates
how each SOl.UL:.e of contamination is to be eliminated, reduced, or
con1:I"0lled for each alternative.
8)
State AccePtaoce
This assessrrent ev'"a.luates the techniCal and administrative issues am
concerns the State (or StlpFOrt agency in the case of state-lead sites) ffi3.y
hav"e regarding each of the al ternati ves.
9)
,
,I
,I,
:1
CQllJT1l.tn.i tv Acceotance
'!his assessment incorp:>rates p.lblic inplt into the analysis of alternatives
and reflects the Ccmm.mity's apparent preferences or concerns atout alter-
natives.
.'
B. &m1rerv of Irx:li vidual Anal vsis of AI ternati ves
J
The fOllowing is ;a: StmInary of the analysis of each alternative against the
nine criteria. 'Ihe Feasibi li ty Study (01apt.er 6) contains a Full discus-
sion of how each alternative compared to the criteria.
'I
,/
I
I
Alternative 1 - RJ k:tian
1)
2)
3)
4)
Short-term Effectiveness
o Continued ground water contamination
o Continued migration of contaminated ground water
to Ironton Iron Inc.
o Potential for direct contact with waste oozing
up through existing cap
Long-term Effectiveness and Pennanence
o Continued ground water contamination
o Continued migration of contaminated ground
water to Irontoh Iron Inc. wells and Ohio River
o N:>t penranent - no treatment of contaminants
provided
Reduction of Taxi city, l-bbi Ii ty, or Volume
o no reductions prov-ided
lmplementability
o no construction, therefore, no technical
diffiCUlties, no rermits necessary, no
-------
-23-
5)
CoStS
o no as,sociated costs
6)
COmpliance with ARARg.
o M:Ls anq TEes in ground water not Iret, waiver
not justifiable
7)
Overall Protection of Human Health and Environment
o adequate protection not provided
o risks rena.in due to present and future grourrl water
contamination
8)
State Acceptan:e
o State does not StJH:Ort no action
9)
t
Ccmnuni ty Acceptance
o Conmmi ty' did not 'carment on this alternative
Alternative 2 - SlUITV WaJ.l/r.;m. Grourx:1 Wrt.er Extraction and Treat:Irent,
M..miciPal Hater. ~ Investiqaticn
1)
2)
Short-tenn Effectiveness
o no detrDnental effects to community,
li ttle to no waste disturbarce, dust
SUl=Pression and protective rre.asures taken
o additional gro~w'ater contamination controlled
by waste isolation and containrrent in fifteen
( 15) rrQnths
o ground 'water cleanup aehiev'"OO at lronton Iron
Inc. in five (5) years
o ground water cleanup achieved at site estirrated '
at twenty-five (25) additional years
o mcinimal detrDnental effects to on-site workers
exp:!Cted, protecti ve measures required
Long-tenn Effectiveness and Permanence
o Long-tenn effectiv-eness of slurry wall/cap
ensured by well constructed and properly
-------
5)
6)
7)
-24-
, Containment systen is not permanent, however, with
proper construction and maintenance, it is reliable
, Risk fram waste retaining on-site should containment
fail are small due to inward ground water gradient
and slurry wall integrity m:>ni toring
, ,Lang-term m3I1agenent of containment systen required
, Pennanent, reliable ground water treatrTEnt provided
, Ground water treatment effective in long-term
3)
Reduction of Toxicity, M:>bility, or Voltnre
, Ground water treatment provides 99% reduction in
toxici ty of contaminants
4)
, Waste is contained, no reduction in toxici t¥ ,
rrobili ty , . or volune of Contaminantsl in waste in the GDA
Irnplementablllty
, N:>t techniCally Complex, high level of quality
assurance/quali ty control necessary for design
and construction of slurry wall
, Materials and services available
, DiSCharge of treated water requires compliance
wi th NPDES limitations
, Access to property not owned by Allied required
Cost
-
, , Total capital and present work 0 & M = $13,130,000
Corrpliance wi th ARARs
, Complies with ARAR.S, however current ground water
clean up levels may not be technically feasible,
technical feasibility evaluated dur-ing renedial
action' '
Overall Protection of H1.lTTBn Health and Environment
, Existing ground water contamination mitigated
through treatment
, Future ground water contamination eliminated bv
-------
-25-
o Irenton Iron s~lied ITllIDicipal water hook-up' fer
. in-plant potable and sanitary uses until ground
water cleanup' levels achieved
o NAPS investigation to examine ranedial alternatives
for Ni\PS layer, espacially treatment
8)
State Acceptan::e
o State has irdicated it accepts this alternative.
~I
"
i
9)
Camumi ty Acceptance
, I
I I
o JUdging fr!=iTI cormumi ty respmse at the p.1blic 'i
meeting, the cormumity accepts this alternative.:
However, no specific written comnents were receiyed
frem the cClTTTil..I!1ity on this alternative. The De~t .
of Interior, a p.1blic agency, COIT1t1ented on this.:al ternati v"'e.
I '; I
:a.J.ternative 3 Ircinerat.e' Waste 51 Wlll For NAPS k .
Treat:Ire!:It. M.micirel Water. NN>s InvestiGation
Water
1)
Short-term Effectiveness
o Need high level of protective measure (foam,' respiratory
€q).lipnent) to mitigate pJtential short-term risk te
corrmmi ty and on-site workers due to disturbance of
waste
o 5 years to achieve cleanup of waste, 3 additional years
to replace ash and construct slurry-wall for Nf\PS layer
o 5 years to achieve ground water clean up at Ironton
Iron wells
o 25 years estimated to achieve ground water cleanup levels
near site '
2)
Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence
o Incineration of waste and treatment of grourrl.water
effecti ve in long-term and :t:ermanent.
o Long-t;.enn effectiveness of contairnrent systen for redispJsed ash
and N?\PS layer ensured by \VeIl constructed and rraintained system
o Containment is not r:;ermanent, however, with prop:r construction and
meintenance, it is reliable
-------
6)
7)
-26-
, Risk from waste renaining on-site should containment fail is small
due to inward ground water gradient
3)
Reduction of Toxicity, M:>bility, or Volume
, Grotmdwater treatment provides 99% reduction of toxicity
of contaminants
, Incineration of ~ waste reduces 80% of toxicity of
contaminants and reduces volume by 15%
4)
Impleneritabi Ii ty
!
III
"
.'i. " "
' Technically complicated to ilriplenent ~;1Clneratlon FOrtlon
or remedy ,
. :i
, Materials handling problem from tarry,. i,Sani -solid waste
. ,
, Construction of Stabilizing wall neces~ary for excavation
I - '\ ~I
, Materials' and services (traI1Sp:)rtable itOtary "In)
availability limited 'I.
I
, Access required to off-site properties
, Test burn approved by Agencies requd.red
, NPDES limitations ITU.1St be met
5)
COst
, Total capital and present worth 0 & M = $92,230,000
Compliance with ARAR.s
, Complies with ARAR.s, however it may not be technically
feasible to achieve current grqund water cleanlIp
standards, technical feasibi li ty evaluated during
ranedial action
. CNerail Protection of Ht.unan Health and Environment
, Existing ground water contamination ITutigated through
treatment
, Future ground water contamination eliminated through
treatment of primary source (GQA waste) and containment
of majority of secondary source (NAPS layer)
, Ironton Iron supplied municipal water hook-up until
-------
-27-
o NAPS investigation to examine ranedial alternatives for
NAPS layer, especially treatment
8~
State Acceptan:e
o State would accept this al ternati v""e
9)
Co1mumi ty Acceptance
o COrmunity. did not CCl1'ITleI1t SJ;:eCifically on this alternative
Alternati ve 4 - Iocinerate Waste. Urx:Ierlvim Soils am ~ Laver. Ground.
W3:ter Trea:tm:nt. Hmici pal Water. NAPS Investiqation .
.1) .
Short-term Effectiveness
o Need high level of prOtective measures (foam, respiratory,
equipnent) to mitigate PJtential short-term risks to
COITmIni ty arx1 6n-si te workers due to disturbance of wastes
o 14 ~s to complete incineration
o 5 years to achieve. ground water cleanup lev"els at Ir:>nton
Iron wells
o 25 years estimated to achieve gro1IDd water cleanup levels
near site
2)
Long-term Effectiveness and Penranence
o Incineration of waste, underlying soils, and majority of
NAPS layer effective in long-term arx1 permanent
o Ground water treatment ef f ecti ve in . long-term and penn-
anent
. 0 I'b need for long-term managenent
3)
Reduction of Toxicity, r'bbility, or Volume
o Ov-e.rall toxicity of waste, underlying soils, majority of
NAPS layer, and ground water reduced by 99%
4)
Implernentability
o Technically complicated to implement incineration portion
or renedy~
~
-------
8)
9)
-28-
o Materials handling problem due to tarry, sarti -solid nature
of waste and need to dewater all materials below water
table
o Construction of stabilizing wall necessary for excavation
o Availability of tran.sp:>rtable rotary kiln limited
o Access to off-site properties required
o Test burn to be approved by Age.xies
a NPDES limitations mJSt be net
5)
Cost
a Total capital and present ~rth 0. & M = $218,000,00
6)
Cornpliarx:e with ARARs
~
COrrplies with ARARs, howev"'er it may not be techniCally
feasible to achiev"'e ground water clean up. levels,
technical feasibi li ty evaluated during ret1edial action
7)
Overall Protection of Hum3n Health and Environment
o Existing ground water contamination mi tigate::l thrOUgh
treatment
a Future grotm:J, water contamination eliminated through
treatment of pr:iIrary an majority of secondary source
o Ironton Iron SlIFPlied with rrunicipal water h:x:>k-up
until cleamlp" levels achievaj .
o ~ investigation to examdne remedial alternatives
for W\PS layer, esp2Cially treatment
State Acceptan::e
a State believes this alternative is not practical
. Corrmmi ty Acceptance
COITITU..mi ty did not corment on this alternativ"'e
-------
-29-
c.
SLmmarv of COrtParisan of Alternatives
TabJ.e 8 presents the comparative analysis of the four alternatives. The
following is a surrrnary of the key advantages and disadvantages of the
alternatives.
1)
Short-term Effectiveness: Alternative 2 offers several advantages
over Alternatives 3 and 4 in regard to sho~-tenn effectivenesS'.
Alternative 2 poses less potential for risk to on-site workers ~n
the corrm.mi ty because the hazardous waste is disturbed as little
as possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 require a high level of health
and safety procedures to ensure the safety of the workers because
the waste:~ill be disturbed. Alternatives 3 and 4 also require
the use o~ foam to reduce vOlatile air anissions. Alternative 2
can be im81enented faster than Alternatives 3 and 4.
2)
Lonq-term~ffective and Permanence: The long-term effectiveness
of Alternative 4 will be ensured by the well designed, maintained,
and rom t9red [tainment system. It does, however, require long-
term mana
-------
usas.or '''(101'
~
.!!!
'.(I"-'D.. U'U"TI""'UI
. II.. ""'11 ""'ell.. I. ""I...,.
- ""IC'''' .f C.-","I', .,.,". ........
ac'l... (u)
~
- ""~CI'" .f ........ ~rl.. I.
.. ~.I....."... I.,u..
Lo.C-fD.. U'tCfUlDftU
- ",,"It~1 .. "'1111., ...~
ILlDUU" I
'" an'08
.. "-"811.. ,........
" "'11"..' "........ ,...u.,.
""...,.,,,,.. -.1' ..ul... .. "'"'' ..,
.lIr' ........., "u... .., ..I(hll......"..,.
10. II.~ I. "."., ..... ,...1... '0.,,,.1.'
::::::.:':. ~~;~II ::::' ;::.: .:;.;:; I;: ;;.:'
c..._,. II. ., . h' ,... ',Id"'.. .u.. ,.., .h.
GIrII, II... ,...,.." , ..ICh....I. ..., 1...1 .,
10. ., I....
'.. .
" "
.., ."It"u..
C...I...... C'.'''''..I.. .. .,....., ..,...
,..,..., ,., ..,1\,...1... .... kilo"., ..
U""u..',,,, III Ih~.
'I.. ... .'...C..I.II ....... .., '.,.Ih.""
11,.,"11'. ....,.",~..
c......"... ., ,..~ .... ........., 1"" rr.. .,...
'::!, ::';:.::'''.'' . utlh...... ,It" h... .,
....1... ..1', I.,.,. .. «"......... ..,..4..,. ..
... ..,...... .
Il88Y.8t " &L'a..u.. UU.tllI
IUD..
'LUII, ,
.. IC08,.I...",..
, c.u &.II' elO\llll'
tUUIlJif'
II..., .... I. .....,.; ,I". .,,1.1..... ..,
.... ..,... .11., '..e.: .... '''',IUh.'1 ,..,
(... ,...., ".... ..... 'n. -"'I. '" .1"..,
,.11 (u.... I...., .,......t; ,,,... ... .....
,...". ..... I....., ""1 ..... '" I"..'
..... ".., 'Ulu,., c....., ,...... ...,.".1
...., c. lie ... ,...... . 100 ". ,'.... ....,
,"'.'11.. .... .. IIC, ...'t..I.,.
c.,. .1.,., ..11. ... ,........, ,h.. .......,..
,... ...1' "" It ..,'I",. .."..... e....., ....,
..c...., ..... .."'" It. "'4, "h, .. ,,,.,
".,t...,. 'h. ,..,. .. .,., I""'" .....
"..4.... It Ih, .118('" "",.... It..
..,.,... ..... II '" ..It., ,,"." .h.. 1 ,.If. ,.
....1. A.'U. If" "c. ,. ... ....... ..... .. 1h8
,..,11'.1' .0....4..,. ..,..1.11, "C,,," .. '''''
'A" I.,... .., ,..,..... .. ..... """" . )0'"
,..t .1.. "... .. "'\8oe'.
I..u.... .. ...... c:...t"""II' ........ ..... ,.
,--,., ,,'. .u.....
'.""" .f ..,.... ......." "...... ....
...1'0_". ,., ....... ....1.......
IIC II ,...U.. .11" '".'d,., ...u '"''''
..... 18' ..11.... .
"''''''UI ., .11. .......... ,.... .. .h.... ,.
...,... ...1',"",
I I
"'.'e.I.. ",,,'"' ......, ....., """U ""
"''''''''''' ...11". al". ....~. .. .etl..
e'''"".cch. .1 u, ... .1...11, ..u. 1111"...,
."..".. .,.. ..,... .",18' '111",,,(11.. .1 ...
..all", .,.".. Mill,....., ,re'.ul'",
'."1\1". .". .....fIIl., ,,'..,u...
VIII ..., '''''fI.''', ...C,........ ,...
."'..1...,... ""........1 .,..... ....,
.h.. .1,,,, ..U h...Ia.,I.. III' '''U......
& "\I" .f Iha """ ..,.. ..II' .. U.''''U''
'''''''' "",.. Aft" ........ ...., ""IU".
... 1""""1 .. e..,I.... "10111., .., .... ....
".1411.1 r.."..... ","1..1... .~ rail. ."Ich ...,
..I h '"...u", r...lr... .. ..-... "'01. lie
'11,,10' «'.,-l1li... I..., .111 .. I... .""
t \011/1 .1 ........ Cdle. ..... Ih. 11(1..',
",.,u. .... ,........ ,., .I..c, e''''ICI,
,........ ...,......, " c""""..,, .. ,.......
..'n, -WI" .rr",I..I, ,...,.1" ."..1., .,
.1t0""', ....re. (II...,.. .,.. .'8(...111. .11
.IU. I. ."111_. ....." ,......", "11... ".
....1,,,,.
.ua..II" J rru...f'IIOIU
i8C1.CI"'~ 01 CIA. "UTI. It:1U, .au.
U. CI~' -UD nlAf'IIOr
c..It .... ,...h.. ..,....., -II .., .1...,
..11 ...... ..... ..... .......... ...., .. '."i
h..."... ,'" c... ..... ... U....... .. ......
..III: ",,,"'11,. ..... ..... II . 'h., .-
.... ,".... 'IIIU,,. .....18. "'.. 'It' ..
eu ..." ..,1',,,,,,, .. ,..,..... "."'.'1 .
.."", ..11 II ,...... '''.'' .......... II ,..
""1 ,ta.. ".h,a.. .. ..II u." .. I', .,
...... .., ""1 ".u: .... ''''''''Iu.: ,-,
I.' ...., ,..... ..... ...' '(118.... e""'i
,...... ''''11',.& ..... II IIC "' ,...lIe .
100 ,.. ,,,.., ..... ,..,..,... ...11 .. lie.
".11"'.,.
f..h. "'''11' ""'''' 'If C"'''«I .., -,. ..18'
'.''''. c''''''.eU.. .. ...."".1 "'.11 (..... .
.", ........, ., CO., .~ h.........
;:,.:: .:~::: I .:: '~J ~::::.:'.: .:~;:::::; .:~ooo
,..,. ,. ....,.... .,. h.. ,-",", ....".
.". .. CNI ... ...,Ih. ,. '."""''' ...",
..11; C...lhll., ... ....,. II '04t. II -.,...
.., .,........ ".., C'''''',,'I18.. tI.. ,..., ..
.... ,.."'.. ..... ....4".. .. ..c.,..... I. I.
..,.u,,' .h.. II .., ..,. h.,.. .... , ,.... ,.
...... un. .., 11C. I. ,.. ...".. ..,.. .. .~.
."""ec. "WI""'. ..,.".U, ~'r.... .. ,...
IUI "'''' r.. ,,,.,.... ., .... """, . 10-
,... II.. t.... -. ...-...
1I,.IIIe.... heflu. .. ."'. ... ,.....h. t"~
,... c..,,,,,,,,,, ''''''. ........... C' ,fI).
..-... .1 ..,..., ....,.... ,...lIu ....
...h....... ,., .....,. ,.,1"'1'.
f_, ..., ...., .,..., 8"" .... " 41.....-
II... a. .".,1 .... ..,."'.." ,..C..,...", ....r.1
C-"I) ...UI ... h u -U .,...,... ..111
C........ell... ., ... ....II'n .. ,... .h", 8.11
(,.,h, hit. 'u".
lie II ,,..1... ..., .-Ie".1 ..... ...,h, ,...
....'h. AI. "'Uh In. hd....... .111,....
I, ........ '''1'... "'.n'hl '."11111 ,.
,,,,,... ,.11..,... (1....1".. .11).
~;:;~~~:I,:'; :::::;~::~ :~~~~;::'::I::hh'. u.
II CO.. (,-,... ...., h".
'",.uh. "~IIIr.. .,..." ,..... «."".... .A4
'...h.h.lI.. '.'111, "'I" '9'" " .,....1...
"..,ctl." ..~...". ....." ..,....... .. '1C,.t.
.. ..... '\oIrh. 'h. ,.... ., ,8("""". '
h'.,,'1I1 ,., e.,,,III.,... ..... ..,....." ''''1".
'8('"'''''' .., ....h,.
hi""'" .tr 1.,.(.. h.. 18,hu.,....
'u....., h. ..,....... (..".., II c..,..""...,
,....'" .U" ...,h. ...., ,.u (I... 'II" ..
"'cl.8t"','h .111,.... I, ,..lu,lu cl"~h.
..4 ......111; ."."",..
"'...hl ,.. ...., h.. .."...1... ,.......,
"'..... ,.1"'",. .., .h.t ... ,...11', I.,,,..
fu. h.",...,I.. cr ,....,.
,,,.. ..., .hU'-''', .., "". tlf, he.........
'11. .......,,,.1"', I"II""~'" .,...,
.".r.
""1..". ., ..... ... ,....... "II"
.'..111.,.." ..hu. ,..I'.... .... ...,.
A It"', .1 ,~ IU. h,.. ..III .. u....U.'
.",... 4"1,.. Ih.. I"".' ..... "',,,tl..
'111' 'u""., .. ...,h... '411111, .11. ,..,
.... ...1.... I.....".. ..,1\.","'" ... ,...
.hlch .., ... h 1"..h.lI, ........ ..
....... n. lie "",.., c'.'blll..., ...., .111
hi." '''l1li , ".,. .," "...... (.....c~ ."1. ....
"""I
... (......IRII.' ..1, ... ,. ......, ",.. ..
,.".. ..... I"..' .1I1f. ,......,. hle"I-. ..
.....chu... .. ...",,,", .."f.
...,,,, .... "'iI.U ,,,..., "'..1,. .1,"'11. .,
,.,..", .1 ,II.., .11......" ..",,, .1
........"III.Ilul '..II". I. .Htll..... III."'.
, . .. . "...1 .. r It" ~. ... ... ,
AltDaAfl.. . I "
l-e'80aIl08 0' CDA w. ~ 'UllalL.
C.oval .,ara flLU"Dr'. Chi --.If. Iurol'L
c....."., """'" ..n .........,.. .,. eoa.
I'.h....,. COA. ..... .., t.""" ., ,. ,.,.u~.
...,... "'''u' u..... ..,.....: ,,,,..n CDA
,... ..".. ....: ,..., .., ''''1 ,.. .....,
..... .... ..,...... C""'I ,...1.. '..1«1,..
..... I. lIel ,...... ''''11(11.. ..1& ,. IIC.
...1,.'1... .
,..... ...It.I-, ".'" .., c..u... ... .t, ,.,11
''''''. ... hel........ -"Ih.,...; .."......
:!: I ::;:~: ~~~. :~~ '::'.:1 .~::: :II::~ :: O~~~' ,: 1
.. '''',,'h. "."", ."., "..,.... .,.... ..III
.. ,,'"'h... .. "-.,,,.. 'h. ,..,. ,. ....
".... -..., "........ .. .le.,I....
",.II'u... her.... I. '..n 1fII' ,."",", ....
.... ."'11""'" ...'1", ..,....h. (II ,....,.
,...,". .. ..,.... ",""a. "..u.. ..,.
........... ,., ......, ,..1'..,..
r., ... ".., .."'..,...... .,...". .".r.
IIC' h ,....... ..... .~.e',,' ..ur ....1111,
,....Ie. II, "'"11 Ir.. '..h....I."
...1...., ., ""'''111 ".'''1. ......hl
..,..... ,. Ih"..1 ,.11...1.. (...../1\.. III).
::. ;:;~~~. ::: ::C :::..:: ~J ~:~~ . ;:11 .::,: ::-......
tlU"If' ,. .. '''-el.. ".,.ul 11.11.., ....
at ,.....
.... .. oIl...III.lh. ) ...." ..,....... .u I..
..".., .....,... .......... ,..,.).
11".111.. .. 10 .... .1,,- .,...... "'.... ,.... ..
'0 r.., -III r...1t I. . hi,.... ,........ .h'
,. .... ..,..,..
,........ .., ","" r... hch..."." UI
,...d. ,........ ..,...r. ,. ..~,..I....,
..."... ..... .111,..., ., ,'''.uh. ""1\1"41
... ,....hl.. .".,......
.... .. .u",,,",,,, ) .u." .....,.. '..,u...
II) ,....,.
1...1..". .1 .''''. ,,,'..11.. .., "....., .....
-III ""1..,. ,.,,'u. .1 ,.11.."8..
, ......, .t .~. ..,. h,.. ...1 II (..,.u..
',,'h, ,..1... ""., .r.".. ..... ...'.e....
... ,...,.... ,. ...,11". .,..U.. .UI iii...
.... ........ ~'''''''''' ."",".1... .... ,....
.hle. ." ... .. '8Ih.le.II, huHh .. .......
"'. Ite IIU,'" I'''''''''.' h,,1 .11' .. ....
'''''' , ...11 .1 .."'.... (.hl." ..... ,h. lIIeL).
.""...1 .... _"I' .. ...,.... .. I. . '1(.." .
I,."UII .."U "4.e. ,.,..,...... ..
-------
UIUI'U.., '''CTO..
... ....,..." ., c.......
... ..11."11., .r c...t.."
'[DuCt.:).. 0' TOIICln, NOllllff. O' VOU"",
~
Il'InDlDfUlillTt
.. fuh..h.a "".'IIU,
... "..fthcrut.... ,...1'''1',
.. "'.''''111., .r lentee. 684 ~..,....
!.ill
.. c.,lhl c...
.. 01" Crr...... ......... 10 ,.u.)
.. 're...... iii.,.... (C.,ac.l ,h. 041'1)
Co..'Llucr "'n- u."'"C
.. eo.,.h..u ..... uu.
.. "",."........ ., ..".'1
.. C..,lh... .... .'11.,...
............
t... ...
AUDIA".' .
.. In 108
Ie.ltre. .'h. .. ...., ........ ... ,........
h...... .. '.".'; ,.,... ...,.., ., 'llut
...1. " 1II"...h....., ,..". ,........ 'II'
..... .. ,...,1,1.. ''''1 r."..., '.""81"- .r
,..... ..1., Uhl,.
.. ,.4.......... .. ...lell,. .."11., ., ..1...,
.h.. .. ,......., It ..,1.,...
.. .44,....... ..........,.. .,........
I,.... ., ,.."... ....., ,a_. -.... ..,.
"..U.' h. ..,. ,,,"",.. I. 'h. ,....,..
.. ....u,w,cU... .. a., ....~.... .,......, ...
,.,.11. ..,,,h.'.
..... .....,....
&.I.... I. ,...... ..... ...a. ..1 M .........
.., ).."'I.'h.
D... ... ..., II( .'''.'18,
J.LiU.1.~
o
(0...,-..
iLlUuU'. I (Cr."'.-"III"
lLUIU IIIALL WI I. CA, UD C.ou..
""18 tlU'''IJII
c." .,..", ".U. "".ar' .ra....... .., .,.-....
,.."... .81.. ..118 "II a .'.1.... '...v,.
........... .r .....", ""ar. &.81 ,...,...
'''h''.'"", ... fal""" ...11II...."c.., c".
......." ..118 '1\' .......". '''''.. .... ,......,
"'''18''.' .t ,....." .". "'U.... .,81.. ..,
.. .,~"Ir.' '111''''' .a.. JD ,.....
..IUfI", ..u. .d ......" ..... ........
....11., .h. .flUII.."... .. .., .". .1..",
..11,
VI.. ,..,.. ..I_.u....c. ., ..,. 00"".'1",
..II.. '''-''. ..., .,....... ,18".. 1...IUoo' .t
10.11,... h ...11. '"' h.r..... ollu......... Ie
."'\1,.'.
Llhllhoo' .t 1811".. ., .1.", ".11 Ie ...11.
C......, .....r "..11111", ...... .. ...If,
""0'.."".
Colli''''.,... .,.... '0'. 'I.' ,...."...., ..u,.,
'h ...It. 10,.....((1.,... '0.:;11" .0UIII,.
., ....1\18, ., C04 1f8l...
hi... .... ...hl', .1 .,...... ..t.r
c.....,tn.th. .....111...'1, r..... .,
.u,.c.lo.. ... .".'...t.-
c...........",. I. ,1\, 'oil.. I.,.r .,. r.I.'...I,
h'ol...~.. ... ".u', ... .-..... .ft' .h.
..J.,lq' .1 .hh 18,., .'11 .. ,..."h.. c.....h..
" .h. .1.", ".11. "-. '0""'''. U....lhf\ .t
...Iclt,. .0\111." ., "01... .t .hl. I.", ..Ul
,. ....1".. ...HI". ,h.I,".
C.,..I."cll.II ., .I."r ..11. c." .,."'... ....r
..,.",. ... .......... .,.,.. c.. ,. I.,.....,..
.'18(.(1..1, .,,1,1111 ..h.h, tuh"ol..,.
I............ ,u.l. ..,..Ir...... C., ..dUIc..I..
.. ..".1". ... '''.t "'DU.,....II) .. 'IUh".
"..... .,...n, ""...,.
Ia,.".. .'" ....,.... ,..,.., ...lh'I..
'0 '00,000
',J )0,000
IJ. IJO,OOO
&.11 UAIJI "III .. ... .. .111. ''''''''''
''''''1118' ,...,hu, """""'.'. "...", ...., ..
._,U...c. 111,,,1\',,". .., ... .... AlAI. ., r.c.
III.c..... ., ,t-. -"" I.,.,. "'. ...h..!tc.1
'."".11., .1 ..1\18.1,.. .......... 'fI' HC. '" ."'.
"..'" ..... 0111 ill. ...1111..,' ...., .,.. ,....
'~"""""" .h. '...'181 .,,1.111,
... ..,,,,....,
IH. -III III. .u.
\.
utUlfltiU I UltU"Oru
"CI.DIIIOII 0' COI ...sr.. '"UlU "IU.
UO C'O\I8I, '..Ia. IU,""OII
I.,,,,....... .. . 'u... 'f.'.."",
lI'ull....... .1 ,"'ft, ..U ......, .. ......,..
,,'h, ...,I1.",u .,... ... ,.....,.....
C..,.h.c. ".U.,.., ..I" .."., .. afhech.
.. ......, .h.... ""CII. II ..,. ., ,....".,
...... .... .1"c8"..". .f ...,., ..u ...... "
......". " ..IIIIt...., ".U. .d 'u..." ..118.
"'''''''00' .1 "II..,. ., ."u, ..11 18 ....11.
C,...... ..10' -dta,h, ...... ... ..,u,
,.rl.,....c..
IlIIc""''''h. .1 CO.. ...... ,I. .. . ,........
'..1 ,....... ,....,.
to.hh, .t 'OA ".... .111' 'f.".' ...or
.1,""'c...II, ,,'..c",
O'.."le c......I........ .,. .11.,..,... .... ..t-.
981... .t re."".. ..a. .111 .. re'..e.' ., 101.
A.h .. ... II"~, .. hrc~i ...,... ,... ,,,,,l1l4I
.111.1.,.
CO..,..''''''.. I. ... ...... ta,., ... '.'..".1,
1""01..111" .. ....., ... 1_."" ... Ih.
..Jo,'., 0' .hh ..", .111 III. 'l,I"h.., co"ul..,.
,,'1\. .1...", 111.11, Th. ,.1111.18. ....u.." .1
'0.1((1" .0111...". .. nl_. .f .1\" h,., ..III
,. ....1.... '...'h, ...1...
1.0'0.8(1... 100 I... ..., ... to .h. ""'.11, .1
.. .(11.-. ..'II... -111&, .....1,. .,.....
'''Ih..''... ,ft' c.".t,.u18.. t.ch...h., ....,.
,., I.~h..... hi ......
.". h"ul... .....1. ......,. .,u 101 .'''''''''1.
c.....ol.. .AI .,.r..."1 ...1,...18 .'11 ......1,.
1..8Ih. .. "'.'11, '''.1...' .".'11.''''..1 ...
...t-...Io., ".. "'11 '..0......... '........,..11"
..... ...,," hi 1110.... ........ .... "J.u..".
4"".1 .h. h(IIII.,8I18..
COI\8I,I,IUIo. .f tl..", ..1&. ".lIIn' .....,
c.,...... '"' ........" "."., ...,..." ...
UOI'" '''''II, c... b. 1.,18.,.... ..,,,, c,,-.a.
'O""'.t..... ...hol,..,., ....1,....1. 'ft'
-'.'1818.
Ac'''', ."..... ., .,... h,.. ... ."..",.. .1
,.u .....h. .1 ,..U....a ...... ....I' III,
..,..It... ,
I"b..,,,,... ,...1. "....1''''''10 (., .04I1Ic""a
Ie ..h,ln. ... ,1... .'PU ,...11) CO 'h,IIoII,.
",.,., "...... "...r.
T,....,o..,'I. '.cl...,..., ."" .,.....,. ."'.';
Ilal..' "...!II,., ., unle. CM,."". .....1"". Ie
..h, ,o..n.". .
1...Ic.. ,... ..'.rl." ,., .......r.. .Ih., .h."
h'lI:h...,., u. '."11, ...1"'1..
'0, "0, 000
'1,100,000
fJ,HO,OOO
..... .. Ahu".. h. I.
t1;a, 1114,,110'.
,.:. ..IU III. ....
UIUIIUI,. . CflLtfJlt)lU
..""OAf,Cat 01 cu -.un UI UIIDU.
,.ow, ."la II&.IUOIt. O"~IIII IUrol41
'lIclo....... .. . ,,..... ...,....". .....,
,...1114 ....., .. ,....... .. .re.'I."" h..h.
.. ...,~..,o .811'"..... .. ..,..1..'. c..,"..c.
..II ... ,,,....., ,..... l1li11.....1.'11.....
".".,l1li. ...a. .. ...,...,. ... ......., ,...
,,,,.,...c. .1 I"v",' ..u, ..,..u... ..,
........, .'.'0..
, ,
lI..... ..1111...l1li, III..'" .. "ulI, "."111' ".u.
'..'.'..1...
1",.h.,.lhe .t CDA ...,. '.'. C."I..I..u..
.,..Ih"-.'."hl. .111' .... .. '''. ."'1 h,., 10
. ,....n.... ""'..e.'.. ,....,.
T08l. a., ,fI' ..aYA. .i '04 ..... '1\' ..h..h
hd",'''', '.ce.. ..,., .t "'8IIIu .'11 ..
,'I.h,I."
t.llllcl', ... .....-. ., ,,.,,,", ....,
c.III."""h" ..,."Iu..., Ie'.".
n. '..'111118' ,....,u.. ., ...'e'". "'III.,.
.r ..1_- .. ,.. ".."1"'8 ..." t.,u .111 ,.
......... '.eI", '....",.
tn."lh. 10 h.. ..., (10 h., teu ,....".
.....) ... Ie ". "......, .. '111 ..118.
..'h,.' -... '.4,,11. .,.ch. '."'''I,ICllo..
.......... 1..01..... .I.h.c 1...1 ., 'h', ......
c.. ,. ..,1........
11II."'.rOlla.. .... I' &.8'.'''811... J. ..c"".l0"
,0'''''.Ir...., ."'. '.pla-IIC..ta.
Cra",.. ...., c.,...,. ... '"81..''' .,,,.. ... 'a
cO"'''lItCu' ".... ca...a .".In..,In, ,ra..Ic...
Ac'''', ."..... .t "101 ,..,,,. ""' .,,'...".1 .1
...""'. '..",1.. I., ...U".I .,h.. .....tr..,
IU~..'III.'" ,. ..It "'''.''..''1. (., ..'II.e.. hili
.. ..18..... tac '.8IIt .'DU ,.....) ,. ''',tIt.,..
.r....' "0"111' 1II".r.
.... .. Alt......... J.
)Q, \00,000
I", \00,000
J 1'.OO\l.OOD
1.- .. .u.......... t,
.
"u ..,..a".. $
tIC. .111
-------
.'
-30-
4)
Implemenr.abilitv~ Alternative 2 offers advantages over
Alternative 3 and 4 in regard to ilrplenentability. Alternative 2
is not techniCally' complicated, although proper construction of
the slurry wall requires a high degree of quality
assurance/quali ty control. '!he materials and services are
avai lable and few administrati ve rB::IUir~ts are. necessary.
Alternati ves 3 and 4 present tectmical diffiCUlties. '!he
excavation of the waste pit will rB::IUire the construction of walls
to provide sta,pility. The tarry, seni-solid material in the waste
pit will present a materialS handling problen. '!he incineration
of the waste material wi 11 be a Canplex o~ration requiring
Sp:;!Cially. trained operators. The availability of roth is limited.
In addition, a test burn TTUSt be conducted and approved by the
Agencies before ilrplarentatian of these rereclies can take place. .
5)
Cost: Alternativ--e 2 offers advantages Ov"'er Alternatives 3 and 4
because it is the least costly alternativ--e at a tOtal present
WDrth cost of $13,130,000. Alternative 3 is 7 tirres rrore costly'
than Alternative 2. at a estimated total present w~rth of
$92,230,000. Alternative 4 is nearly 2.5 times more costly than
Alternative 3 and rrore than 16 tirres rrore costly than Alternative
2.
6)
~: All the alternatives, except no action, wi,ll meet the
Federal and State ARARs surnnarized in Table 6 and 7. HOw'ever, the
ground water cleanup" standards for benzene C5ppb) and PAHs CSppt)
may not be techniCally feasible to reach. This is especially true
if feasible treatJTent alternatives are not available for the NAPS
layer. The ability to achieve the cleanup levels can best be
evaluated using data from: the operating extraction and treatment
systen. Therefore, the teChnical feasibility of reaching these
standards wi 11 be assessed every five C 5) years throughout the
reredial action.
7)
Overall Protectiveness of Hurran Health and the Environment.:&. All
the alternatives, except no aCtion, provide overaJ.l protection of
hurran heal. th and the envi ronment. Al ternati ves 2, 3, and 4 .
provide p:rmanent treatment of a princip3J. threat at the site, the
contaminated ground water. Alternative 2 will eliminate future
ground water contamination by isolating and containing the GDi'\
waste and the rnajority of the NAPS layer. Alternative 3 will
eliminate future 9Tound water contamination by treating the GDi'\
waste and containing the rnajority of the N\PS layer. Alternative
4 will eliminate future ground water contamination by treating the
~ waste, the contaminants in the aquifer rriateriaJ. and the
-------
-31-
8)
State AccePtance: The State will not accept the no action
alternative. The State has indicated that although it prefers
treatment of waste to containment, considering all factors, it
will accept Alternative 2. The State would also accept
Alternative 3. The State believes Alternative 4 is not practical.
9)
Conm..mitv AccePtance: The carrmmity did not raise oPFQsition to
U.S. EPA's preferred alternative, Alternative 2, at the t='Ublic
meeting held on August 1,6, 1988. The conmuni ty did not negatively
or favorably comnent in writing on any of the alternatives. Local
officials accept U.S. EPA's preferred alternative, Alternative 2,
and would like to see local contractors used for the action as
ITUJ.C.h as pass ible.
IX.
selected RaJEdy
Based on the evaluation of the al ternati ves, U. S. EPA selects Al ternati ve 2
- Slurry Wall and Cap, Ground Water Extraction and Treatment, Municipal
Water. Hook-up for Ironton Iron .Inc., NAPS Investigation - as the renedy for
the GDf\ operable tmit of the Allied O1emical/Ironton Coke site. The
selected renedy is protective of human health and the environment, attains
~, and proVides the best balance arrong the nine evaluation criteria.
'!his renedy provid~ for isolation and containment of the GDA waste pit and
the rrajori ty of the NAPS layer to eliminate future ground water
contamination. A supplenental RIjFS for the NAPS layer will also be
conducted as part of the remedy. '!his remedy also provides for e.'ttraCtion
and treatment of the contaminated ground water until the aquifer is
restored to the cleanup standards outlined in Table 7. The rrost i.rrrt:ortant
ground water cleanup standards are the benzene M:L of 5 ppb aJ"I.d the PAH
lowest achievable detection limit of .005 ppb (PAH 10_6 cancer risk level
is .0031 ppb). The risk level atta.ined by the sel,ected remedy is equal to
the risk levels attained by alternatives 3 and 4 tecause the risk from GDf\
is associated with contaminated ground water.
The benzene and PAH ground water cleanup standards may not be technically
feasible to achieve, eSPeCially in the rrost heavily contaminated area near.
the site. The ability to achieve the cleanup levels can best be evaluated.
using data fran the operating extraction and treatment system. 'Therefore,
. ground water cleanup standards will be evaluated every five (5) yearS
throughout the ranedial action. 'The ground water compliance tx:>undary is
the edge of the GD; \.Ja.Ste pi t, just outside the containment systBn.
x.
~ian of I'b Sicmificant Chanqes
U.S. EPA identified Alterrative 2 as its preferred alternative in the
Pro{X)sed Plan for the GD; Operable Unit. u.S. EPA has .selected Alternative
2 as the renedy .for the GDA Operable Unit. I\b significant ct'.anges have
occurred from the preferred alternative to the selected remedy for the GDA.
-------
XI.
-32-
Statutorv Determinations
'!he selected renedy is protective of human health and the environment;
attains ARARs . (unless later U. S. EPA determines certain ground water
cleanup standards are not techniCally feasible), is cost effective; utilize
permanent sOlutions and alternative treatIrent technologies or resource
recovery technologies to the maximum extent practiCable; and uses treatment
that reduces the toxicity, robi li ty, or volume of contaminants as a
principal element.
The fOllowing is a' surrrnary of how the selected renedy meets each of the
five (5) requirements.
A.
Protection of Human Health and the Environment: The selected
renedy will provide protection of human health and the environment
by a combination of treatment, engineered containment, and
insti tutional controls. The GI1i\ is a source of ground water
contamination. Contaminated ground water has migrated from the
GDA to the Ironton Iron Inc., and to the Ohio River. The selected
renedy wi 11 stop future ground water contamination by isolating
and containing the primary source, the GDA waste pit, and the
majori ty of the secondary source, the NAPS layer. A supplemental
RI/FS will be conducted for the NAPS layer. The existing ground
water contamination reaching the Ironton Iron Inc. production
wells and the Ohio River will be treated by the ground water
extraction and treatment systan. Ironton Iron Inc. will be
provided a rm.micipal water hOOk-up for in-plant sanitary and
PJtable uses until ground water at Ironton Iron reaches the ground
water cleanup standards. Deed restrictions will be placed on the
property to limit future uses. The renedy will not PJse
unacceptable'short-term risks and will not cause croSS-media
contamination.
B.
Attainment of ~~e ADolicable or Relevant and APoropriate
Recruirenents: The selected renedy will attain Federal and State
ARARs. However, the ground water cleanup ARARs and 'IB:s mayor
may not be techniCally. feasible to attain. At this time, it is
not !X)ssible to judge Whether or not the ground water cleanup
standards are technically feasible to attain or w,hat other
standard might be technically feasible to attain. SUch a
judgement is PJssible Only after analysis of data collected during
operation of the treatment system. Therefore, an ARAR waiver is
not appropriate at this time. However, U.S. EPA acknowledges that
an ARAR waiver may be appropriate in the future if technical
infeasibility of attaining the groUnd water clean up standards is
deronstrated. The ground water cleanup standards listed in Table
. 7 are the goals for this action. The technical feasibility of
attaining the ground water will be evaluated every five (5) years
-------
-33-
The following is a list of ARARs and Ta:s for the selected remedy.
Chemical &:ecific ARARs and 'IOCs
1)
M:L for Benzene and Trichloroethylene of 5 pPJ promulgated
under Safe Drinking Water Act. [Relevant and Appropriate]
Ambient Water Quality Criteria of 0.5 ppm Ammonia, 0.2 ppm
Cyanide, 3.5 wn Phenol, 0.69 ppm Naphthalene based on Clean
Water Act. [TBCs]
2)
3)
10-6 health based level (ambient water quality criteria) of
0.0031 ppb or lowest achievable detection limit, currently
0.005 ppb, whichever is greater; for PAHs (benzo(a)pYrene is
indicator) .
Action SPecific
1)
40 ern 264.310 - RCRA landfi'll closure require:nents anj
I=Ost closure care. [Relevant and Appropriate]
2)
40 CFR 264.116 and .117 - RCRA land. use restriction after
closure. [Relevant am Appropriate]
3)
40 ern 264.92-99 -: RCRA ground water rronitoring substantive
requirenents only. [Relevant and Awropriate]
4)
40 CFR 262 and 263 - RCRA generator anj transporter'regula-
tions for transport of spent carbon if ita. hazardous
waste. [Applicable]
DOT Transport Regulations 49 CFR 171-173, 177, and 178 if
naturally occurring radioactive material on spent carton
exceeds limits. [AppliCable]
5)
6)
ohfo Regulations for Naturally O::curring Radioactive
Materials OAC 3701-70, 71, and 38 if lead-210 concentra-
tions on spent carbon exceed limits. [Applicable]
7)
~ 3745-31-05 (A) & (B), Water Pollution Control Antide-
gradation Policy. [AwliCableJ
~ 3745-31-05 (A) (3) Water Pollution Control peiITUts to
Install requiring use of Best Available Technology for
any ne,." source of pJllution. [Applicable]
8)
9)
~ 3745-33-04 & 05 (a)(6), (8), (9) Water Pollution Gontrol .
, covering substantive r€qUirerrents for NPDES regulated
-------
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
-34-
10)
Cl2\C 3745-15-07 Air Pollution Control Fugi ti ve Dust Regulations.
[Applicable]
me 3745-81 thrOUgh 99 Public Water SUpply regUlations.
[AppliCable]
Cl2\C 3745-53-11 Hazardous Waste TranspJrt requiring registration
with PUCO. [AppliCable] ,
me 3745-17-08 and 05 Air Pollution ContrOl Fugi ti ve Du.st
Regulations. [AppliCable]
CERCIA Section 121(d) (3) regulating off-site treatment and
diStX>sal of hazardous CERcrA wastes. [AppliCable]
CERcrA Off-site Policy addressing off-site treatment and
diStX>sal of hazardous CERcrA wastes. [Relevant and Appropriate]
C.
Cost Effectiveness: '!he selected remedy is cost effective. It is
protective of p.lblic health and the environment, attains ARARs,
and offers advantages in tenns of short-term effectiveness and
iInplenentabili ty. The selected remedy is effective in the long-
term with proper operation and maintenance. The selected renedy
also ,provides permanent treatment which reduces the toxicity,
nebility, or volume of contaminants for a principal threat at the
GI:::Il\, contaminated ground water. Alternative 3 offers a greater
degree of pennanence and reduction in the toxicity, nebili ty, or
volume of contaminants fram the GDA waste pit itself. However,
these advantages are off-set by the need for long-term managenent
of the conta.irnnent system, and are not comnensurate with the cost
of the alternative. Alternative 4 offers the greatest degree of
pennanence and reduction in the toxicity, nebility, or volume of
contaminants but overall is cost prohibi ti ve. CcJrnt:Bring the
additional costs involved and advantages/diSadvantages of
Alternatives' 3 and 4, Alternative 2 appears to be the nest cost
effective. , -
D.
Utilization of pennanent Solutions and Alternative TreatIDent or
Resource Recoverv TechnolOQ'ies to the Maximum Extent Practi~able:
The selected reredy is protective of human health and the '
environment, attains ARARs, and is cost effective. It also offers
the best balance of the remaiI)ing seven evaluation criteria. The
selected renedy offers advantages over'Alternatives 3 and 4 in
tenns of short-term effectiveness, iInplementability, and cost. .
. The long-term effectiveness of the selected renedy is ensured by a
well designed', maintained, and neni tored containment system. The
selected renedy also provides permanent treatment YJhich reduces
the toxicity, rrobility, or volume of contaminants for a principal
threat at the GDA, contaminted ground water. The conm.mi ty and
the State accept the selected renedy. Alternative 3 is much rrore
-------
-35-
te"nn risks to on-site workers and the conrm.mi ty and takes longer
to implenent. It also requires long-tenn managanent of the
necessary containment system as with Alternative 2. Alternative 3 "
does offer a greater degree of pennanence and reduction of the
toxicity, IrObility, and volume of contaminants but these advantage
are not cc:mnensurate with the costs. '!he State would accept this
al ternati ve. The cOIT1Tllmi ty did not ccmnent on it. Al temati ve 4
is the IrOSt costly, IrOSt diffiCUlt to implenent, presents
FOtential short-term risks to on-site workers and the COITtTllmi ty ,
'and takes the longest to implenent. It eliminates the need for
long-tenn managenent and provides the greatest degree of
pennanence and reduction in the toxicity, IrObility, or volume of
contaminants. The State does not accept this alternative. The
conmunity did not ccmnent on it.
E.
Preference for Treatment as a PrinciDal Element: Portions of the
selected remedy satisfy the statutory preference for treatment as
a principal elenent because it uses treatment to permanently and
significantly reduce the toxicity, IrObility or volume of contaminants
for a principal threat at the GDA, the contaminated ground water.
Another threat, the waste -pit itself, is contained rather than
'treated. Because of the disp:>Sal area size; the fact that there
are no on-site hot spJts (discrete areas of highly contaminated"
material) representing major sources of contamination; the
diffiCUlties in implenenting an excavation and treatment remedy;
and the high cost of incineration, it is not practicable to excavate
-------
~ S[Mo¥\Ry
U.s. EPA received three written J;Ublic comnents on the Prop::>sed Plan and
Feasibility Study for the Goldcamp DiSIX>sal Area Operable unit of the Allied
Chenical/Ironton COke site. . In addition, no oral J;Ublic cornnents were
offered during the ccmnent perioo of the J;Ublic meeting. The three written
p..tblic ccmnents are S1lI1'IMrized and reSIX>nded to below.
Corrrnent 1:
"R1:::ASr Industrial Corp::>ration requested a 90-my extension of the pIDlic
corrment period on Septenber 2, 1988. On september 15, 1988, N.DSI' again
requested ad:1itional time to sutrnit additional COITrnentS. . ArIC1>ST asserted
that the additional time was required because they did not receive
individual notice of the Prop::>sed Plan and preferred alternative tIDtil
August 17, 1988, and did not receive a copy of the site documents fram
. Allied until August 30, 1988.
Resronse:
.
U.S. EPA followed all statutory. and regulatory requiranents '01" Section
113(k) and 117(a) of ~ and-Section 300.67 of Title 40 ofJthe CFR for
notifying the pJblic, of our proFQsed action at the Goldcamp Di~sal
Area. Pursuant to section 113(k) arid 117(a) of CERCI:A, U.S. £FA provided
the p.Jblic, and thereby also 1>M::ASr, notice of its Prop::>Sed Plan, the
starting and ending date of the public conment perioo, the date of the
p..tblic meeting, the location of the repositories where the site documents
could be reviewed and the name of the U.S. EPA contact person in a
newspaper notice pJblished on August 2, 1988, in the Ironton Tribtme
newspaper. The camnent period was in excess of the 21-day minimum
suggested by 40 CFR 300.67. At no time during the camnent period did the
u.s. EPA receive from the corrrnenter a request for copies of the '~site
documen~" contained in the Administrative Record. The Goldcamp Di.spJsal
Area Administrative Record was available for review at the in£ormation
rep::>sitory in Ironton, Ohio and in the Regional office for the full 30-
day J;Ublic COITrnent period. The letter l>M:J:>.Sr receiVed on August 17,
1988, was a "Special Noti.ce" letter required under Section 122(e). It
was not required to satisfy the J;Ub~ic participation requirements of
Sections 1l3(k) and 117(a) Of~; In a letter dated septEmber 9,
1988, U.S. EPA denied the request for extension of the p..lblic cornnent
perioo but indicated that it would try to consider, to the extent
p::>ssible, any comnents received after the close of the cornnent perioo.
Presented below is U.S. EPA's resp::>nse to the one late conment received
to date. U.S. EPA does, not believe that additional time is necessary
-------
-2-
COITment 2:
NJCASr Industrial Corp:>ration Sutmi tted a conrnent letter dated 5eptenber
. 15, 1988 (COITlT\E!l1t period closed 5eptanber 6, 1988). ~ conmented
.that it's preliminary review of the site data indicates safe ground water
cleanup levels may be achieved in a shorter period of time than the 30-
year time period estimated by the Agency. ~ expressed concern that
if the Agency's estimate is excessive, the cost of the preferred
al ternati ve is unreasOnably increased.
Resronse
~ did not provide any 5Upp:)rt for its assertion that the grour1d'..;ater
cleanup can be achieved, faster than presently estimated. U.S. EI?A does
not believe the ground water cleanup time period estilPates contained in
the PrOlX'sed Plan and the Feasibility Study are excessive. '!he time to
achieve the ground water Cleanup'st.andards is dependent on where clearrop
perfonnance is measured. Ground water at the nearest receptor, Ironton'
Iron Inc., will take an estimated 5 years to cleanup to ARARs level.
Ground water near the site (compliance pJint located just outside the
waste pit) will take an estimated 25 additiOnal years to achieve. It
will take longer to achieve the ,ground water cleanup levels near the site'
for several reasons: I) ground water near the site conta;ins high levels
of contamination; and 2) the 'ground water "safe" cleanup levels are low,
such as 5 partS per billion Benzene and 5 partS per trillion Polynuclear
Aromatic Hydrocarbons. U.S. EPA recognizes that the actual time to
achieve the ground water cleanup levels near the site may be shorter or
-longer than the estinated 3D-year time period, but believes this
estimation is reasonable.
'!he cost associated with the estilPated ground water cleanup period does
not impact U.S. EPA's evaluation of the cleanup alternatives because the
ground water cleanup cost is the same for all alternatives, except the no
action alteIn3.tive. Furthenrore, the ground water cleanup is perfoIm3nCe
based, and \.Jill continue \mtil the cleanup levels have been reached,
whether it takes rrore or less time than that estimat'ed in the Feasibility
Study.
Corrment 3:
The Department of Interior informed U.S. EPA by letter that it was not
interested in participating in ~ negotiations as a Natural Resource
Trustee under Superfund. In that letter, the Department of Interior also
provided COiTTT'PJlts on the PropJsed Plan. The Department of Interior (ool)
coornented that it believes, in general, U.S. EPA's planning process for
the long-term sequestration of hazardous wastes is flawed. It cornnented
that it has never seen an EPA SUperfund design that attempted to
determine how long waste would remain, hazardous or tried to design
containment for such a long period of' time. ooI asserted that the major
advantage of the selected alternative is cost, and without reviewing the
-------
-3-
preferred alternative will meet or exceed the cost of the ITest expensive
alternative~ OOI also raised concern about the source of ITeney for
continued long-term operation and maintenance, and the future
environmental consequences if long-term operation and maintenance is not
conducted.
Resoonse:
u.s. EPA recognizes OOI's concern about the long-term disp:>sition of
hazardous wastes, as such conceIT. is not a new issue for this AgerJCy.
However, we respectfully disagree with OOI that the major advantage of
the preferred alternative is cost and that it does not adequately provide
for long-term protection of human health and the envirornnent. U.S. EPA
I1U.1.St examine a number of criteria when evaluating ranedial alternatives.
As we stated 'in the Prop:>sed Plan, the preferred alternative provides the
best balance ancng the many evaluation criteria, of which cost is Only
one. The slurry wall and cap will be designed to be Compatible with the
wastes, thereby minimizing the p:>tential migration of, contaminants from
it. 'll1e structural and chanical 'integrity of these systens will be
ITenitored, with the PRPs J,required to replace, repair, or IrOdify then if
the ITeni toring indicates Tthat they no longer adequately protect human
. health and the environment. Finally, tl1e groundwater systens will be
designed to ensure that the grot.I11dwater zreets environmentally acceptable
levels.
OOI's concern about long-term operation and maintenance is well taken.
The long-tenm operation and maintenance of the preferred'alternative will
be ensured by the p:>tentially respJnsible parties through a funding
mechanism in the Consent Decree. This funding mechanism will provide for
future repair/replacanent of the containment systen, as needed.
'0
h
'I'
-------
-------
-.
Ta::>le A-I
.z..l~e:r;;at.:.ve 2
Cap/Sl.~all wit~ Inside &. Outs1de Extraction ~e1ls/::~at=~~t Sys:e=
Description
Capital Cost
Units Quantity S/unit
l-~OBILIZATION
2-SLURRY W~LL
Soil/Bentonite
Health &. Safty
Sub Total
Measures
sq. ft.
(Slurry Wall)
3-C.~? .
2'Cover sOll(6" Top Soil)
Geotextile
Hvcronet
6~ mil ~DPE liner
21 of Clay Li:ler
Vent System
-611 Gravel
-Geotextile
, -CarbQn Canisters/piping
Revegetatlon '
Sub Total (Cap)
J cu. YS.
so. yo.
sg. vd.
sq. yq.
cu. yo.
cu. YS.
sq. yo.
sq. yd.
t
4-EXT?~CTION WELLS
Ir.s~de Wells unit
Outside Well unit
P~=p connec:ina ~i?e ft.
Transfer P~pe '{4" plpe) ft.
Sub Total (Extraction "Wells) ,
S-IIC PRODUCTION WELL
Well
PU!:!t) (400 gprn)
Piping (a8 Pipe) ft.
Sub Total (IIC Production Well)
6-PRO?OSED MONITORING WELL (GDA) unit
7-T~EA7~ENT SYSTE~ (SEE TABLE A-4)unlt
a-ENG!~EE~!NG 115~ OF ITE~S 1 TO 7)
9-F! EL:J I~iVES:'.. GATTON (SLURRY WALL)
10-L';50?~T8~Y (SLU?~Y ~ALL)
Il-TREATIBILI7Y ST~~Y
Sub Tot~1 (!te~s 1 to 11)
unit
l2-con5~~~ct:on ac~inst~ation(5% It~~s 1
13-'::'~;:-:~;GE~;C::: (1.5~ !te:::.s 1 to 11)
':'o~~: (:~~=:s
1 to l:n
Total Capital Co~~
165600
18550
27800
27800
27800
18550
4633
27800
27800
2
1
300
1500
to 11)
Installed
Ccst
S65,000
S8.00 Sl,324,eOO
S80,000
-------------
Sl,404,500
S12.00 S222,600
51.50 5';1,780
53.50 597,300
59.00 5250,200
S17.00 S315,350
512.00 rS,600
51. 5 0 41,700
$0.30 10,COO
S8,3';0
-------------
51,0~2,790
..
S30,000 560,000
$406°00 $40,000
'51 .00 53 000
$15.00 522~500
-------------
$125,500
1
600
S50,000
$25.00
1 58,000
1 $620,000
Desc=:.?t.:.on
Ba$e J...r.:u.:a2 O?e:ating' C::Jsts
l-~C~;!:':)~!~:G A~;;) S:'.~7:::S:'=CAL ;.~~;.~"!:s=s
2-C.;? ~-~.:!~7~~;';~;~== U:l: =
3 -v--'''''~IO'' ,.-..... }O S "'~ .,.-
-:'........-..-.\-.. .' 'I'f~_w~ .. 1J....-~
"'--"-"'-"'T" ..---... --,." -r- .. . ;.
4-.:..-.:...u..:'.,. S1::.:'.. 5:.:. -".::._.:. h-4iun_-
5-Fr;~-YEAR ~~~AL~~TION (a)
Sub ':otal
(:';~::s 1 t::> 5)
6-CONT!NGENCY AT lS~
Total
(Ite!t6 1 to 6)
Total Base J..nnra1 O?erating
1 SSQ,OOO
3 5, ,oca
1 5300,000
150,000
12,000
20,000
-------------
$82,000
58 000
~620:OOO
502,214
150,000
$40,000
S40,000
-------------
$4,080,304
5204,015
$612,0';6
=============
54,896,364
=============
S': , 9 0 0 , 0'0 0
Sly r .
S35,000
550,000
$::',000
530C,COO
$';0,000
-------------
$446,000
566,900
a:========-====
S51:,9CO
1:============
-------
(a)
Cb)
(c)
C C\ P i .t cd C t;:, s t
, $
---------------
4,=00,000
T c'I b 1 e A-I
(C'~nt i rll.le)
~ 1 t er'r.C\ t i ve
2
C..:'st
S '.1 IalnlC\ ry
Pt' e s e r. t L.J.:",t h
~ r. rr '.\ C\ lOp e r' C\ t i rr 9
$ (b)
Pr'eserrt WQt't h
$
--------------
8,230,000
-------------
13,13121,000
(c)
~:~~:2I,. ~:.:':,-': at the e!"'ld of every 5 years, pr::>rCl.t2d eve" 5 ye:'\"s
=::~'';1::--': Llr'e De;:"e'=~?tion Me:hr:;d,
:"='>sC?~::. ~':"rth Fr:-r Annu?l Operc-.t il"19 Cr:-:';~ Fr~n1 ~able A -5 _u
:--::r Cl.c=..le'r,C'\l aSSlItn;:tions see NO:2S 1 arrd c:: 0;- Apper.Cl>( A ~
~
;1:
-------
G~A, io;aste Incineration/Sl.
Table A-2
;'l:~:-r.a:ive 3
~all with txtraction
ioi~!lS/':':~at~'=~:
Sys:'e~
, ,
Capital Cost
, u
Description
I-M08 I L'IZATION
2-RETAINING STRUCTURE
Reinforced Concerete
Tie Back
Sub Total (Retaining
3-ASH INTERIM STORAGE AREA
Excava:ion
Dike Comcaction
60 Mil HDPE Liner
Surface ~ater Collection
cu. yd.
C~. yd.
so. yd.
ft:.
Units
Quantity $/unit
sq~ ft.
Unlt
Structure)
Sub Total (Ash Interim Storage)
4-saIL S~AG!NG AREA
S-::XTAACTION h"E:LLS '
Inside ioiel1s unit
Outside ioiell unit
Pu~c Connecting Piees ft.
Transfer ?ipes (4"& I-pipes) ft.
Sub Total (Extraction Wells)
6-IIC PRODUCTION WELL,
~ell unit
Pume (400 oem) unit
PipIng (8--l-1ipe) ft.
Sub Total (IIC Productlon Well)
7-PROPOSED MONITORING WELL CGCA)
8-TREATMENT SYSTEM (SEE TASLE A-~l
IO:~¥~~5E¥~~s+~~1T~~NI7~iuAR~OwfLL)
ll-L\SORATORY (S LURRY' WALL)
12-TR~A~IBILITY STUDY
IJ-MONITORING WELLS (ASE INTERIM uni~
STORAGE AREA)
Sub Total (Ite~s 1 to 13)
sq. ft.
84000
420
63000
63000
103333
3400
4000
2
1
300
1500
1
,
800
14-CONSTRUCT10N AC~1NST?~TION (5% l:~ms 1 to 13)
15-Continge~=y (15, of Ite~s 1 to 13)
Total (Ite=s 1 t~ 15)
To:al Capi:'al Cost
, -
Base :"n nu a 1 Op~:-a:i:1g COSt3
l-~(:N::':)R:NG AND
S:'A ':'1 .3:'1 C.~
AN~ 'IS:::S
2-::XT?~CT:CN ~ELLS
(0 & ~)
(S::;:: TABLE:
un.:.t
3-TREAT.~ENT
s:' S -:::."!
t!.- ~ ; '..::"1 i ~
4 -E'IVE-Y'::,AR ~;::'::""'ALUA':'!~~j (a)
unit
Su:: Total (!te~s 1 ::::1 4)
S-CONTrNGE~:C'I .\T 15% 0: Si,;B TO':',;r.
TOTA.!..
('T..".-S '
- '- -.... ..
-......::!,
AV.,,-_-
Base .~.r::-:t.:al
O?e:-:n.:.:-:g
550.80
$1,785
$7.00
$3.00
59.00
54.00
$20.00
530,000
$4°6°00
51 .00
$15.00
550,000
512.000
525.00
1 58,000
1 $620,000
3
$8,000
3 $i,~C:J
1 $JCa,OGG
1 $~O,~OO
to 5)
(;',05 ~
Ins:alled
560,000
54l200,oOO
~749, 700
-------------
54,9<;9,700
5':';1,000
51E9,~00
5930,000
513,600
-------------
1573600
$80,000
560,000
S40,000
53,000
522,500,
-------------
5115,500
550,000
5~2,OGO
5:0,000
-------------
$02,000
$2,000
5620,000
Sl.r.l,~~,~20
~-;I.I,wOO
,5';0,000
$';0,000
$24,000
-------------
58,87i,6~0
5';';:;,331
51,33l,6n
=============
510,6.53,1.';';
==::==========
5:':.550,000
$ II yr.
552,000
$2:,000
5300,000
s.;o,c::o
-------------
5';~3,JJa
51::,950
=============
s.; -;.; . ; 50
-------------
-------------
-------
c C\ pit C\ 1 C.:. s t
$
---------------
1121,550,121121\2)
(cd
( b)
(c)
Tcable A-2
(C,:,,,,t i r".'e)
Al t ef'r,C\ t i \Ie
.3
C,='st S'.II,H,'C\"Y
~ t'o:? S en t !'.k.t't h
Annl.lc\ 1 Ooet'at i Tlg
$ (b)
Pr'esent
W'="f.t h
$
--------------
-------------
81,58121,1210\2)
32,230,000
(c)
$200, ~~~ C\t ~he "'''"'e::: ': f e'/:::'y 5 ye.,:l,f's, Pf'Qf'C\ted C'\ler 5 yeC\r's
Str'C\lg~: L1r,e D=;J~"''=1:t:.~r. Me!h,=.d.
.e"ese!'"lt ~r:.t.th Fr:.r ~rl:-1IJ2,l Gpe"5ting Cc-sts Frorn TC\blea A-E,
r~r C\~Cl:10n~1 C\ssuMp:i~ns seo:? N0teS 1 and 2 of Appendlx A-9
'v
-------
Table A-3
Alt~rnatlve 4
. GDA ~as~e nnd Subsoils Incin~ration with Outside ~ell/Trea:~~nt S/s:e~
and Ash Off-site Disposal
" Description
l-~O=rLrZATION
2-RE~A:~!NG STRUCTURE
Dou~le ~all E~cav.
Double ~all Structure
Dou~le ~all Backfill.
(Include Bor:ow Soil)
Sub Total
3-S0!L S~~GING AR~A
4-~X~~n::ION ~ELL
O~:sid~ ~ell
p~~= Connec:inc ?i~es
::a~s~er Pi?~ {4- pipe)
Capital Cost
Units
cu. vd.
so. tt.
cu. yd.
(Retaini~g Structure)
sq. ft.
Sub Total (~xtraction
5-IIC ?~ODUCT!ON WELL
~ell
?w;:,:::) (400 S";':-::)
Pi;~~; (88 ~i?e)
Su:, Total
£-r:E'j.;n:'~:U~G
?'.;;:':? (200.gprn)
l1':'s=./Pl~n~g
Sub Total
unit
...
.. ....
ft.
Wells)
ft.
(IIC ~rocuction Well)
(Dewatering)
7-~ ~~~~~~ S:STE~ (S~~ TABLE A-4)
8-. !~~~R!~G (l5~ 1TEMS 1 TO 5)
9-T~~A::=I:::Y S~~DY
unit
Quantity $/unit
Install~d
$500,000
51,911,111
51S,420,000
53,185,125
12i407
172000
127407
515.00
590.00
$25.00
-------------
S20,Si6,296
4000 . $20.00 580,000
1 $4°6000 S~O,OOO
100 S1. 00 51,000
900 $15.00 S13,500
-------------
55';,500
1 $ 5 0 , 0'0 0 550,000
800 $25.00 512,000
$20,000
-------------
582,000
4 $20,000 580,000
580,000
-------------
1 $620,000.
$160,000
$620,000
$3,310,919
540,000
-------------
$25,423,716
Sub ~otal (Items 1 to 9)
10-Ca~S:'~UCT!CN AD~!NST?~T!ON (5% Ite~s 1 to 9)
ll-CC~:::~~E~~:; (loSt !:e:r.s 1 to 9)
Total (Ite~s 1 to 11)
:'otal
Capi.tal Cost
Base
A:1rlt=al
l-~O~::':~:SG A~~
s -:.~T! S:'!C.;L
A~.;r. YS! 5
unit
2--Ct::'"~:: ~ ~.;:::..
3 -:-:=~::.~. :'.~Z:~;-:
S-.:'E:-:::~
(S~;: Tn2r..~ A-4)
~ -::."::-::~.;R
R~;:.j';:;';n:-ION (a)
j _.:: ~: ':' : :; .:;::: ~~::? {1.: i r t e ~ sIt 0 4)
TO:21 3ase A~~~a1
t
Cpe:3ti.:1::
unit
S1,271,186
$3,813,557
-------------
-------------
$30,508,459
-------------
-------------
530,500,000
C.....,.-
-- ...
...
$ /'1 -: .
$35,000
$10,000
$300,000
$40,000
1
$1.0 , 00 0
1
$';0,000
-------------
Sub Total (Iter::s 1 to 4)
S3aS,QCO
S 57 , i : O.
=============
Total (It~ms 1 to 5)
$';~2/75a
c============
O.?e:-2ting Cost
-------
"
':
.
it
C.ap i--:.a 1 C,:'st
, s
---------------
30,500,000
( C! )
( c)
( c: )
T.:; b 1 e A-3
(C.:.r,t i r".1e"
Al t e,'y,c. t i'le
4
C.:.st S'.t",r"c.'"y
P"esE>r,t w.:.,'t h
A~ny~l Operating
'$ (b)
P"e sey,t w,=",t h
$
--------------
-------------
187,500,000
218,OOO,000
(c:)
$~'00, 0("121 .;It the end ,=>f eve~'' 5 ' ee.,'s, pt'orated over' 5 )''=::.,'S
S~"al;;2nt lir,e rJepr'e=lc.tiol'r Meth7:-::.
~""ese:'lt W-=,"th F,:." Annl.lc.l Opet'?tirrg C,=,sts . Fro:.m TClble A-7
F,=>,' c.c=itiC'nc.l c\s5I.1r,'p-;i01',S see N0~es 1 .and 2 Clf Apper,clx 1~-9
t
-------
T.;I b I e A-4
Gr"':".md W.;Iter" Tr"eatrl1erlt Systeln with Activ.:Ited C.;II"br:,r.
C.;I pit a 1 C c. s t
Desct" i pt i ,=,n
l-Equali:ation T.:Ink
Units
01.\ a r. tit Y $ / '.1 TI i t
(2,000 gal>
vessel
1
$2,1£':00
2-Ac:t ivated Cat"b.:.r.
'.Ir, it
1 $15121,000
3-Dual Media Filte~
'.Ir. it
1
1
$20,000
!10,000
4-Filt~r B~c:~ W.:Ish Tank
(1:.?1,000 gal>
vessel
5-P\.III';::S
1.0~0 gpm (Bac:~ W2sh)
l~J gpM, TDH=120 ft
100 g;::M, TDH=150 ft
'.lrl it
'.In 1 t
'Jni t
1
.3
2
!S,000
$2,500
$2,500
S\.lb T~t a 1
( I tel" s . 1 t '=' 5)
E. - Ins tall a t i 0:' n
for Activated Carbon
.
7 - ! r, s ~ cd 1 at i ':' n
at 200% of Equip.
CC'st
(e>
Total Capital Cost
Annl.!.:-.l
Ope t' a tin 9
C'='5 t s
. '.
l-~c:t i'..ate::
Ca~:'on
P,=,und
168000
84
$1
$c.00
u
2-~2S~~ O=~iva~~d Carbon
Dis~,=,sl
Ton
Z-La~~~ (6 nr/cay,
::: Eo 5 d c? Y I Y ,- )
Hc,ur
'252'J
$25
4-i':a i n~ enar.c:e.
5-~r1al/': ical
S'Jb Tct a 1
(Iten,s 1tc 5)
T c, tal
Ar,nlJd!
Operating
C:,st
Ul'lir,st~lled
C <:. s t
'i2,000
$150,000
$20,1£':0121
$10,000
$S, ~~""iZ'
$7,50121
$5,1Z:0:.l1
-------------
$200,500
'i50,000
$101,0:210
$105,45'21
$20,O::0
$143,01210
-------------
-------------
$E.20,1?00
-------------
-------------
$ I Y t- .
$162,000
$1E.! ~0',)
$73,~~0
$:..."', ~~0
$1~,~~~
-------------
-------------
$2~7, E~"':0
-------------
-------------
-------
.. . -- -.. _.
~1 ~cr~;~: ~ ie
!'able A-S
P!'"eSc!'1t :':,r!h
2'; ~nr.ual Jperatl~;
C.:;st;
- .
- -.
- ..
---.. --
-'--'.- .-
'. -'.... .
....--..---- -.
- _.-.. ---
....-..:.-:--.... ~.-....";.~._.... ~-.. '- -
',!,,~,
. -- ~~.._.. :"..''''''
- ..-..-
. '-
~'E;~ s&:S; ~~i/'(q !NFUT!ON ~cE.:S'lT ~;E:=NT
:':~,'t::t ~:s: p'" 11""1-:) ~NU'::L ,.,..".- ~T 1''':''-... ~:C':? ~F.~ ' 2'
.,,'.. --':.. ....:: "'-'....
. :s~~~~~) ,... '"'''''' 'f S'/r S;,r c. . .... ~. ~=~J~ Ii'"
:""~-'- , ..,., 1. !"":
J 3;'~0 8:,~ :. J0 1.~~~J ::.~~
:1:;}J0 1 ;J,:.? :2?e;.i ...., ~, ;~:; ~l.~~~:.
- :. c.::-
7 ~1~;,I~~ 2::: ::7'E~: :.:2 J.~.:~~ .......-...
~ ..~::,'.:.
- :!:~~ 21~""3 C'."..,~ !.:S J. :::13 ~.-:~
...1...",,0...... :,.(" --
.: :1:~ '~"I :~:S.:! ,,.., 'J.s.::a "~£?3
....,,-..... u.-.
, SIC'."',""" :;':':3 ~~71e 1. 25 ~.:~a; 4i.---'
1_"'1f.."" ;;.;.~
7 :::~ 0 ~ : ::~00 1 -, 0.:~"'5 ~~::53
...r+
::::..,~ 0 ~!:J\.'0 :.H 0.~::2 371~:..
J ~!:~ ~ 5::000 !.~ 0.:.£~ ~~':~
!J 5i~Jee 11 :1~J 1.55 0.~41 3~a=2~
~1~J00 ~ :1::l00 :.53 0. :5::::: ~""='J
"""'"'_...._~
i2 5 i :e<'2 0 51:~ 1. 71 0. ~J::: 3M'i~':
12 5~:~ 3 ~1:~OO L:0 ~.2:E£ ~4f:2
" 51:~~ e 51:~ 1. g,: cl.2S':i 2:!33il
."
1: :l:~e ~ 51:~\:';} 1.:8 ~.2S:J Co:':",:
1: :i:~-a iJ 51:~~ 2.00 ~.22~ "'c""'....
~-~..;~..;
,., :: 1 ~"OO ~ ~1:~ ~. 18 <'.2:75 2t.~2:2
,.
1~ 5~:~a 0 51~ 2.23 0. l~ia ......... I ~.
,.:..:-:.
l3 :l~~ 1) 51~ 2.41 ".17':9 ~::a
;J 51:~~ 0 5l5~ 2.:3 9.1635 212775
~1 5 1 ~ 0'?'.J 0 51:000 2.55 0. 1486 ~~:4
~~. 51 S~J3 ~ 51500a 2.7': i!.1~1 1':::338
:1::~3 ~ ~l~~ ' ~- 3.129 1~~==
... .j
~~ :l:~a .., 515~ 3.~7 0.1! 1 i Ii co:!
...
;)C 515000 3 Sl:JOO 3.23 0.1315 lE.oSB4
2S 5;:~N \! 51:~ 3.3'3 ~. a-=22 !El?6,
.,~ :l:~ a 51~~ 3.:6 0. J83'3 lC''7:::C'
.;, ........-..J
:; Sl:~~ ~ :l~ ' -., 0.<1753 I' .-'"
w. , J ~'u-
:~ :l:~ ~ 5::~ 7 7? ~. 3£':3 :21:07
w...'-
-" :!:~.a c1 5::0"&1 4,:2 ~.J6~ 12~~
..;"
31 51::~\! ., ~~~~ ~.:Z t'.J:73 127::3
,.
----- ----
1::':.,""m :2£~~ 1~~::2~ :~:6: ~
----
--
==::::';T ;;c:-..
-.,- .: ~~~; -;- : .~t13 . ---...
"\ ;"'c:::~: .r::r':~ = 7.)t~1 ~TirH':.21 :~~':ti~; C~st t :(\f~H ;;:1 ... --.. ~ . ;~o?r.t -jr~:-: :: ~C:':::'
-------
I,bl, . ...J
P.p\,n( U..lh
IIII,rn,II., J', 11,,,,",1 01"',.lIni (0\1,
YIOR ~mA COS I IU tlV1 ~ I( D,.., t:I1'ilm IIC: II( RllII ()f cuslm 101 I ArII'j. I £05 I IYI II'JI SlIIprq (lr.IIYA SOPPlJI ~lJIl (JJ'; " 'A Pf" R{ lV.I/fA II(\Ht IPI(
!J1jpr p( S'lfIT AI II(O'JnIWH al al (fJ1NU III SOil (If.t A nl 01 I'IIA, Silil O'
\q. III" 11.11\1. II tv. rd/,r ""u. Jd I onl yr 'i'Nllon ca. ,d/rr lll/cu. rd cu. ,dlrr 1181ru. ,d cu. rd/rr 'IIr'l. rd cu. ,dl rr tJlru.,d "Q. II ,,..
, . , , I . I . 8 , . 8 . . ,
\ ?I'n.tt t'''8A' ~ tflllro,1 11'1'1'9 II~ 51~ "~\\'Io! , 8 " 8 8 ,
1 c:'" tf IS;fr. U'" rI ~'I'I'..e IPI'W II\"(\~~ 51~ 'I'rrl'f e . . p p p ,
I ;), "H 15:00. tN'i'e t!'l'l\~ 1~ I I",~""" 511'1"i! UIlN'9 . . 8 . . . .
5 U"/Pi! 15;,np (.rI'\"i! I.""'~ I i'N'\1 111'1"1'1'1'1' 51 "" 'fnm 8 8 . . P . .
t ,',I' 'L'~ IS, eo. (,I\'I'I! t,,~'I't 1iW'a IIIIIW.8 511'1'11 . .6N"i! 85'<' 8511L . P . . 51211
1 ' HI..t,. IN'lit~ , . p, . p e p p J(.A'f .11.1:01'9 ~-~ 151:4'1' .
8 JJL"W 1P0 Ida 8 . . , 8 . . .. IJ4'I"i! I':~ I~ '~"i! Zlm
J e . e 8 e p e . . . . . . , .
If . 8 . 8 8 . , . . . . . . . .
II . . . . e 8 8 . e . 8 . , P .
I. . . 8 . . , . . . . . . . p .
IJ . e , . . . . , , , , p , . P
I' . e , . . . , . . , I 8 . . .
IS . 8 , , . . , , , . . . , . ,
IL . . , . , , . 8 8 I , . , . .
" e , . . , , . , , , . . . . .
I~ , e , . . . . . . . I ' . . ,
11 . e e , . , I . I I , e , , ,
it . e 8 ,... ' , , , . . . I ' I 8 .
<'I , p . , , . 8 . I P . . - . p r
it ' e , . . , e 8 I , . . 8 I .
.1 ' 8 , . . , . e . I . . , , . .
cl . 8 . 8 , , . . . . . p . . .
,5 ' 8 . 8 e . . . . . . . . . .
(I, . , . , . . . . . . . . I . I
(1 e . . "" . e . . . . . . p . .
.8 . . . "" . . . e . . . . . , .
.1 . . . I . I . , . I . . . . .
J, . . . . . . . I . I . . I 8 .
31 . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . .
-....-- __a__...- ---- ----...-- ---...--- ------- --............ --.._-
-------
"bl. 1\-6
I[o..ta"u.'
(Il'j'/U I Jqj
-------
c
A-7
p,..\.~. u", II,
"1I"Nlh. 4', AnnUli Opc'..II~1 (0\11
trn. ~ro. coslm 1i000A:If"AQ m;lm [OS IIU l'tII(AnlllJt rosIlY. IKJAII(JI StIlL ros I In It IV: IN; COSI". . ~O:IIIIE OJ5IIU IPfff7(~ rosl/U (tJ':j "U
5Urrl1{ ~.~ III (1(/1VI11 IIJI AI fD [( 1111 U PI rOil lion III ilIA. SlIIL nl 6('(1 nl 101 IH 51 It PI lIe \111( II
'q. It 'r' II. J/\q. It cu. rlffr' III/n. rei IiM, "rr lonfrr 1158/1011 n. rdfr' '''cu. rei cu. rdly. '''cu. rei \q. It 'rr It. J/\q. It cu. ,dly. "I/cu. yd ~JrlU, "rr
I , , , ' I~ , . I , . , . , , , ~IN
Z I"~ 'J?m 5n.. 57~ ~1\"\'9 111'" 11%8808 , . , . I " ~'H 1"~'CIq Ilfil
J 11'~ 5~."?\'f 5/1.N 5".PN 1m'" 711<1 W/ol1~ . , 8 8 8 8 'tH IT./"~ ,iHl
' nl\".'" 58,'1'I'i 51'~ 511'1'9 "'''''a 7I11t II:J>I\I'<'Q , I . I I 8 4~ , 8 I'TI\I~ cl~n
5 Ill',,,, 5/1.1'1'11 511 N' 511.'1't i'I"M'f 17 lit 115(.II~10 , 8 8 8 . . .p.' . 11./111'9 ifj,J'
' I~I"~ ~"I'\'9 5/1.'" 511.\'\'t ""'~ 111 It WIJII'<'Q . . . . . . 4~'. e 11oAI"'i! "'"
1 I~IN'NI :,/1;1'1'\1 511 '" 511.f'I'9 j'N\'" 111,1 II:I,I\~ , . . 1 . . 1/\ ~ fI 11:01'11'9 1
e 1?11\'I't 51!. "'.. 511'" 5/1."''11 ~.. 171<8 115(.111'110 , I . I 1 . IHI (,VI I 1'9 I
9 I~H~ 5[1.,\,\'" 51' '" 51/.~ ,Pl'I'I" 711<1 115(.{1~. , 8 , 1 , 8 10"1(' I;~I"'" .
" I?I""~ ~ 'rI'\1 511,f'I'I 511"" Ci""" 711<8 IIStON'll , , I , . ' In., IV","I1 .
II I~II'I'i"e 5/1,' "'" 51/." 5161'N1 ~'I'I'\l 11 lit 11:;(,r~ . I . 1 . ' 181(., ('1-1"1'9 .
Ie I?IIWf 5n.~' 5'11'9 511,~ (floW\! 1/1 <8 II 5(,1)~ I~ I~ I~'" 7 ('IWra . " p.' I1:A."", .
IJ 1?1~'I1 53;~ 511,1'9 5/1.I'N "....,"" 111i1 115WN4 ~ ~1W4 J(,I\'" I I ",,'" . . I~I(" 11.,AlN .
II 911'1'1"i1 CJli'I'I1 i'6lIN i'8/I~ Cf'/'.'N J8:~.a 5181M 1~'9 I~ I SfI\\'i1 1(1'1'" Zll\l~ 8JII ZIIP' . 91'1.:"" .
15 e . . . , . , , . . , 1 I . , .
I~ , . . . , , , . . . . . . . . 8
II . 8 , . . , . , . 1 . . . . , .
I! , , . I . . , . . . . . , . . .
19 . . . . . . , . . . . 8 , . . .
Ct . . . . . , . . , , , . , . 1 .
i'I , . . . . . . , . . , . , 1 . e
n , . . . . , . . . . . .. . 8 , .
~J . . . . , . , . ,' . . , . . . . .
~I . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . .
i'5 . , . . e . , . . , , , . . , . .
<~ ,. I . . . . . , . . . , . . . ,
,7 . 8 . 8 , , , , . . . . 1 1 , .
~8 . . . .,. . . . . . . I . . . e . e
a', . , , , , . , . , . . . . . . .
Jf , . . , . , , . , , . . , . . ,
JI . , , , . , , , , . . . . 1 I .
---..... --...--- ----- -.. --.--
ZJ7~ 71Z".M'8 1cmt 1~ Vfii'0\"3 %1 Nt IH~ J~ 581~ 7 i'fIOOt ~~ V~ 8]1' 6!iWe ~U8f\W If(-.8{I
-------
..
. .
I.
.
Alternative
-------------
1
2
3
4
Table A-B
Cost Sum.nary
Cost Present Worth
Annual Operating
$
Capital
$
---------------
o
4 900 000
10:650:000
30,500,000
--------------
o
8 230 000
81:58Q:000
187,500,000
.
.Present Worth
$
-------------
o
13,130,000
92,230,000
218,000,000
D "
-------
-
..
APPENDIX A-9
ISSUES FOR CONSIDeRATION
In reviev comments received on July 15, 1988 of the final draft report and at
the reviev meeting, on July 21 and 22, 1988, several comments vere made by the
u.s. EPA and the OEPA which were relatively new and were not initially of
concern. During the meeting, it was agreed to acknovledge these comments
within the body of the text. However, these considerations either do not,
materially impact the alternatives or change the comparisons ,0£ the
alternatives, and because of the time constraints, it was decided not to
revise the figures, schedule, and cost tables.
follows:
'The major items are as
1.
In this FS report, it is assumed that the ash produced by
incineration is nonhazardous. The method of ash storage, ash
disposal, and accordingly the cost would require modification, if
the ash is hazardous.
2.
The cost and handling of spent carbon with the presence of signifi-
cant amounts of radioactive constit~ents is not considered.
J.
Preliminary assessment indicates that it is noc feasible to pump or
treat the NAPS layer identified in this repor~. No considerations
of cost or time is provided for the NAPS investigation. Such con-
siderations will change the implementation schedule and cost for all
except the "no action" alternative.
-------
.-
COST
REF'r:RENCES
'J
"
-------
~
PEI Associates, January 1987, Underground Stora~e Tank Corrective Ac:ion
Technolo2ies, EPA No. 625/6-87/015. .
SAIC, Handbook - Remedial Action at Waste "Dis~osal Sites, EPA No. 625/6-
85/006.
Knox, R.C., L.W. Canter, D.J. Keneannon, E."L. Stover, and C.H. Ward, November
1984, State of the Art Aquifer Restoration, Vol. 1, ~?A - 600/2-84/l82a,
National Center for Cround~ater Research.
Radian Corporation, January 1983, Draft Hethodolc2Y ~anual - Evaluacin2 Cost
Effectiveness of Remedial" A"ctions at Controlled Ha:arcious waste Sites.
Environmental Law Institute, September 1983, Draft Com~endium of Cost of
Remedial Technolo2ies at Hazardous Waste Sites, Washington, D.C.
Rishel, H.L., T.~. Boston, C.J.-Schmidt, 1984, Costs of Remedial Res~onse
Actions at Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Noyes ?ublications.
-------
Su
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 1049. 1800 WaterMark Dr.
Columbus. Ohio 43266-0149
Richard F. Celeste
Governor
October 3. 1988
RE:
Lawrence County
Allied Ch~m'cal/Ironton Coke site
Goldcamp Oisposal Area unit
Valdas V. Adamkus
Regional Administrator
U.S. EPA, Reg10n V
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
0: WMD
CC: RF
FREEMAN -
Dear Mr. Adamkus:
Ohio EPA has received and reviewed the draft Record of Decision for the
. referenced project. Pursuant to the terms of the Adm1n1strative Consent Order
s1gned between the'Agenc1es and Allied 1n Apr1l, 1984, Ohio EPA ;s hereby
providing results of our review to both USEPA and Allied. '
My project coord1nator and your project manager have d1scussed factual and
typographic changes to the document. I understand there was substant1al
agreement to the points we raised. Provided these changes are properly made,
Oh10 EPA believes the representation of the State acceptance portion of the ROD
1s accurate.
Richard L. Shank, Ph.D.
Director
RLS/DCS/l z.
cc:
David Strayer, ,OCA, CO
Robert Ford, Al11ed-Signal Inc.
Steve Ham11n, SEDO
Mary Gade,USEPA ,
RECEIVED
OCT 0 7 1988
u. s. r:~t\ t:'''':-''''''' 5
------- |