United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response
Washington. DC 20460
EPA540-K-01-002
OSWER 9230.0-93
March 2001
Reusing Superfund
Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above
Hazardous Waste Containment
Areas
-------
Notice
This report is intended solely for informational purposes. It is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to
create any rights, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party in litigation with the United
States. The Agency reserves the right to act at variance with the information provided in this report
without public notice.
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Table of Contents
Preface ii
Section 1. Introduction 1
Purpose 1
Organization of Report 2
For More Information 3
Section 2. Background 4
Cover Systems and Associated Remedial Activities 4
Recreational Activities Compatible With Containment Systems 8
Integrating Reuse Plans into Remedies 13
Section 3. Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse 16
Settlement and Subsidence 17
Managing Gases 20
Surface Vegetation 22
Storm Water Management 26
Ensuring Cover System Integrity 27
Other Design Considerations 29
Section 4. Operation and Maintenance 34
Section 5. Case Studies 36
Timber Butte Youth Park, Butte Montana (Silver Bow Creek Superfund Site) 36
Chisman Creek Superfund Site, Seaford, Virginia 38
Ohio River Park Superfund Site, Neville Island, Pennsylvania 40
Bibliography 42
Appendix A. Size and Configuration of Sports Fields A-1
Appendix B. Information Sources for Recreational Reuse B-l
Appendix C. Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts C-l
Table of Contents Page i
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Preface
As of February 2001, more than 190 cleaned up Superfund sites have been returned to productive use.
Many of these sites have been developed into recreational facilities, such as sports fields, hiking trails,
parks, playgrounds, and picnic areas. There are many other Superfund sites that may potentially be
used for similar purposes after they are cleaned up. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
through programs such as the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, promotes the productive reuse of
Superfund sites. EPA's overriding objective for any Superfund site is to ensure it is safe and that public
or private use does not compromise or adversely affect the performance of the remedy. Because land
use is a local decision, EPA does not favor one type of reuse over another.
This report provides technical information on how sites with waste containment areas have been safely
reused for recreational purposes while ensuring that the integrity and protectiveness of the remedy are
maintained. This information may be helpful when considering recreational reuse options during EPA's
process of selecting and designing a cleanup plan for a Superfund site. The information presented in
this report draws on the experiences and lessons learned from previous recreational redevelopment
projects on Superfund and other contaminated sites. This report is intended for informational purposes
only and should not be considered as Agency policy or guidance.
This report is one of a series being developed under the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative to inform
stakeholders at hazardous waste sites about how EPA considers reuse options in the remedy selection
and design process. Other reports in this series provide technical information on the reuse of Superfund
waste containment areas for golf courses, commercial and industrial facilities, and ecological resources.
Preface Page ii
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section 1.
Introduction
Across the country, EPA is working with communities to safely return Superfund sites to productive
use. Former landfills, abandoned hazardous waste dumps, and other contaminated properties are being
transformed into such assets as office parks, retail and industrial centers, residential neighborhoods,
wildlife areas, and recreational facilities. Of the more than 190 Superfund sites in use as of February
2001, approximately 50 are being used for recreational purposes, such as sports fields, hiking trails,
parks, playgrounds, and picnic areas. EPA's experience suggests that sites where the cleanup involves
containing the wastes on site are often well suited for recreational uses. The on-site containment of
wastes often requires vegetated cover systems that, with minor modifications, are highly compatible
with a wide variety of recreational uses.
It is the responsibility of communities to decide how they plan to reuse these formerly contaminated
sites. It is EPA's responsibility to work with communities to identify the anticipated future land use for
sites to ensure that the cleanup of contaminated properties protects human health and the environment.
For sites where the cleanup has already occurred, EPA must ensure that any subsequent reuse of the
site does not adversely affect the protectiveness of the remedy. Careful planning and community
involvement in the remedy selection process, appropriate design and construction practices, and proper
operation and maintenance of the cleanup all work together to ensure the performance and
protectiveness of the remedy and successful reuse.
Purpose
This report is intended for site managers, communities, property owners and developers, and others
with an interest in reusing Superfund sites for recreational purposes. A separate report has been
developed to specifically address the reuse of sites as golf courses. The purpose of this report is to
provide detailed information on the technical aspects of safely integrating the design of recreational
facilities into Superfund cleanups where some or all of the hazardous wastes will be, or have been,
contained on site. This report is not intended to address enforcement, cost recovery, or other non-
engineering issues associated with the cleanup of Superfund sites.
The material presented in this report draws on EPA's experiences and lessons learned from previous
recreational redevelopment projects on contaminated sites. This information should not be considered
Agency policy or guidance. Those considering the recreational reuse of hazardous waste sites may find
the information helpful in understanding how cleanup plans can be modified to safely reuse a Superfund
Section One: Introduction Page 1
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
site while maintaining the integrity of the cover system. Detailed and comprehensive information on the
design of recreational facilities, however, is beyond the scope of this report.
Organization of Report
The remainder of the report provides information on hazardous waste containment systems and the
technical issues that need to be addressed when those systems will support recreational activities. It is
organized into the following sections:
Section 2 provides background information on cover systems and other common
remedial activities at containment sites, the various types of recreational activities that
can occur on a containment site, and considerations when integrating reuse plans into
the cleanup process.
Section 3 identifies remedial design considerations that may need to be addressed to
support recreational reuse, including:
Post-construction waste settlement and subsidence and methods that have been
used to minimize these problems;
- Methods for managing gases that form under containment systems;
- Characteristics and selection of different types of surface vegetation to support
recreational reuse;
Approaches for managing storm water drainage that accommodate both the
functional needs of the containment system and the future recreational needs;
- Methods for controlling and avoiding the accidental intrusion of the cover; and
Considerations for integrating recreation-related buildings, utilities, and paved
surfaces into the cleanup design.
Section 4 provides information on operation and maintenance activities that may be
needed to support the integrity of the containment system and the recreational activities.
Section 5 highlights several sites where EPA addressed the design issues associated
with the reuse of the site for recreational purposes.
Appendices provide additional information to assist those interested in the recreational
reuse of sites, including:
Size and configuration specifications for numerous types of sports fields;
Additional sources of information on design and construction of recreational
facilities; and
Section One: Introduction Page 2
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
- EPA contacts at Superfund sites that are being reused for recreational
purposes.
For More Information
EPA prepared this report as part of its Superfund Redevelopment Initiative. The Superfund
Redevelopment Initiative reflects EPA's commitment to consider reasonably anticipated future land
uses when making remedy decisions at Superfund hazardous waste sites. The safe and productive
reuse of Superfund sites can provide significant benefits to the local communities, including:
New employment opportunities, increased property values, and catalysts for additional
redevelopment activities;
New recreational areas in communities where the availability of land for such activities
may be limited;
Enhanced day-to-day attention to the site, which can result in improved maintenance of
the remedy and continued protection of human health and the environment; and
Improved aesthetic quality of the site through the creation of maintained recreational
facilities as well as discouragement of illegal waste disposal and similar unwanted
activities.
For more information on the Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, including current developments, pilot
programs, tools and resources, and site-specific information and case studies, please visit the Superfund
Redevelopment Initiative web site at
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/
or contact:
John Harris
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code 5204G
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
703-603-9075
harris.john@epa.gov
Section One: Introduction Page 3
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section 2.
Background
This section provides information on the types of cover systems that EPA commonly uses to contain
wastes on site, as well as several remedial activities that are often undertaken in conjunction with, or to
augment, a cover system remedy. In addition, the different types of recreational uses that are
compatible with waste containment systems are discussed. The section concludes with EPA's process
and timing for considering the anticipated future use of sites in the remedy selection process and
limitations on funding activities that enhance the remedy.
Cover Systems and Associated Remedial Activities
There are numerous remedial technologies that can be used to clean up a Superfund site. The remedy
that is appropriate for a given site depends on waste or contaminant characteristics, ability to
implement, effectiveness, cost, and other factors. At many Superfund sites, the remedial action leaves
waste or contaminants on-site in engineered containment systems. In many cases, these containment
systems can support recreational activities following their construction if certain engineering controls and
safety precautions are taken. Several remedial technologies are often utilized at the same site. For
example, remediation of a site may require a cover system, a ground water collection and treatment
system, and a diversion wall.
Cover Systems
At most Superfund containment sites, the principle objectives of the cover system are to: (1) protect the
public from coming into contact with hazardous waste; (2) prevent the release of hazardous waste to
the environment; and (3) minimize surface water infiltration into the waste. General design requirements
are based on federal or state criteria (e.g., Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle
C or Subtitle D closure requirements).1 Cover systems typically utilize one or more of the following
types of barriers:
Hydraulic barriers use a low-permeability physical barrier to impede the downward
migration of water. These multi-layered caps typically incorporate geomembranes,
geosynthetic clay liners, compacted clay liners, or a combination of these as the
hydraulic barrier or barriers. However, asphalt and other materials can also be used as
a barrier. Currently multi-layered hydraulic barrier caps are the most common type of
cover systems and are typically thought of when reference is made to a "RCRA Subtitle
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technical Guidance for RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers (under development).
Section Two: Background Page 4
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
C or Subtitle D" cover.
Capillary barriers essentially exploit the suction potential differences between fine and
coarse grained soils to limit the downward movement of water. A simple configuration
of this type of cover system consists of a fine-grained soil (clay) located over a coarser
grained soil (sand). Under unsaturated conditions the fine-grained clay holds water,
preventing its movement to the lower coarse-grained sand. As the fine-grained layer
approaches saturation it begins to release water to the lower coarser layer. Because of
this, capillary barrier systems are intended for use in arid to semi-arid climates where
unsaturated conditions prevail.
Evapotranspiration barriers also are used predominantly in arid and semi-arid
environments. This type of cover generally consists of a thick layer of relatively fine-
grained soils which is capable of supporting vegetation. The soil layer inhibits
downward water movement and serves as a storage reservoir that holds water until its
future removal by evapotranspiration processes.
Direct contact barriers provide a physical barrier against contaminants that are a
contact and ingestion hazard. These covers are typically one to three feet deep, but can
be deeper, and act as a contact barrier as well as provide some protection against
erosion and shallow digging. Soil covers are often economical because they typically
consist of soils or general fill covered with a few inches of topsoil to support vegetation.
These types of covers are commonly used with metal or asbestos contamination,
because these contaminants are less likely to migrate and contaminate the local
environment.
Surface soil covers provide a physical barrier against contaminants that are contact
and ingestion hazards. These types of covers are often less than one foot deep and are
constructed over contaminated soils that have been stabilized and are unlikely to
migrate and contaminate the nearby environment. Because these covers are more
susceptible to exposure from erosion or shallow digging, they are often vegetated and
constructed in areas that are restricted or in areas that are monitored and well
maintained.
Liners are barriers, typically constructed in landfills, that prevent the migration of
contaminants to the environment. The barrier prevents waste, leachate, and gases
produced by the landfill from contaminating adjacent soil and groundwater. Liners
often consist of clay or a geomembrane depending on local geology and environmental
requirements.
Depending on site-specific requirements, cover systems can be composed of multiple layers of natural
and synthetic materials for gas control, internal drainage, vegetative support, or other purposes. In
Section Two: Background Page 5
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
some cases, individual layers serve dual purposes. When completing the construction of a cover
system, the remedial project manager (RPM) may consider additional sampling to ensure that the cap is
protective of future recreational reuse and that cross-media
contamination of cover or fill material has not occurred. A number of EPA guidance documents address
cover system function and design, including:
Design and Construction of Covers for Solid Waste Landfills, 1979 (EPA
600/2-79/165);
Evaluating Cover Systems for Solid and Hazardous Waste, 1980 (EPA
530/SW-867c);
Standardized Procedures for Planting Vegetation on Completed Sanitary
Landfills, 1983 (EPA 600/2-83/055);
Covers for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, 1985 (EPA
540/2-85/002);
Engineering Guidance for the Design, Construction, and Maintenance of
Cover Systems for Hazardous Waste, 1987 (EPA 600/2-87/039);
Technical Guidance Document: Final Covers on Hazardous Waste
Landfills and Surface Impoundments, 1989 (EPA 530/SW-89/047);
Seminar Publication: Design and Construction of RCRA/CERCLA Final
Covers, 1991 (EPA 625/4-91/025);
Presumptive Remedies: CERCLA Landfill Caps RI/FS Data Collection
Guide, 1995 (EPA 540/F-95/009); and
Technical Guidance for RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers (expected 2001 ).2
Associated Remedial Technologies
There are several remedial technologies utilized at a site in conjunction with, or to augment, a cover
system remedy. Because Superfund sites frequently have groundwater contamination, most of these
technologies are for groundwater remediation. The following are some of the more common types of
technologies associated with containment systems:
Groundwater pump-and-treat systems typically consist of a number of extraction
wells or french drains that collect contaminated groundwater for subsequent above-
ground treatment. There are a number of variations of a typical groundwater pump-
and-treat system that enhance performance or target multiple media (e.g., soil and
groundwater). Dual phase extraction (DPE) is one such technique. DPE is a
technology that uses pumps to remove various combinations of contaminated
2 These documents are available from the Government Printing Office. Several of these documents are available online
using EPA's online search engine at www.epa.gov/epahome/search.html.
Section Two: Background Page 6
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
groundwater, separate-phase petroleum product, and hydrocarbon vapor from the
subsurface. Whatever the remedial technology and media, all collection and treatment
systems require piping, utilities, and on-site or off-site treatment systems in addition to
the wells or drains. The need for and location of such facilities must be considered
when developing reuse plans.
Diversion walls are below-grade structures designed to divert uncontaminated
groundwater flow away from contaminated material or to channel contaminated
groundwater. Since these are below-ground features, they typically will not interfere
with recreational site reuse. However, their presence needs to be taken into
consideration so that they are not damaged by reuse activities.
Permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) are both containment and treatment systems
for contaminated groundwater. In such a system, reactive material is placed in a
location to intercept contaminated groundwater. As the groundwater flows through the
media, contaminants are "trapped" by the reactive material and treated water flows out
the other side of the barrier. Since the reactive material may need to be replaced
periodically, PRBs are placed in accessible locations. This may impact development
options or the location of PRBs at reuse sites.
Landfill gas collection systems are used to control the movement and prevent the
buildup of harmful gases within a landfill. Two common types of collection systems
used are passive and active. A passive gas collection system includes a series of vents
that extend vertically through the cover, and as gas pressure builds within the landfill,
that gas is forced outward through the vents. An active collection system uses a pump
to create a negative pressure within the landfill to collect and move gases either
vertically or horizontally to a discharge or treatment point. Collection systems can also
be designed to recover the energy from gases and use it to power other applications.
Leachate collection systems control the movement and prevent the buildup of
leachate within a landfill. Leachate is produced when water percolates through solid
wastes that are undergoing decomposition and both biological and chemical constituents
leach into the water. The collection systems typically consist of soils with high hydraulic
conductivity values (e.g., sand) and perforated pipes located between the waste and the
bottom liner. Highly permeable soils will typically be graded with a 1 to 5 percent slope
to help channel the leachate into trenches that contain the perforated pipes. Once the
leachate is in the perforated pipe, either a downward slope or a pump is used to extract
the liquid from the landfill.
Solidification and stabilization involve modifying the physical or chemical properties
of the waste to improve its engineering properties or leaching characteristics, or to
Section Two: Background Page 7
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
decrease its toxicity. Solidification encapsulates contaminants into a solid material of
high structural integrity. Stabilization converts waste contaminants into a less soluble,
mobile, or toxic form. Some types of waste require solidification or stabilization prior
to being placed into a landfill or covered by an engineered cover system.
Section Two: Background Page 8
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Recreational Activities Compatible With Containment Systems
There is a wide variety of recreational activities that are compatible with waste containment systems. In
many cases, a site that will be redeveloped for recreational purposes will support more than one type of
recreational activity. For example, a site developed as a general use park may also accommodate
sports fields, playgrounds, trails, or other recreational features. In other cases, recreation may be
secondary to a primary use, such as a commercial development.
The following sections provide information on the types of recreational activities that can be supported
at sites where waste is contained on site and identify a few of the more critical remedy design
considerations for each activity. (EPA is preparing a report that specifically addresses technical
considerations for integrating golf courses with waste containment remedies.) Whatever the type of
recreational use a community prefers for a site, there are remedial design issues that are common to
many containment systems that may be used, such as settlement, managing gases, and storm water
drainage. Some types of waste containment areas may raise more design issues than others; for
example, municipal landfills are more likely to have issues with settlement and managing the buildup of
methane and other gases than non-landfill sites. Section 3 provides more detailed information on the
engineering considerations when designing a remedy where a waste containment area will be used for
recreational purposes.
Athletic Fields and Courts
Many sites with containment areas have been used to support a variety of athletic fields and courts,
such as softball, baseball, soccer, football, volleyball and basketball. The choice of a remedy at a site
that will support athletic fields will take into account a variety of design issues to ensure that the integrity
of the remedy is maintained. For example, it is important when designing the cover system to take
measures to ensure a proper slope and avoid subsidence, manage drainage and storm water runoff, and
select an appropriate type of vegetative cover. These design issues are also affected by the specific
types of activities anticipated for the site. For example, the remedial design will need to address issues
of cap intrusion if reuse plans include such structures as concession stands, bleachers, and goal posts.
Likewise, field drainage, turf, and irrigation requirements for sports fields that will support an intensive
and competitive level of play may be much different from those fields that will not. The configuration of
the site, remedy components, and other site features can also affect the size, layout, and orientation of
sports fields. Appendix A provides information on standard field and court sizes, orientation, and other
information, and Appendix B provides additional sources of information for designing
and building sports fields.
Section Two: Background Page 9
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
A sports complex, including six baseball and soccer fields, were built over waste containment areas at the Lapari Landfill Superfund
site in Mantua Township, New Jersey.
Playgrounds and Picnic Areas
Playgrounds can take many shapes and sizes and can range from a single swing set to an elaborate play
area with slides, climbing structures, sand
boxes, and other equipment. Many general
use parks also have shelters, grills, benches,
and other picnic type areas. As such,
almost any Superfund site can
accommodate some form of playground or
picnic area. When planning a playground
or picnic area, the proximity of landfill gas
management vents (where gas buildup is a
concern) to these public use areas may be
one of the most important considerations.
Other design issues include the foundation
requirements for structures and their impact
on cover system components and the
potential for increased Surface Water In Bangor, Maine, the city expanded a park and built a playground on a
infiltration from playgrounds that are Pฐrtion of the Bansฐr Gas Works site-
surfaced with sand, gravel, shredded wood,
or rubber chips.
Section Two: Background
Page 10
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Appendix B provides additional sources of information for designing and building parks, playgrounds,
and picnic areas.
Trails
Trails can be incorporated into almost any redevelopment plan. There are several categories of trails,
including those designed for fitness, hiking, biking, and equestrian uses. The material used to surface
the trails will be dependent on the types of activities anticipated. In addition, for trails that may be
vulnerable to erosion, a high visibility warning layer may be used to alert maintenance crews that the trail
has degraded to a point that repairs are required.
Hikers walk along a trail that showcases artifacts from former smelting operations in Anaconda, Montana. The trail was built on
Anaconda Smelter Superfund site and surrounds a golf course designed by Jack Nicklaus.
Section Two: Background
Page 11
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Other Recreational Activities
There are a variety of other activities that can be supported at general use parks and similar recreational
areas. A few of these activities are briefly described below. This list is not intended to be exhaustive;
EPA recognizes that there are many more activities that can be supported at containment sites.
Communities can determine what activities are most appropriate for their needs.
Sledding. Some containment areas, such as former landfills, have steep side slopes
that could be used for toboggan or sled runs. Just about any slope can be used for this
type of activity as long as there are limited obstructions. Obstacles such as gas vents
may need to be isolated or protected to prevent injury to the user and to minimize
damage to these features. Side slope drainage features such as channels, swells, and
terraces, if utilized, may also limit sledding activities. In Evanston, Illinois, a suburb of
Chicago, the city's parks department converted several landfills into parks. One of the
converted landfills supports sledding and tobogganing on its slopes. The Dupage
County Landfill Superfund site, also in Illinois, supports an inner tube run on its cover
system's slopes during the winter.
Golf Driving Range. Driving ranges can be constructed on a wide variety of sites
with differing configurations and slope. A typical driving range with 35 tees is about
240 yards wide and 300 yards long and requires approximately 12.5 acres. However,
the size can be reduced with fewer tees or with the use of netting to contain errant golf
balls. Common remedial design considerations include managing cap penetration for
The foundation for the golf tees is constructed for the driving range that was built on top of the
Kane & Lombard Street Superfund site in Baltimore, Maryland.
Section Two: Background
Page 12
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
structures built on the containment area (e.g., the
offices, concessions, covered tee area) and locating gas vents away from the tee area
or placing barriers around gas vents to protect them from activities on the site, such as
motorized ball collection vehicles. Appendix B provides sources of information on
driving range and golf course design and construction. At the Kane and Lombard
Street Drums Superfund site in downtown Baltimore, Maryland, developers built a
family-oriented golf driving range on top of a waste containment area.
Archery. The typical open field archery range is on level ground and covers
approximately five acres for 25 shooting stations. An archery range can easily be
constructed without intruding on the containment system. Locating gas vents at the site
may be an important design consideration if gas management is a component of the
remedy.
Ice Skating. Ice skating can be considered wherever water is available and safe ice
conditions can be expected with reasonable regularity. Ice skating rinks generally
require ice to be at least four inches thick to be safe for skaters. Facilities that support
ice skating include both indoor and outdoor ice skating rinks and each presents different
types of issues for containment systems.
For indoor skating rinks, the remedial design
issues are comparable to the placement of
any building or structure on a containment
system (e.g., settlement, foundations that
penetrate the cap, or incorporating utility
corridors). For outdoor ice rinks, the
placement of ponds on top of containment
systems presents special remedial design
considerations to ensure the integrity of the
cover system. For example, if the ice rink is
seasonal, special care may be necessary to
ensure that melting ice does not introduce
water into the cover system. In addition,
settlement of the containment system may
affect the ice surface and place additional
maintenance requirements on the site. At
the Ohio River Park Superfund Site in
Neville island, Pennsylvania, a sports
complex was built over a former municipal
and industrial waste landfill. The facility includes an indoor skating rink.
At the Ohio River Park Superfund site in Neville
Island, Pennsylvania, a skating rink and other
sports facilities were built over a former
municipal and industrial waste landfill.
Section Two: Background
Page 13
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Other Field Games. Cover systems that provide relatively large open spaces can support a
wide range of field sports or games, such as ultimate frisbee, frisbee golf, cricket, and rugby, to
name a few. As with all reuse activities, cover system features will need to be designed to
accommodate the reuse while ensuring that it remains protective and that the recreational
activities do not affect the integrity of the cover system.
Integrating Reuse Plans into Remedies
Consideration of Future Land Use
Identifying the reasonably anticipated future use of land is an important consideration in the Superfund
cleanup process and is the first step for integrating reuse plans into a cleanup. The anticipated future
land use helps EPA determine the appropriate extent of remediation because it affects the types and
frequency of exposures that may occur to any residual contamination on the site. The process for
identifying the reasonably anticipated future use of land begins during the Remedial
Investigation/Feasability Study (RI/FS) stage of the Superfund cleanup. At this time, EPA conducts a
reuse assessment, which typically identifies broad categories of potential reuse such as recreational or
commercial. This assessment initiates the reuse planning process and lays the groundwork for
integrating reuse into the cleanup plan.
As part of the reuse assessment process, EPA holds discussions with local land use planning authorities,
appropriate local officials, and the public to understand the reasonably anticipated future uses of the
land on which the Superfund site is located. In addition to local preferences for land use, EPA
considers the views of other site stakeholders, such as the state and the PRP landowner. Based on
these discussions, EPA develops remedial action objectives and identifies remedial alternatives that are
consistent with the anticipated future land use.
If there is substantial agreement on the future use of the site, EPA may be able to select a remedy that
supports that use and take certain measures to accommodate that future land use when designing the
remedy. However, EPA must balance this preference for future land use with other technical and legal
considerations provided in the Superfund law and its implementing regulations.3 Specifically, EPA
balances the requirements to treat principal threats, to use engineering controls such as containment for
low level threats, to use institutional controls to supplement engineering controls, and to consider the use
of innovative technologies. In addition, EPA must comply with other laws when they are "applicable or
relevant and appropriate."
See section 300.430(a)(l)(iii) of the National Contingency Plan at 40 CFR Part 300.
Section Two: Background Page 14
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
EPA will select a remedy for a site based on the reasonably anticipated future use of land, the
consideration of the technical and legal requirements, and the views of the community, the state, and the
PRP landowner. Two general land use situations could result from EPA's remedy selection decision:
The remedy achieves cleanup levels that allow the entire site, or a portion of the site, to be
available for the reasonably anticipated future land use - in these cases, EPA will work within
its legal authorities to support the community's preferences for reuse; or
The remedy achieves cleanup levels that require a more restricted land use than the reasonably
anticipated future land use - in these situations, the site will not support the community's
preferences for reuse and possible alternatives, if any, need to be discussed.
For detailed information on how EPA considers land use in the remedy selection process, see EPA's
"Land Use in the CERCLA Remedy Selection Process," EPA OSWER Directive No. 9355.7-04
(available online at http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/ascii/land_use.txt).
Timing
The future use of a Superfund site can affect all aspects of EPA's cleanup process from the RI/FS,
through remedy selection, to remedy design and implementation. Consequently, communities are able
to initiate reuse planning early in EPA's cleanup process to allow for an evaluation of the appropriate
types of remediation and redevelopment options. The longer the community delays its reuse planning,
the greater the possibility that some reuse scenarios will be eliminated due to remedy decisions that
have already been made.
As discussed in the previous section, EPA conducts reuse assessments early in the RI/FS stage of the
cleanup. However, the generalized use categories from a reuse assessment may not provide sufficient
detail to guide the design or implementation of the remedy. To provide specific and detailed proposals
for how a property may be used after cleanup, communities often develop more specific reuse plans
after the RI/FS and prior to or as part of remedial design.
Many cleaned up Superfund sites currently do not support any type of reuse activity. However, EPA
expects that a number of these sites may eventually be returned to productive use. Where waste is left
on-site at levels that would require limited use and restricted exposure, EPA will conduct reviews at
least every five years to monitor the site for any changes. Should land use change, it will be necessary
to evaluate the implications of that change for the selected remedy, and whether the remedy remains
protective.
In many cases, a remedy as designed and constructed may not be able to accommodate the planned
use without modification. In some instances, the preferred reuse may not be feasible due to technical,
Section Two: Background Page 15
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
legal, or other factors. If landowners or others decide at a future date to change the land use in a way
that makes further cleanup necessary to ensure protectiveness, EPA does not
prevent them from conducting such a cleanup so long as protectiveness of the remedy is not
compromised. Retrofitting an existing remedy to support reuse, or an alternative type of reuse at the
site, requires careful planning, design, coordination with, and approval by, EPA and other
regulatory agencies. As discussed below, EPA cannot fund, nor can it require PRPs or others to fund,
activities that are considered enhancements to the remedy.
Enhancements
In general terms, features or modifications that accommodate redevelopment at a Superfund site and
increase the cost of the remedy but are not required for its implementation are considered "betterments"
or enhancements. Enhancements can include roads and parking lots, utility infrastructure, or athletic
field lighting if they are required solely to support the planned future use. Construction of enhancements
are beyond EPA's legal authority and, therefore, cannot be financed using EPA funds nor can EPA
require a PRP to pay for the enhancements. Although they cannot be funded by EPA, enhancements
can be included in the remedial action if they are consistent, and do not conflict, with the selected
remedy and if the cost is covered by another party, such as the local government, a developer, the
landowner, or a PRP.
In some cases, features of the remedy are modified for the proposed future use of the site, but their
implementation does not increase the cost of the remedial action. As such, the feature is not
considered an enhancement and may be eligible for EPA funding as part of a remedial action at a Fund-
financed site. For example, substituting a turf grass for a native grass as the vegetation component of a
cover system at an equal cost may not be considered an enhancement. Similarly, alterations to site
grading to accommodate reuse may not be considered an enhancement so long as the cost for the
modified grading does not exceed what the grading cost would have been absent reuse. Determining
whether an activity constitutes an enhancement is performed on a site-specific basis.
Section Two: Background Page 16
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section 3.
Remedial Design Considerations for
Recreational Reuse
A containment remedy, such as a cover system, can consist of multiple features and components that
each have their own design constraints and criteria. These may be based on federal, state, and local
regulatory requirements, national and local building codes, and site-specific considerations. For
example, regulations may dictate the type and minimum thicknesses of materials used in a cover system.
Site-specific considerations, such as depth of burial and external loading, may dictate the wall thickness
of underground piping. Working within these design constraints and criteria, containment remedies
often can accommodate the reuse of the site for recreational or other purposes.
When designing a containment remedy that will be reused for recreational purposes, several engineering
and other technical considerations need to be addressed. Two issues that may have a profound effect
at redevelopment sites are settlement and the management of gases that may form underneath the cover
system. If not properly accounted for in the remedial design, these two issues can have a detrimental
impact on the reuse activity. For instance, differential settlement (i.e., where the cap settles more in
some places than in others) can result in an uneven surface area and make athletic fields unusable, and
waste off-gases can pose health and safety concerns to site users. These considerations may be
applicable at some sites and not at others; for example, at former landfill sites, issues such as gas
collection, grading of slopes, and subsidence are more likely to arise than at non-landfill containment
areas. Other design considerations include surface vegetation, storm water management, managing the
penetration of the cap, avoiding accidental intrusion, and the on-site construction of paved surfaces,
buildings, and utilities. Some of these considerations may be considered enhancements and may not be
authorized or funded under CERCLA or the NCP. At non-reuse sites, these technical considerations
may not be as critical because there is limited or no public access to the facility and no activity to
support.
This section provides information on the design considerations that are addressed when preparing a
waste containment area for recreational reuse. The information provided below is based on EPA's
experience at Superfund and other waste sites and is not intended to serve as policy or guidance. As
appropriate, EPA may conduct any necessary sampling to ensure that the site is able to safely support
recreational reuse upon completion of the remedy.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 16
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Settlement and Subsidence
Cover system settlement is an issue that may ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
need to be addressed during the design of Exhibit 3-1
remedies that will support recreational reuse, EPA Guidance on Settlement and Cover
particularly at former landfill sites that may System Subsidence
experience significant subsidence and
differential settlements. Site-wide settlement * Covers for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste
can result in slopes that are too shallow or Sites> 1985 (EPA 540/2-85/002)
steep for proper function of the cover system * Prediction/Mitigation of Subsidence
and may inhibit recreational use of the facility. DamaSe to Hazardous Waste Landfiu
T , i i-nr. , , Covers, 1987 (EPA 600/2-87/025)
Localized differential settlement can cause
. ... ..... Seminar Publication: Design and
depressions, holes, and cracks in playing fumA/rvurj A v ,
Construction of RCRA/CERCLA Final
surfaces and accompanying support areas Covgrs 1991 (EpA 625/4_9i/o25)
(e.g., parking lots). It can also cause breaks . ^^ Quidance far RCRA/CERCLA
in irrigation and process piping, disruption of Final Covers (planned 2001).
gas collection systems and other system ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^m
components, misalignment offences and light
posts, and damage to structures, which can render fields or supporting facilities unsafe for use and
require costly repairs. However, if properly accounted for during reuse planning, design, construction,
and operation and maintenance (O&M), cover system subsidence does not preclude the use of a site
for recreational purposes. Exhibit 3-1 identifies the principal EPA guidance documents that address
settlement and subsidence at hazardous waste landfills.
Cover system settlement is due to the consolidation of underlying materials by several processes.
These processes include the compression of materials under their own weight and the weight of any
overlying materials or loads, chemical and biological degradation, raveling, and other mechanisms. The
magnitude, distribution, and rate of settlement are governed by a number of factors including material
age, type, density and thickness, loadings, and moisture conditions. In general, cover systems placed
on older abandoned dumps, industrial waste sites, ash fill sites, and landfills experience greater total
settlements than those constructed on newer landfills of similar size and waste type. This is primarily
due to changes in disposal practices. Current practices generally result in a well-compacted waste
mass free of highly compressible materials, drums, or other voids. Most Superfund landfill sites were
created using older disposal practices and there is the potential for significant general subsidence and
differential settlement of cover systems constructed on such sites.
An estimate of the rate, magnitude, and area! distribution of site settlement is usually performed to
facilitate remedy design and reuse planning. An evaluation of the potential for localized differential
settlement from mechanisms such as the collapse of buried drums can also be performed. Accurately
estimating the magnitude and rate of waste consolidation and the corresponding settlement of cover
systems or other structures can be difficult, particularly at sites where there is a large degree of
subsurface heterogeneity, or where little is known about waste type and distribution. In some cases, it
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 17
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
may be desirable to monitor the waste through the use of settlement gauges or survey monuments prior
to and during design in order to improve the accuracy of settlement estimates. However, this approach
usually requires an extended period of time before sufficient data is available on which to base an
analysis. Consequently, if this type of monitoring is warranted, initiating it early in the Superfund
process, such as during the remedial investigation stage, may be appropriate. Field and laboratory load
tests may also be performed for similar purposes. The cost, time requirements, and usefulness of the
collected data are considered when evaluating the need for such testing.
When considering reuse alternatives for a waste containment area, a community's reuse planners often
factor settlement issues into their plans. In some cases, cover system subsidence may be adequately
addressed through routine maintenance and design modifications or other constraints may not be
necessary. One possible approach at sites that are expected to experience substantial settlement is to
phase the development of the recreational areas.4 With this approach, areas with acceptable levels of
subsidence are initially developed, while development in other areas are delayed until excessive
subsidence is no longer a concern. For example, a cover system that will experience significant
settlement may be left undeveloped in the short-term, while the areas surrounding the cap are used as a
park. The long-term reuse plans may provide for the development of soccer fields on the cover system
after settlement is no longer a concern. In another case, a site may be better suited for a low-intensity
use, such as a golf driving range, rather than a sports field, until a point in the future when further cover
system subsidence is within an acceptable range.
It may also be possible to reduce future consolidation of the waste and corresponding settlements to
acceptable levels during the construction phase of the project through a variety of techniques. These
techniques include cover system reinforcement, soil/waste improvement (e.g., densification), and grade
modifications. For example, cover system reinforcement was used at a municipal waste landfill in
Elmhurst, Illinois, where the landfill cover was retrofitted with geogrid reinforcement because settlement
was creating depressions in ball fields developed on the cover. The geogrids bridge voids or
depressions that might develop below the athletic fields.5 At the McColl Superfund site in Fullerton,
California, geogrids were also incorporated into the cover system to minimize the formation of localized
depressions that would otherwise limit the site's use as a golf course.6
4 M. Golden, "Pros and Cons of Developing Recreational Facilities on Closed Landfills." International Conference on
Marinas, Parks, and Recreation Developments, (1993): 257-260; and R.E. Mackey, "Three End-Uses for Closed Landfills and
Their Impact on the Geosynthetic Design." Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 14 (1996): 409-424.
5 S. Paukstis, "Landfill Transformed into Recreation Area." American City & County June 1993: 30.
6 P. Collins, "Superfund Success, Superfast." Civil Engineering December 1998.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 18
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
At the McColl Superfund site in Fullerton, California, a geogrid-reinforced cap was used to prevent depressions resulting from
settlement. This former refinery waste dumping ground is now being used to extend an existing golf course.
Pre-loading, one method of densifying soil or waste with a temporary surcharge (e.g., soil
embankment), was successfully used at a municipal waste landfill in Massachusetts to prepare the site
for use as a park facility.7 Dynamic compaction, another densification method which involves
compressing the waste by dropping a heavy weight from a crane, was used in conjunction with pre-
loading and pilings at the Raymark Industries Superfund site in Fairfield County, Connecticut, to
prepare it for reuse as retail development. Dynamic compaction may not be possible at certain sites
with unknown wastes due to worker safety concerns.8 These types of waste consolidation techniques
help ensure the continued protectiveness of the cover system in addition to facilitating the reuse of the
site.
Grade modification is another design method that is commonly used to accommodate settlement. In
order to meet minimum regulatory post settlement grades, which is typically three to five percent, cover
systems are commonly constructed at steeper angles than required with the expectation that the slopes
7 J. Kissida etal., "Landfill Park: From Eyesore to Asset." Civil Engineering (August 1991): 49-51.
8 T. Naber, "Today's Landfill is Tomorrow's Playground." Waste Age (September 1987), 46-58; and R.M. Koerner
and D.E. Daniel, Final Covers for Solid Waste Landfills and Abandoned Dumps (Reston, Virginia: American Society of Civil
Engineers, 1997).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 19
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
will flatten over time as the underlying waste
consolidates. At recreational facilities a
slight modification to this procedure may be
appropriate. The surface of the cover
system could be constructed to make the
relatively flat slopes conducive to the reuse
activity, while the underlying layers (e.g.,
drainage layer) are built at a steeper slope to
accommodate settlement and satisfy
regulatory requirements. As the cover
system settles, additional fill can be placed
on the surface to maintain the desired slope
without impacting the performance of
underlying layers.
Managing Gases
A soccer field built on a portion of the Fairfax County Municipal
Landfill in Virginia illustrates the need to address settlement, which can
cause depressions in the cap that can lead to drainage problems and poor
field conditions.
Containment sites, depending on their composition and other factors, have the potential to generate
significant quantities of gas. If not properly controlled, gases can damage cover system components,
stress vegetation, create potential explosive conditions, and pose other health and safety concerns. Gas
control is important at many containment sites, particularly former landfills, and added emphasis and
caution are important when these sites are used for recreational purposes due to the close proximity to,
and heavy use by, the public. At some waste containment sites, gas management is not an issue and,
therefore, does not affect the reuse of the site.
The quantity, rate, and type of gas that a landfill or other containment site will generate depends on the
composition, age, and volume of the waste, moisture conditions, and other factors. Municipal waste
landfill off-gases generally consist of approximately 50 percent methane, 40 percent carbon monoxide,
and 10 percent other compounds including nitrogen and sulfur.9 Off-gases from municipal and other
types of landfills or containment sites may also contain volatile organic compounds such as benzene,
toluene, trichloroethylene, vinyl chloride, or other chemicals. Where appropriate, these gases are
collected using either an active or passive strategy. An active collection system utilizes induced negative
pressure (vacuum) to move gases to the discharge or treatment point, whereas passive systems rely on
natural pressure gradients.
The need for, and the appropriate type and configuration of, a collection system (e.g., collection layers,
wells, vents) depends on a number of factors including gas generation rates, gas composition, waste
9 U.S. EPA, Seminar Publication: Design and Construction of RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers, 1991 (EPA
625/4-91/025).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 20
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
thickness, depth to groundwater, and cover system components. The type of reuse also may be a
factor in determining the appropriate type of system. Where collection systems are necessary, the
design takes into account issues such as odor management, ignition sources, vent locations, treatment
system location, discharge limitations, and the proximity of features to the public, all of which have
added importance at sites used for recreational purposes.
A typical passive gas collection system includes a series of vents that extend through the cover system
and discharge gases to the atmosphere. Similarly, an active system generally has a number of extraction
wells that extend through the cover and connect to subsurface collection piping that transports the gas
to a treatment facility or discharge point. When designing the gas collection system, particular attention
is given to the type and concentration of gases that will be vented and the possible health and safety
impacts to site users. Special consideration is given to the locations of vents, collection wells, piping,
discharge points, and treatment systems and their proximity to site users. These types of features can
be placed in areas that will not interfere with recreational activities and supporting facilities, and
minimize distractions to recreational users and spectators from equipment noise, odors, or other factors
(e.g., flares). In addition, the need for security measures beyond those normally required could be
assessed to address the visibility and accessibility of these features to the public, and the increased
potential for trespassing and vandalism. For instance, in addition to other security measures, facilities
may be screened with vegetation to decrease their visibility and limit access.
Closed structures that support recreational areas, such as concession stands or maintenance facilities,
pose additional gas control concerns. Due to their susceptibility to gas accumulation, these types of
structures may require collection or monitoring systems that are independent of any other such systems
at the site. Methods used to minimize gas intrusion into closed structures include constructing floor
slabs with convex shaped bottoms, placing impermeable geomembranes below or within floors of
structures, connecting services (sewer, gas, and electric) outside of the structure so they do not
penetrate the floor slab and create avenues for gas infiltration, and installing vented crawl spaces.10
There are several sites where gas control systems were designed to accommodate reuse. At the Clark
Tailings Operable Unit of the Silver Bow Creek Superfund Site, passive gas vents for a closed
municipal landfill area are being located away from the tee boxes at this future golf driving range.
Designers of the driving range also intend to disguise the gas vents as distance markers for golfers. At
the Army Creek Landfill, an ecological reuse site, shrubbery was used to conceal gas vents and to
provide a food source for animals. Horizontally installed gas collection systems have also been used to
support reuse. At the Delaware Sand and Gravel site, a horizontal passive gas collection system was
used to avoid vent protrusions into an overlying equipment storage area. The horizontal collection pipes
discharge in an unused and unobstructed five acre area of the property.n A similar horizontal
10 J.R. Emberton, and A. Parker, "The Problems Associated with Building on Landfill Sites." Waste Management &
Research, 5 (1987): 473-482.
n
U.S. EPA, Reuse of CERCLA Landfill and Containment Sites, 1999 (EPA/540-F-99-015).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 21
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
collection system was used for an agricultural area established over a nine-acre municipal landfill site to
minimize obstructions to tilling. The gas is passively discharged into perimeter ditches that are also used
for drainage purposes to prevent stress on crops.12
Surface Vegetation
The vegetation used on cover systems serves several purposes, including limiting erosion of the
underlying soil and promoting evapotranspiration of water. The appropriate or allowable vegetation for
a given site depends on a number of factors, including the site's geographical location, the type of cover
system that is selected, the planned future use, and any special accommodations that are made, such as
irrigation. Although the type of vegetation that is used may change, the basic functions of the vegetative
layer will remain the same. In arid or semi-arid areas of the country where a vegetative layer may not
be used, recreational reuse with supporting systems may make vegetation a viable alternative to
armored or other surface treatments. Exhibit 3-2 delineates climate regions in the United States.
Historically, the preferred vegetation on cover systems has been a mixture of native grasses. Grasses
are typically used because they have relatively shallow root systems, they minimize erosion, are well
adapted to the local environment, and are capable of thriving with limited or no support (e.g., irrigation
and fertilization). Trees, shrubs, and other deep rooted vegetation typically have not been used
because of the potential for damage to critical cover system components from root intrusion, the
possibility that roots could extend directly into waste, and other maintenance issues. Historically,
landscaping features such as ponds have not been constructed on cover systems because of the
potential for harmful impact on the performance of the remedy. However, if properly accounted for in
planning and design, a Superfund site can support a wide variety of vegetation and landscaping features
that protect the integrity of the remedy and improve a site's aesthetic qualities, and satisfy recreational
needs.
Sports Fields
For cover systems designed to support sports fields, turf grass may be a better choice than native
grasses. Turf grasses, such as Kentucky Blue Grass and Bermuda Grass, have been specially
developed and selected to resist damage from foot traffic and grow quickly. Typically, a mixture of
different turf grasses with varying levels of resistance to drought, temperature, disease, and other
environmental factors are used for recreational fields. At the Chisman Creek Superfund site in York
County, Virginia, softball fields were constructed on the cover over contaminated fly ash material. A
combination of Kentucky bluegrass and tall fescue was used for the vegetative cover. This grass
combination gave the fields durability during seasonal play and times of
12 WJ. Spreull, and S. Cullum, "Landfill Gas Venting for Agricultural Restoration." Waste Management & Research, 5
(1986): 1-12.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 22
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit 3-2: Climate Regions of the United States
COOL SEASOKLZONE
WARM SEASON ZONE
drought. Sod was applied to expedite the availability of the fields, as tall fescue takes a longer time to
establish itself than other varieties of turf grass. Exhibit 3-3 provides information on four commonly
used turf grasses.
The surface layer of containment systems typically consists of topsoils that can accommodate a variety
of recreational reuse activities. The surface layer of topsoil that supports turf grass or other vegetation
used on a recreational field must be able to resist compaction from sports and other activities. A
suitable topsoil for recreational fields consists of a well-screened (i.e., free of stones and other debris)
sandy loam of uniform composition that contains a minimum of one percent organic matter and has a
pH of 6.5 to 7.13 Fields that are overly sandy need extensive irrigation and fertilizing, while soils with a
high clay content drain poorly and compact easily, making it difficult to grow grass. To reduce the
effect of compaction, many professional fields are constructed with a topsoil layer consisting of 80 to 85
percent sand.14
13 J. Puhalla, Sports Field Design and Construction (Michigan: Ann Arbor Press,! 999); and Prince William County,
Design Standards (1996).
14 Soccer Industry Council of America, Soccer Planning System: A Guide for Community Soccer Center Management
(1998).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 23
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 24
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit 3-3: Characteristics of Common Turf Grasses
Turf Grass
Species
Bermuda-
grass
Kentucky
bluegrass
Tall fescue
Perennial
ryegrass
Strength as Sports Turf
Robust vegetative growth,
excellent wear resistance,
good surface resiliency.
Robust vegetative growth,
moderate wear resistance,
good surface resiliency.
Excellent wear resistance,
robust primary and vegetative
growth, good surface
resiliency, adapted to
transition zone of the U.S.
Excellent wear resistance,
robust primary and vegetative
growth, prolific tillering, rapid
seedling growth.
Limitation as Sports Turf
Limited to warm climatic
regions of U.S., vegetative
propagation only of
improved types, slow
establishment from seeded
types.
Limited to cool climatic
regions of the U.S., slow
establishment from seed.
Limited to transition or
warmer regions of the
U.S., poor sod knitting.
Takes a long time to
establish and has a
tendency to become
uneven and clumpy.
Limited to cool regions of
the U.S., very poor sod
knitting.
Comments
Good for all sports fields, but
cannot withstand heavy
traffic during periods of
dormancy (in cold weather).
Good for baseball, football,
soccer fields.
Most fields planted with
mixture of Kentucky
bluegrass and Perennial
ryegrass.
Good for baseball, football,
soccer fields. Suggested for
areas with a low annual
rainfall.
Good for baseball, football,
soccer fields. Most fields
planted with mixture of
Kentucky bluegrass and
Perennial ryegrass.
Adapted from J. Puhalla, Sports Field Design and Construction (1999).
As with any vegetative cover, it is important to select a grass species that will thrive in a particular
region, thereby preventing erosion, protecting the cover, and supporting the intended post use.
Technical assistance on selecting turf grass is available through the National Turfgrass Evaluation
Program (go to http://www.ntep.org), which maintains a national database on success rate of seed
mixes used throughout the country. Additional regional information can be obtained from the Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (go to http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/NRCSorg.html). NRCS
offices also profile information on native grass species and may be helpful in choosing a final turf grass
mixture. Local nurseries and local parks departments can also provide useful information on turf grass
selection.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 25
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
At the McColl Superfund site in Fullerton, California, designers included
landscaped areas as part of a golf course built over a cover system. Designers
omitted a layer of cobbles for covers over landscaped areas to minimize
settlement caused by the weight of the cap, using institutional controls instead.
Landscaping
In addition to the cover system, the
overall landscaping scheme for the
site will be considered during initial
planning. For example, the cover
system portion of the site may be
vegetated with turf grass to
accommodate athletic fields while
the surrounding areas are planted
with a variety of native grasses,
trees, and shrubs for aesthetic
purposes. Specially designed
planting zones, islands, or terraces
may be located within the limits of
the cover system to support
alternative vegetation. These areas
may require thicker layers of
supporting soils, biota barriers,
enhanced drainage features, or other
modifications to ensure that the
integrity of the cover system is maintained and that function is not compromised. At the Clark Tailings
Operable Unit of the Silver Bow Creek Superfund site, for example, soil berms were used to allow the
planting of both coniferous and deciduous trees. Aboveground planters or similar structures may also
be used to accommodate trees, shrubs, flowers, and other types of vegetation to some extent.
Although some waste containment sites are able to support water-holding features such as lakes and
ponds, such features are closely evaluated for their potential to increase the amount of water that
infiltrates to the waste mass. Ponds and wetlands are commonly constructed outside of the limits of
cover systems for aesthetic and storm water management purposes.
An important aspect to consider when developing landscaping plans is the level of short and long-term
maintenance that will be required. As previously noted, one reason native grasses are used on most
cover systems is that the maintenance requirements are relatively minimal. Additional maintenance
efforts may be necessary at reuse sites depending on the vegetation and landscaping features. For
example, additional and recurring costs can be incurred for fertilization, irrigation, pruning, trimming, and
plant replacement. The cost for this type of maintenance will ultimately be borne by the local
community or other parties responsible for maintaining the site depending on how site-specific
agreements are fashioned.
Additional information on vegetation and ecological reuse of Superfund sites is provided in EPA's
report Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Ecological Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste
Containment Areas (planned for 2001).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 26
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Storm Water Management
The manner in which storm water is managed will affect the design of a cover system and will strongly
influence the performance of the cap, particularly with respect to erosion and stability. Methods for
managing storm water on cover systems typically involve grading the cap to establish an effective slope,
or constructing drainage channels and swales. At sites that support redevelopment, storm water
management may be more complex. For example, a containment site that supports multiple athletic
fields may require cover system slopes that are shallower or configured much differently than would
typically be the case.
EPA guidance on cover systems indicates that
the final top or upper layer of a cover system,
after allowance for settlement, should have a
slope of between three and five percent to
maintain effective drainage.15 However, a
slope of three percent or more is usually not
conducive to recreational use. Generally,
developers of recreational fields prefer a
surface grade of one to two percent for athletic
fields in order to minimize field slope and still
maintain positive drainage. Exhibit 3-4 lists
standard slopes for several types of sports
fields.16 To accommodate the recreational
needs while maintaining the integrity of the cap, the surface of a cover system may be minimally sloped
to support recreational activity while internal drainage or other layers are more steeply sloped to satisfy
regulatory criteria and functional needs. Flat areas on the cover system are often avoided because of
the potential for ponding of water which can negatively impact the function of the remedy. For example,
surface water infiltration into the cover can increase and the field and cover system are susceptible to
damage if played on in wet conditions.
Exhibit 3-4: Standard Slopes of
Recreational Fields
Snort
Baseball/Softball
Basketball
Football/Soccer
(Natural Turf)
Tennis
Slone
0.5 to 1.0%
1.0 to 1.5%
1.5 to 2%
0.5 to 1.0%
Typically, developers of sports fields on Superfund sites have worked with EPA to design the slope of
a cap in a way that minimizes the elevation differences along the direction of play. For example, if a
football field were uniformly sloped at 1.5% from end to end, one goal line would be about 4.5 feet
higher than the other. In a situation such as this, developers would prefer to orient the field and
direction of play perpendicular to the slope. In the case of the football field, the change in elevation
from sideline to sideline for a 1.5% slope would be about 2.25 feet. The field could be crowned along
the centerline of play with uniform slopes extending 10 to 15 feet beyond the playing field boundary.
15 U.S. EPA, Technical Guidance Document: Final Covers on Hazardous Waste Landfills and Surface Impoundments,
1989 (EPA 530/SW-89/047).
16 Carpenter (1976).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 27
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Smaller fields or courts could be placed on built up areas on the cover system to prevent surface run-on
and accommodate flatter slopes. However, general cover system grading needs or costs may preclude
this alternative for larger fields or multiple field complexes.
Reuse features can also significantly alter surface water runoff characteristics. For example, an asphalt
parking lot can generate a larger quantity of runoff in a shorter period of time than a similar sized and
configured vegetated surface. In contrast, it is possible that a relatively porous surface, such as a
crushed rock parking lot, will result in decreased runoff and increased surface water infiltration into the
cover system. Features such as these and their corresponding effects may require modification to the
cover systems design. Additional drainage channels, swales, or storm sewers may be needed to
efficiently collect and remove water from fields, parking lots, and other reuse areas where they
otherwise would not be needed. In other cases, the location of drainage channels or other drainage
features may be limited due to interference from reuse facilities or vice versa.
At the Chisman Creek Superfund Site in Virginia, a surface water collection system was developed
using a concrete lined swale that collected storm water runoff and channeled it off the cap and into a
neighboring creek. To accommodate athletic fields, the cover system and accompanying drainage
swales in some areas were sloped as little as one percent. The swales were lined with concrete
because grass-lined drainage swales could not efficiently remove storm water with the minimal channel
grade.
Ensuring Cover System Integrity
With the recreational reuse of a waste containment area, special care is often necessary to ensure the
integrity of the cover system to avoid possible accidental contact with people using the site. Maintaining
the integrity of the cover system involves: (1) controlling whether and how recreational facilities on the
surface penetrate the cover system; and (2) taking steps to prevent accidental intrusion into the cover
system.
Controlling Cover System Penetration
Recreational sites generally have lighting, fences, signs, backstops, scoreboards, or similar features
depending on the type of use. Foundations and supporting poles or structures for these features could
penetrate the cover system and possibly extend into waste if standard construction techniques are used.
For example, fence, backstop, and small Scoreboard poles typically extend three to five-feet into the
ground, which exceeds, or is comparable to, the thickness of many cover systems.17 Light poles and
other large structures can extend much deeper into the ground and could penetrate most cover systems.
Because penetrations can provide a conduit for gas and water movement, their use must be carefully
17 Prince William County (1996); and Pioneer Manufacturing Co. (Cleveland, Ohio), 1999.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 28
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
considered and proper steps must be taken to ensure the integrity of the cover system (e.g., using
properly engineered seals or controls utilized to prevent the migration of gas or water).
One approach to avoid penetrating the cover is to increase the thickness of cover system layers so that
shallow foundation systems are located above critical components of the cap. Footings located at
shallower depths may be an option for fences and other relatively small features. The use of "sleeves"
may also be considered to minimize disruptions to critical cover system components during removal and
replacement of poles and other support structures. For example, a football field may have goal posts
that are replaced periodically. Instead of creating new cover penetrations or causing other damage
from replacement activities, the old pole could be slipped out of the sleeve and a new one installed. If
structures are in contact with waste, their resistance to damage from contaminants is usually evaluated.
Avoiding Accidental Intrusion
Unauthorized digging or intrusive repairs or improvements may occur periodically at reuse sites. The
use of warning or barrier layers, therefore, are often considered to minimize damage to critical cover
system components and encroachment into waste. Visible barriers, such as colored geotextiles or other
synthetic layers, can be placed in the upper portion of the cover system to serve as a warning to
workers that additional digging can result in damage to underlying layers and exposure of waste or
contaminants. A visible layer can also be used under high activity or non-vegetated areas such as paths
or infields to identify regions where soil has eroded to a point where repair is necessary.18
A more robust barrier, commonly referred to as a biota-barrier, may be necessary to prevent digging
activity by animals, the public, and unauthorized construction activities. Depending on the situation and
anticipated intruder (e.g., children or animal) an appropriate barrier layer might range from a geogrid or
other geosynthetic to gravel or cobbles. The barrier will be most effective if it is separated from the
critical components of the cap or is thick enough to withstand a limited degree of intrusion. For
example, at the Cohen Property Superfund site in Taunton, Massachusetts, a salt storage area was
constructed over lead contaminated soils. High visibility orange fencing was placed over the
contamination to mark the beginning of contaminated soil and to serve as a warning against
encroachment. A hazardous waste landfill in Colorado will use recycled crushed concrete from an
abandoned airport runway as a biota-barrier to prevent possible intrusion from badgers and other
burrowing animals.
In addition to barriers, registering the site with the county or state "one call system" typically used to
locate subsurface utilities prior to construction is an alternative method to ensure that no one
inadvertently excavates waste containment areas. Markers could be placed on the site reminding
workers to use the "one call" system before taking actions that may degrade the containment system or
expose them to the contained waste.
Mackey(1996)
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 29
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Other Design Considerations
Most recreational uses are accompanied by support facilities, such as buildings, utilities, and paved
surfaces, such as parking lots. The construction of support facilities on a waste containment area must
be considered during the design and construction of the remedy. The following sections provide
information on the remedial design issues to be considered when the recreational use of the site includes
support facilities.
Buildings
Most recreational areas have buildings and supporting utilities that are used for concession stands,
restrooms, maintenance facilities, or other purposes. For the most part, these are small and lightly
loaded structures. However, most closed landfills do not have buildings located over waste because of
design issues that include accommodating settlement, off-gas management, and foundation
incompatibility with cover system components. If a building must be located on the cover system to
support the planned reuse, temporary or moveable structures such as small sheds or trailers used in
place of permanent structures have proven to be effective.
Differential settlement can cause significant structural damage to buildings, rendering them unusable and
unsafe. Placement of permanent buildings over unstable areas is generally avoided unless subsurface
conditions are improved, or foundation and structural systems are designed to accommodate large
movements. Deep foundations (e.g., piles) or oversized and heavily reinforced shallow foundations
may be necessary, even for lightly loaded structures, because of settlement or other foundation
concerns. Although these types of foundations may limit total and differential settlement of the structure
to acceptable levels, their impact on other aspects of the project needs to be considered. For example,
a structure supported on piles and constructed on a landfill may experience less settlement than the
surrounding ground. Over time, the structure can become partially or fully elevated above the ground
surface which is unsightly, can result in damage to supporting utilities and access features, and require
periodic maintenance.
Foundations, even shallow foundations, typically extend to a depth that is greater than the thickness of
conventional cover systems. This is particularly true in cold climates where foundations are typically
required to be located below the frost zone. Foundation systems that penetrate cover system
components, particularly barrier layers, can provide preferential flow paths for the downward
movement of liquids or the upward movement of gases, either of which can adversely affect the
performance and safety of the remedy or structure. As a general rule, penetrations of the cover system
are avoided to the extent possible. If they are necessary, appropriate measures are taken to seal the
penetration to prevent liquid and gas movement. Seals also need to be able to tolerate the effects of
differential settlement to prevent tearing and rupture. Where a shallow foundation will suffice, the
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 30
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
thickness of the cover soils could be increased to avoid penetrating barrier layers or other critical
components of the cover system.
The potential accumulation of toxic or explosive gases inside structures can also make them dangerous
and unusable. Because the public will use, or have access to, many of the structures at recreational
reuse sites, an extra degree of caution is appropriate and redundant gas-management features may be
necessary. This may entail gas collection and monitoring systems that are independent of other such
systems at the site. For example, a building on a site with a site-wide landfill gas collection system may
have a dedicated monitoring system for the structure. In addition, the building could be designed to
minimize the accumulation of gases in the structure. Automatic air monitoring systems and alarms are
often considered for any structure that is located in gas producing areas.
Utilities
Most recreational areas will require some level of utility service to support field lighting, bathrooms,
concession stands, and other reuse features. Typical underground utilities include sanitary sewers,
potable water, and natural gas systems. Telecommunication (e.g., phone and cable) and electrical lines
can be either buried or located above ground. However, even above ground utilities require poles or
other supporting mechanisms that extend some depth into the ground. Any such buried structure can
potentially conflict with critical cover system components and impact the effectiveness of a remedy.
For example, leakage from a sanitary
sewer located above a cover system's
barrier layer might be captured by the
cap's internal drainage system and
cause excessive bio-fouling of the
drainage media. A leaking potable
water line located within waste below
a cover system's barrier layer could
result in an increase in the quantity of
leachate that is being generated.
Repairing or upgrading the water line
would also require disruption of the
cap and expose waste. As these
examples illustrate, utilities must be
designed and located with the same
considerations as other features of the
*' Workers install lights for sports fields during construction of the cover system
at the Chisman Creek Superfund site in Yorktown, Virginia, a former fly ash
Sewers, water lines, and gas disposal area'
distribution systems generally are
located in areas where large settlements are anticipated. Differential movement can result in broken or
cracked piping and an uncontrolled release of the media that are being carried. When used in areas
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 31
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
that will experience differential settlement, piping is often designed to accommodate some movement by
using ductile materials, flexible connections, and similar features. For pressurized water and gas
systems, automatic monitoring devices and shut-offs are considered to prevent large uncontrolled
releases. Gravity sewers and other non-pressurized systems could also be designed for easy
monitoring. For example, double-walled piping equipped with an interstitial leak detection system
could be used. Another example of a possible monitoring system consists of wrapping a utility trench's
pervious backfill with a geomembrane and sloping the trench to direct flow to monitoring sumps. The
sumps could be periodically checked for liquids. Any monitoring system will have advantages and
disadvantages related to cost, implementability, function, performance and maintenance. The need for
and type of monitoring required will be decided on a site-specific basis.
The use of clean utility corridors and building pads have proven to be effective in minimizing the
potential for workers to encounter waste or contaminants during repairs of, or modifications to,
underground utilities, process piping, or other features. In this approach, utilities and similar
underground features have been placed in oversized trenches and backfilled with uncontaminated or
"clean" soils. The additional width and depth of the clean trenches limits the possibility that waste will
be encountered or critical cover system components damaged during future excavations. Clean
building pads could be constructed for the same purposes. These methods were utilized for utility
trenches installed at the Chisman Creek Site in Virginia and the Cohen property site in Massachusetts.
To accommodate future development and minimize future exposure to waste or contaminants, clean
utility corridors and building pads could also be installed during initial construction. Detection tape,
surface monuments, and other methods of marking the alignment or limits of trenches and building pads
could be considered to facilitate locating these features in the future.
Paved Surfaces
Almost all reuse sites will include paved
surfaces that will be used as parking lots,
sidewalks, roads, trails, support areas, and
other purposes. In some cases, the pavement
may be an integral part of the remedy. For
example, at the Rhone-Poulenc, Inc./Zoecon
Corporation Superfund site in East Palo Alto,
California, paved surfaces are the sole
hydraulic barrier to prevent water from
Example of Use of
Paved Surface as a Cover System
At the Rhone-Poulenc, Inc./Zoecon Corporation Superfund
site in East Palo Alto, California, paved surfaces have been
used as the sole hydraulic barrier to prevent water from
percolating into waste. Engineers designed a cap that
utilized three layers of asphaltic concrete placed over soil
that had been deep-mixed with Portland cement and silicates.
The top layer consisted of a conventional dense-graded
asphalt which is similar to that used for heavy-duty
highways and industrial pavements. The middle layer
consisted of asphalt with a high percentage of air voids that
acted as a drainage layer and the bottom layer consisted of
hydraulic asphalt (asphalt with a higher tar content to reduce
air voids) to prevent percolation of liquids into the waste.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 32
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
A parking lot for the sports fields at the Chisman Creek
site in Yorktown, Virginia, was built over a portion of
the cover system.
percolating into waste.19 A paved surface can also be
designed to function as both a cover system's barrier
layer and a parking lot. For example, the containment
portion of the site may be used for parking while the
rest of the site is developed into recreational areas. In
most cases, however, paved surfaces are used solely to
support the reuse activity and are not integral features of
the remedy. The materials used to construct pavement,
and the location of the pavement relative to the cover
system, need to be carefully considered during planning
and design due to the potential for damage from
subsidence and differential settlement. Other factors to
consider when selecting a pavement include cost, loading, durability, and long-term maintenance.
Pavement is susceptible to varying degrees of damage from a number of mechanisms depending on the
materials used. At containment sites, perhaps the most significant mechanism for damage is related to
differential settlement. The three principal surfacing materials asphalt, concrete, and crushed rock
will accommodate differing levels of settlement.
Asphalt has proven to be an effective surface pavement for final covers, particularly when a limited
amount of subsidence and differential settlement is anticipated.20 The flexibility of asphalt allows the
material to deform to some extent which minimizes cracking and other types of damage. In addition,
depression or sunken areas can be returned to grade by placement of additional material, and damaged
areas can be replaced relatively quickly and easily. However, asphalt surfaces can become non-
functional due to excessive cracking, depressions, and other types of damage resulting from poor
foundation conditions or excessive settlement. Asphalt pavements also require maintenance, such as
new top coatings, on a regular basis.
Concrete has a limited ability to accommodate subsidence and differential settlement and is generally
not used as a pavement on cover systems. Concrete will experience significant damage (e.g., cracks
and displacements) when foundation support is poor. The appearance of cracks will facilitate
additional damage from mechanisms such as freeze-thaw. Unlike asphalt or crushed rock, repair or
replacement of concrete pavements can be expensive and time consuming. Although not recommended
for use on cover systems where settlement is anticipated, concrete pavements may be effectively used
on other portions of a site.
19 Roger Smith, "Asphalt Pavement Doubles as Hazardous Soils Cap and Loading Area." Asphalt, 9 (Winter
1995/1996).
M. Keech, "Design of Civil Infrastructure Over Landfills." In Landfill Closures, American Society of Civil Engineers
(1995).
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse
Page 33
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Crushed rock or gravel surfacing is superior to either asphalt or concrete in terms of its ability to handle
differential settlement. Because crushed rock is not rigid like concrete, it can withstand significant
deterioration before its function as a pavement is impaired from potholes, depressions, or other
deformations. Any areas that do experience damage can be quickly and easily repaired by the
placement of additional rock. Crushed rock surfacing is commonly used for access roads and support
areas at Superfund sites and for roads and parking lots at recreational areas. It is used in these kinds of
applications because of the relatively light loads that will be supported, limited traffic volume, material
durability, and low cost.
Section Three: Remedial Design Considerations for Recreational Reuse Page 34
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section 4.
Operation and Maintenance
Following the completion of construction activities, and any sampling that may be performed to ensure
the cleanup achieves its remedial objectives and is protective of any future use, a waste containment site
enters into the operation and maintenance (O&M) phase. O&M encompasses a wide range of
activities, including caring for cover system vegetation, operating landfill gas or groundwater collection
and treatments systems, sampling and monitoring various media (e.g., air, water, soil), performing
annual and special inspections, and making necessary repairs or upgrades to remedy features. All
containment remedies require some form of O&M on a continuing and regular basis due to normal
operations or wear and tear. At recreational reuse sites, O&M is especially important due to the
increased use of the site and the potential for damage to the remedy from that use. Properly
implemented O&M is necessary to ensure that the remedy functions properly and protects human
health and the environment.
An O&M plan is developed and implemented at every Superfund site. RPMs may consider holding
additional meetings with the state and those responsible for carrying out or paying for O&M activities
when developing the O&M plan for a waste containment site that will be reused. Typically, the plan is
comprehensive and includes a discussion of the roles and responsibilities of the various parties involved.
In addition to specifying typical O&M requirements, such as the frequency of maintenance activities,
sampling, and inspections, the plan may address limitations or special considerations related to the reuse
activity. For example, to prevent damage to a containment site's cover system at a recreational reuse
site, the O&M plan may require controls on play or turf care practices that are more stringent or
involved than those required at other recreational complexes. The O&M plan may also include
requirements for documenting and reporting maintenance related activities that occur at the site. This
information typically would be included in an annual report that is distributed to interested parties and
regulatory agencies. Quality control and quality assurance systems are also established and
implemented to ensure that O&M is being performed satisfactory.
Additional meetings between EPA, the state, and those parties responsible for carrying out O&M
activities may be considered when developing an O&M plan for a site that will be in reuse. At
redeveloped sites, responsibility for implementing and paying for O&M may be split among various
parties. When splitting O&M responsibilities, it is essential that roles and responsibilities are clearly
delineated in enforceable agreements and specified in an O&M plan. For example, at the Chisman
Creek Superfund Site, York County is responsible for maintaining the sports fields and conducting
other ordinary O&M activities. Mowing the grass and performing routine repairs are tasks that the
county performs as part of their normal park
Section Four: Operation and Maintenance Page 34
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
maintenance operations. This has, in effect, eliminated the need for the state or PRP to conduct routine
O&M activities at the site. However, the PRP retains responsibility for major cover systems repairs.22
In some situations, a local entity that is not familiar with requirements typically associated with O&M at
Superfund remedies or with the additional requirements resulting from recreational reuse may be tasked
with site maintenance. In these cases, it is critical that O&M personnel are properly trained to perform
the work and to recognize hazards at the site and indications of remedy distress. It is important that
those involved with the long-term care of a Superfund site understand the limitations and potentially
hazardous nature of some aspects of the site and remedy, and that proper precautions are taken and
appropriate procedures followed. For example, at many sites, only properly trained personnel are
involved with activities that may encounter waste because of the potential for exposure to contaminants.
Similarly, the improper operation of treatment systems can result in contaminant releases above
specified levels, damage to the system, and an unsafe working environment.
As noted above, the O&M plan contains requirements for performing annual and special inspections
and sampling to determine if the remedy is functioning properly. In addition to these inspections, EPA
conducts an in-depth review of the remedy at least every five years for any site where the remedial
action leaves hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants on-site above levels that allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. The two products of this review include: (1) an analysis and
report that determines whether the remedy is still protective of human health and the environment; and
(2) a list of additional maintenance activities that need to be performed to ensure continued
protectiveness and the parties responsible for performing those activities. At Superfund sites where
reuse is occurring, these type of inspections, reviews, and determinations are particularly important
given the potentially intensive public use of the site.
22 U.S. EPA, Reuse of CERCLA Landfill and Containment Sites, 1999 (EPA/540-F-99-015).
Section Four: Operation and Maintenance Page 35
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Section 5.
Case Studies
Timber Butte Youth Park (Silver Bow Creek Superfund Site)
Butte, Montana
The Timber Butte Youth Park is under construction atop 1.4 million cubic yards of mine tailings at the
80-acre Clark Tailings area at the Silver Bow Creek Superfund site. Site contamination is the result of
over 100 years of mining process operations in the area. Until the early 1970s, mining, milling, and
smelting wastes were dumped onto the site. A
cover system was constructed over the 80-acre
area to protect the public from exposure to the
mining waste and was designed to support
athletic fields. Adjacent to the covered mine
tailings is the closed Butte-Silver Bow Landfill,
which is being developed into a golf driving
range.
Cross Section Diagram of Clark Tailings
Operable Unit Cover System
(adapted from As-Built drawings provided by ARCO)
. L
"'
1 r
, L
12'
' r
1 J'
1
, L
18"
r
i 1
r1
s
'
W$^i^$&
-f
'Mji,
Typs G -il nopsoil)
Typf C Rl iGensra 11]
' Cwswrnhefc Fisr Fabi:)
' CsireeGwel
_. , . .... .
A- Mins'AAiSB
J
Site Settlement: Designers of the Timber Butte
Youth Park located the athletic fields on the
covered mine waste, where little settlement is
expected. Since settlement is expected at the
closed Butte-Silver Bow Landfill, this area was
selected for the golf driving range. Settlement of
the waste beneath the driving range will not affect
play or present a tripping hazard to users.
Cover System Design: Six inches of high
quality topsoil was taken from nearby borrow
areas for the surface layer of the Clark Tailings
cap to support turf grass for athletic fields. Design engineers included a capillary break in the cover
system that will support the park. The capillary break, which is a coarse gravel layer, confines water in
the fine grained vegetative support soils. This provides the park grasses with the moisture they need
within the rooting zone without excessive irrigation, which reduces the amount of leachate generated. A
geotextile overlies the gravel layer to prevent the upper fined grained soils from migrating into the gravel.
Section Five: Case Studies
Page 36
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Gas Collection: Design engineers installed passive gas vents at the closed municipal landfill area as far
away as possible from the tee boxes at the golf driving range. It has been suggested that the gas vents
be disguised as distance markers for the driving range. The covered mine waste is not expected to
generate gas.
Operation & Maintenance and Institutional Controls: ARCO is currently responsible for O&M at
the site but will transfer responsibility for maintaining the athletic fields and driving range, which will also
serve to maintain the cover system, to the City of Butte. By 2004, the City of Butte will also be
responsible for maintaining the entire site with financial assistance from a trust fund set up by ARCO.
ARCO will always retain responsibility for addressing issues with the cover system, such as cap failure
or improper cap design. Institutional controls include a notation on the deed that mine waste is
contained on site, restrictions on well drilling and groundwater use, and prohibition of future uses that
might damage the cover system. Public access to areas where passive methane gas vents are located is
also restricted.
Enhancement: The enhanced cover system design, athletic fields, and golf driving range were financed
by Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO), the major PRP at the site, so no costs were incurred by EPA
to support reuse of the site. In return for financing the park, the PRP will transfer the title to the
property and operation and maintenance of the cover system to the City of Butte.
Section Five: Case Studies Page 37
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Chisman Creek Superfund Site
Seaford, Virginia
The Chisman Creek Superfund site now supports a 27-acre lighted sports complex atop capped fly
ash. From 1957 to 1974, Virginia Electric & Power Company contracted with a local trucking
company to dispose of 500,000 tons of fly ash generated by their Yorktown generating plant at the site.
Investigations of contamination began in 1980 following citizens' concerns about discolored well water,
which revealed heavy metal contamination in groundwater and Chisman Creek. A cover system was
constructed to contain the fly ash and prevent additional migration of heavy metals from the ash into
ground and surface water.
Site Settlement: Designers of the Chisman Creek Site expected little settlement due to waste
characteristics, depth of waste, and
the amount of time that had elapsed Cross-Section Diagram of the Chisman
since deposition Creek Superfund Site Cap
Cover System Design: The cover
system consists of one foot of a
soil/ash mixture, one foot of clay, six
inches of sand and six inches of
topsoil. Utility trenches were
installed in the cap to support park
lighting and irrigation. The utility
trenches were constructed so that at
least two feet of clean fill surrounds
installed utilities to prevent future
maintenance workers from contact
with the covered fly ash. Prior to constructing the cover system, the fly ash was sculpted to support the
planned athletic fields.
Operation and Maintenance: Site maintenance such as mowing the grass, preventing cover system
erosion, and repairing site improvements is handled by York County as part of their normal park
operations. The Virginia Electric & Power Company leases the property to the York County Parks
Department for the yearly property tax value. In return, the Parks Department performs routine
maintenance including mowing the lawn, upkeep of the fields and sprinkler systems. Any work resulting
from cap failure, improper cap design and the operation and maintenance of the dewatering system and
treatment of water is the responsibility of Virginia Power. One such incident occurred shortly after the
park opened where uneven settling caused a pool of water to form on one of the fields. This was
considered a cap design issue and taken care of by Virginia Power.
pp f%i\Mir /Tniwiilt _
6~" ^Anrl -
12" Low
rerrneaDility
Sol (Cloy)
12" Soil/Ash .
Mixture
^^
Ash Waste
Section Five: Case Studies
Page 38
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Enhancement: The Chisman Creek site was redeveloped at no additional cost to EPA. Virginia
Power financed the construction of the cover system and graded the site to support recreational fields.
York County constructed the fields, which it operates and maintains.
Section Five: Case Studies Page 39
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Ohio River Park Superfund Site
Neville Island, Pennsylvania
The 32-acre Ohio River Park Superfund Site in Neville Island, Pennsylvania, is now home to the Island
Sport Center, a multimillion dollar sports and entertainment complex. A municipal landfill operated on
the property from the 1930s until the 1950s. From 1952 to the mid-1960s, the Pittsburgh Coke &
Chemical Company disposed of industrial waste on the property, causing widespread contamination of
the soil, surface water, and groundwater. As part of the remedy, the PRP, under the oversight of EPA,
placed a protective cover over the landfill to protect the public from exposure to the industrial waste
and developed the site into an athletic and entertainment facility, which includes an indoor ice-skating
and hockey complex (indoor ice rink, and external ice rink/field courts) on the northeast portion of the
property, a golf complex (driving range, exterior miniature golf course, and interior golf center) on the
central-western portion of the property, and a theater complex and restaurant on the extreme western
tip of the site.
Site Settlement: The sports complex includes several areas where site subsidence and differential
settlement were a concern. For the portion of the site that supports the golf dome, the PRP first pre-
loaded the area with several hundred tons of fill material and monitored the settlement until it ceased.
The PRP also contoured the site and placed additional clean soil over areas targeted to support heavy
cement foundations for the dome. The additional soil would allow for some differential settlement to
occur without the waste below being disturbed. The cement foundations used to stabilize the dome
were constructed of wide flat cement blocks, which distribute the mass of the block over a greater
surface area and reduce the likelihood of differential settlement.
For the portion of the site that supports a restaurant and two ice rinks, the PRP installed piles that were
driven 60 feet down into bedrock. A total of 412 piles were needed to support the restaurant and
skating facility. Although other, less expensive engineering techniques could have been used to build the
foundation, the use of piles driven into bedrock eliminated the possibility that differential settlement
would adversely affect the structures.
Cover System Design: Areas in which there was a high concentration of waste were covered with a
multi-layer cap to prevent further contamination of groundwater. The multi-layer cap includes a
subgrade layer, a barrier layer, a drainage layer, and a vegetative cover layer. The subgrade layer
consists of engineered fill and a liner foundation and provides a firm foundation for the barrier layer
construction, as well as an adequate slope to ensure drainage from the drainage and vegetative layers.
Engineered fill was placed six inches below the liner subgrade layer. The liner subgrade material is
composed of fine-grained soil (silt and clay) that is free of any materials that might damage the overlying
synthetic liner. The barrier layer consists of a high density polyethylene liner that is 40 millimeters thick.
The drainage layer consists of a non-woven geotextile. Finally, the vegetative cover layer supports
vegetative growth, provides frost protection, and minimizes the potential for damage from surface
activities and root penetration.
Section Five: Case Studies Page 40
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
The designers understood that some areas of the site are more susceptible to repairs than others. In
areas where intrusive work might be needed, highly visible orange fencing was unrolled flat, over the
waste, and tacked into the ground. Clean fill was then placed over the waste and fencing to provide a
physical barrier. The orange fence acts as a visible barrier for future workers at the site. An erosion
soil cap was then placed over the entire site, raising the ground system above the 100-year flood
elevation. Two to eight feet of fill dirt (transported from off-site) was used for the soil cap and serves to
prevent exposure to contaminants in the event of erosion of the cap. The slopes that were created by
elevating the site were vegetated to prevent future erosion. Pruning and watering keeps the existing
vegetation and slopes both healthy and stable.
Gas Collection: A gas collection and venting system was designed to collect excess gases beneath
the multi-layer cap and passively vent the gases to the atmosphere. The gas collection and venting
system consists of shallow gravel-filled trenches connected to a header along the crest of the liner
subgrade layer and a series of vent pipes. A non-woven geofabric surrounds the trenches to prevent
migration of fine-grained soil particles into the gas collection system. To hide some of the vents from
the public, shallow root trees and bushes were placed around some on the vents.
Operation and Maintenance and Institutional Controls: Site maintenance is the responsibility of
the PRP, who maintains the cover systems and monitors groundwater. Institutional controls restrict
land and groundwater use at the site and reduce the potential for human exposure to contamination.
Permanent signs were installed on the banks of the Ohio River to caution fishermen against eating
bottom-feeding fish and a series of signs were installed to restrict access to the side slopes leading to
the Ohio River and the Ohio River Back Channel (areas that did not receive additional fill placement or
covering by roadways or buildings).
Enhancement: The Ohio River Site was redeveloped at no additional cost to EPA. The PRP
financed the entire cost of construction for the multi-layer cap, the soil cap, and the Island Sport
Center, including the internal and external ice rinks, golf complex, athletic fields, trails, and theater and
restaurant. The PRP incurred additional costs to contour the site and pre-load areas to avoid
differential settlement, and used engineering technologies that improved the performance of the remedy
rather than using least costly alternatives. EPA oversaw the cleanup and redevelopment of the site, but
did not incur additional costs for these activities.
Section Five: Case Studies Page 41
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Bibliography
Carpenter, J. D. 1976. Handbook of Landscape Architectural Construction. McLean, Virginia:
Landscape Architecture Foundation.
Collins, P. 1998. "Superfund Success, Superfast." Civil Engineering (December).
Crowley, P. (Montana Department of Environment, Solid Waste Division). 1999. Personal
Communication.
Crowcroft, P. H. 1996. "Promoting Landfill Stabilisation and Controlling the Consequences." Polluted
& Marginal Land - 96, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Re-use of
Contaminated Land and Landfills.
Emberton, J. R. and Parker, A. 1987. "The Problems Associated with Building on Landfill Sites."
Waste Management & Research, vol. 5, 473-482.
Fogg, G. 1997. Park Planning Guidelines, 3rd Edition. National Recreation & Park Association.
Golden, M. 1993. "Pros and Cons of Developing Recreational Facilities on Closed Landfills."
Proceedings of the International Conference on Marinas, Parks, and Recreation Developments, 257-
260.
Hall, R, et al. 1996. "Re-use of Landfills" Polluted & Marginal Land - 96, Proceedings of the Fourth
International Conference on the Re-use of Contaminated Land and Landfills.
Keech, M. 1995. "Design of Civil Infrastructure Over Landfills." In Landfill Closures. New York:
American Society of Civil Engineers.
Kissida, J., et al. 1991. "Landfill Park: From Eyesore to Asset." Civil Engineering (August), 49-51.
Koerner, R. M., and Daniel, D. E. 1997. Final Covers for Solid Waste Landfills and Abandoned
Dumps. Reston, Virginia: American Society of Civil Engineers.
Mackey, R. E. 1996. "Three End-Uses for Closed Landfills and Their Impact on the Geosynthetic
Design." Geotextiles and Geomembranes, vol. 14, 409-424.
Naber, T. 1987. "Today's Landfill is Tomorrow's Playground." Waste Age (September), 46-58.
Bibliography Page 42
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Patch, J., et al. 1996. "Foundation Engineering on Contaminated Land Sites." Polluted & Marginal
Land - 96, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Re-use of Contaminated Land
and Landfills.
Pioneer Manufacturing Co. (Cleveland, Ohio). 1999.
Paukstis, S. 1993. "Landfill Transformed into Recreation Area." American City & County (June), 30.
Prince William County. 1996. Design Standards.
Puhalla, J. 1999. Sports Field Design and Construction. Michigan: Ann Arbor Press.
Sachs, J. 1997. "At Play on a Field of Trash." Discover (June), 55-59.
Schlect, E. 1996. "Tacoma Asphalt Cap is Tough and Impermeable." Asphalt, vol. 5, no. 1
(Summer).
Smith, Roger. 1995-1996. "Asphalt Pavement Doubles as Hazardous Soils Cap and Loading Area."
Asphalt, vol. 9, no. 3 (Winter).
Soccer Industry Council of America. 1998. Soccer Planning System: A Guide for Community Soccer
Center Management.
Spreull, W. J. and Cullum, S. 1986. "Landfill Gas Venting for Agricultural Restoration." Waste
Management & Research, vol. 5, 1-12.
U.S. Product Safety Commission, Office of Information and Public Affairs. "Handbook for Public
Playground Safety." Publication no. 32.
U.S. EPA. 1979. Design and Construction of Covers for Solid Waste Landfills, EPA 600/2-79/165.
U.S. EPA. 1980. Evaluating Cover Systems for Solid and Hazardous Waste, EPA 530/SW-867c.
U.S. EPA. 1983. Standardized Procedures for Planting Vegetation on Completed Sanitary Landfills,
EPA 600/2-83/055.
U.S. EPA. 1985a. Covers for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, EPA 540/2-85/002.
U.S. EPA. 1985b. Settlement and Cover Subsidence of Hazardous Waste Landfills, EPA
600/2-85/035.
Bibliography Page 43
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
U.S. EPA. 1987a. Engineering Guidance for the Design, Construction, and Maintenance of Cover
Systems for Hazardous Waste, EPA 600/2-87/039.
U.S. EPA. 1987b. Prediction/Mitigation of Subsidence Damage to Hazardous Waste Landfill Covers,
EPA 600/2-87/025.
U.S. EPA. 1989. Technical Guidance Document: Final Covers on Hazardous Waste Landfills and
Surface Impoundments, EPA 530/SW-89/047.
U.S. EPA. 1991. Seminar Publication: Design and Construction of RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers,
EPA 625/4-91/025.
U.S. EPA. 1995. Presumptive Remedies: CERCLA Landfill Caps RI/FS Data Collection Guide, EPA
540/F-95/009.
U.S. EPA. 1999. Reuse of CERCLA Landfill and Containment Sites, EPA/540-F-99-015.
U.S. EPA. Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment
Areas for Commercial and Light Industrial Facilities (Planned 2001).
U.S. EPA. Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment
Areas for Golf Facilities (Planned 2001).
U.S. EPA. Technical Guidance for RCRA/CERCLA Final Covers (Planned 2001).
U.S. EPA. Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Ecological Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste
Containment Areas (Planned 2001).
Bibliography Page 44
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Appendix A.
Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
The size and configuration of a site and any accessible adjacent properties can have a major impact on
the kinds of recreational use it can support. For example, a large, regularly shaped site may be well
suited for a multiple athletic field complex (e.g., soccer or baseball). A smaller, irregularly shaped site
may not be able to support this level of development and may be better used for smaller athletic fields
or courts (e.g., basketball or tennis courts). In addition to the area requirements for the selected
recreational activity, space may be needed for supporting facilities such as parking lots, concession
stands, spectator areas, and storage buildings. At multiple athletic field complexes, space also may be
needed for buffer zones between fields, drainage features, access areas and adjacent properties.
Exhibit A-l provides standard field dimensions
and acreage for common athletic fields. The area
required for most playing fields ranges from
approximately 0.05 acres (a volleyball court) to
three acres (an adult level baseball field).
However, recreational facilities consist of more
than just a playing field. When estimating the area
needs for a recreational facility, the size of the fields
and the space requirements for supporting features
or areas, such as those listed below, need to be
considered.
Parking
Bathrooms
Storage facilities
Concession facilities
Bleachers or other spectator areas
Spillover noise and activity areas
Surface drainage features
Buffer zones
Access areas
Remedy criteria/layout (building,
drainage, piping, etc.)
Exhibit A-l: Common Field Dimensions
Sport
Field Hockey
Lacrosse
Football
Tennis
Softball
Baseball
Soccer
Basketball
Volleyball
Golf Range (35
tees)
Field Dimensions
100ydsx60yds
1 19 yds x 69 yds
120 yds x 53 yds
78 ft x 36 ft
325-ft radial arc from
backstop
200-ft (little league) -
350-ft (adult) radial arc
from backstop
100+ydsx60+yds
50 ft x 94 ft
29.5 ft x 59 ft
240 yds wide x 300 yds
deep
Minimum
Acreage
1.25
1.7
1.3
0.06
2.0
0.75-3.0
1.0-2.0
0.01
0.05
15
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-l
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit A-2 lists typical minimum parking needs for sports fields and the approximate area required for
the parking spaces.
Exhibit A-2: Minimum Suggested Parking for Sports Fields
Sport
Softball
Baseball
Volleyball
Tennis
Basketball
Soccer, football,
lacrosse, etc.
Minimum Parking
Spaces
15 Spaces / Diamond
20 Spaces / Diamond
6 Spaces / Court
2 Spaces / Court
6 Spaces / Court
16 Spaces / Field
Approximate Area
(Acres)
0.2
0.27
0.08
0.03
0.08
0.22
Source: Carpenter, Handbook of Landscape Architectural Construction (1976)
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-2
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Softball and Baseball Fields
Field size varies from approximately three-quarters of an acre for a little league baseball field to
approximately three acres for an adult baseball field with the center field fence 375-feet away from
home plate. Accounting for additional space for errant balls, spectator areas, and other features, a full
size baseball field may need up to six acres. Exhibit A-3 lists the dimensions for little league baseball,
adult baseball and softball fields and Exhibit A-4 provides a typical diagram of a softball field.
Exhibit A-3 Baseball and Softball Field Dimensions
Standard Dimensions
Length of Baseline
Pitching Distance
Batters Box
Rise of Pitching Mound
Coaches Box
Home Plate to Backstop
Left Field Distance
Center Field Distance
Right Field Distance
Infield Radius
Radius of Infield Mix Around
Bases (for grass infields only)
Diameter Pitcher's Mound
Approximate Acreage
Little League
60'
46'
3'x6'
6"
4'x8'
25'
200'
200'
200'
50'
9'
10'
0.75
Baseball (Adult)
90'
60'
4'x6'
10"
10'x20'
60'
320'
350' -375'
320'
95'
13'
18'
3
Softball (Adult)
65'
46'
3'x7'
none
10'xl5'
25'
300'
300'
300'
-
-
-
2
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-3
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit A-4 Softball Field Diagram
(adapted from Pioneer Manufacturing Co.)
25 ft. minimum,
Backstop to Fwfncplaiic
5tt.ctvi*
g
/
Filching
RuttET
I I6j.
tcitVKvt 17~
CJcheo' 1 - 1 AS*
an.
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-4
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Soccer and Other Athletic Fields
Many large athletic fields can be used for multiple purposes and sports due to their similar sizes and
dimensions. Exhibit A-5 provides the field dimensions of typical sports fields. Football and soccer are
two of the most popular sports and their field sizes are quite compatible for dual use. Typical football
and soccer fields layouts are provided as Exhibits A-6 and A-7. As noted earlier, the age and level of
play is one factor to consider when determining the appropriate field size.
Exhibit A-5 Typical Sports Field Dimensions
Sport
Adult Soccer
Football
Field Hockey
Lacrosse
Field
Dimensions
1 10+ yards x 80 yards
120 yards x 53 yards
100 yards x 60 yards
119 yards x 69 yards
Approximate
Acreage
1.8
1.3
1.3
1.7
Exhibit A-6 Football Field Diagram
(adapted from Pioneer Manufacturing Co.)
Sideline
i,
=0ฎ
I 111 1111 i 111 111 I 11(1 111II II111
IIII
I III
II11
I III
mi
mi
1111
1111
End
Zone
10yds
deep
Sideline
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-5
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit A-7 Soccer Field Diagram
(adapted from Pioneer Manufacturing Co.)
iToam Mr Ccdohli
3 [
uffinU
Arm
Inul
Sideline (Touch Lht)
s-
)
(.
F*malty&^jC faxatdMif
/jTydt /ram EntfL*i-c-
mrrd 7Dydr. fijm mn*f
D
Soccer fields vary greatly in size depending on the age and level of play. As shown in Exhibit
A-8, a field for players age six and under is approximately 0.12 acres in area while a field for i
adults can
A-ป, a Held tor players age six ana under is approximately u. 12 acres in area wnne a tieia tor adult:
require nearly two acres. Additional area is also required for spectator areas, bad shots and errant
passes. An adult soccer field with supporting areas may need up to three acres of land.
Exhibit A-8 Soccer Field Dimensions
Age/Level
Under 6
(3 on 3)
Under 8
(4 on 4)
Under 8
(11 on 11)
Under 10
Under 12
Under 14
16 and over
Length
(yds)
20-30
40-50
80
90
100
110
110+
Width
(yds)
15 -20
20-30
60
60
60
65
80
Goal Width Approx.
(yds) Acreage
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
0.1
0.3
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.8
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-6
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Sand Volleyball Court
A standard volley ball court is 29.5 feet by 59 feet, the sand area is 49 feet by 78.5 feet, and a 12 feet
wide zone beyond the sand is typically allowed around the court for players to pursue the ball. The
total required area is approximately 0.2 acres. Although sand thickness varies, a layer between 2 and
3.5 feet thick is preferred. Refer to Exhibit A-9 for a diagram of a typical volleyball court.
Exhibit A-9 Volleyball Court Diagram
(adapted from Pioneer Manufacturing Co.)
f "N
r N#J
_L
33" i
'1
^
D
E
Vnlenna j
1
n
J i
r
ฃ
COS
If:
||
ซปฃ;
=*.=!.
- -u
a
Length of Court between
9ft., Sri.
square
7fl ft 7 C m. length of sซid
fe
^
^
fT
a
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-7
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Basketball
Exhibit A-10 lists common dimensions and areas for basketball courts of different level of play. As
shown in this table, basketball courts for the various levels are approximately the same size. A
diagram of a typical basketball court is provided as Exhibit A-ll.
Level
Size
Distance from free
throw line to backboard
Width of free throw
lane
3 -point arc distance
(measured from center
of hoop)
Approximate Acreage
High School
50' x 84'
15'
12'
19' 9"
0.1
College
50' x 94'
15'
12'
19' 9"
0.11
50'x94'
15'
16'
21' 9'
0.11
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-8
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Exhibit A-l 1 Basketball Court Diagram
(adapted from Pioneer Manufacturing Co.)
Lane Detail
V^Wv 'on^\
Mt _ Gil. Pit, ait. 1
n: iiall.. Wictniiilt
Appendix A: Size and Configuration of Sports Fields
A-9
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Appendix B.
Information Sources for Recreational Reuse
Sports Fields - General
The book, Stadia, Arenas and Grandstands, by Jean Benedetti (2000) contains general
information about designing and building sports fields.
United States Department of the Army. "How to Plan, Design and Build Outdoor Sports
Facilities." Sterling Publishing Co, IRC.: New York.
Sports Turf: Science, Construction and Maintenance by V.I. Stewart
For more information about the proper installation and care of turfgrass for sports fields,
access the National Turfgrass Evaluation Program Internet Site at http://www.ntep.org .
Prince William County, Virginia, Design Standards (1996), shows examples of sport field
designs that have been implemented by Virginia's Prince William County.
"Vigilance and Sound Advice Help Spell Relief from Landfill Gag," an article by Shapard,
Rob (1996 page 22-28) published in American City and County describes dramatic
change that can occur when a former toxic site is transformed into use as a recreational
site.
Softball and Baseball Fields
Handbook of Sports and Recreational Building Design: Outdoor Sports by John
Geraint, (1993)
For step-by-step instructions on how to develop land into sport fields, setting up drainage
systems, and other helpful information about soil and turf maintenance access the Landco
Company Internet site at http://www.lancoturf.com/cadre-sports.htm
Sports Fields: A Manual for Design, Construction, and Maintenance by J. Puhalla
(1999) Ann Arbor Press: Michigan.
Geraint, John. (1993). "Handbook of Sports and Recreational Building Design: Outdoor
Sports," available through the Urban Land Institute.
Soccer Industry Council of America. (1998). "Soccer Planning System: A Guide for
Appendix B: Information Sources A-l
Soccer
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Community Soccer Center Management."
Purdue Turf Grass Science Program internet site:
http://www.agrv.purdue.edu/turf/pubs/av31 .htm
Golf Driving Ranges
Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course, National Golf
Foundation (1995).
"A Study of Designing/Reclaiming a Sanitary Landfill as a Future Golf Course: A
Thesis," by Chiaojung Charles Yang (1993) Louisiana State University and Agricultural
and Mechanical College.
"Enhancing Golf and the Environment," by Jerry Matthews (1994) published in Parks
and Recreation.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Use of
Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas for Golf Facilities" (Planned 2001).
United States Golf Association internet site:
http://www.usga.org/green/index.html
The Lanco Company, Golf Course Construction internet site:
http://www.lancoturf.com/golfl .htm
Volleyball Courts
USA Volleyball Guidelines internet site:
http://www.vollevball.org
Volleyball Magazine Site Construction internet site:
http://volleyball.about.com/sports/volleyball/cs/courtconstruction/index.htm
Playgrounds, Picnic Areas, and Trails
"The Creation of a Park" by Karen Arent published in Public Works (1989).
"The Complete Guide to Trail Building and Maintenance," by Carl Demrow and David
Salisbury published in Appalachian Mountain Club (1998).
"Today's Landfill is Tomorrow's Playground," by T. Naber published in Waste Age
(1987, September, pages 46-58).
Appendix B: Information Sources B-2
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
"Landfills Become Landscapes: The American Park Revolution," by Dan Treadway
published in American City and County (1987, September).
U.S. Product Safety Commission, Office of Information and Public Affairs. "Handbook
for Public Playground Safety." Publication no. 32.
Ice Skating
Ice Rink Design and Construction: A Bibliography of Recent Literature #a!997, by
Mary Ellen Huls (1998).
Horseback Riding
Equestrian Facilities: Planning and Design, Alexander Bigler.
Paved Surfaces, Parking, Buildings, and Utilities
"Handbook of Landscape Architectural Construction." J.D. Carpenter (1976). McLean,
Virginia: Landscape Architecture Foundation.
Prince William County, Virginia, Design Standards (1996).
Smith, Roger. (1995-1996, Winter). "Asphalt Pavement Doubles as Hazardous Soils
Cap and Loading Area." Asphalt, vol. 9, no. 3.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Use of
Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas for Commercial and Light Industrial
Facilities" (Planned 2001).
Appendix B: Information Sources B-3
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Appendix C.
Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
Table 1: Superfund Waste Containment Sites with Recreational Reuse
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary
Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
MULTIPLE RECREATIONAL USES
Dupage County
Landfill/Blackwell Forest
Preserve Warrenville, IL
Tar Creek
Ottawa County, OK
Ohio River Park
Neville, PA
Picnic and camping
areas, trails, a lake, a 120-
ft sledding hill, and a
soccer field
Picher Sports Complex
with baseball field and
playground
Sports-recreation center
with 2 indoor ice-skating
rinks, and other
recreation facilities
Municipal landfill
including 2.2 million
cubic yards of waste
material
Lead, cadmium, zinc
Benzene, 2,4.6
Trichlorophenol,
magnese, benzo (a)
pyrene, dibenz (a,h)
anthracene,
beryllium, and
mercury
- Repairs and improvements to existing cap
- Adding clay to needed areas
- Enhancing surface drainage
- Installing a leachate extraction and
treatment system
- Installing additional landfill gas
venting
- Long-term groundwater monitoring
Excavation of lead-contaminated soil
and replacement with clean fill
Institutional controls
Diversion and diking of inflow areas
Capping of concentrated waste with a
multilayer cap
Construct a landfill with a synthetic
membrane cover
Install extraction and injection wells
within landfill
Tim Prendiville (RPM)
(312)886-5122
prendi ville. timothy @
epa.gov
Rafael Casanova
(214) 665-7437
casanova.rafael@
epa.gov
Romuald A. Roman
(215)814-3212
roman.romuald@
epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-l
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary
Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
ATHLETIC FIELDS
American Cyanamid
Company
Bound Brook, NJ
Chisman Creek
Seaford, VA
East Mt. Zion Landfill
Springettsbury Township,
PA
International Minerals
Company
Terre Haute, IN
Lipari Landfill
Pitman, NJ
Minor league baseball
2 Softball fields and 4
soccer fields
Baseball fields
Little-league ball fields
Baseball and soccer
fields
VOCs, acetone,
ethylbenzene
chloride, toluene, and
xylene, copper,
chromium, lead,
mercury, nickel, zinc,
arsenic, and cadium
Fly ash including
trace metals,
inorganics, arsenic,
cadmium, copper,
lead, nickel,
vanadium.
Municipal and
industrial wastes,
including vinyl
chloride and benzene
VOCs and BHC
Solvent, paint, paint
thinner,
formaldehyde, and
resins
Contain the contaminants
Low-permeability soil cap
Ground water collection system and
treatment system
Alternate water supply for those homes
still on residential wells
Relocating a portion of the tributary,
deed restrictions
Multilayered cap
Vent system
Surface water control system
Placing a clay cap and a fence around
the site
Continually monitor the site
- Security fence
- Construction of a landfill containment
system
- Capping of the landfill with a synthetic
membrane cover
- Installation of extraction and injection
wells within the landfill
JeffCatanzarita(RPM)
(212) 637-4409
catanzarita.jeff@epa.gov
Andrew C. Palestini
(RPM) (215) 814-3233
palestini. andrew@
epa.gov
John Banks (RPM)
(215)814-3214
banks.john-d@epa.gov
Gladys Beard
(312) 886-7253
beard.gladys@epa.gov
Fred Cataneo
(212) 637-4428
cataneo.fred@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-2
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Silver Bow Creek/Butte/
Silver Bow
Deer Lodge Country, MT
Silver Bow Creek/Butte
Area (Clark Tailings)/
Silver Bow
Deer Lodge County, MT
Recreational Uses
Baseball, soccer, tennis,
hiking, and basketball
areas
Baseball fields, courts,
and picnic areas
Primary
Contaminants
Mining wastes
including metals,
arsenic, and lead
Metals including,
arsenic, lead, copper,
zinc, and cadmium
Remedial Activities
Construction of a cover of lime, fill and
soil
Removal of hazardous materials
Stabilization of soil containing lead
Covering the site with 18 inches of clean
soil
EPA Contact
Sara Weinstock (RPM)
(406)782-7415
weinstock.sara@epa.go
V
Sara Weinstock (RPM)
(406)782-7415
weinstock. sara@epa.go
V
GOLF COURSES / DRIVING RANGES
Anaconda Company Smelter
Anaconda, MT
Kane and Lombard Streets
Drum
Baltimore, MD
Lexington County Landfill
Cayce, SC
McColl
Fullerton, CA
Golf course
Golf driving range
Golf driving range
Golf course
Arsenic, metals
including copper,
cadmium, lead, and
zinc
VOCs and metals
including cadmium,
lead, magnesium,
nickel
Benzene, bisphthlate
bromodichloro-
methane, and
chlorobenzene
Sulfur dioxide, VOCs,
inorganic chemicals,
volatile, and semi-
volatile compounds
- Relocated residents
- Removal of contaminated soil and
placement of clean soil
Constructed a surface barrier wall
Constructed a permeant cap
Consolidation and capping the waste
piles with clay and soil
Control the venting of the methane gas
Removal of wastes
Temporary caps placed
Charles Coleman
(612)296-7813
coleman.charles@
epa.gov
Lesley Derascavage
(215)814-3239
derascavage. lesley @
epa.gov
Terry Tanner
(904) 562-8797
tanner.terry@epa.gov
David Seter
(415)744-2212
seter.david@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-3
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Mill Creek Dump
Erie, PA
Monticello Mill Tailing
Monticello, UT
PAB Oil and Chemical
Services, Inc.,
Abbeville, LA
South Weymouth Naval Air
Station (SWNAS)
Weymouth, MA
Stauffer Chemical
Tarpon Springs, FL
Recreational Uses
Golf course
Golf course
Golf driving range
Golf course and
recreational and open
space
Golf course
Primary
Contaminants
Poly cyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, PCBs,
and heavy metals
Uranium, thorium-
230, radium 226,
radon 222, heavy
metals including
arsenic, selenium,
vanadium,
molybdenum,
manganese, and
uranium
Arsenic, barium,
chromium, lead,
manganese, and
acetone
Battery acid, lead,
VOCs, and heavy
metals
Phosphorous,
arsenic, radium-226,
beryllium, and heavy
metals
Remedial Activities
Removal of material
Soil cap
Flood retention basin
Removal of contaminated material
Place an evapo-transpiration cover on
site
Remove top layer or soil
Install a clay cap
Removal of drums and containers
Removal of soil
Place soil cap on surface
Removal of hazardous material and soil
Consolidation and capping of the site
Establish land use ordinances
Construct physical barriers
EPA Contact
Romuald A. Roman
(215)814-3212
roman.romuald@
epa.gov
Paul Mushovic
(303)312-6662
mushovic.paul@
epa.gov
Caroline A. Siegler
(214)665-2178
Patty Whittemore
(617)918-1382
whittemore .patty @
epa.gov
John Blanchard
(404) 562-8934
blanchard.john@
epamail.gov
PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-4
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Bangor Gas Works
Bangor, ME
Central City-Clear Creek
Central City, CO
Chemical Metals Industries
Baltimore, MD
Port Hadlock
(US NAVY)
Indian Island, WA
PATHS AND TRAILS
Bunker Hill Mining
Smelterville, ID
Fulbright Landfill
Springfield, MO
Milltown Reservoir
Milltown, MT
Recreational Uses
Community park
Outdoor recreation
Neighborhood parks
Recreational beach
Hiking trails and ski area
Walking trails
Walking trails including
a foot bridge
Primary
Contaminants
Coal tar
Zinc, lead, cadmium,
and arsenic
DCE, TCE, and PCEs
Ordnance
compounds, heavy
metals, PCBs, and
pesticides
Lead, arsenic, and
cadmium
Landfill wastes
including cyanides,
acids, plating, paint
sledges, solvents
and pesticides
Heavy metals and
arsenic
Remedial Activities
Emptied tank and demolished buildings
Built cap and paved over as a parking lot
Build a water treatment plan
Remove and cap waste files
Remove the deteriorating asphalt
Recap and remove any contaminants that
surface
Removal of debris
Construction of a landfill/erosion
prevention measures
Cap and close area deemed unacceptable
Removal of drums and drum remnants
Monitoring groundwater and leachate
Institutional controls
Dig new well from separate aquifer
Construct new distribution system
Flush current plumbing system
Continually test water quality
EPA Contact
Don Berger
(617)918-1351
berger.don@epa.gov
Holly Fliniau
(303)312-6535
fliniau.holly@
epa.gov
Stephen D. Jarvela
(215)814-3259
j arvela. stephen@
epa.gov
Bob Kievit (RPM)
(360)753-9014
kievit.bob@epa. go v
Earl Liverman
(208) 664-4858
liverman.earl@epa.gov
Mary Peterson (RPM)
(913)551-7882
peterson.mary@epa.gov
Russ Forba
(406)441-1123
forba.russ@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-5
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Northwest 58th Street
Landfill
Miami, FL
Recreational Uses
Hiking trails
Primary
Contaminants
Pesticides, paints,
solvents, heavy
metals, arsenic, and
VOCs
Remedial Activities
Grade and cap landfill with synthetic
membranes
Construct a storm water management
system
EPA Contact
Pam Scully
(404) 562-8935
scully .pam@epa. go v
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-6
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary
Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
OTHER
Asarco Smelter
Tacoma, WA
Smuggler Mountain
Aspen, CO
Whitewood Creek
Whitewood, SD
Amphitheater
Homes and historic tour
service
Creek used for irrigation,
watering livestock, and
recreation
Metals, arsenic,
cadium, copper, and
lead
Lead
Heavy metals,
arsenic, cadmium,
copper, silver,
mercury, and cyanide
Demolish building
Remove and disposal of soil
Plug/abandon surface water
Cap area
Reinforce the shoreline of the plant site
and slag peninsula against erosion
Long term monitoring
Install a clean soil cap
Remove soil
Monitoring water quality
Limit future uses of contaminated areas
Kevin Rochlin
(206) 553-2106
rochlin.kevin@epa.gov
Armando Saenz
(303)312-6559
saenz.armando@epa.go
V
Gwen Hooten
(303)312-6646
hooten.gwen@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-7
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Table 2: Superfund Treatment Sites with Recreational Reuse
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
MULTIPLE RECREATIONAL USES
Abex
Portsmouth, VA
Bayou Bonfouca
Slidell,LA
Peterson Sand & Gravel
Liberytville, IL
Pepe Field
Boonton, NJ
Recreation center
Boat landing and recreational
area
Boat launch, canoes, picnic
area, swimming beach, and
hiking trails
Restored recreation facility
with a regulation little league
field, walking path,
playground, basketball court,
gazebo, flag pole area and
concession stand
Heavy metal, lead, antimony,
nickel, tin, copper, zinc,
cadmium, chromium, silver,
and PAHs
Creosote compounds and
PNA
Industrial waste including
solvents and paints
High levels of hydrogen
sulfide waste
- Removal of soils
- Fenced off areas of the
site
- Dredging contaminated
sediments
- Incineration of soils and
sediments extraction
- Treatment of
groundwater
- Removal of toxic drums
and contaminated soil
- Stabilization and
excavation of
approximately 50,000
cubic yards of waste
material
- Pumping and pre-
treatment of leachate
before discharge to the
Rockaway Valley
Regional Sewerage
Authority
- Backfilling of waste
Randy Sturgeon
(215) 814-3227
sturgeon.randy@epa.gov
Katrina Coltrain
(214) 665-8143
coltrain.katrina@epa.gov
Gladys Beard (RPM)
(312)886-7253
beard.gladys@epa.gov
John Frisco
(212)637-4419
frisco.john@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-8
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
ATHLETIC FIELDS
East Helena
East Helena, MT
Reilly Tar&Chem (St. Louis
Park Plant) Hennepin, MN
Spokane Junkyard Spokane,
WA
Waite Park Wells
Waite Park, MN
Baseball fields
Soccer field and a park
Baseball field, Softball field, 3
regulation-sized soccer
fields, and 8 smaller soccer
fields
Little league baseball fields
Lead, arsenic, and cadmium
Wood preserving wastes
including creosote, coal tar,
and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons
Asbestos, oil containing
PCBs, lead, and VOCs
TCE, PCE, lead, heavy
metals, and VOCs
Remove soil
Isolating the processed
water from ground
water by constructing
steel storage tanks
and replacing the leaky
equipment
Groundwater wells
closed
Groundwater treatment
Removal and off site
disposal of drums,
solids, and asbestos
- Removal of
contaminated soil
- Setting up a groundwater
monitoring plan
Scott Brown
(406)441-1123
brown. scott@epa. go v
Darryl Owens (RPM) (312)
886-7089
owens.darryl@epa.gov
Paul Crutchfield, Assistant
Director of Parks, Spokane
(509)625-6455.
Kevin Rochlin (RPM)
(206) 553-2106
rochlin.kevin@epa.gov
Brenda Winkler
(612)296-7813
GOLF COURSES / DRIVING RANGES
Gratiot County Golf
St. Louis, MI
Golf course
Industrial waste including
DDT, VOCs, heavy metals,
and benzene
Removal of
contaminated soils
Groundwater treatment.
Rosita Clarke-Moreno (RPM)
(312)886-7251
clarkemoreno.rosita@
epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-9
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Roebling Steel Company
Site
Roebling, NJ
Recreational Uses
Driving range and park
Primary Contaminants
Compressed gas tanks,
numerous types of acids,
and solid wastes
Remedial Activities
Construction of a cover
of lime, fill, and soil
Removal of
contaminated soil
EPA Contact
Site Repository Florence
Township, 711 Broad Street,
Florence, NJ 085 18
(609) 499-2525
PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS
Westline Site
Westline, PA
Recreational area
VOCsandPAH
- Soil excavation
- Cover graded area with
clean fill and seeded
mulch
Roy Schrock
(215)814-3210
schrock.roy@epa.gov
PATHS AND TRAILS
DeRewal Chemical Company
Kingwood Township, NJ
French, Ltd.
Crosby, TX
Time Beach Site
Times Beach, MO
Bike path
Nature walks and fishing
Horse back riding
Cadmium, chromium, copper,
lead, VOCs, and polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons
VOCs, phenols, heavy
metals, and PCB
Dioxin
Remove contaminated
soil
On-site treatment of soil
Groundwater extraction
Place sheet pile wall
around part of the site
On-site treatment of soil
with in-situ biodegration
Construction of a series
of spur levees
Removal and treatment
of contaminated soil
Larry Granite
(212)637-4423
granite.larry@epa.gov
Ernest Franke
(214)665-8521
franke.emest@epa.gov
Bob Feild
(913)551-7697
feild.robert@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-10
-------
Reusing Superfund Sites:
Recreational Use of Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas
Site Name/Location
Recreational Uses
Primary Contaminants
Remedial Activities
EPA Contact
OTHER
Army Materials
Technological Laboratory
Watertown, MA
Yacht club
PAH's, PCB's, pesticides,
and various chemical and
radiological contamination
Removal of hazardous
material and soil
Decommissioning of the
nuclear reactor
Meghan Cassidy (RPM)
(617)918-1387
cassidy.meghan@epa.gov
Appendix C: Superfund Recreational Reuse Sites and EPA Contacts
C-ll
------- |