EPA Proposes Cleanup Plan for 2 Areas and Future Situations Ottawa Radiation Areas Site Ottawa, Il July 2003


&EPA

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

EPA Proposes Cleanup Plan for
2 Areas and Future Situations

Ottawa Radiation Areas Site

Ottawa, III.	July 2003

Your comments invited

EPA invites your comments on this
proposed cleanup plan for residential
areas and for two of the 14 areas in
the Ottawa Radiation Areas
Superfund Site. Your input is impor-
tant. EPA may modify its recom-
mendation based on new information
and comments from area residents.
You may fill out and return the
enclosed form, or you may fax or e-
mail your comments to Joe Munoz at
EPA. See Page 7 for his contact
information.

You may also share your views with
EPA officials at a public meeting
scheduled for:

Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Time: 7 p.m.

Place: Ottawa City Hall
301 W. Madison St.
Ottawa, 111.

You must submit your statement
during the

Public Comment Period
July 18 to August 18, 2003

If you need special accommodations
in order to attend this meeting,
please contact Joe Munoz at least
two weeks prior to the meeting.

<&

A plan proposed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 calls
for any radium-contaminated soil found in residential areas of Ottawa to be
dug up and replaced with clean dirt. The proposed plan is almost identical
to the method previously used to clean up other residential areas. But this
plan, once it becomes final, will ensure that if any contamination is discov-
ered in the future, there will be no need to go back through EPA's analysis
and evaluation process. That will make any future residential cleanups
more efficient and effective.

The first site to benefit from this proposed plan would be a vacant lot that is
part of NPL-11 (see map on Page 3). The lot is a grassy area off Bellevue
Avenue, between homes where contamination has already been removed.
Cleanup under this proposed plan would restore the area to a condition suit-
able for building private homes. That same standard would apply in any
future cleanups of residential areas under this proposal.

EPA is proposing a similar plan for the area known as the NPL-8 frontage
property. In this case, however, only the top 10 feet of soil will be removed.
By digging up the soil and processing it on the site, EPA can ensure that only
contaminated soil is taken to a licensed landfill. EPA will install equipment to
monitor and control the release of radon gas from under the ground, and future
use of the site will be restricted to commercial and industrial purposes. The
approach saves money while protecting human health and the environment.

The plan is not yet final. Ottawa residents will have 30 days in which to
comment on EPA's proposal, and the proposed plan could change based on
input from the public. One opportunity to comment will be a public meeting,
scheduled for July 30 at 7 p.m., in Ottawa City Hall. Comments may also be
mailed, e-mailed or faxed to the EPA regional office in Chicago.

1Section 117(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act requires
the publication of a notice announcing the proposed plan and a brief analysis. It also requires an opportu-
nity for a public hearing and comment period. This proposed plan summarizes the feasibility study, the
technical memorandum and information detailed in other site-related reports available in the administra-
tive record at the Reddick Library and at the EPA office in Chicago.

-------
Risks to the people and the environment

The risk at NPL-11 is primarily to residents, construction
workers and people walking through the area. They can
be exposed to contamination by inhaling radon gas
escaping from the ground, or by touching radium-
contaminated soil. They can also get small particles of
contaminated soil in their mouths by casual hand-to-mouth
contact. EPA estimates that one out of 10,000 could
develop cancer. The study did not include risk to the
environment because the area is small and highly
developed, with no habitat for wildlife.

At the NPL-8 frontage property, the risk for residents is as
high as one case of cancer in every 1,000 exposures. For
people who walk through the site occasionally, the risk is as
high as one case in every 10,000 exposures. EPA evaluated
the risks for several uses, but EPA expects this area to remain
a commercial/industrial site. People coming to a recreation
area or playground built in this area would have a risk as high
as four cases of cancer in every 10,000 exposures, while
people working at new businesses in the area would have a
risk as high as five cancer cases in every 10,000 exposures.
Construction workers building any new facilities would have
a risk of seven cancer cases in every million exposures. In all
three cases, exposure would be primarily from direct contact
with the soil. EPA found that plants and wildlife in this area
would not be affected by the contamination.

About the Ottawa Radiation Areas Site

Both NPL-11 and the NPL-8 frontage property are part of
the Ottawa Radiation Areas Site. A total of 14 separate
areas in and around Ottawa are contaminated with radium-
226. Some areas also have heavy metal contamination. The
radium, and probably the heavy metals, came from two
Ottawa companies that used radium sulfate paint in making
glow-in-the-dark watch dials. Radium Dial Co. operated
from 1920 to 1932, and Luminous Processes Inc. from 1932
through 1978.

EPA's cleanup priority in Ottawa was residential
property and properties near residential areas, because
they posed immediate and substantial danger to people.
From 1995 to 1997, EPA removed more than 40,000 tons
of radium-contaminated soil from 12 of the 14 areas,
and replaced it with clean soil.

NPL-11 is on Bellevue Avenue in the northeast side of
Ottawa, with Goose Creek on the south and homes east and
west. EPA removed 4,176 tons of contaminated soil from
three residential properties in 1996, but an investigation in
2000 revealed some contamination remained in the vacant
lot. Fill material containing contaminated waste from both
companies may have been deposited in the area. After the
cleanup, the site will be suitable for private homes.

The NPL-8 frontage property is about four acres, 1/4-mile
east of Ottawa. The NPL-8 area itself is north and west of
the property. There is a car dealership on the southwest,
water-filled clay pits on the northeast, and State Route 71
on the southeast. This area provided access to NPL-8. It
was originally considered part of NPL-8, but EPA placed
the frontage property in a separate category during an
investigation last year. EPA expects the frontage property to
remain as a commercial/industrial site.

Evaluation criteria

Cleanup plans are evaluated against these nine criteria:

1.	Overall Protection of Human Health and the
Environment addresses whether an alternative ade-
quately protects both human health and the environ-
ment. This criterion can be met by reducing or elimi-
nating the contaminant, or by reducing exposure to it.

2.	Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements assures that each project com-
plies with federal, state and local laws and regulations.

3.	Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence evaluates
how well an option will work in the long term, including
how safely remaining contaminants can be managed.

4.	Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility or Volume Through
Treatment addresses how well the option reduces the
toxicity, movement and amount of contaminants.

5.	Short-Term Effectiveness is how quickly the project
achieves protection, as well as its potential to be harm-
ful to human health and the environment while it's
being constructed and operating.

6.	Implementability addresses how well the alternative
can be implemented. It evaluates the technical feasibil-
ity and whether materials and services are available to
carry out the project.

7.	Cost includes estimated capital or startup costs, such as
the cost of buildings, treatment systems and monitoring
wells. The criterion also considers costs to implement
the remedy and operate and maintain it overtime.
Examples include laboratory analysis, repair costs and
personnel costs. Inflation, interest, etc., are factored
into cost estimates for work to be done in the future.

8.	State Acceptance is whether the state, in this case
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety, agrees with,
opposes or has no comment on EPA's recommended
alternative. This criteria addresses how well the option
complies with state laws and regulations.

9.	Community Acceptance evaluates how well the com-
munity near the site accepts the option. EPA evaluates
community acceptance after it receives and evaluates
public comments on its recommended alternative.

2

-------
Cleanup alternative - Residential Areas

EPA evaluated three alternatives for residential areas,
including:

Alternative 1 - No Action

EPA always includes "No Action" as an alternative. The
estimated cost for NPL-11 and other residential areas is $0.

Alternative 2 - Excavation, Backfill, Off-Site Disposal
of Soil Contaminated with Radium-226 and Perched
Water Collection (if necessary)

This would consist of digging up contaminated soil and
disposing of it in a licensed landfill. Clean dirt would then
replace what was removed.

In addition, pockets of underground water (called
"perched water')would be treated and removed.
Estimated cost is $200,000 for the NPL-11 vacant lot.

Alternative 3 - Excavation, Backfill, Volume Reduction,
Off-Site Disposal of Soil Contaminated with Radium-
226 and Perched Water Collection (if necessary)

This would be essentially the same as Alternative 2, but
the soil would be processed so that a reduced amount of
soil would be disposed of in a licensed radioactive waste
landfill. NPL-11 was not evaluated for this alternative,
because the volume of contaminated soil was too small
for consideration.

Recommended Alternative - Chosen Cleanup Plan for
Residential Areas: Alternative 2

Excavation of contaminated soil, backfill, perched water

NPL-11 Site Layout

(if necessary) and off-site disposal as a chosen cleanup
plan for soil in residential areas. The plan provides for
the option for volume reduction (Alternative 3) depending
on the evaluation in the technical memorandum.

A technical memorandum will be used to make the deter-
mination as to whether a site meets certain criteria or
"plugs into" the record of decision for implementation of
the chosen cleanup plan at the residential area.

Recommended Alternative for NPL-11: Alternative 2

Excavation of contaminated soil, backfill and off-site dis-
posal.

Comparison of Cleanup Alternatives for Residential Areas

Evaluation of Criteria

Alternative 1

Alternative 2*

Alternative 3

1. Overall protection of human health and the environment

2. Compliance with ARARs

3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence

4. Reduction of toxicity, mobility or volume through treatment

5. Short-term effectiveness

6. Implementability

7. Cost (estimated)

—

NPL-11

$200,000

N/A

8. State acceptance

Will be evaluated after public comment period

9. Community acceptance

Will be evaluated after public comment period

| Fully meets criteria ~ Partially meets criteria EH Does not meet criteria * EPA's recommended alternative N/A = Not applicable

This table provides a comparison of the cleanup alternatives for NPL-11. The No Action alternative does not meet the criteria.
Alternatives 2 and 3 provide the best balance of nine criteria. EPA cannot select an alternative unless it is fully protective of human
health and the environment and compliant with the applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements.

-------
Cleanup alternatives - NPL-8

These are the alternatives for the NPL-8 Frontage Property:
Alternative lb - No Action

EPA always includes "No Action" as an alternative. The
estimated cost is $0.

Alternative 2b - Excavation, Backfill, Off-Site
Disposal of Soil Contaminated with Radium-226 and
Perched Water Collection

In this alternative, all contaminated soil would be
removed and disposed of in a licensed radioactive waste
landfill and replaced with clean dirt. In addition, pockets
of underground water would be treated or removed. The
estimated cost is $9.1 million.

Alternative 3b - Excavation, Backfill, Volume
Reduction, Off-Site Disposal of Soil Contaminated

with Radium-226 and Perched Water Collection

This would be essentially the same as Alternative 2b, but
the soil would be processed so that a reduced amount of
soil would be disposed of in a licensed radioactive waste
landfill. The estimated cost is $10.6 million.

Alternative 4b - Institutional Controls, Excavation of
Contaminated Soil to a Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground
Surface, Off-Site Disposal and Perched Water Collection

Similar to Alternative 2b, but future use would be
restricted to commercial/industrial uses with a system to
control radon gas. The estimated cost is $5.8 million.

Alternative 5b - Institutional Control, Excavation of
Contaminated Soil to a Depth of 10 Feet Below Ground
Surface, Volume Reduction, Off-Site Disposal and
Perched Water Collection

Similar to Alternative 3b, but future use would be restricted to
commercial/industrial uses with a system to control radon
gas. The estimated cost is $6.6 million.

Recommended Alternative for NPL-8 Frontage/
Alternative 4b

Excavation of contaminated soil to a depth of 10 feet,
off-site disposal and perched water collection, institution-
al controls with the option of using volume reduction or
the segmented gate system (Alternative 5b) if treatability
studies show that it is effective and if the remedial action
for the Frontage Property and NPL-8 landfill could be
conducted at the same time.

Comparison of Cleanup Alternatives for NPL-8

Evaluation of Criteria

Alternatives

4b*

1. Overall protection of human health and the environment

2. Compliance with ARARs

3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence

4. Reduction of toxicity, mobility or volume through treatment

5. Short-term effectiveness

6. Implementability

7. Cost (estimated)

$9,100,000

$10,650,000

$5,820,000

$6,600,000

8. State acceptance

Will be evaluated after public comment period

9. Community acceptance

Will be evaluated after public comment period

| Fully meets criteria Q Partially meets criteria | | Does not meet criteria * HI'. Vs recommended alternative

This table provides a comparison of the cleanup alternatives for the Frontage Property. The No action alternative does not meet the
nine criteria. Many of the other alternatives were equivalent when evaluated against the criteria. EPA eliminated alternatives 2b and
3 b because the additional cost did not provide significantly more benefits in the form ofprotection of health and land use. In addition,
the greater long-term effectiveness of complete removal in Alternatives 2b and 3b could be offset by engineering controls and other
long-term operation and maintenance measures. EPA belie\>es that Alternative 4b or 5b would protect human health while providing
for fairly unrestricted use, except for a few small areas where buildings could not be located without radon reduction equipment being
installed. EPA cannot select an alternative unless it is fully protective of human health and the environment and compliant with
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements.

-------
Comment Sheet

EPA is interested in your comments on the proposed cleanup alternatives. The Agency will consider public comments
before selecting a final cleanup remedy for the Ottawa Radiation Areas Site. You may use the space below to write your
comments, then fold and mail this form. Comments must be postmarked by August 18, 2003. Comments may also be
sent via e-mail to Joe Munoz at munoz.joe@epa.gov.

Optional information

Name	

Affiliation	

Address	

City	State	Zip

5

-------
Place
First Class
Postage
Here

Joe Munoz

Community Involvement Coordinator
Office of Public Affairs (P-19J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.

Chicago, IL 60604-3590

-------
Soil is excavated at NPL-8 to initiate the treatability study.

The segmented gate system is loaded with soil from NPL-8:
The system detects contamination and sorts the soil per
cleanup standards.

Equipment for the segmented gate system is set-up on-site.

For more information



If you have questions or would like additional information about the Ottawa Radiation Areas Superiund Site, please

write or call:



Joe Munoz

Community Involvement Coordinator
Office of Public Affairs (P-19J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.

Chicago, IL 60604-3590

Denise Boone
Remedial Project Manager
Office of Superfund (SR-6J)
EPA Region 5
77 W. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3590

phone: (312) 886-7935

(800) 621-8431 ext. 67935
— 7 a.m.- 4:30 p.m., weekdays

phone: (312) 886-6217

(800) 621-8431 ext. 66217
— 7 a.m.- 4:30 p.m., weekdays

fax: (312) 353-1155
e-mail: munoz.joe||epa.gov

fax: (312) 886-4071 or
(312)353-5541

e-mail: boone .denise@epa.gov

7

-------
The next step

EPA will consider all public comments submitted during the comment period before choosing a final plan for these
sites. EPA will provide a written response to comments in its final cleanup decision, called a record of decision.
EPA will announce the decision in a newspaper ad in local newspapers.

EPA Web site

This fact sheet, previous fact sheets and other site doc-
uments can be found on the following EPA Web site:

http://epa.gov/region5/sites/ottawa/

Information repository

If you would like to learn more about EPA's proposed
cleanup, or about the Ottawa Radiation Areas Site in
general, please see the site files in the information
repository, located at the Reddick Library,

1010 Canal St., Ottawa.

seajv Z JOJ suo;ido sasodojd ue|«j dnueaio
=SV3UV NOIIVIQVU VMV110

st>t>o-aeo

jaded papAoay uo paonpojday ©

00£$ 9Sf| aiBAUd jo; Aieued

sseuisng ibioijjo

06S£"t?0909 II 'o6eo!i|o
¦pAia uos>per m LL
g uo|69y

Aoua6v uouoajojd lejuaiuuoJiAU^ sn

(r6L"d) sJjBjjv oiiqnd jo eo^o

yd

-------