Spectron Superfund Site Proposed Plan Contaminated Shallow Soils

1
Spectron Superfund SiteProposed
PlanContaminated Shallow Soils

• U.S. EPA Region III
• June 26, 2003
• Philadelphia, PA

Robert J. Sanchez US EPA - Remedial Project
Manager
2
Meeting Agenda

• Superfund Process
• Participants
• Site History
• Cleanup Action History
• Elements of the Proposed Plan
• Next Steps

3
Superfund Process

• Investigation
• How much contamination?
• Where is the contamination?
• What are the conditions on-Site?
• What are the risks?
• Feasibility Study
• How can we clean this up?
• Possible Alternatives

4
EPA's Superfund Process
Prelim. Assessment/ Site Inspection/ HRS Scoring
Notification/ Site Discovery
Removal Assessment
REMOVAL
REMEDIAL
Sites in the Remedial Program may be referred to
the Removal Program at any time, and vice versa.
Removal Action
No Action
No Action
Proposal to NPL
Proposed Plan
(Finalized on NPL)
Remedial Investigation
Feasibility Study
Record of Decision
(if finalized on NPL)
Remedial Action
Proposed Deletion
Remedial Design
Operation Maintenance
Deleted from NPL
Community Involvement and Enforcement take place
throughout the Superfund Process. Public comment
is solicited at Proposal to NPL, Proposed Plan,
and Proposed Deletion.
5
Proposed Plan

• EPAs Recommended Cleanup Method or
• the Preferred Alternative
• Subject to change based on comments
• Your comments and concerns?
• Be heard today
• Write or email us before August 20, 2003
• Final Cleanup Determination
• Record of Decision (ROD)

6
Participants

• Federal Government
• US Environmental Protection Agency
• US Fish and Wildlife
• Agency for Toxic Substances
  and Disease Registry ("ATSDR").
• State Government
• Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE),
• Potential Responsible Parties (PRPs)
• Local Governments and
• The Public

7
Historical Background1881 1954 Kenmore Paper
Mills
8
Spectron Superfund Site1961 1988 Galaxy
Chemicals/Spectron, Inc.
Contaminants of Concerns
Solvents Trichloroethene("TCE") and
Perchloroethene ("PCE")
9
Spectron Superfund Site1989 EPA Begins Removal
Action
10
Historic Cleanup Actions

• 500,000 gals of flammable chemicals removed
• Residential Well Sampling Program Started
• Ground water containment system Installed
• Contaminated Shallow Soil Operable Unit 1
• Contaminated Bedrock Operable Unit 2

11
Residential Well Sampling Program

• Responsible Parties agreed to pay cost of
  sampling your wells.
• Over 5 years of sampling wells.
• Continues to meet drinking water standards.
• Sampling will continue.

12
Ground Water Containment System

• March 2000 - Startup of ground water containment
  system.
• Treats 40,000 gallons of contaminated ground
  water per day.
• Levels dropped significantly in Creek
• IT DOES NOT SMELL ANYMORE!!!

13
Ground Water Containment System
14
Ground Water Containment System
15
Little Elk Creek Contaminant Levels
16
Mass Removal of Contaminates
17
Operable Unit 1 (Phase 1) Shallow Soil
Contamination

• OU 1 Includes
• Ground water containment system
• Plant area soils (approx 7 acres)
• Soil down to the bedrock (4ft to 15 ft deep)
• OU 2 Includes
• Office Area
• Bedrock
• Ground water (off-site)
• Residential wells/Creek

18
Operable Unit 1 Coverage Plant Area down to
Bedrock
19
Power House (existing)
SOIL OPERABLE UNIT 1
BEDROCK OPERABLE UNIT 2
20
Proposed Plan Common Elements

• Ground water containment, collection and
  treatment system
• Demolish all old structures
• Re-Grade Site
• Deed Notices not to build
• or drill a well

21
Proposed Plan Alternatives

• Alt
• 1. No Action
• 2. Phytoremediation (Trees) soil cover
• 3. Sub-surface treatment and an
• engineered plastic cap
• 4. Excavation hot spots with off-site disposal,
  
• and a soil cover
• 5. Soil Vapor Extraction (vacuum)
• with plastic cap

22
EPAs Preferred Alternative Sub-surface
treatment and an engineered plastic cap

• Ground Water Containment System
• Continue to meet Water Quality Criteria in Creek
• Sub-Surface Treatment of contamination
• Treats contamination - residual DNAPL
• Engineered Protective Cover (Plastic Cap)
• Prevent current or future direct contact
• Institutional Controls
• Prevent current and future
• use of ground water

23
EPAs Preferred Alternative Sub-surface
treatment and an engineered plastic cap

• WHY THIS ALTERNATIVE?
• Provides sub-surface treatment
• Provides protective barrier between people and
  contamination
• Prevents wash-outs due to floods
• Helps minimizes flow to system
• Less disruptive to community
• Standard Construction methods
• Cost effective

24
Preferred Alternative Sub-surface treatment and
Engineered Cap
25
Drip Track
26
Next Steps

• End of Comment Period Aug 20, 2003
• Issue Final Cleanup Plan ROD Sept 30
• Consent Decree negotiations
• Remedial Design How to build it
• Remedial Action Construction Start-up

27
EPA Contacts

• Robert Sanchez,
• Remedial Project Manager
• [phone] sanchez.robert_at_epa.gov
• Carrie Deitzel,
• Community Involvement Coordinator
• [phone] deitzel.Carrie_at_epa.gov

28
For more info, check out the EPAs Spectron Web
Site

• http//epa.gov/reg3hwmd/super/MD/spectron

End of slides. Thank you for coming.
29
Alternative Cost Summary
O M costs include 360K for Ground Water
Containment System operation