2008 Record of Decision West Lake Landfill Community Dialogue - - PDF document

2008 Record of Decision

West Lake Landfill Community Dialogue Framework April 18, 2016

Terrie Boguski, Skeo Solutions

TASC

• Technical Assistance Services for

Communities (TASC)

• Provides non-advocacy,

independent technical assistance

2

Agenda

• Superfund remedial process at West

Lake Landfill

• 2006 Feasibility Study (FS)
• 2008 Record of Decision (ROD)
• Preferred Remedy Conceptual Design

3

Operable Unit-1 Areas Operable Unit-2 Areas

!oww.-

800

I

SCALE IN FEET

Figure 2

Facility Layout

West Lake Landfill Superfund Site

EMS I

Engineering Management Support, Inc.

West Lake Landfill

4

Superfund Remedial Process

5

Superfund Process

Discovery Assessment Cleanup Decision Cleanup Post-Cleanup Activities Removal Actions Can Occur at Anytime in the Process.

6

West Lake Landfill Assessment

• 2000-2006: Remedial

Investigation & Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

• 2008: Record of Decision

(ROD)

• 2008-2011: Supplemental

Feasibility Study

• 2011-2016: Final Feasibility

Study

Assessment

7

2006 Feasibility Study (FS)

8

FS Evaluation Criteria

• Threshold
• 1. Overall

Protection of Human Health and the Environment

• 2. Compliance

with ARARs

• Balancing
• 3. Long-Term

Effectiveness and Permanence

• 4. Reduction of

Toxicity, Mobility,

• r Volume
• 5. Short-Term

Effectiveness

• 6. Implementability
• 7. Cost

9

FS Evaluation Criteria

• Modifying
• 8. State Acceptance
• 9. Community Acceptance

10

2006 FS Cleanup Alternatives

Alternative

• 1. No Action
• 2. Cover Repair and Maintenance, Additional Access Restrictions,

Additional Institutional Controls, Monitoring

• 3. Soil Cover to Address Gamma Exposure and Erosion Potential
• 4. Regrading of Areas 1 and 2 (minimum slope of 2%), Installation
• f a Subtitle D Cover System
• 5. Regrading of Areas 1 and 2 (minimum slope of 5%), Installation
• f a Subtitle D Cover System
• 6. Excavation of Material with Higher Levels of Radioactivity from

Area 2 and Regrading, Installation of a Subtitle D Cover System

11

2008 Record of Decision (ROD)

12

2008 Record of Decision

• Specifies:
• Preferred remedy
• Major remedy components
• Preferred remedy conceptual design

13

Preferred Remedy

• Alternative 4 (below), plus moving

contaminated material from the Buffer Zone/Crossroads property and consolidating it under Areas 1 and 2 landfill covers

Regrading of Radiological Areas 1 and 2 (minimum slope of 2%), Installation of a Subtitle D Cover System

14

Major Remedy Components

• Landfill cover with enhancements (armoring layer

and radon barrier)

• Consolidation of radiologically contaminated

surface soil from Ford property to containment area

• Groundwater monitoring
• Surface water runoff control
• Gas monitoring and control, including radon and

decomposition gas as necessary

• Institutional controls to prevent inappropriate land

and resource uses

• Long-term surveillance and maintenance

15

Preferred Remedy Conceptual Design

16

Buffer Zone Area 2 Inactive Area Demolition Final Surface Landfill

490 - Approximate 490 Flood Surface 480 - (Protected 480 by Levees) 470 - 470 460 - 460 450 450 440 - Top of Alluvium

j- 440

Water Table 430

1- 430

Monitoring 420 - Zone

• 420

Alluvium

410 -

1- 410

Intermediate 400 - Monitoring

• 400

I

Zone 390 -

• 390

~ ~

I Deep

340 -

~

Monitoring

Alluvium

• 340

Zone 330

Limestone

330

2008 WLL ROD Conceptual Design

17

=

~

• ENGINEERED LANDFILL COVER DETAIL

NOT TO SCALE

EroslonNegetatlve Layer Topsoil

• -----.--

Infiltration Layer Low Permeability Soil (<1x10--S em/sec) Bio-lntrusion/Marker Layer Crushed Concrete or Rock (6" Diameter Max) Waste & Fill

5

2008 ROD Landfill Cap Design

feet

18

Radiation and Cap Thickness

2 feet cap thickness

10,000 1,000 100 10 1 0.1

4 feet cap thickness

19

Summary

20

Community Concerns about 2008 ROD

• Level of protectiveness for nearby

residents

• Protection of groundwater
• Protection from natural disasters
• Flooding
• Earthquakes
• Tornados
• Protection from radon and other

potential airborne contamination

21

What Has Changed Since 2008?

• EPA heard community concerns
• In response to public comments and

concerns, EPA tasked the PRPs to collect additional data to better characterize the location and volume of RIM

• This new data will allow for thorough

evaluation of all 3 alternatives: cap in place, partial excavation, full excavation

22

Future

• Once EPA proposes a final remedy,

the public will have an opportunity to comment

23

Questions and Next Steps

24

CONTACT INFORMATION

TASC Technical Assistance Provider Terrie Boguski, PE (913) 780-3328 tboguski@skeo.com

25