Lower Genesee River (OU-5 of the Eastman Business Park) Corrective - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lower Genesee River (OU-5 of the Eastman Business Park) Corrective Action Development

February 12, 2020

Introductions

▪ NYSDEC

• Lisa A. Gorton, P.E. – Project Manger

▪ Parsons

• Matthew Vetter – Technical Lead

▪ Ramboll

• Michael Rondinelli – Ecological Specialist

2

Objectives

▪ Review Site Location and History ▪ Review of Remedial Investigation Findings ▪ Review Corrective Measure Study Alternatives and Proposed Remedy

• Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs)
• River Based Alternatives – Preferred Alternative
• Wetland Based Alternatives – Preferred Alternative

▪ Next Steps ▪ Questions and Comments

3

Site Location - Regional Overview

4

Site Location – Proposed Remediation Areas

Site Location - Study Area Overview

Shumway Marine Turning Point Basin/Nav Channel Kings Landing Wastewater Treatment Plant (KLWWTP)

6

Site History

▪ Kodak Eastman Business Park constructed in 1891

• Manufactured film, paper, synthetic organic chemicals, and dyes
• 2012 bankruptcy/facility reorganization

▪ Kings Landing Wastewater Treatment Plant (KLWWTP)

• In operation since 1957
• Upgraded in 1970s (Clean Water Act)
• Wastewater generated from film/paper process
• Currently operated by RED Rochester

7

Study Area Characterization

8

RCRA Facility Investigation River Sampling Activities

▪ River sediment, surface water, CSO sediment sampling ▪ River bottom mapping

• Bathymetry
• Side-scan sonar

▪ Biological tissue sampling

• Mussels
• Forage, benthic, and predatory fish

▪ Benthic community assessment ▪ Sediment toxicity testing ▪ Hydrodynamic and sediment transport modeling

9

RCRA Facility Investigation Wetland/Floodplain Sampling Activities

▪ Surface and subsurface wetland sediment/floodplain soil sampling ▪ Characterization of cover types ▪ Habitat and flora/fauna characterization ▪ Rare, threatened, and endangered species assessment

10

RCRA Facility Investigation Reporting

11

RCRA Facility Investigation River Characterization

12

▪ Ten sediment transects (T1 – T10)

• Sediment
• Sediment toxicity
• Benthic macroinvertebrate community

▪ Five surface water transects ▪ Five fish tissue sampling reaches ▪ Three benthic macroinvertebrate (mussel) tissue transects (T4 – T6)

RFI Key Findings - River Characterization

▪ Nature and Extent of Contamination

• Silver – Primary contaminant of concern for river and

wetland sediments

• Multiple exceedances of NYSDEC Class C SGVs
• Silver in surface water present in suspended solids

▪ Geochronology core analysis – peak sediment concentrations buried ▪ Hydrodynamic and sediment transport modeling

• Widespread erosion unlikely even under Hurricane

Agnes event

• Sediments subject to high shear stress under elevated

flow conditions

• Potential for scour highest along western shoreline

13

RFI Key Findings - River Sediment Silver Concentrations

14

RFI Key Findings - River Evaluation of Potential Impacts to Human Health/Environment

▪ Qualitative Human Health Exposure Assessment

• Primary current and anticipated future use is

passive recreation

• Silver not identified as a contaminant of

concern for human health

15

▪ Fish and Wildlife Resources Impact Analysis

• Sediment toxicity testing – silver up to 69 mg/kg does not result in toxicity to mussels
• Mussel tissue

RFI Key Findings - River Evaluation of Potential Impacts to Human Health/Environment

▪ Fish and Wildlife Resources Impact Analysis

• Fish tissue
• Food chain modeling

16

Substrate Invertebrates Fish Dosediet Dosesubstrate Silver 6.4 49.5 0.26 0.19 0.44 0.0 0.44 6.02 <1 119 <1 River Otter Dose (mg/kg bw-day) Diet Total Dose TRVNOAEL HQNOAEL Maximum Invertebrate Tissue Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)1 TRV (mg/kg bw-day) TRVLOAEL HQLOAEL Analyte Maximum Fish Tissue Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)1 Substrate Invertebrates Fish Dosediet Dosesubstrate Silver 6.4 49.5 1.56 0.81 2.37 0.0 2.37 2.02 1.2 61.1 <1 Belted Kingfisher Dose (mg/kg bw-day) Diet Total Dose TRVNOAEL HQNOAEL Maximum Invertebrate Tissue Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)1 TRV (mg/kg bw-day) TRVLOAEL HQLOAEL Analyte Maximum Fish Tissue Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)1

RFI Key Findings - River Evaluation of Potential Impacts to Human Health/Environment

17

▪ Fish and Wildlife Resources Impact Analysis

• Benthic community assessment

RFI Key Findings Wetlands/Floodplain Evaluation

▪ Exceedances of Class C SGV for silver at many locations in upper 1 foot ▪ Maximum concentration at FP-07 ▪ Highest concentrations at depth ▪ FWRIA – Plant community robust; limited exceedances of silver Eco-SSLs

18

RCRA Facility Assessment Conclusions

▪ Significant human health exposures to silver are unlikely ▪ Highest silver in sediment observed at and downstream of the KLWWTP (T-07 and T-06) ▪ Potential for localized impacts in mussels and forage fish downstream of KLWWTP ▪ Elevated silver in Wetland C sediments ▪ Peak silver buried in river and wetland sediments ▪ Corrective Measures Study (CMS) warranted

19

CMS - Summary of Supplemental Sampling

▪ Additional sediment sampling conducted at 57 river and 91 wetland locations ▪ Waste characterization and porewater sampling conducted in highest concentration areas ▪ Geotechnical analysis of sediment/soil samples ▪ Refinement of hydrodynamic and sediment transport model ▪ Monitoring of water levels to obtain long- term water elevation data at multiple locations along river ▪ Ice impact study

20

Considerations For Development of Alternatives

▪ Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs)

• Reduce and stabilize areas with the potential for exposure

▪ Silver – Primary contaminant of concern

• Other contaminants not attributable to Kodak discharge and documented in relatively low

frequency and low concentrations (similar to background)

▪ Clean-up Objectives

• Several criteria evaluated for applicability
• Action Levels vs Guidance Values

▪ Scour Potential

• Remedial boundaries applied in areas where Silver concentration levels exceeded action

levels (at all depths) in primary scour potential zones (>10 cm (~4 in) scour)

▪ Alternatives developed separately for river and wetland sediments

21

Remedial Action Objectives

▪ Prevent ingestion and/or direct contact with contaminated soil and sediments ▪ Prevent migration of contaminants that would result in groundwater or surface water contamination ▪ Prevent impacts to biota form ingestion/direct contact with soil or sediment causing toxicity ▪ Prevent released from contaminant(s) in sediment that would result in surface water levels in excess of ambient water quality standards

22

Ecological Media Cleanup Standards

▪ NYSDEC Freshwater Sediment Guidance Values and Soil Cleanup Objectives ▪ Site-Specific Action Levels Evaluated:

• 30 ppm – Wetland Sediment
• 100 ppm – River Sediments

▪ Selected Site-Specific Action Level:

• 70 ppm – Site-Specific Toxicity-Based

23

Corrective Measures Study Alternatives – River

▪ R1 – No Action ▪ R2 – Monitored Natural Recovery (MNR)

• Ongoing and naturally occurring processes with periodic monitoring

▪ R3 – Dredging and capping riverbed areas exceeding 100 ppm action level ▪ R4 – Dredging and capping riverbed areas exceeding 70 ppm action level ▪ R5 – Dredging and capping riverbed all primary scour areas ▪ R6 – Riverwide Alternatives

24

Remedial Areas

Proposed Recommended Alternative – River (R4B)

▪ Remedial boundaries near KLWWTP and adjacent to Wetland D

• ~4 acre removal area
• Dredging of top 2 feet
• 20,400 CY removal

▪ Installation of isolation cap

• Stabilizes areas exceeding 70

ppm within primary scour areas

▪ Long-term monitoring

26

River Area 1 River Area 2

Conceptual Cap Design

▪ Includes habitat, erosion protection, and chemical isolation layers ▪ Additional evaluations will be completed during the design to determine thickness and composition of each layer

• Anticipated total thickness: 2.5 ft

Isolation Cap (River Areas 1 and 2)

Fine gravel Sand

27

Erosion Protection Layer Habitat Layer Chemical Isolation Layer Underlying Sediment

Corrective Measures Study Alternatives – Wetland

▪ W1- No Action ▪ W2- Monitored Natural Recovery

• Ongoing and naturally occurring processes with periodic monitoring

▪ W3 – Excavation and backfill areas exceeding 70 ppm action level ▪ W4 – Excavation and backfill areas exceeding 30 ppm action level ▪ W5 – Excavation and backfill all Wetland areas

28

Proposed Recommended Alternative – Wetland (W3)

▪ Remedial boundaries in Wetland C

• 2-acre removal area
• Excavation of top 2 ft
• 8,200 CY removal
• Excavation based on Site-Specific Toxicity-Based

Goal (>70 ppm)

▪ Backfill and restoration to facilitate habitat enhancement ▪ Long-term monitoring

29

Wetland C

Summary of Preferred Remedy

▪ Dredging

• ~ 20,000 CY River Based Removal
• ~ 8,000 CY Wetland C Removal

▪ Capping in river areas ▪ Backfill in wetland areas ▪ Restoration

• Placement of clean cover in the Wetland C
• Shoreline areas restored where disturbed to support staging and access to remedial areas

▪ Site Management

• Long-term monitoring
• Institutional controls

30

Why is this the preferred alternative?

▪ Minimizes potential for exposure ▪ Facilitates natural recovery throughout the system ▪ Maintains current river bathymetry and flow dynamics ▪ Minimizes disruption to public access areas during corrective action ▪ No significant implementability issues

31

Recent Developments and Next Steps

▪ Final Statement of Basis Issued January 2020 ▪ Design, Permitting, Procurement and Construction: 2020 – 2022

32

Where to Find Information

▪ NYSDEC – Eastman Kodak Business Park (Kodak) Website:

• https://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/97804.html
• File transfer service available

▪ Document Repositories available:

• Avon – NYSDEC Region 8 Office (by appointment)
• Maplewood Library – 1111 Dewey Avenue
• Greece Public Library – 2 Vince Tofany Boulevard
• Albany – NYSDEC Central Office

33

Thank you for attending Questions