Site Background. Libby is a community in northwestern Montana located 7 miles southwest of a vermiculite mine that operated from the 1920s until 1990. The mine began limited operations in the 1920s and was operated on a larger scale by the X.X. Xxxxx Company from approximately 1963 to 1990. Studies revealed that the vermiculite from the mine contains amphibole-type asbestos, referred to as Libby amphibole (LA). Epidemiological studies revealed that workers at the mine had an increased risk of developing asbestos-related lung disease (McDonald et al. 1986, Xxxxxxx and Xxxxxxx 1987, Xxxxxxx et al. 1987, Xxxxxxxx 2007). Additionally, radiographic abnormalities were observed in 17.8 percent of the general population of Xxxxx including former workers, family members of workers, and individuals with no specific pathway of exposure (Xxxxxxx et al. 2003). Although the mine has ceased operations, historic or continuing releases of LA from mine-related materials could be serving as a source of on-going exposure and risk to current and future residents and workers in the area. The Site was listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) in October 2002.
Site Background. Current LFG System Existing LFG extraction xxxxx Existing LFG collection system Existing LFG blower/flare facilities Landfill Expansion/Filling Sequence Plans . LFG Production Rate Estimates . Future LFG System Designs County of Santa Solid Waste Service@ Extraction xxxxx Collection system Blower/flare facilities Future LFG System Installation Sequencing Plan LFG System Installation/Construction Guidelines . LFG to Energy Plans In preparing the master plan, several alternative LFG extraction systems will be analyzed. Both vertical and horizontal extraction well designs will be evaluated, as well as, the appropriate placement criteria for proper installation of each type. Concurrent with the work effort regarding extraction xxxxx, various types of typical LFG control facilities and collection system details will be identified. These system details will then be compared for such factors as: • Technical effectiveness; • Reliability and history of operation; • Ease of operations and maintenance (O&M); • Cost of initial installation and O&M; and • Compatibility with existing control systems and mitigation measures. Once this evaluation is complete, a selection matrix will be prepared. This matrix will compare the well design types and collection system details to specific site conditions and designs that will be applicable to future phases of landfill expansion. It will match the type, size and configuration of each phase or module to the appropriate type of landfill gas control or recovery methodology required. It would also include such items as calculations of expected landfill gas production rates for each phase, and tables summarizing the expected installation sequencing of the various system components over time. Utilizing the matrix tool described above, the installation/construction guidelines for the LFG system will be developed. These detailed guidelines will allow County staff to anticipate, identify, and install the appropriate extraction well type and collection system components, as they are needed over the life of the site operations. The installation guidelines will include information on extraction well siting/placement considerations, system design details, material requirements, equipment selections, and brief discussions of applicable installation/construction procedures. A future construction schedule consisting of system installation milestones that are coordinated with, and based upon the landfill expansion plans and waste filling pattern...
Site Background. 2. The Discharger owns the property at 0000 Xxxxx Xxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx of Orange (Site). Until 1987, the Site was owned by Xx. Xxxxxxxx XxXxxxxxx. When Xx. XxXxxxxxx passed away, the Site was transferred to the XxXxxxxxx Trust where it was held until the Discharger acquired the Site in 2002.
Site Background. On October 15, 2012, one of 98 storage bunkers at Explo Systems Inc. site exploded prompting investigations by the EPA, LDEQ, the Louisiana State Police, and other responders. The explosion shattered windows in the City of Minden, Louisiana (approximately 4 miles to the northeast), and generated a 7,000-foot mushroom cloud. Explo Systems was under contract with the Department of Army to demilitarize surplus munitions. The State Police found 10 million pounds of unsecured M6 (howitzer gunpowder) improperly stored outside of the bunkers and 8 million pounds of a variety of other explosives improperly stored inside bunkers. To keep the residents safe due to the potential risk, the town of Doyline, Louisiana (approximately 400 homes), was evacuated during operational hours from November 28 to December 7, 2013. In addition, the Youth Challenge Program (school) and non-essential personnel at Camp Minden were evacuated. The Webster Parish Jail at Camp Minden followed shelter-in-place procedures. The State Police directed Explo Systems, Inc., to temporarily secure the M6 in available bunkers. This was completed in May 2013. In August 2013, Explo Systems Inc. declared bankruptcy and the Louisiana Military Department took ownership of the explosives at the site. EPA then initiated negotiations with all potentially responsible parties to eliminate the risks posed by the 18 million pounds of M6 and other explosives culminating in the October 28, 2014 Agreement.
Site Background. This section provides the Site background information. It describes the location and setting of the Site, presents the regulatory history, and summarizes the results of the RI.
Site Background. The Site includes a former smelter facility located in the City of Pueblo, Pueblo County, Colorado, and the surrounding community which was contaminated with lead and arsenic from smelting operations. The Colorado Smelter (also known as the Colorado Smelting Company and the Xxxxxx Smelter) was one of five smelters in Pueblo at the turn of the last century. The Colorado Smelter processed silver-lead ore from the Monarch Pass area and operated from 1883 to 1908. The Colorado Smelter merged with the Pueblo Smelter as the American Smelting and Refining Company (ASARCO) in 1899. The Colorado Smelter closed in 1908. While most of the historical smelter structures were torn down in 1909, portions of the facility’s foundation and waste piles still exist. The Site is organized into two geographic operable units. Operable Unit 1 (OU1) consists of community properties within an approximate one-half mile radius surrounding the former smelter facility, an area encompassing approximately 700 acres. There are approximately 2,030 residential parcels and another 200 parcels within OU1, including vacant properties, commercial businesses, schools, parks, and city- owned alleys and rights-of-way. Operable Unit 2 (OU2) consists of an approximately 700,000 square- foot (16-acres) slag pile and several more acres that overlie the former smelter footprint. There is a wetland on OU2, and surface water drains through OU2 via stormwater conveyances through the wetland and into the Arkansas River. In May 2014, EPA proposed listing the Site on the NPL. Thereafter, also in 2014, EPA initiated a removal action that included posting no trespassing and caution signs around the former smelter area to raise community awareness about the presence of heavy metals and warn people about the potential health risk from walking through that area. On December 11, 2014, EPA finalized the listing and added the Site to the NPL. In 2016 and 2017, EPA began to address residential properties with high levels of lead dust inside individual homes. Between June 2016 and July 2018, EPA performed twenty-seven emergency indoor dust cleanups. In addition, in December 2018, EPA performed seven additional priority indoor cleanups. Also, during December 2017, EPA completed a time-critical removal action at Xxxxxxxx Xxxx to cleanup arsenic and cadmium contamination found a foot or more beneath the eastern play area. Shortly after the NPL listing was finalized, EPA initiated a remedial investigation/feasibility stud...
Site Background. The site is located along the lower reach of the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon, and extends from approximately river mile 1.9 to 11.8. While the site is extensively industrialized, it is within a region characterized by commercial, residential, recreational, and agricultural uses. Land use along the lower Willamette River in the site includes marine terminals, manufacturing, other commercial operations, public facilities, parks, and open spaces. The State of Oregon owns certain submerged and submersible lands underlying navigable and tidally influenced waters. The ownership of submerged and submersible lands is complicated and has changed over time. This lower reach was once a shallow, meandering portion of the Willamette River but has been redirected and channelized via filling and dredging. A federally maintained navigation channel, extending nearly bank-to-bank in some areas, doubles the natural depth of the river and allows transit of large ships into the active harbor. Much of the river bank contains overwater piers and berths, port terminals and slips, and other engineered features. While a series of dams in the upper Willamette River watershed moderate’s fluctuations of flow in the lower portions of the river, flooding still occurs approximately every 20 years, with the last occurring in 1996. Armoring to stabilize banks covers approximately half of the harbor shoreline, which is integral to the operation of activities that characterize Portland Harbor. Riprap is the most common bank- stabilization measure. However, upland bulkheads and rubble piles are also used to stabilize the banks. Seawalls are used to control periodic flooding as most of the original wetlands bordering the Willamette in the Portland Harbor area have been filled. Some river bank areas and adjacent parcels have been abandoned and allowed to revegetate, and beaches have formed along some modified shorelines due to relatively natural processes. Development of the river has resulted in major modifications to the ecological function of the lower Willamette River. However, several species of invertebrates, fishes, birds, amphibians, and mammals, including some protected by the Endangered Species Act, use habitats that occur within and along the river. The river is also an important rearing site and pathway for migration of anadromous fishes, such as salmon and lamprey. Various recreational fisheries, including salmon, bass, sturgeon, crayfish, and others, are active within the...
Site Background. The Dakhue Sanitary Landfill (Landfill) is located in Dakota County, Hampton Township (T113N, R18W, Sect. 24), received its first permit to accept waste on 10/1/71, and continued operating until 5/1/88. Figure 1 shows the location of this facility. In accordance with the legislation enacted in 1992, (Minn. Laws 1992, Ch. 513, Art. 2, Sec. 2, Subd.3), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) assessed and classified closed landfills in Minnesota. According to that assessment and classification, the Dakhue Sanitary Landfill was given a ranking of D and a score of 8.01 This classification was revised to a ranking of B and a score of 11 in 1997 due to some concerns regarding off fill migration of landfill gas and the potential need for further remedial actions. This concern is discussed below (II.C.). On June 28, 1991, a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed for the Operable Unit one (source control). This action provided for a final cover system consisting of a gas control layer, a synthetic (HDPE) barrier layer over the waste, a drainage layer, topsoil cover and vegetation. The construction of this cover was completed in 1992. The ROD for the Operable Unit two (groundwater) included Institutional Controls contained in Dakota County Ordinance No. 114 and Minnesota Rules 4725.2000 and 4725.4300 that restrict well development. Also included in this ROD was a long-term groundwater monitoring program to:
Site Background. The mine has historical roots of operation dating from as early as 1904 to the present. Early mining began on the west side of the Pend Oreille River. Mining on the east side of the river, at the current site, took place from 1952 until closure of the mine in 1977. Various owners operated the facility until 1996 when Cominco American Incorporated acquired it. In 2001, Cominco American Incorporated changed its name to Teck Cominco American Incorporated and reopened the mine in 2004 for production. Teck Cominco American Incorporated remains the current owner and operator. Purpose of Mining The purpose of mining at the site is to remove ore-bearing rock from the underground mine and process it in facilities above ground. Zinc and lead are the primary metals recovered in the mining process and sold for economic benefit. Publication No. 00-00-000 If you require this publication in an alternate format please call Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx at 000-000-0000 or call 711 or 0-000-000-0000 (TTY) Page 1 Tailings Disposal Facilities During ore processing and metal extraction a fine material is produced called tailings. Historically, tailings were discharged directly into the Pend Oreille River until 1967. Since 1967 three areas have been used to store mine tailings at the site. These storage areas are called Tailings Disposal Facilities (TDF) 1, 2 and 3 (see Figures 1 & 2). TDF-1 and 2 cover approximately 49 acres and are located northwest of the Pend Oreille Mine Golf Course and east of the Pend Oreille River. Both TDF-1 and 2 are located on Pend Oreille Mine property owned by Teck Cominco American Incorporated and are no longer active. TDF-3 is about 20 acres in size and is currently covered by a new facility where tailings are stored. TDF 1 and 2 are the focus of the RI/FS. TDF-3 will be addressed in the future when the mine is closed. What Happens Next Ecology will review the comments submitted about the Agreed Order for the RI/FS and provide a written response called a Responsiveness Summary. The summary will be sent to those who commented and will also be available in the locations listed in the box on page one. If applicable, modifications will be made to the Agreed Order. After the RI/FS is completed, a report containing the findings will be made available to the public for comment. The report is expected by the end of 2005. . Figure 1 Figure 2 General Site Location Map Facility Location Map
Site Background. (Compendium Sections 5, 6, and 7) The analysis of the existing Site details must be included in the FSP. This analysis shall include a conceptual site model (“CSM”) that describes the Site and surrounding areas, discusses known and suspected contaminant sources, characterizes the state and transport of contaminants, identifies potential exposure pathways and likely receptors (human and ecological), and includes other information regarding the physical and chemical conditions that may affect contamination at the Site. The FSP shall also include descriptions of specific data gaps and ways in which SRI sampling is designed to fill those gaps.
