Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund Site

Transcription

1 Explanation of Significant Differences Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund Site Borough of Ringwood Passaic County, New Jersey EPARegion2 April 2015 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) is to explain the changes made by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the final soil remedy selected for the Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund site in Under Section 117 (c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund), as amended, EPA is required to publish an ESD when, after issuance of a Record of Decision (ROD), subsequent enforcement or remedial actions lead to significant, but not fundamental, changes in the selected site remedy. Sections (c)(2)(i) and (a)(2) of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) set forth the criteria for issuing an ESD and requiring that an ESD be published if the remedy is modified in a way that differs significantly in either scope, performance, or cost from the remedy selected in the ROD for the site. This ESD presents the details ofepa's decision to change to a contingency remedy identified in the 2014 ROD. This ESD provides a brief history of the site, describes the original and contingency remedies, and explains how, subsequent to the finalization of the decision document, activities led to the change to the contingency remedy. EPA's June 2014 Operable Unit Two (OU2) ROD for the Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund site selected, among other things, the excavation and off-site disposal of an estimated 71,000 cubic yards of contaminated fill material from the 0'Connor Disposal Area (OCDA) (see Figure 1), placement of at least six inches of topsoil throughout the excavated area to enable revegetation ofthe OCDA, restoration of wetlands that would be disturbed during implementation of this remedy and groundwater monitoring in the OCDA until a groundwater remedy for the site is addressed in the Operable Unit Three (OU3) ROD. The OU2 ROD also called for implementation of Alternative 4A, Site Grading and Permeable Engineered Cap as a contingency remedy for the OCDA should the Borough of Ringwood advance its plans to use a portion of the OCDA as the Borough's recycling center and provided assurances that the recycling center would be constructed in a timely manner. This ESD serves to document EPA's decision to implement the contingency remedy for the OCDA. SUMMARY OF SITE HISTORY, CONTAMINATION PROBLEMS, AND SELECTED REMEDY The site is located in a historic iron mining district in the Borough of Ringwood, Passaic County, New Jersey. The site is approximately 500 acres in size and includes 48 residential properties, an inactive municipal landfill, abandoned mine shafts, filled mine pits, an industrial refuse disposal area, small surficial dumps, a municipal recycling center and a rugged, forested area within the Ringwood State Park. The site is drained by four brooks that

2 2 ultimately lead to the Wanaque Reservoir, which supplies drinking water to much of northern New Jersey. The residents in the immediate area of the site receive their water from municipal wells which are unaffected by the site. The land which comprises the site has been utilized for the mining of iron ore almost continuously from the mid-1700s to the early 1900s. From 1965 until about 1971, the site was used for the disposal of waste materials from Ford Motor Company's Mahwah facility, including cardboard and other packing materials, scrap car parts, paint sludge and scrap and dented drums containing hardened sealing and insulating material. Waste was disposed of in two former iron mining pits (Peter's Mine Pit and the Cannon Mine Pit) as well as a former mine tailing disposal area, now called the OCDA. The results of a July 1982 Site Inspection conducted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) identified levels of benzene, ethylbenzene, and xylene in water samples collected from the Peters Mine airshaft, which led to the Site's inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL) in From 1984 through 1988, Ford implemented a Remedial Investigation (RI), completed a Feasibility Study (FS) and removed over 7,000 cubic yards of paint sludge and associated soil from the Site. In September 1988, EPA issued a ROD which selected long-term monitoring of groundwater and surface water as the remedy for the site. The site was deleted from the NPL in 1994, with the presumption that all paint sludge and drums of hazardous substances had been removed from the site. The deletion was further supported by the determination that groundwater at the site did not pose an unacceptable threat to human health and the environment. In 1989,1995 and again in 1998, additional paint sludge was located at the site, prompting several additional removal actions by Ford. The site was restored to the NPL in September 2006, which was prompted by the discovery of additional significant quantities of paint sludge at the site. In 2005 and 2010, the Ford Motor Company entered into enforcement agreements with EP A which required the performance of an additional RI and FSs for the site. The site has been divided into four Areas of Concern (AOCs) as follows: Peters Mine Pit Area - includes waste, fill material and soil located in and immediately adjacent to the former Peters Mine Pit; Cannon Mine Pit Area - includes waste, fill material and soil located in and immediately adjacent to the former Cannon Mine Pit; O'Connor Disposal Area - includes waste, fill material and soil located in and immediately adjacent to the former mine tailing disposal area; and Site-Related Groundwater Contamination - includes any groundwater contamination resulting from disposal activities at the site. Based upon the results of an additional RIlFS, in June 2014, the OU2 ROD was signed which called for, among other things, the selection of Alternative 5A for the OCDA. Alternative 5A requires the excavation and off-site disposal of an estimated 71,000 cubic yards of contaminated fill material from the OCDA, placement of at least six inches of topsoil throughout the excavated area to enable revegetation of the OCDA, restoration of wetlands that would be disturbed during implementation of this remedy and groundwater monitoring in the OCDA until a groundwater remedy for the site is addressed in the OU3 ROD. In September 2013 the Borough of Ringwood, which owns the land that comprises the OCDA, provided plans to EPA for a new Borough recycling center in the OCDA. The Borough indicated that Alternative 4A, Site Grading and Permeable Engineered Cap, would be an alternative that would

3 3 be protective and compatible with this intended use. The Borough also noted that the capping called for in Alternative 4A would create a level area near the center of the OCDA, facilitating construction of the proposed recycling facility. The Borough further indicated that the new recycling facility would replace the existing recycling facility and that the existing recycling facility property would be converted to green space for use by the surrounding community. As discussed in the OU2 ROD, if the land use at the OCDA were to change so that a portion of the OCDA were to be reused as the Borough's recycling center, many ofepa's concerns that informed selection of the selected remedy, Alternative SA, would be addressed with respect to that reused portion. Among the primary reasons for EPA's selection ofthe selected remedy are concerns regarding the potential for unauthorized access to the area and associated damage to the cap which may result if a containment alternative was selected. However, under the Borough's proposal, the portion of the OCDA that would be used for the recycling facility would be capped with asphalt, which would mitigate concerns regarding damage to the cap. Furthermore, the routine presence of Borough employees at the recycling center would discourage unauthorized access to this property. The Borough has also communicated its view that the existing recycling facility property would be a better greenspace asset than the sloped property that would remain at the OCDA if the selected remedy were to be implemented. DESCRIPTION OF SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES AND THE BASIS FOR THOSE DIFFERENCES the recycling center; and (3) assurances and supporting documentation indicating that the construction of the contingency remedy, including the recycling center, can and will be completed within either a shorter or, at least within a comparable timeframe than it would take to implement the selected remedy, described above; and (B) EPA determines that the information and assurance( s) that the Borough has submitted to EPA, as described above, are sufficient to allow the contingency remedy to be implemented. On December 19, 2014, the Borough of Ringwood submitted documentation to EPA to attempt to demonstrate satisfaction of the aforementioned three conditions for selection of the contingency remedy. Documentation submitted by the Borough included, but was not limited to: (1) Ten drawings prepared by Engineering and Land Planning Associates, Inc., signed on December 12,2014, which provide detailed engineering plans for the new Borough recycling center; (2) A signed and notarized document entitled, "Declaration of Financial Assurance Relating to the Municipal Recycling Center at the Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund Site," dated December 18,2014. This document notes that Ford has reserved and committed $1.5 million to complete the construction of a new recycling center at the OCDA, should the contingency remedy be selected by EPA; and The OU2 ROD indicates that EP A would select the contingency remedy as the remedy for the OCDA and appropriately document the selection of the contingency remedy, if the following occurred: (3) A document entitled, "Ringwood Mines Draft Timeline Comparison for 0'Connor Disposal Area Alternatives 4A and SA," dated December 18,2014. This document estimates that construction of the selected remedy would take 524 days while construction of the contingency remedy and the new recycling center is estimated at 262 days. (A) The Borough provides EPA with the following within six months of the date of the OU2 ROD: (1) detailed engineering plans for the new recycling center; (2) financial assurance(s) indicating that sufficient funds will be available for construction of EPA has received and reviewed the materials submitted by the Borough of Ringwood and has determined that the information and assurances that the Borough submitted has satisfied the criteria set forth in the OU2 ROD to allow the contingency

4 4 remedy to be implemented. Therefore, EP A has selected the contingency remedy, as specified in the OU2 ROD, as the remedy to be implemented in the OCDA. The contingency remedy, as specified in the OU2 ROD, includes the following components: Consolidation of fill from the fringe areas of the OCDA to the center of this area to provide level land which would permit reuse of this area; Installation of a minimum two-foot thick engineered permeable soil cap over the consolidated fill materials, which will consist of a geotextile fabric, 18 inches of clean soil and six inches of top soil; Placement of six inches of clean fill in excavated areas beyond the engineered cap where soil/fill was removed for consolidation under the cap to ensure proper drainage and a suitable substrate for planting; Revegetation of the engineered soil cap and the surrounding fill areas; Restoration of wetlands in the OCDA which were disturbed during implementation of the selected remedy, in coordination with the NJDEP's Land Use Program; Implementation of engineering controls, such as the installation of fencing and the placement of boulders, to restrict access to the capped area; Implementation of institutional control(s), such as deed notice(s), to maintain the integrity of the cap; Long-term monitoring and maintenance of the capped area to ensure the integrity of the permeable cap; and Monitoring of groundwater quality in the OCDA until a groundwater remedy is selected for the site. SUPPORT AGENCY COMMENTS The NJDEP, after careful consideration of the contingency remedy, supports this ESD, since the contingency remedy is protective of human health and the environment, and because the Borough of Ringwood and Ford Motor Company have committed to restore the current location of the Borough Recycling Center to a natural, green space ecosystem of similar size and composition to the stream buffer zone that the OCDA currently occupies. FIVE-YEAR REVIEWS Because the selected remedy, as modified by this ESD, will result in hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining on-site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, a statutory review will be conducted within five years after initiation of the remedial action to ensure that the remedy is, or will be, protective of human health and the environment. AFFIRMATION OF STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS The EPA and NJDEP believe that the remedy, as modified, remains protective of human health and the environment, complies with federal and state requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate to this remedial action, and is costeffective. In addition, the modified remedy utilizes permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent practicable for this site. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES Pursuant to NCP (a)(2), this ESD will become part of the Administrative Record file for the site. The Administrative Record for the remedial decisions related to the site is available for public review at the following locations:

5 5 u.s. EPA Records Center, Region Broadway, 18th Floor. New York, New York (212) Hours: Monday-Friday - 9 am to 5 p.m., by appointment. Ringwood Public Library 30 Cannici Drive Ringwood, New Jersey Hours: Monday - Thurs. loam to 9pm, Friday loam - 5pm, Saturday loam - 4pm The EPA and NJDEP are making this ESD available to the public to inform them of the change made to the remedy. Should there be any questions regarding this ESD, please contact: Joseph Gowers Remedial Project Manager New Jersey Remediation Section u.s. Environmental Protection Agency 290 Broadway, 19th Floor New York, New York (212) gowers.joe@epa.gov With the publication of this ESD, the public participation requirements set out in (c)(2)(i) of the NCP have been met.

6

7 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION II DATE: SUBJECT: Issuance of an Explanation of Significant Differences to Implement a Contingency Remedy for the Ringwood Mines/Landfill Superfund Site, Ringwood, New Jersey FROM: Doug Garbarini, Chief New York Remediation Branch TO: Walter E. Mugdan, Director Emergency and Remedial Response Division Please find attached for your approval an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) for the Ringwood Mines/Landfill Site (Site), located in Ringwood, Passaic County, New Jersey. The June 30, 2014 Operable Unit Two Record of Decision (OU2 ROD) specifies criteria that need to be met in order to implement a contingency remedy for the O'Connor Disposal Area (OCDA) of the Site. EPA has reviewed documentation submitted by the Borough of Ringwood and has determined that this information satisfies the criteria specified in the OU2 ROD for implementation of the contingency remedy. Therefore, this ESD has been prepared to implement the contingency remedy for the OCDA. ac owledge your approval of the attached ESD by signing below. Walter E. Mugd Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division