1	CIC Meeting February 19, 2002
2	Global Settlement Issues Identified by Parties in December Meeting Four Issue Categories (Remedial, Cost, NRD, CD Amendment) Resolve Issues Concurrently EPA Developing Schedule
3	Neal’s Landfill Status Report for Water, Sediment and Fish Nearly Complete Sampling/Analysis of Fish in Conard’s Branch and Richland Creek Complete and Report Released Discussed Obtaining Information with Rogers Group Discussing Gas Vent Sampling Draft Treatability Study Results
4	Neal’s Landfill Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Required Under SOW Minor Issues Remain Before Approval Biweekly Influent Samples at Water Treatment Plant Monthly Grabs from North and South Spring PCBs/TSS
5	Neal’s Landfill Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Flow/Conductivity During Non-Storm Conditions Minimum of 1 Storm/Year >4000 gpm Branham and Taylor Springs Semi-Annually Piezometer Monitoring Within Landfill
6	Neal’s Landfill Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Water Levels in Monitoring Well 5A Fish Sampling in 2004 Reports Submitted 2/year
7	Neal’s Landfill Groundwater Investigation Plan Basin Investigation Including Rogers Quarry Aerial Photograph Analysis Review Field Stone Records in Detail Water Level Data in Monitoring Wells
8	Neal’s Landfill Groundwater Investigation Plan Periodic Updates of EPA Status Report Dye Trace Decision for Cave Creek in Spring 2002 Interim Reports Submitted Quarterly Final Report August 2002 – Phased Approach
9	South Spring Neal's Landfill Site
10	North Spring Neal's Landfill Site
11	Neal Landfill Flow Records Flow records June 6, 2000 to November 14, 2001 Gage 0, Parshall Flume – Northwest Spring System Overflow 0 Gage 012, V-Notch Weir, - Overflows 0, 1 and 2 Gage 34, V-Notch Weir, - Overflows 3 and 4 Gage NS, V- Notch Weir, - North Spring Overflow Q _{Conard’s Branch Gage} = Q _{Gage 012} + Q _{Gage 34} + Q _{South Spring Spillover} Official USGS Gaging Stations – Water Resources Data for Indiana Water Year 2000
12	Comparison to Viacom Conard’s Branch Flow Records Overlap of records for period October 9 to November 14, 2001 Summed flow from Gages 012 and 34 compares well with new Viacom gage at Conard’s Branch
13
14
15
16
17
18
19	2001 Fish Sampling, Neal’s Landfill Site, Bloomington, IN August 6 – 8 Combined effort USEPA IDEM USFWS Conard’s Branch and Richland Creek Whole-body fish and fillets
20	Sample Locations (Reach) Conard’s Branch – 1 [CBS #1] Richland Creek 2 – S of West Vernal Pike bridge [CBS #2] 3 – S of Rts 43/48 intersection 4 – Rt 43 bridge S of Hendricksville [CBS #3] 5 – near 490N/800 intersection NW of Solsberry 6 – Rt 54 bridge E of Bloomfield [previous CBS sample stations]
21
22	Fish Species Collected BRH – black redhorse (4 – 6) CP – carp (5 – 6) CRC - creek chub (1 and 3) GS – green sunfish (1) LS – longear sunfish (2 and 4 – 6) WS – white sucker (2 and 4) (Reach in which each species was collected)
23	Chemical Analysis USEPA – whole-body fish and fillets Total PCBs (Aroclor 1248) Did not detect 1016, 1221, 1232, 1242, 1254, 1260 PCB congeners (14 dioxin-like) 77, 81, 105, 114, 118, 123, 126, 157/156, 167, 169, 170, 180/193, 189 IDEM – fillets Total PCBs
24
25
26	Draft Focused Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) Receptors: Mink Kingfisher Chemical basis: Total PCBs (Aroclor data) TEQ – [dioxin] toxic equivalents (congener data) Sum of congener-specific risks (kingfisher egg only)
27	Draft ERA Exposure assumptions 100 % aquatic diet (whole-body fish) 100 % foraging within a given reach Opportunistic feeding (no species preference) Data reduction Species mean – average concentration in a particular species within a single reach Reach mean – average of the species means
28	Assessment of Mink Risk Based on concentrations in prey NOAEC – no observed adverse effect conc. Highest concentration with no reproductive effect LOAEC – lowest observed adverse effect conc. Lowest conc. causing adverse reproductive effect PCB – geometric mean of 4 mink studies TEQ – geometric mean of 3 mink studies
29
30
31
32
33	Assessment of Kingfisher Risk 1 Based on dose (ingestion/bodyweight/day) NOAEL – no observed adverse effect level Highest dose with no reproductive effect LOAEL – lowest observed adverse effect level Lowest dose causing adverse reproductive effect PCB – geometric mean of 3 chicken studies TEQ – single chicken study
34
35
36	Assessment of Kingfisher Risk 2 Model accumulation in eggs Diet-to-egg biomagnification factors (BMF) Based on alewife-to-gull egg BMFs (L. Ontario) for PCB congeners and total PCBs Modeled egg congener conc. converted to TEQ Compare modeled accumulation to egg NOAEC and LOAEC for chickens
37	Egg NOAECs and LOAECs PCBs – geometric mean of 3 studies TEQ – single dioxin study Based on hatchability and chick survival
38
39
40	Assessment of Kingfisher Risk 2b Third approach for assessing risk to eggs Congener-specific risks (77, 105, 126 only) Each congener risk based on single study Individual risks summed to hazard index (HI) Results – Reaches 1 and 2 above lowest effect Reach 3 near no effect Reaches 4 – 6 below no effect
41	Draft Summary of Ecological Risks Conard’s Branch #1 – 6 to 70 times above lowest effect Richland Creek #2 – 1.3 to 10 times above lowest effect #3 and 4 – 0 to 2 times above lowest effect 0 to 6 times above no effect #5 < lowest effect, 0 to 1.7 times above no effect #6 – below no effect
42	James Chapman, Ph.D., Ecologist USEPA Region 5 (SRT-6J) 77 W. Jackson Blvd. Chicago, IL 60604 312 886 7195 312 353 5541 (fax) chapman.james@epa.gov
43	Bennett’s Dump Developing Status Report for Bennett’s Dump – Summarize Water, Sediment and Fish Data Minor Issues Remain for both Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Groundwater Investigation Plan
44	Bennett’s Dump Developing Five-Year Review for the Site Viacom Agreed to Groundwater Investigation but No Agency Document Further Investigation is Necessary Prior to Determination on Addressing Contaminated Springs
45	Bennett’s Dump Any Concerns on Issues at Bennett’s Dump Can be Sent to the Following: Thomas Alcamo U.S. EPA Region V 77 W. Jackson Mail Code SR-6J Chicago, IL 60604 Alcamo.Thomas@epa.gov
46	Bennett’s Dump Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Pursuant to SOW Quarterly PCB Sampling of Middle & Mound Springs North and Mid-North Quarterly if Flowing Quarterly PCB Sampling Upstream and Downstream in Stout’s Creek
47	Bennett’s Dump Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Creek Flow Measured Continuously Minimum of One Storm Event Sampling In 2003, Fish and Sediment Sampling (?) Semi-Annual Monitoring of MW 6I, 6D and 5(?)
48	Bennett’s Dump Groundwater Investigation Plan Objectives Define Site Hydrogeology and Recharge Area (relationship between gw elevations, water levels in quarry pits and spring flows) Monitor PCBs into Stout’s Creek under varying hydrogeologic conditions Determine Impact of Route 46 Highway Construction
49	Bennett’s Dump Groundwater Investigation Plan Air Photo Analysis New Topographic Map Install Staff Gages in Quarry Pits Stream Gaging in Stout’s Creek V-Notch weirs on Middle and Mound Spring
50	Bennett’s Dump Groundwater Investigation Plan Piezometer in Grid H7 Quarterly Reports and Summary Report End of 2002 – Phased Approach Periodic Pumping of MW 5 and Evaluate
51	Stout's Creek West Branch Bennett's Dump Site
52	Middle Spring Bennett's Dump Site
53	Mound Spring Bennett's Dump Site
54	Monitoring Well MW-6D Bennett's Dump Site
55	Monitoring Well MW-6I Bennett's Dump Site
56	Stout's Creek Downstream Bennett's Dump Site
57	Lemon Lane Landfill Updating Status Report for Water, Sediment and Fish Viacom to submit shortly the Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan Appears Issue with fence surrounding landfill resolved
58	Illinois Central Spring Lemon Lane Landfill Site
59	Illinois Central Spring Water Treatment Plant Total gallons treated as of 12/31/01 – 176,781,606 Roll off-box sent for disposal on 2/4/02 Roll-off sent to Safety-Kleen PPM in Ohio, then transferred to approved landfill in Clive, Utah
60	Illinois Central Spring Water Treatment Plant Two Storm Events: 12/14/01 and 12/17/01 Peak flow on 12/17/01 – 2,777 gpm PCB peak – 28 ppb Volume Stored – 8,181,195 gallons Volume Overflowed (from tanks) – 6,353,035 gallons Total storm volume treated – 11,615,539 gallons
61	Lemon Lane Landfill November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests Draft report received by EPA on February 2, 2002 Tests conducted October 31 to November 23, 2001 Data are preliminary and analysis is ongoing
62	November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests Goals To determine if any of the wells surrounding the site were on or near a major conduit which would integrate all three dyes into one flow path towards the ICE To determine travel times from various areas of the site to the ICE To determine if Quarry B would receive dye under controlled flow conditions, and hence could be presumed to be an Illinois Central underflow discharge point To determine if pumping wells at Lemon Lane Landfill would impact PCB levels at ICE
63	November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests Test Phases Multiple dye injections under natural gradient conditions (October 31 – November 7) MW –21 Pump Test (November 7 – November 9) MW – 16 Pump Test (November 13 - November 19) Injection test at Sargent’s Pond (November 20 - November 23)
64	November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests Dye Injections Natural Gradient Conditions Eosine at NN700 10/31/01 at 10:15 (phreatic well open in the 795’ – 800’ zone) Phloxine B at SP1 10/31/01 at 11:15 (phreatic well open in the 795’ – 800’ zone) Fluorescein at LF6-8 10/31/01 at 11:50 (vadose “epikarst” well, high PCB area)
65
66
67	Natural Gradient Conditions Fluorescein Results Fluorescein analytical results are regarded as semi quantitative Unambiguous detections of Fluorescein in several Valhalla wells (OO370, NN300, NN300A, OO300 and OO300A) Epikarst flow from LF-6 area is predominately southwest, but descends to the 795’ – 800’ phreatic zone near NN-370 Very high dye concentrations suggest that these wells are located near a primary conduit Single Fluorescein detection at 4S may be of questionable validity Travel time to ICE - 21 hours at 170 gpm average flow rate Fluorescein response at ICE indicates there may be more than pathway from LF6 to the spring. Fluorescein in only one sample from Quarry B at background levels No breakthrough curve for Fluorescein at Swallowhole Seep
68
69
70
71	Natural Gradient Conditions Eosine Results Difficult to detect Eosine in presence of large concentrations of Fluorescein Eosine concentrations much lower than Fluorescein Eosine detected in Valhalla wells (OO-370, OO-587, OO-387, NN-300 and NN-625) Eosine detected in Lemon Lane MW-15, -16, -18, -19, -20 and 21 Ground water from NN-700 area flows east and northeast to MW-21 - MAYBE!
72
73	Natural Gradient Conditions Phloxine Results Phloxine was not detected unambiguously in any well or spring.
74	November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests MW –21 Pump Test Could significant levels of PCBs be recovered from a pumping well? Would PCBs levels at ICE be reduced as a result of pumping? Pump on 11/7/01 10:00 Rate = 17 gpm Pump off on 11/9/01 14:00 52 hours Secondary dye flush at LF 6-8 11/8/01 15:30
75	MW –21 Pump Test Results ICE flow rate reduced The well received some Fluorescein from LF- 6, but ICE received much more PCBs at pumping well in the 5-7 ug/l range. Pumping did not lower the PCBs at ICE Spring after 52 hours, in fact PCB levels appear to have increased at the onset of pumping MW-21 is not on or hydraulically well connected to a major conduit that carries a large amount of PCBs to the ICE Pumping of MW-21 will not capture most of the materials that are flushed from the epikarst near LF-6
76
77	November 2001 Tracer / Pumping Tests MW – 16 Pump Test Pump on 11/13/01 12:00 Rate = 17 gpm Pump off on 11/19/01 08:30 140 hours Secondary dye flush at LF 6-8 11/16/01 15:30 Secondary dye flush at SP-1 11/14/01 15:30 Secondary dye flush at NN700 11/15/01 11:30
78	MW –16 Pump Test Results ICE flow rate reduced The well received some Fluorescein from second flush at LF- 6, but ICE received much more PCBs at the pumping well decreased from 8 to 2.5-3 ug/l PCBs at ICE varied during pumping, and drops in PCBs were not consistent or large enough to be considered a direct benefit of pumping MW-16 pumping will not significantly lower PCBs at ICE. Pumping of MW-16 will not capture most of the materials that are flushed from the epikarst near LF6
79
80	Injection test at Sargent’s Pond (November 20 - November 23) 200,000 gallons treated water discharged to Sargent’s Pond No large rise in water levels observed in any monitoring well ICE may have shown a 4 –5 gpm flow increase Sargent’s Pond has a low seepage rate
81