My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-12-02_PERMIT FILE - M2020061
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2020061
>
2020-12-02_PERMIT FILE - M2020061
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/28/2024 5:42:53 AM
Creation date
12/2/2020 11:46:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2020061
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/2/2020
Doc Name
Is It Mining?
From
Union Milling Contractors
To
DRMS
Email Name
DMC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
10/8/2020 Federal Register::National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan:Partial Deletion of the California Gulch Superfund... <br /> The State,the EPA and certain Potentially Responsible Parties(PRPs)have conducted various studies and <br /> investigations to evaluate the nature and extent of contamination generally at the Site,and specifically within <br /> OU3.Remedial Investigations(RIs)began in 1986 within the Site,including mine waste rock piles,tailing <br /> disposal areas,surface water and aquatics,groundwater,smelter sites,residential/populated area soils,slag <br /> piles,and terrestrial studies. <br /> Concurrent with the various investigations and studies,risk assessments were conducted at the California <br /> Gulch Superfund Site.Some included the Preliminary Baseline Risk Assessment(Preliminary BRA),and the <br /> Final Baseline Human Health Risk Assessments(Final BRA):Part A,Part B,and Part C.For human health <br /> risk issues at OU3,the Preliminary BRA and the Final BRA Part C,Evaluation of Worker Scenario and <br /> Evaluation of Recreational Scenarios,were most pertinent.The Preliminary BRA indicated that lead and <br /> arsenic are responsible for the majority of human health risks at the Site.Therefore,arsenic and lead were <br /> used as indicator contaminants for risk in the Final BRA. <br /> EPA and D&RGW entered into an Administrative Order on Consent(1991 D&RGW AOC)on December 3, <br /> 1991.The 1991 D&RGW AOC required D&RGW to perform remedial investigations of major lead slag piles <br /> and one zinc slag pile within the Site.In 1992,D&RGW completed a remedial investigation(1992 OU3 Slag <br /> RI)of the major lead slag piles and the zinc slag pile within the Site.Slag was found to have elevated levels of <br /> zinc,lead,arsenic and cadmium along with a low acid-generating potential,and a neutral to basic pH.Fine <br /> slag,which is less than 3/8 of an inch,was found to have elevated lead levels.The fine fraction of slag was the <br /> only part of the slag that may present an unacceptable risk because fine slag poses an inhalation hazard. <br /> EPA and D&RGW entered into a Consent Decree on September 15,1993(1993 D&RGW CD)for the <br /> completion of investigation,feasibility studies,and remediation activities to be performed for OU3.The 1993 <br /> D&RGW CD stated EPA's concerns regarding the fine fraction of the stockpiled slag at the AV Smelter site <br /> and the potential for particulate release during ballast operations as a potential human health exposure <br /> pathway.The 1993 D&RGW CD required D&RGW to perform a feasibility study for stockpiled fine slag and <br /> to submit an operations plan before initiating any ballast operations. <br /> In 1993,the EPA conducted a Screening Feasibility Study(1993 SFS)to initiate the overall CERCI A FS <br /> process at the California Gulch Site.The purpose of the SFS was to develop general response actions and <br /> identify an appropriate range of alternatives applicable to the various contaminant sources to be considered <br /> during feasibility studies for the California Gulch Site.The 1993 SFS for Remedial Alternatives examined <br /> several remediation alternatives for slag located❑at the Site based on specific criteria,such as relative cost, F� Start Printed <br /> implementability,and effectiveness.The three remedial alternatives for slag retained for further evaluation Page 6774 <br /> were:No action,institutional controls,and resource utilization.The La Plata and Harrison Street Slag piles <br /> did not contain fine slag.Therefore,no further action was necessary.Because the AV Smelter pile contained <br /> fine slag,more investigation was required. <br /> In July of 1995,D&RGW submitted a ballast operations plan to EPA.Following EPA's approval of the plan, <br /> ballast operations commenced in August 1995 but ceased soon thereafter for lack of a profitable market for <br /> the slag.Ballast operations involve the sorting of larger slag so that the size fraction of greater than 3/8 inch <br /> and less than 21/2 inches is produced for road ballast.The undersized fraction(i.e.,less than 3/8 inch),or <br /> sorted fine slag,that is produced by the sorting process is stockpiled along with the previously sorted fine <br /> slag at the Arkansas Valley pile. <br /> https://www.federairegister.gov/documents/2016/02/09/2016-02601/national-oil-and-hazardous-substance-pollution-conti ngency-plan-partial-deletio... 12/16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.