Written by Kelly Kaczala
April 03, 2009
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency will not be adding monitoring wells around Envirosafe Services of Ohio, Inc. (ESOI), a hazardous waste landfill on Otter Creek Road.
ARCADIS, Oregon’s consulting engineer, found low levels of contamination in four wells in the city’s right-of-way near the Envirosafe site. Oregon hired ARCADIS last year to install the wells to determine if harmful substances in Envirosafe’s historic landfills migrate off-site into the right-of-way along York Street, Old Millard Avenue and Otter Creek Road. Low levels of contaminated ground water were found in each of the wells.
ARCADIS concluded that the contamination is coming from the historic landfill and is making its way off-site in the right-of-way.
“We’re recommending that new wells be installed as part of future monitoring,” Brian O’Mara, an engineer and geologist at ARCADIS, recently told Oregon City Council.
Ohio EPA is currently reviewing ARCADIS’s report. The agency thinks the 119 wells installed around Envirosafe that are sampled semi-annually are adequate.
“As part of the corrective measures study, they are required to evaluate the entire groundwater monitoring well network to determine if additional wells are necessary for long-term monitoring,” said Lynn Ackerson, an environmental specialist with the Ohio EPA. Ackerson is overseeing corrective action measures at Envirosafe. “At this point in time, we feel the current network at Envirosafe is adequate.”
Dina Pierce, northwest district media coordinator for Ohio EPA, said Envirosafe has been adequately studied and characterized for the purpose of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Correction Action Program.
An interim correction action remedy was implemented at the facility on July 1, 2007, to mitigate the potential for off-site migration of contaminants, said Pierce. A leachate removal remedy was implemented in three old landfills, said Pierce.
Ohio EPA has been reviewing Envirosafe’s RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) report, which the company submitted in February, 2008. “We will send a notice of deficiency (NOD) to ESOI on the RFI report in April,” she said. A NOD indicates Envirosafe needs to supply the agency with more information.
Envirosafe is required to respond to the NOD in 60 days,” said Pierce. “Lynn will review it, see if that fulfills everything we need. If not, another letter will go out.”
Once Ohio EPA approves a revised RFI report, Envirosafe will be required to submit a Corrective Measures Study (CMS) in 60 days that recommends additional data collection necessary to develop and evaluate remedy options for the old units at the facility. The CMS will include an evaluation of whether or not additional wells needed to be added to Envirosafe’s monitoring well nework. Envirosafe’s RFI wells affirmed the findings from its existing monitoring well network.
In the 1990s, contamination was found migrating north of the Envirosafe site, which prompted the EPA to require Envirosafe to plan corrective action measures.
Phase 1 of the RCRA Facility Investigation study looked at the nature and extent of contamination, mostly at the northern boundary of the site. Phase 2 looked more in-depth at the identified areas. Hundreds of samples have been taken and researched. Those studies have been developed in the RFI report, which identifies the problems and addresses what needs to be done.
“They have conclusions in their RFI report,” said Ackerson. “That’s just leading in the direction of the corrective study work plan. If people have looked at the RFI report, they can see which units there are problems at, and what the problems are.”
There will be an official public comment period announced before a final remedy for the ESOI site is selected, said Pierce. “However, Ohio EPA accepts specific comments at any time and continues to have an open mind to consider new information and, if necessary, respond appropriately. This includes the city’s report from ARCADIS.”
$15 Hourly wage
The "Fight for $15" campaign proposes a $15/hour wage for fast food workers. Do you agree?
No answer selected. Please try again.
Thank you for your vote.