Elizabeth Mine
Community Advisory Group Meeting
Approved January 12, 2006
Attendees:
EMCAG Members
and Alternates Present: Jim Condict, Tom Essex, John Freitag, Neal Meglathery, Cathy Cook
Parker, Scott Stokoe, Bob Walker and Steve Willbanks
VT Agency of
Natural Resources: George Desch and John Schmeltzer
Vermont
Department of Health: Vernon Nelson
EPA: Ed Hathaway
U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers: Scott Acone
URS: Jason Clere, Marcel Guy,
Chris Hatton
Copperas Hill
Coalition: Lori
Barg and Fred Moody
Adamant Accord: Cindy Cook, Facilitator
The EPA, ANR, US Army Corps
and URS representatives left the meeting after the election of officers.
Announcements
Ben
Copans announced a meeting of the Ompompanoosuc Watershed Alliance.
Phyl Harmon announced that she now has funding for
her video project. She received an EPA
Environmental Education grant for $10,000 and an EPA Environmental Justice
grant for $25,000
for
the project.
EPA Site Update
Ed
announced that EPA has divided the Non-Time Critical Removal Action (NTCRA)
into two phases, because funding is not currently available for the full
project. TP-3 won’t be addressed until
the later phase, because it is the most complex portion of the site.
Ed
does not yet know the estimated truck volumes for this summer. Once he has these numbers, he will work with
the Strafford and Thetford Selectboards to minimize traffic impacts. John Freitag noted that Strafford is planning
to repave Tyson and Mine Roads this summer.
EPA
tested several treatment technologies, including bauxol, at the site on a small
scale this past summer.
The
group discussed the dark orange discharge from the seeps of TP-1. Iron levels have been increasing. In August and October they were very
high. Ed is not yet sure if this is a
seasonal phenomenon, or something else.
The
discharge of water from the Air Vent does not yet meet the chemical criteria of
Vermont Water Quality Standards.
However, it mixes almost immediately with waters of the West Branch, and
is substantially diluted. Because he
West Branch immediately below the West Branch meets biological standards of the
Vermont Water Quality Standards, EPA has determined that the Air Vent is not a
significant threat to the West Branch.
Copperas
Brook does not meet the biological criteria of the Vermont Water Quality
Standards. The regulations provide for a mixing zone of at most 100 feet below
the point of compliance.
The
data from the benthic surveys should be analyzed and distributed to the EMCAG
before its next meeting.
Ed
described the class of the Yale School of architecture that focused on the mine
site this semester. Ten graduate
students visited the site and spent the semester designing a hypothetical
educational facility on the site. The
students will present their projects at Yale in December. They may present their projects at an EMCAG
meeting early next year.
A
copy of Ed’s presentation is attached.
State Update
John
Schmeltzer noted that the state now has responsibility for maintaining the
buttress. The state will probably let a
contract to clean out the sedimentation basins next year. He does not yet know if the material from the
basins will be classified as a hazardous waste.
John
Freitag offered that community members can help monitor the site on an informal
basis.
The
June meeting summary was reviewed and approved.
Election of
Officers
The following officers were elected unanimously for
terms beginning December 12, and running through June 11, 2006:
Steve Willbanks, Vice Chair,
Gwenda Smith, Secretary, and
John Freitag, Treasurer.
EMCAG Discussion with TAG
Advisor Lori Barg
Lori
Barg discussed her concern that contaminated water from TP-3 not be diverted to
a part of the watershed that is currently uncontaminated, that the speed of
runoff from TP-3 not be increased due to a lack of attenuation from the pond on
TP-1.
The
EMCAG agreed to ask EPA to:
Consider
installing a sedimentation basin to attenuate flows from TP-3,
Design
surface water diversion so that contaminated and uncontaminated waters are
separated, and
Consider
diverting surface water around TP-3.
Lori
indicated that she would like an opportunity to review the loading data.
The
EMCAG would like an update in January regarding the options for addressing the
lead contaminated areas of the sit.
The
group discussed the issue of groundwater contamination, and what, if anything
local groups should do to address the contamination. The EMCAG asked that ANR bring someone to the
next meeting who is knowledgeable regarding the state’s groundwater
reclassification process.
The
group discussed the possibility of holding an EMCAG-only Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) meeting sometime in February.
Finally,
the group discussed the form that the upcoming documents take. Nobody expressed a need to have a hard copy;
electronic copies are fine.
Next Meeting Date
The next EMCAG meeting was tentatively set for January 12.
The meeting was adjourned at
9:40 PM.
Text of EPA Slide
Presentation:
Elizabeth Mine
Community Advisory Group (EMCAG) Meeting
November 10, 2005
EPA Presentation
Outline
nTime-Critical Removal Action
(TCRA) Update
nButtress
nNon-Time-Critical Removal
Action (NTCRA)
nPhase 1
nPhase 2
nRemedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (RI/FS) Update
nUpcoming documents
nSchedule
nOther Topics
nIron levels in West Branch
n
nTime-Critical Removal Action (TCRA)
nButtress and grading
activities were substantially complete in Fall 2004
nErosion on buttress face from
rain in December 2004, prior to grass growth
nErosion repairs were made in
June 2005
nGrass did not grow during
summer 2005
nNew topsoil was placed in
September 2005
n
nTime-Critical Removal Action (TCRA)
nAs of October 2005, grass is
well established
nButtress face has experienced
only limited erosion after recent heavy rain events
nTime Critical Removal Action
is complete
n
nNon-Time-Critical Removal Action (NTCRA)
nEPA has provided funding to
move forward with NTCRA as a two phase program
nPhase 1
nStabilize western face of
Tailing Dam
nSurface water diversion for
TP-1/TP-2
nToe tailing removal in
Copperas Brook
nPhase 2
nCollect and treat seeps at toe
of TP-1
nGroundwater and surface water
diversion
nFinal cover on TP-1 and TP-2
nTP-3 - approach to be
determined during design, but may include:
nConsolidation and cover in
place
nExcavation and removal and
placement in TP-1
nPossible treatment of
remaining run-off
n
nNTCRA Phase 1
nSurface water diversion for
TP-1/TP-2
nStabilize western face of
Tailing Dam
nToe tailing removal in
Copperas Brook
n
nNTCRA Phase 1 Schedule
nDesign and Construction
activities have been approved for funding
nNovember 2005
nAssemble design/construction
team
nDecember 2005 – May 2006
nDesign and develop
implementation plans
nMeet with TAG advisors and
brief EMCAG as design is developed
nDiscuss truck traffic with
EMCAG and Selectboards
nJune/July 2006
nInitiate construction
activities
nConstruction may extend into
2007 field season
n
nNTCRA Phase 2
nSurface water and groundwater
diversion
nFinal cover on TP-1 and TP-2
nCollection and treatment of
seeps at toe of TP-1
nNTCRA Phase 2
nTP-3 (Design Options)
nConsolidate and cap in place
nExcavation and removal to TP-1
nCollect and treat remaining
run-off
n
nNTCRA Phase 2 Schedule
nOnly design has been approved
for funding
nConstruction will be evaluated
based on cost estimate from design work
n2005
nAssemble design team
n2006
nDevelop conceptual design and
design work plan
nIdentify any data needs
nCollect field data
n2007
nComplete design
nSubmit request for funding
nRemedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
nFour reports to be released in
2006
nThree are components of the
Remedial Investigation Program
nRemedial Investigation Report
(January/February 2006)
nHuman Health Risk Assessment
(January/February 2006)
nEcological Risk Assessment
(February/March 2006)
nOne is the evaluation of
cleanup options based on the above Reports
nFeasibility Study (March/April
2006)
nCleanup proposal will be
presented to EMCAG in Spring 2006
nPublic Comment targeted for
late Spring/early Summer
nRemedial Investigation Report (RI Report)
nPresents the investigations
and data
nIdentifies the extent of
contamination
nFindings are similar to what
was previously presented:
nNovember 2004 EMCAG
nJanuary 2005 EMCAG
nJune 2005 EMCAG
nTAG Advisor meetings
nHuman Health Risk Assessment (HHRA Report)
nEvaluates the potential cancer
and non-cancer threats based on current and future potential land use scenarios
nFindings are similar to what
was previously presented:
nNovember 2004 EMCAG
nJanuary 2005 EMCAG
nJune 2005 EMCAG
nTAG Advisor meetings
nSpecific TAG advisor briefing
regarding this in June 2005
nEcological Risk Assessment (BERA)
nEvaluates the potential
impacts to ecological receptors
nFindings are similar to what
was previously presented:
nNovember 2004 EMCAG
nJanuary 2005 EMCAG
nJune 2005 EMCAG
nTAG Advisor meetings
nSpecific TAG advisor briefing
regarding this in June 2005
nRemedial Investigation Summary
nNTCRA/Time Critical Removal
(buttress/pipe) will address the most significant source of contamination to Copperas Brook and West
Branch
nTP-3
nTP-1 and TP-2
nTwo areas outside NTCRA area
were identified in Human Health Risk Assessment as potential threats to human
health
nCopperas Factories (lead in
soil)
nGroundwater - Underground workings (water within mine
pool is contaminated)
nRemedial Investigation Summary
nSeveral other source areas (in
addition to NTCRA areas) have the potential to cause adverse impacts to
ecological receptors
nEcological impacts to Lord
Brook and tributaries
nSouth Open Cut
nTP-4
nSouth Mine
nEcological Impacts to Copperas
Brook and Mixing Zone of West Branch of Ompompanoosuc
nRun-off from Mine
Infrastructure area
nSediment of Copperas Brook and
Mixing Zone
nFurnace Flats waste areas,
Sargent Brook waste areas, and air vent discharge are not considered to be a
threat to ecological receptors (based on evaluations to date)
Copper Loads by
Source Area
nFeasibility Study (FS)
nEvaluates cleanup options for
area determined to represent an “unacceptable threat” based on conclusions in
Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments
nCleanup options must:
nBe protective of human health
and the environment
nComply with federal and state
environmental regulations
nEvaluates cleanup options
using 9 criteria
nFeasibility Study (FS)
nFeasibility Study areas that
are often the focus of discussion with community/TAG
nRemedial Action Objectives and
Cleanup Standards
nApplicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements (federal and state environmental regulations)
nRange of alternatives under
consideration
nFeasibility Study (FS)
nAreas that are often the focus
of discussion
nRemedial Action Objectives and
Cleanup Standards
nRemedial Action Objectives
nGeneric statements about
cleanup
nPrevent contact/comply with
Standards
nCleanup Standards
nVermont Groundwater Protection
Rule and EPA safe drinking water levels (MCLs) or risk based if there is no
regulatory criteria (manganese)
nVermont Water Quality
Criteria/Clean Water Act Criteria
nRisk Based levels for lead in
soil
nRisk Based levels for
sediments
nFeasibility Study (FS)
nAreas that are often the focus
of discussion
nApplicable or Relevant and
Appropriate Requirements (ARARs)(federal
and state environmental regulations)
nFull compliance is required
unless waiver is justified
nKey ARARs
nVermont Water Quality
Standards and Clean Water Act –Class B standards must be met in all surface
water at points of compliance
nVermont Groundwater Protection
Rule and drinking waste standards – these criteria must be met for all
groundwater at the points of compliance
n
nNext Steps
nIssue Reports
nPresent information that will
be in FS to EMCAG in January and subsequent EMCAG meetings
nEvaluate comments from
EMCAG/TAG
nDevelop cleanup proposal for
public comment
n
nOther issues:
nIron in West Branch
nDischarge from seeps at TP-1
are creating discoloration
nConcentration of metals in
seeps, Copperas Brook, and West Branch have been measured in Sept. 2004, January 2005, February 2005, April 2005, June
2005, August 2005, and October 2005
nIron levels in seeps and at
sedimentation basin discharge were highest in Aug and October 2005 during
periods of low flow
nThere appears to be an
increasing trend but more data is necessary
nNext sample will be collected
in December 2005
nEPA Summary
nReports will be released in
2006
nConclusions in RI, HHRA, and
BERA are similar to previous presentations
nEPA is looking for feedback
regarding frequency of meetings and topics
nFS focus?
nReport distribution
nThese are very large reports
nCD?
nCan we reduce cost and save
trees by sharing hard copies and having individual CD copies?
nTown Office, Norwich Library
will be given full paper sets and CD version