Karolina Brownfields Redevelopment Site Ostrava, Czech Republic Thomas C. Voltaggio Senior Advisor Dawson & Associates

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Role of Activity & Use Limitations in Clean Energy Development at Disposal Sites Elizabeth Callahan Acting Division Director, Policy and Program Planning,
Advertisements

By Chris Ford and James Hughes ( ) ( )
Cytec Statement of Basis and Permit Modification July 16, 2012 Public Hearing Ohio Environmental Protection Agency.
1 BoRit Asbestos & The Superfund Process Stacie Peterson, Remedial Project Manager (RPM)
BoRit Superfund Site Timeline
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT IN AN ICS STRUCTURE. EU Mission Statement The Environmental Unit is established to provide technical and scientific expertise and capabilities.
Vermilion County Brownfield Assessment Grant. Overview Brownfield Basics USEPA Brownfield Assessment Grant Vermilion County Assessment Grant Site Selection.
Claremore Medical Office Building From Landfill to Medical Office Building A Brownfield Success Story THE GREEN SIDE OF BROWNFIELD REMEDIATION.
AHMET UCANOK JOHN E. ELVIS Pump and Treat of Contaminated Groundwater at the United Chrome Superfund Site Corvallis, Oregon.
Jill Lowe Remedial Project Manager August 7, 2013.
Partnerships and Processes Landfill Redevelopment.
SRC/OAS Project Environmental Performance Presenter: Julia Louise Brown.
Location In the mountain of Colorado consist of numerous sites in Denver area which contaminate with radioactive soils and Debris. There are about 65.
Membrane Softening Water Treatment Plant completed in –Upper Floridan groundwater wells provide the source water for treatment. –Treatment process.
1 Risk Assessment Develop Objectives And Goals Develop and Screen Cleanup Alternatives Select Final Cleanup Alternative Communicate Decisions to the Public.
Delivering Excellence in Remediation of Contaminated Sites.
Brownfields in Baltic States - Lifelong Educational Project CZ/08/LLP-LdV/TOI/ Environmental Aspects of Brownfield Redevelopment Linas Kliučininkas.
1 P.L Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of January 11, 2002 U. S EPA, Region 5 Deborah Orr Indiana Grant Proposal.
Justification of Incukalns Rehabilitation Project Modification
A Developer’s Perspective on Financing Brownfield Projects: A Change in Lender’s Attitude? Presented by Dan Paris, Acting CEO REM Tech 2006, Banff, AB.
McCoy Field Proposed Keith Middle School Site EPA Proposes Approval of McCoy Field Cleanup Plan.
1 Facilitating Reuse at RCRA Sites: Innovative Technologies for Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup Introduction Walter W. Kovalick Jr., Ph.D. Associate.
4-7 June 2006NATO-CCMS Pilot Study, Athens Contaminated Land in Greece Recent Developments Nymphodora Papassiopi NATO-CCMS Pilot Study Tour de Table -
Water Treatment Plant No. 2 Concentrate Zero Liquid Discharge August 30, 2011.
Landia Superfund Site: Green Remediation and Green Infrastructure Support Sustainable Development Douglas Reid-Green, BASF Corporation.
Brownfields in UK and Czech Republic An Engineer’s Experience Presentation for COBRAMAN Training Programme 5 th Training, 21 st – 22 nd September 2010.
U.S. EPA Brownfields Grants An Overview Karla Auker U.S.EPA Brownfields Region V.
Update on the Superfund Program: U.S. Tour de Table NATO SPS Pilot Study Prevention and Remediation in Selected Industrial Sectors June 17-23, 2006 Ljubljana,
Brownfields Health Risks & Remediation Diogo Cadima Topic ‘A’ Term Project CET 413.
REUSE AT THE OHIO RIVER PARK SITE Chris Thomas, Region 3 Superfund Redevelopment Coordinator.
Denver Federal Center Calibration Silo Removal Plan What are the DFC Calibration Silos? Installed in 1981 by Bureau of Mines Support minerals industry.
Review of Work Plan for Leaded Gasoline Tank Bottom Disposal Pit Assessment and Interim Stabilization Measures Presented by The Great Plains/Rocky Mountain.
WasteSection 3 Types of Hazardous Waste Hazardous wastes are wastes that are a risk to the health of humans or other living organisms. They may be solids,
Spectron Superfund Site Proposed Plan Contaminated Shallow Soils U.S. EPA Region III June 26, 2003 Philadelphia, PA Robert J. Sanchez US EPA - Remedial.
History and Cleanup at Chemical Commodities, Inc. Jeff Field US EPA Region 7 1.
CHEMICAL COMMODITIES INC. The History, Cleanup and Ecological Reuse of a Superfund Site 1.
Module 6: Alternatives. 2  Module 6 contains three sections: – 6.1 Development and Screening of Alternatives – 6.2 Detailed Analysis of Alternatives.
Brownfields and Community Gardens. Purpose  The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the Brownfields Program and how it can service.
The Superfund ERA Process. What is Superfund? Superfund was created on December 11, 1980 when Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
September 23, 2005 Local Hazardous Waste Management Program in King County Washington Program Funding.
BROWNFIELDS: “Financial and Technical Support for Redevelopment” HAYWOOD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS COALITION Presented to: TOWN OF WAYNESVILLE.
Implementing Greener Cleanups through ASTM's Standard Guide Webinar Introduction November 17, Carlos S Pachon Superfund Program US Environmental.
Reuse Opportunities at Capped Superfund Sites July 16, 2014.
Greener Cleanups in the Region 10 PCB Program Michelle, Mullin R10 PCB Coordinator Clu-In Webinar November 17, 2015.
By Mitch Cooper & Haley Herbert January 1987 Vertac site manufactured herbicides 1978 National Dioxin Survey 1983 Site placed on the National.
November 17, 2015 Application of ASTM’s Greener Cleanup Guide to a Superfund Site in Oregon Results and Take-Home Lessons Beth Sheldrake, Manager, Superfund.
South East False Creek Vancouver, British-Columbia Matthew Ramsay Emily Czaplinski ENVR 3750.
Presentation to Association Municipalities of Ontario Implementation of Management of Excess Soil - A Guide for Best Management Practices Ministry of the.
Think safe. Act safe. Be safe. LEHR Site Annual Soil Management Plan Training Sue Fields, Environmental Health & Safety Sept,
 Examples of Hazardous Waste.  Any discarded chemical that threatens human health or the environment  1% of the solid waste in the U.S.  May be.
1 1 FY2009 and FY2010 Big Case Projections: Randy Hill, Acting Director, Office of Civil Enforcement David A. Hindin, Deputy Director, Office of Compliance.
Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam July 2009 Green Plaza Hotel Da Nang MPV Group.
Brownfield Redevelopment Dylan Harrington- University of Connecticut.
RE-Powering America’s Land: Renewable Energy on Potentially Contaminated Land and Mining Sites December 15, 2010 Lura Matthews Phone: (202) U.S.
Office of Legacy Management Land Transfer and Reuse November 2006 Steven R. Schiesswohl Senior Realty Officer, Office of Legacy Management.
1 FORMER COS COB POWER PLANT From Characterization to Redevelopment Brownfields2006 November 14, 2006.
DRAFT The RCRA Cleanup Vision for 2020 “Where are We Going? Matt Hale Director, Office of Solid Waste U.S.EPA.
 Clean Water Act 404 permit  Ohio EPA Division of Surface Water 401 water quality certification  Ohio Revised Code 6111 – Placement of dredged materials.
Solid Waste Study Board of County Commissioners March 20, 2012 Orange County.
Omaha Riverfront Redevelopment Project Brownfields 2004 C. Dale Jacobson, P.E., DEE.
Revitalizing Brownfield/Landfills The State of Ohio’s Role William Murdock, Director Urban Development Division Ohio Department of Development May 5, 2008.
Sustainable Remediation Case Studies
Presentation on Livermore Lab Site 300 Superfund Cleanup Peter Strauss, Environmental Scientist, PM Strauss & Assoc. Community-Wide Meeting on
January 18, 2017 City of San Diego
Anniston PCB Site Review of Risk Assessments for OU-1/OU-2
Green Energy and Green Spaces
Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management Update
Team Lead, Greener Cleanups
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Purpose To address the hazards to human health and the environment presented.
the path less traveled Termination of Post Closure Care
Presentation transcript:

Karolina Brownfields Redevelopment Site Ostrava, Czech Republic Thomas C. Voltaggio Senior Advisor Dawson & Associates 1

Introduction Project request to USEPA spring 1994Project request to USEPA spring 1994 –Evaluate remediation options for Karolina facility –USEPA Region III assigned project under broader USAID funded “Project Silesia” program Team consisted of Superfund Director Voltaggio and included Steven Hirsh, Dawn Ioven and Kathryn Davies – all experienced Superfund staffTeam consisted of Superfund Director Voltaggio and included Steven Hirsh, Dawn Ioven and Kathryn Davies – all experienced Superfund staff Team Communicated frequently with Czech colleagues and consultantsTeam Communicated frequently with Czech colleagues and consultants EPA team reviewed and evaluated sampling and analysis report prepared by Czech consultantEPA team reviewed and evaluated sampling and analysis report prepared by Czech consultant 2

Role of USEPA Region III Team Utilize EPA’s experience to present information which would facilitate the decision-making process for site remediation and redevelopmentUtilize EPA’s experience to present information which would facilitate the decision-making process for site remediation and redevelopment –Performed a risk assessment –Identified suggested cleanup options along with cost estimates paying close attention to the proposed development plan for the Karolina site –Suggested additional information needs Developed a matrix of cleanup options which met the following criteriaDeveloped a matrix of cleanup options which met the following criteria 3

Factors Health and environmental protectionHealth and environmental protection CostCost Technical feasibilityTechnical feasibility Future use of the land (City Master Plan)Future use of the land (City Master Plan) Czech cleanup requirementsCzech cleanup requirements Community acceptanceCommunity acceptance 4

The Karolina Site During the Socialist Era 5

6

The Karolina Site After Demolition 7

The Karolina Site After Demolition With Outline of Development Plan Area 8

The Karolina Site With Rendering of Development Plan 9

Future Use Areas Overlain on Site Map from the Development Plan Notes: - Areas D, F, L and J are Residential Areas - Area G is a Park 10

Site Showing Master Plan Use Categories Overlain by Concentrated Tar Contamination Area Site Showing Master Plan Use Categories Overlain by Concentrated Tar Contamination Area Notes: - Areas D, F, L and J are Residential Areas - Area G is a Park 11

Residential Residual Risk Levels Overlain on Site Map Residential Residual Risk Levels Overlain on Site Map Notes: - Red hashed areas denote Green hashed areas denote Entire site exceeded

Long term Commercial Residual Risk Levels Overlain on Site Map 13

Technologies Initially Evaluated Thermal treatment of Coal Tar and contaminated soilsThermal treatment of Coal Tar and contaminated soils Offsite disposal of Coal Tar and contaminated soilsOffsite disposal of Coal Tar and contaminated soils Construction of onsite landfill for contaminated soilsConstruction of onsite landfill for contaminated soils 14

Constraints on Alternatives Cost is a major factor. Cleanup costs would come from a limited “National Fund” established when Czech industry was privatized after the fall of the Iron CurtainCost is a major factor. Cleanup costs would come from a limited “National Fund” established when Czech industry was privatized after the fall of the Iron Curtain Thermal treatment and offsite disposal of large amounts of wastes could be prohibitively costlyThermal treatment and offsite disposal of large amounts of wastes could be prohibitively costly Onsite landfills significantly reduce the developable area to a point where development would not be feasibleOnsite landfills significantly reduce the developable area to a point where development would not be feasible 15

Difficult Issue for Czech Government Almost entire site exceeded cancer risk levelAlmost entire site exceeded cancer risk level –Costs estimated at over $450 million These costs were considered initially to be beyond levels contemplated by the Czech GovernmentThese costs were considered initially to be beyond levels contemplated by the Czech Government EPA team evaluated alternatives using cleanup levelsEPA team evaluated alternatives using cleanup levels –Still within EPA’s risk range for Superfund cleanup A number of options emergedA number of options emerged 16

Initial Alternatives Excavate and thermally treat tar and site contaminated soils to or 10 -6Excavate and thermally treat tar and site contaminated soils to or –Costs estimated to be $170 M and $472 M Liquid tar burned offsite; excavate site soils above and construct onsite landfillLiquid tar burned offsite; excavate site soils above and construct onsite landfill –Cost estimated to be $65M Liquid tar burned offsite; excavate site soils above and send to offsite landfillLiquid tar burned offsite; excavate site soils above and send to offsite landfill –Cost estimated to be $94M 17

New Alternative EPA team suggested:EPA team suggested: –Thermally treating the coal tar from within the Coke Plant Area –Isolate the Coke Plant area with a slurry wall or sheet pile –Excavate and place soils with risk level > within the slurry wall –Cover the Coke Plant area of the site with a liner, clean fill, and a multilayer cap –And … 18

New Alternative (continued) Revise the development plan to: –move the proposed locations of residential areas to areas outside the Coke Plant area –move the central square and park to be situated over the capped Coke Plant area 19

EPA Team Proposal for Readjusting Residential Use Areas 20

EPA Team Proposal for Readjusting All the Future Use Areas Based on Cleanup Alternative 4b Notes: - Areas D, F, L and J are Residential Areas - Area G is a Park 21

Subsequent Steps EPA team presented report to the Czech Government in September 1995EPA team presented report to the Czech Government in September 1995 After much discussion, Czech government decided to clean to risk levelAfter much discussion, Czech government decided to clean to risk level Equivalent of $100 million were obtained from the “National Fund”Equivalent of $100 million were obtained from the “National Fund” Tender was offered for the cleanupTender was offered for the cleanup 22

Subsequent Steps (continued) OKD-Rekultivace (a subsidiary of the company who was a major PRP of the site) was awarded the cleanup contractOKD-Rekultivace (a subsidiary of the company who was a major PRP of the site) was awarded the cleanup contract –Cleanup order issued by the Czech government –Cleanup performed between 1997 and 2004 A thermal desorption unit was used to clean site soils to levels determined by the Czech government to be protective of residential useA thermal desorption unit was used to clean site soils to levels determined by the Czech government to be protective of residential use 23

Subsequent Steps (continued) Cleanup cost less than the EPA estimates due to: Cleanup cost less than the EPA estimates due to: – Wage rates, transportation and other costs substantially lower than US levels – Cleanup contractor utilized many miners and workers, as well as equipment and expertise idled after privatization 24

Development Progress Work under the development phase began in  Work under the development phase began in  It is called “New Karolina”  The developer is a Dutch company - Multi Development 25

Looking Back … The contribution of the EPA team needs to be put in context of the world as it existed in 1995The contribution of the EPA team needs to be put in context of the world as it existed in 1995 Brownfields was a twinkle in Tim Field’s eyeBrownfields was a twinkle in Tim Field’s eye This was a Superfund level cleanup in a country just emerging from the socialist eraThis was a Superfund level cleanup in a country just emerging from the socialist era The EPA team provided a level of comfort to the Czech government trying to balance environmental needs with the need for developmentThe EPA team provided a level of comfort to the Czech government trying to balance environmental needs with the need for development The EPA team was very proud of its contribution to this effortThe EPA team was very proud of its contribution to this effort 26

Thank You! Questions About this Project? Tom Voltaggio 27