The document provides a biopile management plan for remediating petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil at the Cantung Mine site. It describes the design of the biopile, which will use divided steel tanks to contain approximately 90 cubic meters of soil per cell. Operations will involve sampling soil for contaminants, accepting only light hydrocarbon contaminated soil, and conducting field trials to determine the optimal remediation treatment over multiple seasons. Soil and leachate will be sampled and monitored according to standards from GNWT and CCME guidelines. The goal is to remediate an estimated total of 600 cubic meters of contaminated soil in batches over approximately six seasons.
The Bayo Canyon site in New Mexico was used by DOE for explosive compression tests on metals from 1982 to
1942. Long-term stewardship activities include surveillance and institutional controls over 0.6 hectares to restrict
access to subsurface contamination. The estimated annual cost from 2000 to 2006 was $1,000.
The Kansas City Plant site has soil and groundwater contamination from previous industrial operations. Long-term stewardship activities include monitoring of groundwater and surface water, maintaining caps and treatment systems, and enforcing land-use restrictions. These activities are expected to continue indefinitely due to contaminants entering the groundwater that are difficult to remove. Estimated long-term costs average around $1.3 million annually through 2070 due to long-term groundwater monitoring and treatment requirements.
The document provides an update on the remediation approach for the Gude Landfill site to community members. It summarizes the findings of site investigations identifying groundwater contamination beyond the landfill boundary. It outlines the assessment of corrective measures currently underway to evaluate technologies to address the contamination to meet regulatory standards. It also discusses future land reuse preferences of the community and next steps in the process including further community engagement and coordination with county agencies.
This document summarizes a community meeting about remediation efforts at the Gude Landfill. The proposed corrective measure is to install a geomembrane cap over part of the landfill and additional landfill gas collection wells to address groundwater contamination. A land reuse process was outlined that involves community input and approval from county officials. Passive recreation uses are preferred by the community for post-remediation land use. The anticipated schedule and ongoing community engagement were also discussed.
Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Division of Solid Waste Services - Gude Landfill Remediation Project Corrective Measures Implementation - June 2017
There are seven identified prioritized abandoned mine sites: Philippine Pyrite Corporation - Bagacay, Hinabangan, Western Samar; Basay Mining Corporation - Brgy. Maglinao, Basay, Negros Oriental, Thanksgiving Mine, Benguet Exploration Inc. - Camp 6, Kennon Road, Tuba, Benguet, Black Mountain Inc. - Tuba, Benguet, Consolidated Mines, Inc. - Ino & Capayang, Mogpog, Marinduque, Palawan Quicksilver Mines - Tagburos, Puerto Princesa, Palawan, Western Minolco Corp. - Atok, Benguet The Bagacay Mine in Western Samar ranks first for remediation. The Bagacay site, which was formerly worked for the recovery of pyrite/copper, is located at the border of a nature reserve. It exhibits many environmental problems, including the formation of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) and the related spread to nature of potential toxic metals. MGB has conducted a preliminary investigation into the environmental impacts at Bagacay Mine and developed some initial rehabilitation plans including some revegetation trials. These plans are insufficient for final closure and rehabilitation but can be identified as interim remediation measures...
The document discusses plans to restore habitat in the Hudson Raritan Estuary, including Jamaica Bay, as authorized in the Chief's Report of May 2020 and WRDA 2020. It will restore 621 acres of habitat through projects that include wetlands, tidal channels, forests, and oyster reef restoration. For Jamaica Bay, it outlines restoration projects on 5 marsh islands that will restore over 200 acres using dredged materials, with timelines for engineering and construction over the next 20 years. The document provides background on the authorized restoration program and next steps to advance initial projects pending FY22 budget appropriations.
ACOE Coastal Storm Management Alternative for Jamaica Bay Communitiesecowatchers
The document summarizes plans for managing coastal storm risk in Jamaica Bay, New York. It discusses the US Army Corps of Engineers' process for formulating alternatives, addressing sea level rise, and evaluating alternatives for the East Rockaway Inlet to Rockaway Inlet and Jamaica Bay reach. High-level details are provided on recommended plans for the Atlantic shorefront, Back Bay flooding risk reduction features, and nature-based features in Jamaica Bay. The schedule and opportunities for public involvement in the ongoing New York-New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study are also outlined.
The Bayo Canyon site in New Mexico was used by DOE for explosive compression tests on metals from 1982 to
1942. Long-term stewardship activities include surveillance and institutional controls over 0.6 hectares to restrict
access to subsurface contamination. The estimated annual cost from 2000 to 2006 was $1,000.
The Kansas City Plant site has soil and groundwater contamination from previous industrial operations. Long-term stewardship activities include monitoring of groundwater and surface water, maintaining caps and treatment systems, and enforcing land-use restrictions. These activities are expected to continue indefinitely due to contaminants entering the groundwater that are difficult to remove. Estimated long-term costs average around $1.3 million annually through 2070 due to long-term groundwater monitoring and treatment requirements.
The document provides an update on the remediation approach for the Gude Landfill site to community members. It summarizes the findings of site investigations identifying groundwater contamination beyond the landfill boundary. It outlines the assessment of corrective measures currently underway to evaluate technologies to address the contamination to meet regulatory standards. It also discusses future land reuse preferences of the community and next steps in the process including further community engagement and coordination with county agencies.
This document summarizes a community meeting about remediation efforts at the Gude Landfill. The proposed corrective measure is to install a geomembrane cap over part of the landfill and additional landfill gas collection wells to address groundwater contamination. A land reuse process was outlined that involves community input and approval from county officials. Passive recreation uses are preferred by the community for post-remediation land use. The anticipated schedule and ongoing community engagement were also discussed.
Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Division of Solid Waste Services - Gude Landfill Remediation Project Corrective Measures Implementation - June 2017
There are seven identified prioritized abandoned mine sites: Philippine Pyrite Corporation - Bagacay, Hinabangan, Western Samar; Basay Mining Corporation - Brgy. Maglinao, Basay, Negros Oriental, Thanksgiving Mine, Benguet Exploration Inc. - Camp 6, Kennon Road, Tuba, Benguet, Black Mountain Inc. - Tuba, Benguet, Consolidated Mines, Inc. - Ino & Capayang, Mogpog, Marinduque, Palawan Quicksilver Mines - Tagburos, Puerto Princesa, Palawan, Western Minolco Corp. - Atok, Benguet The Bagacay Mine in Western Samar ranks first for remediation. The Bagacay site, which was formerly worked for the recovery of pyrite/copper, is located at the border of a nature reserve. It exhibits many environmental problems, including the formation of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) and the related spread to nature of potential toxic metals. MGB has conducted a preliminary investigation into the environmental impacts at Bagacay Mine and developed some initial rehabilitation plans including some revegetation trials. These plans are insufficient for final closure and rehabilitation but can be identified as interim remediation measures...
The document discusses plans to restore habitat in the Hudson Raritan Estuary, including Jamaica Bay, as authorized in the Chief's Report of May 2020 and WRDA 2020. It will restore 621 acres of habitat through projects that include wetlands, tidal channels, forests, and oyster reef restoration. For Jamaica Bay, it outlines restoration projects on 5 marsh islands that will restore over 200 acres using dredged materials, with timelines for engineering and construction over the next 20 years. The document provides background on the authorized restoration program and next steps to advance initial projects pending FY22 budget appropriations.
ACOE Coastal Storm Management Alternative for Jamaica Bay Communitiesecowatchers
The document summarizes plans for managing coastal storm risk in Jamaica Bay, New York. It discusses the US Army Corps of Engineers' process for formulating alternatives, addressing sea level rise, and evaluating alternatives for the East Rockaway Inlet to Rockaway Inlet and Jamaica Bay reach. High-level details are provided on recommended plans for the Atlantic shorefront, Back Bay flooding risk reduction features, and nature-based features in Jamaica Bay. The schedule and opportunities for public involvement in the ongoing New York-New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study are also outlined.
IMPACTS AND RISKS FROM DIFFERENT LAND USES IN SAMAR ISLAND FOREST RESERVENo to mining in Palawan
A typical risk assessment process was applied to identify and evaluate the different impacts and risks associated with forestry and mineral development options in the Samar Island Forest Reserve (SIFR).
The mineral development options that would significantly affect SlFR are Concord bauxite mining and Bagacay copper-pyrite mining. Both are situated within Taft watershed and are located 10-km apart from each other.
This document summarizes a citizen's forum meeting regarding remediation of the Gude Landfill. Representatives from the county, concerned citizens groups, and engineering firms presented information. The county discussed the landfill history and current operations/monitoring. Groundwater monitoring has found some exceedances of EPA standards near the landfill. The concerned citizens group objectives ensuring remediation is completed before any reuse. The engineering firm discussed plans for further site characterization and risk assessment to develop remediation alternatives. The concerned citizens group discussed possible future reuse options for the landfill property.
The (Atlas) Moab Mill site is the location of a former uranium mill in Moab, Utah. It operated from 1956 to 1988,
leaving behind uranium mill tailings and contaminated soil and groundwater. Under the NDAA for FY 2001, DOE
will remediate the site and perform any long-term stewardship activities required. Remediation may include
relocating wastes and restoring groundwater. Long-term activities such as groundwater monitoring are expected but
will depend on the final remediation plan. The site covers 162 hectares and residual contamination volumes are
currently unknown.
This document discusses operational planning and logistics for prescribed burning in three areas: North Head, La Perouse NSW Golf Course, and Centennial Park. It outlines considerations for each location including resource allocation, control lines, weather conditions, ignition strategies, and mitigation of risks to infrastructure, wildlife, and nearby communities. Photos show before, during, and after results of prescribed burns, which aim to conserve and restore the endangered ecological community of Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub. Over 120 personnel from multiple agencies coordinate controlled fires to improve the health of 18% of this at-risk habitat.
New & Modified Oil & Gas Drilling Regulations Proposed by the PA Environmenta...Marcellus Drilling News
This document contains definitions for terms used in Chapter 78 of Title 25 of the Pennsylvania Code regarding oil and gas wells. It defines over 80 terms, including conventional and unconventional formations, pits, containment systems, water sources, well operators, and more. It also outlines application requirements for well permits, including providing information on business entities, consulting the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program to avoid environmental impacts, and notifying relevant agencies for certain locations near public resources.
The document summarizes a request to rezone 120 acres from agricultural to industrial use to allow for the development of a limestone quarry. Key details include:
- The site is currently farmed and zoned for agriculture. Surrounding uses are also agricultural.
- Concerns were raised about impacts to traffic, water resources, property values, and consistency with the land use plan.
- Township and county planning bodies recommended denying the rezoning due to environmental and community impacts.
The Parkersburg Site in West Virginia contains an engineered disposal cell for radioactive waste from a former uranium mill. Major long-term stewardship activities include monitoring the disposal cell, restricting access, inspecting fencing and signs, and monitoring groundwater. The 6-hectare site has been monitored since 1983, with disposal of approximately 15,300 cubic meters of waste in the cell. Annual costs average around $16,400, with higher costs every 5 years for groundwater monitoring. The site will remain under long-term stewardship by the DOE indefinitely to ensure the integrity of the disposal cell.
The document discusses rehabilitation of open pit mines in the Philippines. It covers the adverse environmental and social impacts of open pit mining, Philippine policies requiring rehabilitation, state-of-the-art rehabilitation practices, and challenges for Philippine mines. The key challenges are ensuring open pits and pit lakes do not become long-term liabilities and developing them for beneficial end uses through collaborative government-industry efforts.
The document provides information on two sites in Pennsylvania - the Burrell Site and the Canonsburg Site. For the Burrell Site, it summarizes that the major activities are disposal cell and groundwater monitoring with access restrictions. The site size is 28 hectares and the estimated annual cost from 2000-2006 was $51,600. For the Canonsburg Site, it summarizes the major activities are disposal cell monitoring, groundwater and surface water monitoring, and access restrictions, with a site size of 14 hectares and estimated annual cost from 2000-2006 of $148,000.
The Lakeview Site in Oregon contains a disposal cell that received approximately 722,000 cubic meters of contaminated materials from the nearby Lakeview Mill uranium processing site. The U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for long-term stewardship activities at the site, including monitoring the disposal cell and maintaining institutional controls. Annual inspections evaluate the condition of surface features and groundwater monitoring assesses initial disposal cell performance. Estimated annual long-term stewardship costs are $111,000 through at least 2070 to ensure protection of human health and the environment.
The document summarizes long-term stewardship activities at Amchitka Island in Alaska. Major activities include soil and groundwater monitoring to ensure restrictions on access to subsurface contamination are enforced. The site covers 30,000 hectares and long-term stewardship is estimated to cost $23,000 annually and will continue in perpetuity. Monitoring involves sampling soil and groundwater every 5 years to restrict access to nuclear test sites on the island and ensure contaminants remain isolated.
This document provides erosion and sediment control guidelines for the Wellington region. It discusses factors that influence erosion such as climate, soil characteristics, topography and ground cover. It outlines principles of erosion and sediment control including minimizing disturbance, protecting waterbodies, rapidly stabilizing exposed areas, and inspecting erosion and sediment control structures. Various erosion and sediment control measures are described such as runoff diversion channels, contour drains, sediment retention ponds, silt fences, and revegetation techniques. The document also provides erosion control guidance for activities like quarries, forestry operations, and works in waterbodies.
This document provides recommendations to supplement an existing Phase II Wetland Mitigation Plan for a property located at 354 Old Whitfield Road in Guilford, CT. It recommends that the plan graphically illustrate existing groundwater depths and elevations, delineate original site conditions such as flood zones and wetland areas, address concerns raised by a citizens group regarding past debris and fill, establish baseline elevations and conduct soil testing of current site conditions, provide more detailed plans for proposed regrading and restoration including drainage and planting, and develop a 5-year maintenance and monitoring plan as recommended by a wetlands scientist. It also recommends considering additional recommendations from wildlife agencies and nurseries.
Provide wetland mitigation plans to the town of Guilford, Connecticut regarding a parcel of property with areas of concern regarding presumed filled wetlands.
Northampton Landfill Waiver from DEP 06-23-2006Adam Cohen
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection approved a waiver request from regulatory siting criteria for a proposed expansion of the Northampton Landfill. The expansion areas are located within the Zone II of a public drinking water well and a Potentially Productive Aquifer. The Department determined that strict compliance with the criteria would result in undue hardship and not minimize adverse impacts. The waiver was necessary to accommodate the regional need for additional landfill capacity and would not diminish protection of public health, safety, or the environment.
Michael Bowen has built a career in business development, marketing, and helping others to develop and explode their communication and thinking skills. As a consultant, Michael Bowen Oil and Gas investments providing biggest advantages of tax deductions.
The document provides a geotechnical master plan for a proposed residential community called Joy Ranch Housing situated on 622.86 acres. 14 exploratory borings were performed across the site to determine soil characteristics in different parcels. Testing showed predominantly clayey sands near the surface. Groundwater levels were found to be deep, between 301-511 feet below surface. Based on soil testing, design recommendations are provided for structure footings and retaining walls to account for soil properties and planned building loads, including for an elementary school and pedestrian bridge. Issues like collapse, subsidence, fissures and sulfate are also addressed.
San Manuel 1999 Ore Reserves Report (Draft)Gary Sutton
This document summarizes the oxide ore reserves report for the San Manuel copper mine as of June 1, 1999. It details the geology, exploration history, mining operations, and block model used to estimate reserves of xxx.x million kilograms of recoverable copper remaining at the mine, primarily within the in situ leaching reserves. Production from in situ leaching has averaged 2.3 million pounds of copper per month. The report provides the background and methodology used to estimate reserves for SEC reporting requirements.
Range Resources Voluntary Plan to Close Yeager Wastewater Impoundment in SWPAMarcellus Drilling News
A voluntary plan created and submitted by Range Resources to the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection to permanently close (and restore) the Yeager wastewater impoundment (i.e. open pond) site in Amwell Township, located in Washington County, PA. The plan was tweaked by the DEP to require Range to test for certain compounds underneath the two liners in the impoundment--liners that, according to Range, had holes in both layers.
IMPACTS AND RISKS FROM DIFFERENT LAND USES IN SAMAR ISLAND FOREST RESERVENo to mining in Palawan
A typical risk assessment process was applied to identify and evaluate the different impacts and risks associated with forestry and mineral development options in the Samar Island Forest Reserve (SIFR).
The mineral development options that would significantly affect SlFR are Concord bauxite mining and Bagacay copper-pyrite mining. Both are situated within Taft watershed and are located 10-km apart from each other.
This document summarizes a citizen's forum meeting regarding remediation of the Gude Landfill. Representatives from the county, concerned citizens groups, and engineering firms presented information. The county discussed the landfill history and current operations/monitoring. Groundwater monitoring has found some exceedances of EPA standards near the landfill. The concerned citizens group objectives ensuring remediation is completed before any reuse. The engineering firm discussed plans for further site characterization and risk assessment to develop remediation alternatives. The concerned citizens group discussed possible future reuse options for the landfill property.
The (Atlas) Moab Mill site is the location of a former uranium mill in Moab, Utah. It operated from 1956 to 1988,
leaving behind uranium mill tailings and contaminated soil and groundwater. Under the NDAA for FY 2001, DOE
will remediate the site and perform any long-term stewardship activities required. Remediation may include
relocating wastes and restoring groundwater. Long-term activities such as groundwater monitoring are expected but
will depend on the final remediation plan. The site covers 162 hectares and residual contamination volumes are
currently unknown.
This document discusses operational planning and logistics for prescribed burning in three areas: North Head, La Perouse NSW Golf Course, and Centennial Park. It outlines considerations for each location including resource allocation, control lines, weather conditions, ignition strategies, and mitigation of risks to infrastructure, wildlife, and nearby communities. Photos show before, during, and after results of prescribed burns, which aim to conserve and restore the endangered ecological community of Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub. Over 120 personnel from multiple agencies coordinate controlled fires to improve the health of 18% of this at-risk habitat.
New & Modified Oil & Gas Drilling Regulations Proposed by the PA Environmenta...Marcellus Drilling News
This document contains definitions for terms used in Chapter 78 of Title 25 of the Pennsylvania Code regarding oil and gas wells. It defines over 80 terms, including conventional and unconventional formations, pits, containment systems, water sources, well operators, and more. It also outlines application requirements for well permits, including providing information on business entities, consulting the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program to avoid environmental impacts, and notifying relevant agencies for certain locations near public resources.
The document summarizes a request to rezone 120 acres from agricultural to industrial use to allow for the development of a limestone quarry. Key details include:
- The site is currently farmed and zoned for agriculture. Surrounding uses are also agricultural.
- Concerns were raised about impacts to traffic, water resources, property values, and consistency with the land use plan.
- Township and county planning bodies recommended denying the rezoning due to environmental and community impacts.
The Parkersburg Site in West Virginia contains an engineered disposal cell for radioactive waste from a former uranium mill. Major long-term stewardship activities include monitoring the disposal cell, restricting access, inspecting fencing and signs, and monitoring groundwater. The 6-hectare site has been monitored since 1983, with disposal of approximately 15,300 cubic meters of waste in the cell. Annual costs average around $16,400, with higher costs every 5 years for groundwater monitoring. The site will remain under long-term stewardship by the DOE indefinitely to ensure the integrity of the disposal cell.
The document discusses rehabilitation of open pit mines in the Philippines. It covers the adverse environmental and social impacts of open pit mining, Philippine policies requiring rehabilitation, state-of-the-art rehabilitation practices, and challenges for Philippine mines. The key challenges are ensuring open pits and pit lakes do not become long-term liabilities and developing them for beneficial end uses through collaborative government-industry efforts.
The document provides information on two sites in Pennsylvania - the Burrell Site and the Canonsburg Site. For the Burrell Site, it summarizes that the major activities are disposal cell and groundwater monitoring with access restrictions. The site size is 28 hectares and the estimated annual cost from 2000-2006 was $51,600. For the Canonsburg Site, it summarizes the major activities are disposal cell monitoring, groundwater and surface water monitoring, and access restrictions, with a site size of 14 hectares and estimated annual cost from 2000-2006 of $148,000.
The Lakeview Site in Oregon contains a disposal cell that received approximately 722,000 cubic meters of contaminated materials from the nearby Lakeview Mill uranium processing site. The U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for long-term stewardship activities at the site, including monitoring the disposal cell and maintaining institutional controls. Annual inspections evaluate the condition of surface features and groundwater monitoring assesses initial disposal cell performance. Estimated annual long-term stewardship costs are $111,000 through at least 2070 to ensure protection of human health and the environment.
The document summarizes long-term stewardship activities at Amchitka Island in Alaska. Major activities include soil and groundwater monitoring to ensure restrictions on access to subsurface contamination are enforced. The site covers 30,000 hectares and long-term stewardship is estimated to cost $23,000 annually and will continue in perpetuity. Monitoring involves sampling soil and groundwater every 5 years to restrict access to nuclear test sites on the island and ensure contaminants remain isolated.
This document provides erosion and sediment control guidelines for the Wellington region. It discusses factors that influence erosion such as climate, soil characteristics, topography and ground cover. It outlines principles of erosion and sediment control including minimizing disturbance, protecting waterbodies, rapidly stabilizing exposed areas, and inspecting erosion and sediment control structures. Various erosion and sediment control measures are described such as runoff diversion channels, contour drains, sediment retention ponds, silt fences, and revegetation techniques. The document also provides erosion control guidance for activities like quarries, forestry operations, and works in waterbodies.
This document provides recommendations to supplement an existing Phase II Wetland Mitigation Plan for a property located at 354 Old Whitfield Road in Guilford, CT. It recommends that the plan graphically illustrate existing groundwater depths and elevations, delineate original site conditions such as flood zones and wetland areas, address concerns raised by a citizens group regarding past debris and fill, establish baseline elevations and conduct soil testing of current site conditions, provide more detailed plans for proposed regrading and restoration including drainage and planting, and develop a 5-year maintenance and monitoring plan as recommended by a wetlands scientist. It also recommends considering additional recommendations from wildlife agencies and nurseries.
Provide wetland mitigation plans to the town of Guilford, Connecticut regarding a parcel of property with areas of concern regarding presumed filled wetlands.
Northampton Landfill Waiver from DEP 06-23-2006Adam Cohen
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection approved a waiver request from regulatory siting criteria for a proposed expansion of the Northampton Landfill. The expansion areas are located within the Zone II of a public drinking water well and a Potentially Productive Aquifer. The Department determined that strict compliance with the criteria would result in undue hardship and not minimize adverse impacts. The waiver was necessary to accommodate the regional need for additional landfill capacity and would not diminish protection of public health, safety, or the environment.
Michael Bowen has built a career in business development, marketing, and helping others to develop and explode their communication and thinking skills. As a consultant, Michael Bowen Oil and Gas investments providing biggest advantages of tax deductions.
The document provides a geotechnical master plan for a proposed residential community called Joy Ranch Housing situated on 622.86 acres. 14 exploratory borings were performed across the site to determine soil characteristics in different parcels. Testing showed predominantly clayey sands near the surface. Groundwater levels were found to be deep, between 301-511 feet below surface. Based on soil testing, design recommendations are provided for structure footings and retaining walls to account for soil properties and planned building loads, including for an elementary school and pedestrian bridge. Issues like collapse, subsidence, fissures and sulfate are also addressed.
San Manuel 1999 Ore Reserves Report (Draft)Gary Sutton
This document summarizes the oxide ore reserves report for the San Manuel copper mine as of June 1, 1999. It details the geology, exploration history, mining operations, and block model used to estimate reserves of xxx.x million kilograms of recoverable copper remaining at the mine, primarily within the in situ leaching reserves. Production from in situ leaching has averaged 2.3 million pounds of copper per month. The report provides the background and methodology used to estimate reserves for SEC reporting requirements.
Range Resources Voluntary Plan to Close Yeager Wastewater Impoundment in SWPAMarcellus Drilling News
A voluntary plan created and submitted by Range Resources to the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection to permanently close (and restore) the Yeager wastewater impoundment (i.e. open pond) site in Amwell Township, located in Washington County, PA. The plan was tweaked by the DEP to require Range to test for certain compounds underneath the two liners in the impoundment--liners that, according to Range, had holes in both layers.
The Burrell Site and Canonsburg Site summaries are as follows:
Burrell Site:
- Major activities include disposal cell and groundwater monitoring and access restrictions
- Site size is 28 hectares
- Estimated average annual cost from FY2000-2006 is $51,600
Canonsburg Site:
- Major activities include disposal cell monitoring, groundwater/surface water monitoring, access restrictions, and inspections
- Site size is 14 hectares
- Estimated average annual cost from FY2000-2006 is $148,000
The document provides information about two sites in Kentucky - the Maxey Flats Disposal Site and the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. It summarizes that the Maxey Flats site accepted low-level radioactive waste until 1977 and is undergoing remediation expected to be complete by 2003, at which point the Commonwealth of Kentucky will assume long-term stewardship responsibilities. It also summarizes that the Paducah plant has been operating since 1952 to enrich uranium, and that DOE is currently conducting cleanup activities of environmental contamination from plant operations expected to be complete by 2010, along with long-term monitoring and maintenance.
The Water Management Plan at Minorca Surface Coal Mine allowed for effective monitoring and protection of on-site waterways. Key issues identified included low pH and high nickel concentrations at monitoring point CM4, indicating acid mine drainage. Increased chloride levels were also detected in site discharges. The plan enabled swift action through expanded sampling and predictive model updates to reduce risks. Adaptions to mining operations, like increased storage pond testing and dilution, additionally helped address issues. Ultimately, the interactive plan received regulator approval and ensured negligible environmental impacts.
This document provides details for a Notice of Work application to develop the Swamp Point North Aggregate Project in British Columbia. The project will involve developing a sand and gravel quarry over 5 years to produce 235,000 tonnes per year. Project components include the quarry, a crushing and washing plant, conveyors, a barge load-out facility, and an upgraded access road. Archaeological assessments found low potential for impacts to cultural resources. The proponent has signed an agreement with the local Metlakatla First Nation regarding economic participation and regulatory approval. Management plans are included in the appendices to address operations, water management, reclamation and environmental protection.
Tropical Resources Pty Ltd conducted exploration on EL28790 during the second year of their six year license term. Work during the second year consisted of office studies and a short field reconnaissance trip with a potential partner. Plans for the third year include geological surveying and a proposed geophysical survey focused on the basement rocks to evaluate the prospectivity for phosphate, base metals, and iron. Expenditure for the second year totaled $74,000.
The document discusses three sites in Nevada - the Central Nevada Test Area, Nevada Test Site and Tonopah Test Range, and Project Shoal. For the Central Nevada Test Area:
- One subsurface nuclear test was conducted in 1968, with ongoing groundwater monitoring and access restrictions required.
- Surface remediation of contaminated soil pits will be complete by 2001, with long-term monitoring and controls over residual subsurface contamination indefinitely.
- Annual costs for long-term stewardship are estimated at $37,000.
The geology of aframtwo, dabaa, wioso and their environs in the ashanti regio...atbecket
This field mapping report summarizes work done by a group to map an area in northern Kumasi, Ghana over two weeks. The report includes:
1) Background information on the study area such as location, topography, climate, vegetation, and land use.
2) A description of the mapping equipment and procedures used which included a base map, compass, samples, and note-taking.
3) Details of the various maps produced, including traverse, outcrop, structural, geological, and cross-section maps.
4) Analysis of the geological setting including regional geology of the Birimian system, local stratigraphy of granitoids and metasediments, observed structures like joints and veins
The Parkersburg Site is a 6-hectare former uranium mill site that now contains an engineered disposal cell. Long-term stewardship activities include monitoring the disposal cell, restricting access, inspections, and maintenance. The estimated annual cost from 2000-2006 was $16,400. The site will be maintained in perpetuity.
This document summarizes a case study of subzone redevelopment in the Long Beach Unit of the Wilmington oil field in California. The original development completed wells across entire reservoir zones, leading to poor vertical conformance during waterflooding. A pilot program completed new injectors and producers in isolated subzones, demonstrating improved conformance and recovery. This led to an expanded interim program completing additional subzone wells across multiple zones, confirming high remaining oil and improved performance over original full-zone completions. Subzone redevelopment successfully improved oil recovery from the field.
The (Atlas) Moab Mill site is a former uranium milling site located on 162 hectares near Moab, Utah. Operations from 1956 to 1988 created uranium mill tailings and other wastes occupying around 53 hectares. The U.S. Department of Energy will be responsible for long-term stewardship if needed. Per the 2001 National Defense Authorization Act, the Department of Energy must prepare a remediation plan considering relocating wastes to an offsite disposal cell and restoring groundwater, in consultation with other groups. Long-term activities are not expected to begin until after 2006.
Observed Impacts of Marcellus Shale Drilling on Agricultural LandsGeorge_Frantz
The document summarizes observed impacts of Marcellus Shale drilling on agricultural lands in Bradford County, Pennsylvania. Typical well pad sites are 3-5 acres in size with gravel surfaces. Drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations can last several months. Proper restoration, including regrading, reseeding, and two years of monitoring is important. Gas collection lines and transmission lines can cause temporary disruption during construction but follow stormwater and restoration best practices. Heavy truck traffic increases during drilling. New York guidelines aim to site wells and roads to minimize agricultural impacts and ensure proper restoration.
Similar to NATCL Biopile Management Plan Dec 2014 - IFU (20)
Observed Impacts of Marcellus Shale Drilling on Agricultural Lands
NATCL Biopile Management Plan Dec 2014 - IFU
1. CANTUNG MINE
PREPARED BY NORTH AMERICAN TUNGSTEN CORPORATION LTD.
BIOPILE (LANDFARM) MANAGEMENT PLAN
CANTUNG MINE, GNWT
ISSUED FOR USE
DECEMBER 22, 2014
COPY #: ASSIGNED TO:
2. RECORD OF REVISIONS AND DISTRIBUTION LIST
Record of Revisions
REVISON NUMBER DATE SECTION REVISED, ADDED OR DELETED
0 30/09/2014 Initial Plan
1
2
3
Distribution List
COPY # DEPARTMENT/AGENCY CONTACT PHONE
1 Head Office Kurt Heikkila 604 684 5300
2 Mine Manager Jason McKenzie/Brian
Delaney
604 759 0913 ext. 363
3 Environmental Superintendent Deborah Flemming/David
Vokey
604 759 0913 ext. 275
4 Maintenance Superintendent Brian Harvey/Jon
MacCurdy
604 759 0913 ext. 227
5 - 7 MVLWB Julian Morse 867 766 7453
8 GNWT – Regulatory Officer Jarret Hardisty 867 695 2626
9 Wenck Associates, Inc Rodney Ambrosie, P.Eng 612 889 0764 cell
3. ISSUED FOR USE i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cantung Mine (Landfarm) Biopile Management Plan Sept 2014
PAGE
RECORD OF REVISIONS AND DISTRIBUTION LIST................................................................................. II
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Regulatory Background ............................................................................................................ 3
2.0 GENERAL SITE INFORMATION........................................................................................................ 4
2.1 Location.................................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Climate ..................................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 BIOPILE DESIGN............................................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Biopile Location ........................................................................................................................ 6
3.2 Biopile Cells.............................................................................................................................. 8
4.0 BIOPILE OPERATIONS................................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Soil Chemistry......................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Acceptable Materials .............................................................................................................. 10
4.3 Time Requirements ................................................................................................................ 10
4.4 Remediation Standards .......................................................................................................... 11
4.4.1 Soil Standards ........................................................................................................... 11
4.4.2 Leachate Standards................................................................................................... 12
4.5 Remediation Methods............................................................................................................. 12
4.5.1 Cover......................................................................................................................... 13
4.5.2 Aeration ..................................................................................................................... 13
4.5.3 Nutrients .................................................................................................................... 13
4.5.4 Moisture..................................................................................................................... 13
4.6 Leachate Management........................................................................................................... 14
5.0 SAMPLING AND MONITORING ...................................................................................................... 14
5.1 Soil Sampling.......................................................................................................................... 14
5.2 Leachate Sampling................................................................................................................. 14
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL....................................................................... 15
7.0 CLOSURE AND RECLAMATION..................................................................................................... 15
8.0 SIGNATURE..................................................................................................................................... 17
9.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................. 19
4. ISSUED FOR USE ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cantung Mine (Landfarm) Biopile Management Plan Sept 2014
PAGE
APPENDICES
Appendix A Soil Sampling Results
5. 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Biopile (Landfarm) Management Plan was developed to formalize the soil remediation
practices and procedures to be employed by North American Tungsten Corporation Ltd.
(NATCL) at the Cantung Mine. Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments (Gartner
Lee Limited, 2002; EBA, 2009) revealed petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC) contamination as a
result of the extension of Tailings Pond 4 (TP4) into a historic waste disposal area. This soil
was excavated and stored on top of Tailings Pond 3 (TP3). NATCL has committed to
remediating or removing this, and any additional contaminated soil, as part of its Closure and
Reclamation Plan.
The purpose of this plan is to ensure the proper management, treatment, and monitoring of
contaminated soils during biopile operations and that all regulatory requirements pertaining
to biopile operations are followed. The Biopile (Landfarm) Management Plan should be read in
conjunction with the overall site Waste Management Plan.
1.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
This Biopile (Landfarm) Management Plan has been developed in accordance with the
requirements that are outlined in the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board Water
License MV2002L2-0019;
Part E.25. “The Licensee shall provide to the board for approval 60 (sixty) days prior
to the construction of any new landfarm an engineered design for the landfarm that
includes but is not limited to:
a. A description of the site characteristics, including surface and
subsurface characteristics, geotechnical characteristics and site Water
Management plans;
b. Construction and materials specifications including the Licensee’s
Quality Assurance and Quality Control program;
c. A geotechnical analysis, which may include, but is not limited to: settlement,
slope stability, groundwater seepage and contaminant transport, and
any liner performance;
d. The details of a volume balance and Landfarm sizing that considers
expected hydrocarbon contaminated soil and snow to be contained;
e. The details of leachate management that includes but is not limited to:
estimation of leachate generated; leachate collection and disposal; and
leachate sampling and monitoring;
f. An operational plan that details, but is not limited to: acceptable soil types to
be deposited in the Landfarm; remediation standards; and methods and
frequency of any soil conditioning to promote remediation;
6. 4
g. The spatial and temporal monitoring program for soil chemistry within
the Landfarm;
h. The location for the proposed Landfarm on a map to scale with GPS
coordinates; and
i. A detailed closure plan for the Landfarm.”
Annual reporting of treated soil is required in the Water License as per Section B.2 (g)
“…the monthly and annual quantity in cubic meters of soil treated in the Landfarm.”
2.0 GENERAL SITE INFORMATION
NATCL has operated the Cantung Tungsten Mine at Tungsten, NWT since 2001. Mining
operations at the Cantung Mine commenced in 1962 as an open pit mine, with suspensions
in 1962 and 1966. The discovery of the “E zone” ore body in 1971 resulted in the
development of an underground mine from 1973 onwards. The mine was in operation until
its temporary closure in 1986, and finally re-opened in 2001. The mine was then again
temporarily closed in 2009 and re-opened in 2010 with an extended mine life.
Prior to the 1986 closure, mine personnel lived in the town site of Tungsten with their
families. The mine is now operated on a fly-in/fly-out basis and parts of the former town
site are still used to house staff.
2.1 LOCATION
The Cantung Mine is located in the Mackenzie Mountains, approximately 5 km from the
NWT-Yukon Territory border and approximately 310 km northeast of Watson Lake
(Figure 1). The Cantung Mine is located near the headwaters of the Flat River in a narrow
valley surrounded by the mountains of the Mackenzie range. The elevations of the
mountain peaks in the immediate area of the property range from 1,981 to 2,750 m above
sea level. The main rivers are northwest-southeast trending at elevations of 914 to 1,067m
above sea level.
The Flat River Valley has been in-filled with unconsolidated sediments, largely deposited by
glacial meltwater associated with the last phase of the continental ice retreat. The deposits
are interbedded sand and gravels, with occasional silty sand layers, to a depth of roughly 30
m. These sediments are overlain by fluvial sands and gravels from the Flat River and
tributary streams emanating from the valley sides. There is no evidence of permafrost at the
Site.
7. 5
FIGURE 1 MINE SITE LOCATION MAP
2.2 CLIMATE
Climatic conditions in this area are typically sub-arctic. Average temperatures during the
winter period from November to March range from -6°C to -40°C. Blizzard conditions
during January and February are frequent but usually of short duration. Maximum snow
depth in the valleys during the winter averages about 127 cm. The snow-free season extends
from mid-May to early October. Total annual precipitation averages about 636mm, with
approximately half occurring as rain and half as snow.
8. 6
3.0 BIOPILE DESIGN
Landfarming has a demonstrated success record in treating petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC)
contaminated soil, even in cold climates with short summer seasons. A traditional landfarm
is typically an engineered berm where soil is aerated and fertilized to allow for
biodegradation and oxidation of PHC contaminants. A large surface area is typically
required, as well as lining and ditching to prevent infiltration of leachate to groundwater and
contamination of surface water features. This type of structure has high capital costs that
would be prohibitive to a small mining operation such as Cantung. Additionally, the
footprint of the Cantung Mine is relatively small and confined in a narrow mountainous
valley. As such, space for a traditional landfarm is limited.
The contaminated soil requiring remediation is currently stockpiled on top of Tailings Pond
3 (TP3). Locating a “landfarm” here is advantageous in that it does not require the
disturbance of any new land and eliminates the need to transfer the soil to a different
location. There are used fuel tanks on site that are no longer usable for their intended
purpose. These tanks will be used to house the “landfarm” or, more accurately, biopile. The
biopile cells will operate on the same principles as a traditional landfarm (i.e. requiring
aeration and fertilization) but will be contained within steel tanks. This eliminates the need
for a lined system with drainage ditching. This will significantly decrease construction time.
3.1 BIOPILE LOCATION
The proposed biopile operation on the top of TP3 is located at 541263 E and 6870035 N
(Figure 2). The design and location of the biopile have been selected to minimize
geotechnical issues relating to stability, seepage, contaminant transport and settlement.
Since the material will be stored in steel tanks, the effects of seepage and contaminant
transport have been mitigated. Therefore, since the tanks themselves will provide collection
of leachate, a liner system will not be needed. The proximity of the tanks to the tailings
slopes is such that the effects of the tanks on TP3 are negligible. In addition, the tanks will
provide support for the material, mitigating any possible failures of material as it will be
constrained by the tank walls. The tailings themselves consist of fine sand that can provide
adequate bearing capacity for the tanks to sit on. Settlement of the tanks will be negligible
and will not affect the integrity of the tanks.
10. 8
3.2 BIOPILE CELLS
The biopile cells will be contained within single-walled fuel tanks stored on site that are no
longer usable for their original purpose. Two tanks with a 45 m3
capacity will be halved
length-wise to create four cells, allowing approximately 90 m3
of soil to be treated at any
given time. Each of the four cells will be further divided in half with a welded section of
steel to provide a total of eight individual cells (Figure 3). Field trials will be conducted
during the first active working season of the biopile, with each individual cell receiving
differing treatments (Section 4.3). This will allow NATCL to determine the optimal
treatment regime, which will be applied to all eight cells in subsequent active working
seasons.
Each tank will be fitted with a 2-inch drain with shut-off valve, to allow for leachate
drainage and collection. One end of the fuel tanks will be propped to slope the cells slightly
and promote leachate drainage to the drainage valves (Figure 3). A 2” slotted PVC pipe will
be wrapped in geotextile cloth and fitted into the bottom of the steel divider, to allow
drainage from both halves of each biopile cell. Any excess moisture will be drained into
totes or 45 gallon drums, and sampled to determine leachate quality (Section 5.2)
Aeration and soil mixing will be achieved through the use of heavy equipment. To ensure
that the tanks are not damaged by heavy equipment during this process, the tanks will be
surrounded by a perimeter of cement blocks or other appropriate barriers.
11. 9
FIGURE 3 BIOPILE CONCEPTUAL DRAWING
Protective
Barrier
Steel Divider
2” Leachate Drain
Single Walled Tank
45 Gallon Drum
Prop for Drainage
Sloping
12. 10
4.0 BIOPILE OPERATIONS
4.1 SOIL CHEMISTRY
Sampling of the PHC contaminated soil was conducted in 2009 as part of a Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment (EBA, 2009). Discrete and composite samples were taken
from the three stockpiles of contaminated soil that existed at that time (an approximate
volume of 415 m3
). The results of the investigation revealed that contaminants of concern
included petroleum hydrocarbon fractions F2 and F3 and select metals (arsenic, copper,
nickel, selenium, and zinc). F2 fractions are hydrocarbons with 10 to 16 carbon atoms (i.e.,
C10-C16) and F3 fractions are hydrocarbons with 16 to 34 carbon atoms (i.e., C16-C34).
An estimated 600 m3
of PHC contaminated soil currently exists on site. The three
preexisting stockpiles were re-sampled in May 2014 to determine their current contaminant
levels. This revealed that contaminants of concern are very similar to those identified in
2009 (Appendix A – Tables 1 and 3). Hydrocarbon fractions F2 and F3, as well as arsenic,
copper, selenium and zinc are present in concentrations exceeding industrial remediation
objectives (see Section 4.2).
Background samples of undisturbed soil were also obtained and analyzed for metals, BTEX,
and F1-F4 fractions. The sampling results (Appenidx A – Tables 2 and 4) indicate elevated
levels of select metals (arsenic, copper, and zinc), although these are limited. There are no
hydrocarbon exceedances in the background samples.
4.2 ACCEPTABLE MATERIALS
In light of the May 2014 sampling results, the focus of the treatment at the biopiles will be
light hydrocarbon fractions such as gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. Heavier petroleum
hydrocarbon fractions (i.e. F4) such as waste oils are not as readily degradable and may
remain in contaminated soils for extended periods of time (Sanscartier et al., 2009; DeBeers,
2013). The results of the 2009 and 2014 investigations did not however, reveal F4 fractions
as a contaminant of concern. Should soil become contaminated with heavy fraction PHC
products, they will not be accepted at the biopile for treatment, and will be shipped off-site
as hazardous waste.
As metals are not biodegradable, the soil will not be treated for metals removal in the
biopiles. When a batch of soil has been successfully remediated for PHC’s, the soil will be
resampled for metals. A strategy for disposal of any metals contaminated soil will be
developed at that time, with disposal to tailings being a possible consideration.
4.3 TIME REQUIREMENTS
An estimated 600 m3
of PHC contaminated soil currently exists on site. Given that the total
soil volume that can be treated at any one time is approximately 90 m3
, the contaminated
soil will be treated in about six batches. Landfarming studies conducted in the Canadian
13. 11
Arctic (McCarthy et al., 2004; Sanscartier et al., 2009) have successfully remediated
contaminated soils in minimal timeframes (i.e. one to three working seasons). The actual
time required to fully remediate a batch will, however, be highly variable and dependent on
the contaminant levels and treatment regime chosen. The results of the field trials will serve
to identify the most efficient remediation strategy and its approximate time requirements.
4.4 REMEDIATION STANDARDS
The results of the soil and leachate sampling programs (Section 5.1 and 5.2) will be
compared to remediation objectives based on GNWT and CCME guidelines, as well as
criteria defined in NATCL’s Closure and Reclamation Plan as it is developing.
4.4.1 Soil Standards
Laboratory analysis will be conducted for both petroleum hydrocarbon (PHC) fractions F1-
F4 and BTEX compounds in order to capture all possible petroleum contaminants. The
results for PHC fractions F1-F4 will be compared to the Canada Wide Standard (CWS) for
petroleum hydrocarbons in soil established by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the
Environment (CCME, 2001).
BTEX compounds are specific aromatic compounds falling within the F1 fraction (i.e.
benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylene) that are normally managed separately (GNWT,
2003). Remediation objectives for BTEX compounds are not included in the CWS;
therefore sampling results will be compared to the criteria established by the GNWT for
coarse grained surface soil (GNWT, 2003).
Results will be compared to both Industrial and Residential/Parkland land use criteria. Soil
will be remediated to the most stringent set of criteria for both sets of parameters, namely
the Residential/Parkland standards (Table 1). Sampling results will be compared to the
Industrial land use criteria internally, as a measure of progress and to allow for a better
understanding of the time requirements for remediation.
TABLE 1 SOIL REMEDIATION OBJECTIVES
Parameter
Tier 1 CCME Canada Wide Standards for
Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Soil (mg/kg) Parameter
GNWT Environmental Guideline for
Contaminated Site Remediation (mg/kg)
Residential/Parkland Industrial Residential/Parkland Industrial
PHC F1 30 320 Benzene 0.5 5
PHC F2 150 260 Ethyl
Benzene
1.2 20
PHC F3 300 1700 Toluene 0.8 0.8
PHC F4 2800 3300 Xylene 1 20
14. 12
Once the contaminated soil has been treated to the Residential/Parkland remediation
objectives in Table 1, it will be considered clean and appropriate for closure/reclamation
activities.
4.4.2 Leachate Standards
The compliance parameter limits set for Station S4-43 in Table E2 of the Type A Water
License (Table 2) will be used as a guideline for acceptable biopile leachate quality. Leachate
that complies with parameter limits set out in Table 2 will be discharged to TP5 and treated
at the wastewater treatment facility. Leachate that exceeds these limits will be appropriately
labelled and shipped off site as hazardous waste (Section 4.4).
TABLE 2 LEACHATE PARAMETER LIMITS
Parameter
Type A Water License MV2002L2-0019, Section E.21.
Maximum Average Concentration Maximum Concentration of any Grab Sample
EPH 4.00 mg/L 5.00 mg/L
Benzene 4.00 ppm
Ethyl Benzene 2.00 ppm
Toluene 0.39 ppm
4.5 REMEDIATION METHODS
The three pre-existing stockpiles characterized in 2009 by EBA and again in 2014 by
NATCL will be remediated first, as more is known about their origins and contamination
level. It is anticipated that this volume of soil (approximately 415 m3
) will take a number of
years to remediate. At that time, the remaining stockpiled soil will be sampled and
characterized. The appropriate method of remediation, whether it is biopile treatment or
off-site disposal, will be determined at that time. If any new contaminated soil is generated,
it will be stored separately on TP3 with its origins, type of contamination, and location in
the stockpile storage area documented. All soil will be sampled prior to treatment in the
biopile cells to determine initial contaminant levels and appropriate treatment methods.
To determine the optimal treatment regime, NATCL will conduct field trials on eight
individual biopile cells during the first working season. The different treatment regimen will
vary the aeration levels, nutrient levels, and the application of a cover during the summer
months.
15. 13
4.5.1 Cover
Four biopile cells will receive a cover during the summer months in the form of a dark
coloured tarp to trap heat and warm the biopile. Tires will be placed on top of the pile to
create airspace and allow for air circulation under the tarp. Providing a warm environment
for soil microorganisms can not only extend the length of the working season, but can
possibly aid in enhanced bioremediation (Paudyn et al., 2008).
The other four biopile cells will remain uncovered and exposed to the elements. This may
negate the need for watering of the piles as they will be exposed to precipitation, and can
enhance volatilization of lighter hydrocarbon fractions (Sanscartier et al., 2009). The
benefits of warming the pile via use of a cover are also not proven, and this trial will help
determine its necessity.
4.5.2 Aeration
In each set of four biopiles (covered and uncovered), two cells will receive biweekly aeration
and two cells will receive monthly aeration. Mixing the soil provides oxygen to
microorganisms, enhances volatilization of lighter hydrocarbons, and evenly distributes
fertilizer amendments. Aeration will be achieved through the use of heavy equipment, and
should also be conducted when adding amendments to ensure uniform mixing. Some
studies have shown that an aggressive aeration schedule can significantly decrease the time
required for remediation (McCarthy, 2004), although low maintenance landfarms are
typically aerated once per month (Sanscartier et al., 2009; De Beers, 2013). Access to heavy
equipment during the busy summer months may be limited, thus it will beneficial to
determine whether additional aeration has any impact on remediation time.
4.5.3 Nutrients
It is well documented that the addition of nutrients stimulates the biodegradation of
hydrocarbon contaminants. Nitrogen and phosphorous will be added to the biopile cells in
the form of fertilizer. Studies have shown that low level nutrient addition is most beneficial,
as high levels can actually inhibit microbial activity (Braddock et al., 1997). The
recommended nitrogen to phosphorous ratio varies from anywhere between 2:1 and 15:1.
Within each set of four biopiles, two cells will receive fertilization with an N:P nutrient
concentration ratio of 10:1, while the other two will receive fertilization with an N:P
nutrient concentration of 2:1. While nitrogen is typically the limiting nutrient in landfarm
systems (Braddock et al., 1997), it will be useful to determine whether increasing the
amount of nitrogen will have any significant benefit.
4.5.4 Moisture
The contaminated soil will be monitored regularly by visual inspection for moisture content
during the working season. Dry soils can promote volatilization of hydrocarbons, but
moisture is essential for biodegradation (Sanscartier, 2009). The soil in all biopile cells,
regardless of treatment regime, should remain moist but not fully saturated. It is likely that
the uncovered cells will not require the addition of moisture as they will be exposed to
16. 14
precipitation. Should either covered or uncovered cells require moisture addition, the water
will be sourced from the waste water treatment facility, transferred in totes to TP3, and
sprayed onto the biopiles.
4.6 LEACHATE MANAGEMENT
Excess moisture within the biopile cells will be collected in totes or 45 gallon drums via the
2” drainage valves installed on the fuel tanks. The leachate will be sampled as it is produced
to determine water quality (see Section 5.2). Should the sampling results meet the criteria as
defined in Part E, Table E2 of the water license, the leachate will be discharged to TP5 and
treated at the wastewater treatment facility. Should the sampling results exceed these
criteria, the totes or drums will be appropriately labelled and shipped off site as hazardous
waste.
All biopile cells, regardless of treatment regime, will be covered with tarps during the winter
months. The tarps will be erected so as to ensure snow and rain run off the cells, and the
soil does not absorb this excess precipitation.
5.0 SAMPLING AND MONITORING
5.1 SOIL SAMPLING
Soil characterization and tracking of remediation progress will be achieved through a soil
sampling program. Initial sampling of the three pre-existing stockpiles has been conducted
in May 2014 to confirm the results of the 2009 Phase II ESA and to further characterize the
contaminated soils. At the beginning of the first working season, soil from these stockpiles
will be homogenized using heavy equipment and placed into the eight individual biopile
cells. The soil in each cell will then be re-sampled to determine initial contaminant levels.
The soil will be sampled twice per working season – once at the beginning and once at the
end. Samples will be analyzed for both PHC fractions F1-F4 and BTEX compounds by
AGAT Laboratories in Burnaby, BC. The results of these sampling events will be compared
to the remediation objectives outlined Section 4.2.1. Once the soil has been remediated to
the Residential/Parkland guidelines, it will be considered clean. The cell will be emptied and
re-filled with contaminated soil and the process will begin again.
5.2 LEACHATE SAMPLING
Sampling of leachate will occur as needed throughout the working season as totes/drums
become full. At the end of the active working season, all remaining leachate will be sampled
to determine its disposal method prior to the winter months. Leachate samples will be
analyzed for extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPH) and BTEX compounds by AGAT
Laboratories in Burnaby, BC. The results of sampling events will be compared to the
parameter limits set out in Section 4.2.2. If leachate does not exceed these limits it will be
17. 15
disposed of in TP5, otherwise it will be appropriately labelled and shipped off site as
hazardous waste.
6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
Soil and leachate samples will be collected, preserved, stored, and shipped as per the Water
Quality Sampling Quality Assurance and Quality Control Manual issued under separate cover. All
samples will be analyzed by AGAT Laboratories, an accredited lab by the Canadian
Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc.
Once per working season, duplicate soil and leachate samples will be collected in order to
monitor the precision and accuracy of the laboratory conducting the analyses, and to
identify any deficiencies in sampling techniques.
To ensure that each biopile cell is clearly delineated and receives its appropriate treatment
regime during the field trials, durable signage will be erected at each cell indicating the
treatment regime. The steel sections dividing each tank in half will be taller than the height
of the tank to ensure that cells are clearly divided and that no mixing across cells occurs
during field trials.
Prior to loading soil, the fuel tanks will be partially filled with water and checked for leaks.
Any leaks found will be patched and rechecked prior to loading soil into the cells. Locating
the biopile cells on TP3 also minimizes risks to human and ecological receptors in the event
of a leak or spill of leachate. The contaminated stockpiles are also already located here, so
transporting the contaminated soil over large distances will not be necessary.
7.0 CLOSURE AND RECLAMATION
The creation and use of biopiles will contribute to the Closure and Reclamation Plan by
addressing site wide (SW) closure and reclamation plan objectives as approved by the
Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board, specifically:
SW 3 “Surface soil quality on-site is safe for future land uses,” and
SW 4 “Contaminated soils are removed and remediated.”
To achieve these objectives NATCL has committed to the closure options of in-situ
treatment or removal of contaminated soils. In order to fulfill these commitments, in-situ
treatment will be conducted as outlined in this plan. To ensure that soil quality is safe for
future land uses, NATCL has chosen to adhere to the Residential/Parkland criteria for PHC
contaminated soils as established by the CCME and GNWT.
Any persistently contaminated soil that cannot be remediated on site as per these guidelines
will be shipped off site as hazardous waste. Any leachate that exceeds the criteria outlined in
18. 16
section 4.2.2 will also be appropriately labelled and shipped off site as hazardous waste. The
successfully remediated soil may be used for cover or fill applications for progressive
reclamation activities or at mine closure.
The construction of the biopile cells is not resource intensive, and will actually extend the
life of fuel tanks that are no longer usable for their original purpose. At the end of the soil
remediation program, minimal material will require disposal. The tarps used for cover will
be landfilled on site and the tires and steel fuel tanks will be shipped off site for recycling.
On site remediation of contaminated soils through the use of low maintenance biopiles will
help to resolve a contamination issue in a cost effective manner, provide clean fill for mine
site activities, and achieve closure and reclamation objectives as set out in the Closure and
Reclamation Plan.
21. 19
9.0 REFERENCES
Braddock, J., Ruth, M., Catterall, P., Walworth, J., and McCarthy, K.A. (1997). Enhancement and
inhibition of microbial activity in hydrocarbon contaminated Arctic soils: Implications for
nutrient-amended bioremediation. Environmental Science and Technology, 31 (7): 2078-2084.
CCME Canada-Wide Standards for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHC) in Soil. Canadian
Council of Ministers of the Environment. 2001
Gaucho Kue Project, Landfarm Management Plan. DeBeers Canada. May 2013
GNWT Environmental Guideline for Contaminated Site Remediation. GNWT. November
2003
Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board Water License No. MV2002L2-0019. Mackenzie
Valley Land and Water Board. January 30, 2009.
McCarthy, K., Walker, L., Vigoren, L., and Bartel, J. (2004). Remediation of spilled petroleum
hydrocarbons by in situ landfarming at an arctic site. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 40:
31-39.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update and Phase II Environmental Site
Assessment, Cantung Mine, NT. EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. February 2009
Paudyn, K., Rutter, A., Kerry Rowe, R., and Poland, J. (2008). Remediation of hydrocarbon
contaminated soils in the Canadian Arctic by landfarming. Cold Regions Science and Technology,
53: 102-114.
Sanscartier, D., Laing, T., Reimer, K., and Zeeb, B. (2009). Bioremediation of weathered petroleum
hydrocarbon soil contamination in the Canadian High Arctic: Laboratory and field studies.
Chemosphere, 77: 1121-1126.