Record of Decision for Remedial Actions at Operable Unit 4, Fernald Environmental Management Project, Fernald, Ohio

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Record of Decision for Remedial Actions at Operable Unit 4,

Fernald Environmental Management Project, Fernald, Ohio

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Record of Decision (ROD) for Operable Unit 4 (OU4) at the

Fernald Environmental Management Project was signed by the Department

of Energy on November 3, 1994, and was approved by the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) Region V on December 7, 1994, with concurrence

of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. This decision was made in

accordance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et

seq. For OU4 at Fernald, the Department has chosen to complete an

integrated CERCLA/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. To

support the selection of a remedy for OU4, which includes K-65 silo

wastes, the [[Page 2093]] Department prepared an integrated Feasibility

Study/Proposed Plan-Environmental Impact Statement (FS/PP-EIS) (DOE/

EIS-0195). Subsequent to the public involvement opportunities on the

draft and final FS/PP-EIS documents, and after having considered the

comments received, a remedy was selected in a joint CERCLA/NEPA ROD.

The Department is publishing this Declaration Statement of the joint

CERCLA/NEPA ROD, as originally signed in November 1994, as specified in

the Department NEPA regulations [10 CFR 1021.315(c)].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information on the CERCLA/NEPA ROD at Fernald, contact:

Mr. Gary Stegner, Public Affairs Specialist, Fernald Area Office, U.S.

Department of Energy, P.O. Box 538705, Cincinnati, Ohio 45253-8705,

(513) 648-3014.

For further information on the DOE NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol

M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Oversight, EH-25, U.S.

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, D.C.

20585, (202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756.

Issued in Washington, D.C., this 30th day of December, 1994.

Clyde Frank,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is the verbatim Declaration

Statement of the joint CERCLA/NEPA ROD for Remedial Actions at OU4 at

Fernald, Ohio.

Site Name and Location

Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) Site--Operable Unit

4, Fernald, Hamilton County, Ohio

Statement of Basis and Purpose

This decision document presents the selected remedial action for

Operable Unit 4 of the Fernald Site in Fernald, Ohio. This remedial

action was selected in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and to the

extent practicable 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 300, the

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).

For Operable Unit 4 at the FEMP, DOE has chosen to complete an

integrated CERCLA/NEPA process. This decision was based on the

longstanding interest on the part of local stakeholders to prepare an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the restoration activities at

the FEMP and on the recognition that the draft document was issued and

public comments received. Therefore, this single document is intended

to serve as DOE's ROD for Operable Unit 4 under both CERCLA and NEPA;

however, it is not the intent of the DOE to make a statement on the

legal applicability of NEPA to CERCLA actions.

The decision presented herein is based on the information available

in the administrative record for Operable Unit 4 and maintained in

accordance with CERCLA. The major documents prepared through the CERCLA

process include the Remedial Investigation (RI), the Feasibility Study

(FS), and the Proposed Plan (PP) for Operable Unit 4. The FS and the PP

also comprised DOE's draft EIS and were made available for public

review and comment. This decision is also based on the public hearing

held on March 21, 1994, in Harrison, Ohio, and the public meeting held

on May 11, 1994, in Las Vegas, Nevada following the issuance of the

Feasibility Study/Proposed Plan-Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(FS/PP-DEIS). DOE has considered all comments received during the

public comment period on the FS/PP-DEIS and following issuance of the

final EIS in the preparation of this ROD.

The State of Ohio concurs with the remedy and the applicable or

relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) put forth in this ROD for

Operable Unit 4.

Assessment of the Site

Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from Operable

Unit 4, if not addressed by implementing the response action selected

in this ROD, may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to

public health, welfare, or the environment.

Description of the Remedy

This is the selected remedial action for Operable Unit 4, one of

five operable units at the FEMP. The materials within Operable Unit 4

exhibit a wide range of properties. Most notable would be the elevated

direct radiation associated with the K-65 residues versus the much

lower direct radiation associated with cold metal oxides in Silo 3.

Even more significant would be the much lower levels of contamination

associated with the soils and building materials, like concrete, within

the Operable Unit 4 Study Area. To account for these differences and

for the varied cleanup alternatives applying to each waste type,

Operable Unit 4 was segmented into three subunits. These subunits are

described as follows:

Subunit A: Silos 1 and 2 contents (K-65 residues and bentonite clay)

and the sludge in the decant sump tank

Subunit B: Silo 3 contents (cold metal oxides)

Subunit C: Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4 structures; contaminated soils within

the Operable Unit 4 boundary, including surface and subsurface soils

and the earthen berm around Silos 1 and 2; the decant sump tank; the

radon treatment system; the concrete pipe trench and the miscellaneous

concrete structures within Operable Unit 4, any debris (i.e., concrete,

piping, etc.) generated through implementing cleanup for Subunits A and

B, and any perched groundwater encountered during remedial activities.

On the basis of the evaluation of final alternatives, the selected

remedy addressing Operable Unit 4 at the FEMP is a combination of

Alternatives 3A.1/Vit--Removal, Vitrification, and Off-site Disposal--

Nevada Test Site (NTS); 3B.1/Vit--Removal, Vitrification, and Off-site

Disposal--NTS; and 2C--Demolition, Removal and On-Property Disposal.

These alternatives apply to Subunits A, B, and C respectively. The

major components of the selected remedy include:

Removal of the contents of Silos 1, 2, and 3 (K-65

residues and cold metal oxides) and the decant sump tank sludge.

Vitrification (glassification) to stabilize the residues

and sludges removed from the silos and decant sump tank.

Off-site shipment for disposal at the NTS of the vitrified

contents of Silos 1, 2, 3, and the decant sump tank.

Demolition of Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4 and decontamination, to

the extent practicable, of the concrete rubble, piping, and other

generated construction debris.

Removal of the earthen berms and excavation of

contaminated soils within the boundary of Operable Unit 4, to achieve

remediation levels. Placement of clean backfill to original grade

following excavation.

Demolition of the vitrification treatment unit and

associated facilities after use. Decontamination or recycling of debris

prior to disposition.

On-property interim storage of excavated contaminated

soils and contaminated debris in a manner consistent with the approved

Work Plan for Removal Action 17 (improved storage of soil and debris)

pending final disposition in accordance with the [[Page 2094]] Records

of Decision for Operable Units 5 and 3, respectively.

Continued access controls and maintenance and monitoring

of the stored wastes inventories.

Institutional controls of the Operable Unit 4 area such as

deed and land use restrictions.

Potential additional treatment of stored Operable Unit 4

soil and debris using Operable Unit 3 and 5 waste treatment systems.

Pumping and treatment as required of any contaminated

perched groundwater encountered during remedial activities.

Disposal of Operable Unit 4 contaminated debris and soils

consistent with the Records of Decision for Operable Units 3 and 5,

respectively.

The remedy specifies off-site disposal of vitrified contents of

Silos 1, 2 and 3 at the NTS. At the time of the signing of this ROD,

The Department of Energy--Nevada Operations Office (DOE-NV) is in the

process of preparing a site-wide environmental impact statement (EIS)

under NEPA for the NTS. Shipments of Operable Unit 4 vitrified waste

are not proposed to begin until after the planned completion of the EIS

for the NTS.

The planned date of completion of the EIS for the NTS is December

1995, at which time a Record of Decision is expected to be issued.

Shipments of low-level waste generated from the remediation of Operable

Unit 4 are not proposed to begin until mid-1997, which should be after

the planned completion of the NTS site-wide EIS. Given these

timeframes, DOE does not anticipate the NTS EIS schedule will

negatively impact the Operable Unit 4 remediation schedule discussed in

the ROD.

The containerized vitrified product will require interim storage at

the FEMP prior to its transportation to the NTS for disposal. The

purpose of this interim storage is two-fold; first, the vitrified

product will require verification sampling in order to certify that

each production lot has met specific performance and waste disposal

criteria; and second, to provide the Fernald waste shipping program a

buffer staging area where the material can be safely managed prior to

its shipment to NTS in accordance with DOE as low as reasonably

achievable (ALARA) principles, ARARs identified and included in the

Operable Unit 4 ROD, as well as in a manner protective of human health

and the environment. It has been anticipated that the interim storage

area will be needed to accommodate the interim handling of

approximately 90 days of vitrification production.

The decision regarding the final disposition of the remaining

Operable Unit 4 contaminated soil and debris will be placed in

abeyance, until completion of the Records of Decision for Operable

Units 3 and 5 remedial actions, in order to take full advantage of

planned and in progress waste minimization treatment processes by these

operable units. Further, this strategy enables the integration of

disposal decisions for contaminated soils and debris on a site- wide

basis.

In the unlikely event unforeseen circumstances preclude the

integration of Operable Unit 4 soil and debris into the Operable Unit 3

and/or Operable Unit 5 treatment and disposal decisions, the disposal

decision for Operable Unit 4 contaminated soils and debris will be

documented in a ROD amendment for Operable Unit 4 in accordance with

Section 117(c) of CERCLA and United States Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) guidance. The ROD amendment will provide the public and

the EPA further opportunity to review and comment on the final disposal

option for Operable Unit 4 soils and debris. A ROD amendment to the

Operable Unit 4 ROD will not be necessary in the event the Operable

Unit 3 remedy for debris and the Operable Unit 5 remedy for

contaminated soils can be feasibly implemented for Operable Unit 4.

In reaching the decision to implement this remedial alternative,

DOE evaluated other alternatives for each subunit, in addition to no

action. The other alternatives are: (a) Subunit A--Silos 1 and 2

Contents: (1) Removal, Cement Stabilization, Off-Site Disposal at

Nevada Test Site; (b) Subunit B--Silo 3 Contents: (1) Removal,

Vitrification, On-Property Disposal; (2) Removal, Cement Stabilization,

On-Property Disposal; (3) Removal, Cement Stabilization, Off-Site

Disposal at Nevada Test Site; (c) Subunit C--Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4

Structures, Soils, and Debris: (1) Demolition, Removal, Off-Site

Disposal at Nevada Test Site; (2) Demolition, Removal, Off-Site

Disposal at Permitted Commercial Facility.

A description of the alternatives is provided in the Decision

Summary of the ROD, hereby incorporated by reference for DOE's NEPA

ROD, and is available in the Administrative Record. CERCLA's nine

criteria set forth in 40 CFR Part 300, the National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan were used to evaluate the

alternatives. The selected remedy represents the best balance among the

alternatives with respect to these criteria and is the environmentally

preferable alternative.

The preferred alternative for Operable Unit 4 provides the best

performance when compared with the other alternatives, with respect to

the evaluation criteria. This remedy will achieve substantial risk

reduction by removing the sources of contamination, treating the

material which poses the highest risk, shipping the treated residues

off-site for disposal, managing the remaining contaminated soils and

debris consistent with the site-wide strategy. The selected treatment

alternative both reduces the mobility of the hazardous constituents and

results in significant reduction in the volume of materials requiring

disposal. The selected remedy also provides the highest degree of long-

term protectiveness for human health and the environment.

Statutory Determinations

The selected remedy is protective of human health and the

environment, complies with Federal and State requirements that are

legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action,

and is cost effective. This remedy utilizes permanent solutions and

alternative treatment (or resource recovery) technologies to the

maximum extent practicable, and satisfies the statutory preference for

remedies that employ treatment, and also reduce toxicity, mobility, or

volume as a principal element. This remedy will result in contaminated

debris and soil being dispositioned by Operable Units 3 and 5,

respectively. Because this remedy will result in hazardous substances

(i.e., contaminated soil and debris) remaining on site, above health-

based levels, a review will be conducted every five years after

commencement of remedial action to ensure that the remedy continues to

provide adequate protection of human health and the environment.

All practical means to avoid or minimize environmental harm from

implementation of the selected remedy have been adopted. During

excavation activities, sediment controls will be implemented to

eliminate potential surface water runoff and sediment deposition to

Paddys Run. Final site layout and design will include all practicable

means (e.g., sound engineering practices and proper construction

practices) to minimize environmental impacts.

[FR Doc. 95-345 Filed 1-5-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P