1 65 Sout h Unio n Boulevar d Unio n Tower
, Suit e 100 0 Lakewood

, C O 8022 8

FINA L STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G FEASIBILIT Y STUD Y Submitte d t o U.S

. EP A Region VII I 99 9 18t h Stree t Denver

, Colorad o 8020 3 

### 375419

Terranext Projec t No

. 0610480 9 Prepare d For : Denve r & Ri o Grand e Wester n Railroa d

Ma y 13 , 199 6

Telephone : 30 3 914-170 0 Facsimile : 30 3 914-170 9 www.terranext.co mTABL E O F CONTENT S

1. 0 INTRODUCTIO

N

..................................... . 1- 1 1. 1 Purpos e and Organizatio n o f Repor t

...................... .

1- 1 1. 2 Organizatio n o f Report

.............................. . 1- 3 1 . 3 Sit e Descriptio n
................................... . 1- 3 1.3. 1 Sit e Histor y
................................. . 1- 3 1.3. 2 Climatolog y
................................ . 1- 4 1.3. 3 Geolog y
................................... . 1- 5 1.3. 4 Ground Wate r
............................... . 1- 6 1.3. 5 Surfac e Wate r
............................... . 1- 7 1.3. 6 Soil s
..................................... . 1- 8 1.3. 7 Descriptio n o f Lea d Sla g
......................... .

1- 8 1.3. 8 Descriptio n o f Individua l Sla g Pile s
.................. .

1- 9 1.3.8. 1 Th e Arkansas Valle y (AV ) Sla g Pil e
......... . 1- 9 1. 4 Remedia l Investigation s
............................. . 1-1 4 1.4. 1 Summar y o f Sla g Investigation s
................... .

1-1 4 1.4.1. 1 Stat e o f Colorad o RI
- 198 6

............. .

1-1 5 1.4.1. 2 EP A Phas e I I RI 198 9

................ .

1-1 5 1.4.1. 3 Jame s P

. Wals h an d Associate s Soil s Investigatio n - (Walsh
, 1988 )

............ .

1-16 1.4.1. 4 Jacob s Engineerin g Sla g Sampling -(EPA

, 1990a )

.......................... . 1-1 7 1.4.1. 5 D&RG W Sla g Pil e Remedia l Investigatio n Activitie s
........................ . 1-1 9 1.4. 2 Ground Wate r
.............................. . 1-2 5 1.4. 3 Surfac e Wate r
.............................. . 1-2 6 1.4. 4 Soil s
.................................... . 1-2 6 1. 5 Fat e an d Transpor t

................................ . 1-2 6 1.5. 1 Releas e Mechanis m 1 - Win d

.............................. . 1-27 1.5. 2 Releas e Mechanis m 2 - Leachin g
................... .

1-2 9 1.5. 3 Releas e Mechanis m 3 - Mixin g b y Huma n Activitie s
....... . 1-3 0 

## TerraNex t

### TABL E O F CONTENT S (continued ) 

### 1.5. 4 Releas e Mechanis m 4 - Runof f o f Sla g
.............. .

1-3 0 1.5. 5 Releas e Mechanis m 5 - Direc t Contac t

.............. .

1-3 1 1. 6 Ris k Assessmen t

................................... . 1-3 1 1.6. 1 Commercial/Industria l

Ris k Assessmen t

.............. .

1-3 1 

### 1 . 7 Cultura l Resources Surve y A V Smelte r an d Sla g Sit e
........... . 1-3 2 1.7. 1 Site Documentatio n
............................ .

1-3 3 1.7. 2 Recommendation s

............................. . 1-3 4 

### 1 . 8 Applicable o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Requirement s (ARARs ) Evaluatio n
........................................ . 1-36 

### 1.8. 1 Overview o f ARAR s
............................ .

1-3 6 

### 1.8. 2 Summar y o f ARAR s fo r th e Stockpile d Fin e Sla g
....... . 1-3 8 2 . 0 IDENTIFICATIO N

AN D SCREENIN G O F TECHNOLOGIE S

.......... . 2- 1 

### 2. 1 Remedia l Actio n Objectiv e
............................. .

2- 1 2. 2 Genera l Respons e Action s
............................. .

2- 1 3 . 0 DEVELOPMEN

T AN D SCREENIN G O F PRELIMINAR Y

REMEDIA L ACTIO N ALTERNATIVE S

FO R ALL SLA G PILE S (EPA

, 1993 )

........ . 3- 1 4 . 0 DETAILE D

ANALYSI S O F ALTERNATIVE S

FO R D&RG W STOCKPILE D

FIN E SLA G

.................................. . 4- 1 

### 4. 1 Introductio n
........................................ . 4- 1 

### 4. 2 Evaluatio n Criteri a
................................... . 4- 1 

### 4.2. 1 Overal l Protectio n o f Huma n Healt h an d th e Environmen t

.. . 4- 2 4.2. 2 Attainmen t o f ARAR s
............................ .

4- 2 

### 4.2. 3 Long-Ter m Effectivenes s an d Permanenc e
............ .

4- 2 4.2. 4 Reductio n o f Toxicity
, Mobilit y o r Volum e
.............. .

4- 3 

### 4.2. 5 Short-Ter m Effectivenes s
......................... .

4- 4 4.2. 6 Implementability
................................ . 4- 5 4.2. 7 Cos t

........................................ . 4- 5 

### 4.2. 8 Stat e Acceptanc e
............................... . 4- 6 4.2. 9 Communit y Acceptanc e
.......................... .

4- 6 

## ii TerraNex tTABLE O F CONTENT S (continued )
4. 3 Individua l Analysi s o f Alternative s
....................... .

4- 6 4.3. 1 Alternativ e 1 - N o Actio n
........................ .

4- 6 4.3.1. 1 Descriptio n

........................ .

4- 6 4.3.1. 2 Assessmen t

........................ .

4- 6 4.3. 2 Alternativ e 2 - Institutiona l Control s
.................. .

4- 9 4.3.2. 1 Descriptio n

........................ .

4- 9 4.3.2. 2 Assessmen t

........................ .

4- 9 4.3. 3 Alternativ e 3 - Resourc e Utilizatio n
................. .

4-1 1 4.3.3. 1 Descriptio n

....................... .

4-1 1 4.3.3. 2 Assessmen t

....................... .

4-1 2 5 . 0 COMPARATIV

E ANALYSI S O F ALTERNATIVE

S

................ .

5- 1 6. 0 BIBLIOGRAPH

Y

...................................... . 6- 1 APPENDICE S Appendi x A Cos t Summaries fo r Alternative s Evaluate d Appendi x B ARAR S Evaluatio n fo r Stockpile d Fin e Sla g Appendix C Responsivenes s Summar y FIGURE S Figur e 1- 1 Slag Pil e Locatio n Ma p Figur e 1- 2 Locatio n o f Stockpile d Fin e Sla g Figur e 1- 3 Huma n Healt h an d Environmen t Conceptua l Sit e Mode l TABLE S Tabl e 1- 1 Potentia l Chemica l Specifi c ARAR s fo r th e Stockpile d Fin e Sla g Tabl e 3- 1 Developmen t

an d Screenin g o f Preliminary Remedia l Alternative s Tabl e 5- 1 Gri d Compariso n Metho d fo r Alternative s Analysi s1 . 0 INTRODUCTIO N



### 1. 1 Purpos e an d Organizatio n o f Repor t 

### O n Decembe r 3 , 1991 , EP A and the Denve r and Ri o Grand e Wester n Railroa d (D&RGW ) entere d int o a n administrativ e orde r o n consent (AOC ) fo r th e performanc e
o f a Remedia l Investigation/Feasibilit

y Stud y (RI/FS ) o n lea d sla g pile s an d 

### performanc e o f specifie d studie s o n on e zin c sla g pil e a t th e Californi a Gulc h 

### Superfun d Site

, Leadville

, Colorado

. EP A studie d th e sla g pile s a s par t o f othe r variou s investigation s a t th e Sit e prio r t o th e AOC

. D&RGW performe d a Remedia l Investigatio n (Rl ) fo r seven lea d sla g pile s an d on e zin c slag pile i n 199 2 (MK
, 1992)

. Subsequen t t o th e Rl

, a Site-wid e Screenin g Feasibilit y Stud y (SFS ) wa s undertake n a s a join t effor t betwee n th e potentiall y responsibl e partie s (PRPs ) an d th e U.S

. EPA

, 

### a n d wa s complete d i n Marc h 199 3 (EPA

, 1993)

. Th e SF S screene d a numbe r o f 

### alternative s fo r al l type s o f slag locate d withi n th e sit e base d o n relativ e cost , implementabilit y an d effectiveness

. Th e SF S narrowe d th e evaluate d alternative s fro m si x t o three : n o action , institutiona l control s an d resourc e utilization

. O n Decembe r 15 , 1993 , D&RG W an d EP A entere d int o a Consen t Decre e t o perfor m 

### t h e remainde r o f th e wor k a t th e sit e relativ e t o D&RGW' s responsibilities

. A s a resul t o f th e consen t decree
, D&RG W is t o perfor m a feasibilit y stud y fo r stockpile d 

### fin e slag

. EP A determine d tha t th e primar y concern wa s wit h th e stockpile d fin e sla g
a n d release d th e greate r tha n 1/ 4 inch sla g fo r D&RGW's use
. Th e consen t decre e 

### state s "EPA' s primar y concer n i s th e fin e fractio n o f stockpile d slag
, i.e. , les s tha n 1/ 4 inc h particl e size , a s a huma n healt h exposur e pathway

. Remedia l alternative s 

### retaine d i n th e SF S an d evaluatio n wil l involv e th e result s o f EPA' s baselin e ris k assessments

. I f desired
, D&RG W may commenc e ballas t operation s withi n th e sit e prio r t o completio n o f th e feasibilit y study

. D&RG W i s require d t o submi t t o EP A a n operation s pla n which wil l b e subjec t t o EP A approva l prio r t o initiatio n o f operations. " 1 0 CIR

, 1993

. I n Jul y o f 1995 , D&RG W submitte d t o EP A a ballas t operation s pla n 

## TerraNex t 1- 1

### whic h EP A subsequentl y approved

. D&RG W commence d ballas t operation s i n 

### Augus t o f 199 5 an d continue d unti l weathe r condition s prohibite d furthe r work

. Durin g th e earl y par t o f 199 5 a commercial/industria l

risk assessmen t wa s undertake n b y EP A which resulte d i n a propose d plan

. Th e risk assessmen t conclude d tha t a n actio n leve l fo r th e on e elemen t o f concern (lead ) in soil s woul d b e approximatel y 

### 7,00 0 mg/kg

. Th e propose d pla n wa s sen t ou t fo r publi c comment wit h a closin g dat e f o r comment s o f September

, 1995

. Th e propose d pla n indicate s tha t a larg e area o f t h e commercia l industria l zone d are a withi n th e Superfun d Site woul d carr y a no actio n designation

. Fiv e areas , includin g th e soil s surroundin g th e thre e D&RGW

- 

### owne d slag piles
, woul d no t carr y a no-actio n designatio n a t thi s time , subjec t t o furthe r evaluatio n fo r healt h protectio n o f curren t an d futur e workers

. 

### Thi s Stockpile d Fin e Sla g Feasibilit y Stud y (SFSFS)

, i s bein g submitte d b y D&RG W pursuan t t o th e Consen t Decre e entere d o n Decembe r 15 , 1993

. Pursuan t t o th e Consen t Decree

, th e SFSF S addresse s th e alternative s evaluatio n fo r th e stockpile d 

### fin e sla g a t th e Arkansa s Valle y (AV ) sla g pil e withi n th e Californi a Gulc h Sit e i n Leadville

, Colorado

. Stockpile d fin e sla g exist s onl y a t th e A V sla g pile

. A s par t o f

a ny futur e ballas t operation s fo r sla g othe r tha n tha t currentl y a t th e A V pile
, th e coars e materia l woul d b e transporte d t o th e A V pil e prio r t o sorting

. Thus

, an y futur e fin e slag tha t woul d b e generate d i n th e cours e o f ballas t operation s woul d b e 

### generate d a t th e A V area where th e stockpile d fin e sla g currentl y resides

. I n summary , stockpile d fin e sla g currentl y exist s onl y a t th e A V pil e an d an y futur e generatio n o f fin e sla g woul d -als o occu r a t th e A V pile

. N o fin e sla g exist s o r woul d 

### b e generate d a t an y locatio n othe r tha n th e A V pile

. Th e tota l volum e o f stockpiled
, 

### sorte d fin e slag an d water-quenche d fin e sla g i s approximatel y 190,00 0 cubi c yards

. Thi s SFSF S perform s a detaile d analysi s o f alternative s usin g th e retaine d alternative s fro m EPA' s SF S applie d t o stockpile d fin e slag

. 

## TerraNex t 1- 21. 2 Organizatio n o f Repor t 

### Sectio n 1. 0 provide s a n overvie w o f th e purpose s o f thi s repor t as wel l as sit e history

. Section s 2. 0 an d 3. 0 provid e a reiteratio n o f th e finding s o f th e SF S whic h narrowe d 

### t h e alternative s fo r al l sla g fro m si x t o three

. Sectio n 4. 0 provide s a detaile d analysi s
o f alternative s fo r th e thre e retaine d option s fo r th e stockpile d fin e sla g only

. Sectio n 5 . 0 present s a comparativ e analysi s o f alternatives

. Sectio n 6. 0 i s th e Bibliography

. 

### Appendi x A provide s cost s fo r th e retaine d alternative s whil e Appendi x B provide s th e analysi s o f applicabl e o r relevan t an d appropriat e requirements

. Appendi x C provide s
a responsivenes s summar y t o comment s provide d o n th e Draf t SFSFS

. 1 . 3 Site Descriptio n 

### T h e followin g descriptio n o f th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e include s a brie f histor y o f th e Leadvill e mining district
, a genera l descriptio n o f th e physiologi c an d 

### hydrologi c propertie s o f th e Site

, an d summar y descriptio n o f stockpile d fin e sla g a t t h e A V sla g pile

. 1.3. 1 Sit e Histor y 

### T h e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site is th e resul t o f ove r 13 0 year s o f mining an d minera l processin g activity

. I t encompasse s th e town o f Leadville

, Colorad o an d surrounding areas , an d i s approximatel y 11 0 mile s southwes t o f Denve r a t a n 

### elevatio n o f approximatel y 10,00 0 fee t above mean se a level

. Silver

, gold
, copper , lead
, an d zin c wer e mine d b y undergroun d an d place r method s fro m multipl e sulfide/carbonat e or e deposit s withi n th e Site

. Approximatel y 1 7 smelte r facilitie s ar e reporte d t o hav e operate d withi n th e Site

. Onl y a fe w smal l t o moderate-size d minin g operation s no w exis t an d n o smelter s currentl y operat e withi n th e Site

. 

## TerrdNex t 1- 3

### T h e principa l presen t day mining-relate d feature s i n th e Leadvill e are a includ e th e following :



### • Tailing s impoundment s • Sla g pile s 

### • Mor e tha n tw o thousan d wast e roc k dump s 

### • Abandone d mining , milling
, an d smeltin g facilitie s • A fe w activ e minin g an d reprocessin g operation s • Min e wate r drainag e tunnel s T h e Ya k Tunnel
, whic h drain s int o th e surfac e wate r bod y know n a s th e Californi a 

### Gulch

, is th e mai n point-sourc e discharg e o f acidi c metal-lade n wate r i n th e drainage

. Thi s tunne l drain s undergroun d minin g area s wit h relativel y hig h concentration s o f sulfid e minerals

. I n 1983 , th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site wa s place d o n th e 

### EPA' s Nationa l Prioritie s Lis t becaus e o f heav y metal s loadin g t o th e Arkansa s River

. Recently

, ground-wate r an d surface-wate r monitorin g program s hav e been 

### implemente d ove r th e lengt h o f th e Californi a Gulch

. Remedia l action s hav e
commence d a t th e Orego n Gulc h Tailing s pile an d associate d drainage

. Also
, th e Y a k Tunne l treatmen t syste m ha s been installe d t o trea t surfac e wate r fro m th e Uppe r Californi a Gulc h drainage

. Recentl y EP A an d othe r PRP s have undertake n restoratio n activitie s i n Malt a Gulch

, 

### Star r Ditc h area an d alon g th e lowe r Californi a Gulch

. Additionally
, tailing s fro m th e Colorad o Zin c Lea d minin g are a have bee n remove d an d consolidate d a t th e Orego n Gulc h impoundment

. 1.3. 2 Climatolog y 

### T h e climat e o f th e Leadvill e are a i s typica l o f mountainou s area s in centra l Colorado

. T h e area has extrem e temperatur e change s fro m summe r t o winte r an d in an y 

# TerraNex t 1- 4seaso n

ca n have rapi d change s o f weathe r cause d b y storm s travelling primaril y fro m 

### wes t t o eas t throug h th e region

. Th e loca l topographi c feature s strongl y influenc e climati c variations

. 

### Averag e annua l precipitatio n i s 12.67 inche s (Res-ASARCO

, 1991)

. Jul y an d Augus t hav e th e mos t precipitation , an d Decembe r an d Januar y hav e th e least

. Summe r precipitatio n is usuall y associate d wit h convectiv e showers

. Annua l snowfal l depth s 

### f o r mountain s in th e are a rang e betwee n 20 0 an d 30 0 inches

. Durin g winte r months
, t h e dept h o f sno w o n th e groun d i n Leadville i s commonl y si x inches

. Precipitatio n


### occur s sporadically
, causin g occasiona l flas h floods

. Th e precipitatio n an d weathe r 

### cycl e giv e ris e t o a n annua l pea k runoff
, usuall y occurrin g durin g June

. T h e temperatur e extreme s rang e fro m 86 F t o -30 F

, wit h th e averag e minimu m dail y temperatur e bein g 21.9°F

. Th e averag e frost-fre e seaso n i s 7 9 days

. Win d i s predominatel y fro m th e northwes t (CDL

, 1986a)

. 1.3. 3 Geolog y 

### T h e geolog y o f th e Leadville Minin g distric t is complex

. Bedrock consist s o f th e 

### Precambria n crystallin e rock s overlai n b y quartzites , shales
, limestones
, dolomites
, an d sandstone s o f th e Paleozoi c era
. Numerou s fault s exis t a t th e easter n edg e o f 

### t h e site , ranging i n widt h fro m severa l fee t t o hundred s o f feet

. Thi s faultin g wa s importan t t o igneou s intrusio n an d subsequen t mineralization

. Post-mineralizatio n 

### faultin g ha s als o bee n documente d (EPA

, 1989a)

. T h e primar y mineral s deposite d by hydrotherma l solution s whic h intrude d quartzit e
a n d limeston e sediments
, wer e predominantl y sulfide s o f iron , zinc , an d lead
, bu t als o include d copper , silve r an d gold

. Late-Tertiar y tectoni c activit y faulte d th e 1- 5 

## TerraNex t

### mineralize d

zone s int o block s an d expose d the m t o oxygenate d groun d waters

. 

### Sulfid e mineral s wer e oxidized
, forme d sulfuri c acid
, an d release d metal s int o solution

. Thes e solution s wer e transporte d t o carbonat e zones , wher e precipitatio n 

### reaction s occurre d betwee n th e mineralize d sulfuri c aci d solution s an d th e carbonat e rock

. Thi s depositio n zon e o f secondary
, o r remobilized
, meta l ore s i s terme d th e oxidize d zone
. Thes e carbonat e ore s wer e th e dominan t or e zones in man y o f th e
area' s mine s (ERA

, 1989a)

. 

### T h e chang e i n geolog y i s significan t downstrea m fro m th e Pender y Fault
, whic h i s ofte n use d t o demarcat e th e uppe r fro m th e lowe r Californi a Gulc h drainag e an d i s 

### locate d a t th e easter n edg e o f Leadville

. Abov e th e Pender y Fault

, Precambria n crystallin e rocks ar e a n upthrus t relativ e t o stratigraphi c unit s o f sediment s o r 

### alluvium

. Belo w th e Fault
, thre e identifiabl e geologi c unit s ar e noted: bedrock
, lak e b e d sediments
, an d hig h terrac e gravels

. Th e thicknes s o f th e uppe r an d middl e stratigraphi c unit s (gravel s an d th e lak e be d sediments ) increase s fro m eas t t o west

. 

### T h e uppe r uni t varie s i n thicknes s fro m approximatel y 5 0 fee t nea r th e Pender y Faul t t o severa l hundre d fee t nea r th e Arkansa s River

. Place r operation s an d min e wast e disposa l probabl y altere d th e surfac e an d near-surfac e feature s o f th e hig h terrac e gravel s stratigraphi c uni t (EPA

, 1989a)

. 1.3. 4 Groun d Wate r 

### T h e comple x geolog y i n th e are a ha s a significan t impac t o n groun d wate r movement

. Groun d wate r occur s in bot h bedrock an d alluvia l systems , an d recharg e 

### i s principally fro m infiltratio n o f snowmel t an d rainfall

. Groun d wate r migratin g throug h th e bedroc k syste m eas t an d southeas t o f Leadvill e discharge s directl y t o Californi a Gulc h surfac e waters , int o min e working s an d th e Ya k Tunnel

, o r int o downgradien t bedroc k o r alluvia l groun d wate r system s (EPA

, 1989a)

. I n th e lowe r 1- 6 

## TerraNex t

### streambe d

o f Californi a Gulch

, ther e is a n activ e interchang e betwee n th e shallo w ground-wate r syste m an d th e surfac e water

. 1.3. 5 Surfac e Wate r 

### T h e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e are a encompasse s abou t 1 5 squar e mile s o f surfac e wate r drainag e upstrea m fro m th e confluenc e o f th e streambe d o f Californi a Gulc h wit h th e Arkansa s River

. Th e mai n stem o f th e Californi a Gulc h flow s eas t t o west , jus t sout h o f Leadville

, an d drain s wate r fro m severa l smal l tributarie s t o th e nort h an d south

. Th e Stra y Hors e Gulch/Star r Ditc h watershe d i s th e larges t sub

basi n an d drain s land s extensivel y affecte d by minin g operations

. Al l tributarie s t o t h e Californi a Gulch

, a s wel l a s th e uppe r Gulc h drainag e itself
, ar e ephemera l drainages

. Californi a Gulc h drainag e receives flow s fro m tw o continuou s point

sourc e discharges : 1 ) th e Ya k Tunne l a t 1 t o 2 cubi c fee t pe r secon d (cfs ) and ; 2 ) th e Leadvill e wastewate r treatmen t plan t a t approximatel y 1 cf s (ERA

, 1989a)

. Annua l flow s i n bot h th e Arkansa s Rive r an d th e Californi a Gulc h ar e normall y highes t i n th e spring durin g snowmel t an d lowes t i n th e fal l an d winter

. Loca l
summe r thunderstorm s are, however
, potentiall y capabl e o f producing high-intensity
, short-duratio n flow s i n th e gulch

. Floodin g potentia l i s hig h becaus e o f th e lac k o f vegetativ e cover
. Maximu m floo d condition s i n th e are a ar e expecte d i n th e May

- Jun e snowmel t perio d (EPA

, 1989a)

. 

### D&RG W ha s performe d wor k nea r th e Californi a Gulc h t o minimiz e th e direc t contac t
o f surface-wate r wit h th e slag piles

. I n th e vicinit y o f th e Arkansa s Valle y sla g pile
, clea n fil l ha s bee n berme d along th e to e o f th e slag t o preven t direc t surfac e wate r fro m contactin g th e slag

.

1- 7 

## TerraNex t1.3. 6

Soil s 

### T h e nativ e soil s o f th e Leadvill e area occu r i n th e Troutville-Leadvill e

association

. 

### The y ar e primaril y dee p an d well-drained
, forme d i n stony an d cobbl y glacia l 

### outwash

. Soil sample s collecte d durin g a 198 6 soi l surve y wer e foun d t o b e sand y loa m an d Pieria n gravell y sand y loam
, (Wals h 1988)

. Th e sample s became progressivel y mor e cobbl y an d gravell y wit h depth

. Permeabilit y an d wate r capacit y
wer e estimate d a s moderate

. Value s reporte d fo r p H wer e moderatel y acidi c t o 

### neutra l i n surfac e layers

. 1.3. 7 Descriptio n o f Lea d Sla g 

### Lea d sla g i s a mineralize d by-produc t o f smelting
, resultin g fro m th e primar y processin g o f lea d or e b y blas t o r reverberator y furnace s fo r th e productio n o f metal

. 

### Sla g is a hard
, dark
, relativel y dens e vitreou s materia l tha t generall y exist s i n a layere d o r biock y an d angula r state

. Withi n th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site

, th e slag i s generall y foun d ver y near th e forme r smelte r sites

. 

### T h e lea d sla g a t th e Sit e i s a n iron-rich sla g tha t contain s approximatel y 25 % iron , substantia l amount s o f th e element s magnesium , calciu m an d silicon
, a s wel l a s trace s o f residua l bas e metals

. I n geologica l terms , th e sla g a t th e Sit e i s simila r i n appearanc e t o extrusiv e igneou s rock
, blac k t o grey in color
, ver y dense
, har d (> 7 o n 

### Moh s scale ) an d vitreous , generall y wit h a metalli c luster

. T h e majo r constituent s o f lea d slag ar e iron , silico n an d calcium
, whic h su m t o over 

### 4 5 % o f th e sla g b y weight

. O f th e contaminant s o f concer n a t th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site

, lea d an d zin c occu r a t approximatel y 1 % an d 4% , respectively
, whil e

1- 8 

## Terranex t

### arseni c

an d cadmiu m occu r a t value s les s tha n 100 0 part s pe r millio n (ppm ) an d 2 0 ppm , respectively

. 1.3. 8 Descriptio n o f Individua l Slag Pile s 

### Figur e 1- 1 depict s th e know n histori c location s o f lea d slag pile s a t th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e i n Leadville

, Colorado

. Th e sla g pile s wer e selecte d fo r samplin g base d o n previou s identificatio n by ERA

, conformanc e wit h th e definitio n fo r lea d slag
, an d volume s greate r tha n 1,00 0 cubi c yards

. Detaile d map s an d dat a fo r 

### th e individua l sla g pile s ar e presente d in th e Final Report fo r Lead Slag Remedial Investigation a t th e California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado (Rl ) (MK

, 1992)

. Stockpile d fin e slag currentl y exist s onl y a t th e Arkansa s Valle y (AV ) slag pile

. 1.3.8. 1 Th e Arkansa s Valle y (AV ) Sla g Pil e T h e A V pil e is th e larges t an d westernmos t o f th e thre e sla g pile s owne d b y D&RG W i n th e Leadvill e area
. Thi s pil e wa s generate d fro m slag produce d primaril y by th e A V smelte r facility
, whic h operate d fro m 188 2 t o 1960

. Th e A V Smelte r operate d 

### longe r tha n th e othe r smelter s i n th e Leadville area
. I t wa s situate d i n lowe r Californi a Gulc h drainage
, wes t o f th e cit y limits

. Slag pile s wer e initiall y develope d

a t th e lowes t leve l o f th e plan t towar d th e bas e o f th e slope

. Sometim e durin g th e 

### 1940s , th e molte n sla g wa s discharge d wit h col d water , producin g a fine-grained
, water-quenche d slag

. Unti l thi s time , th e molte n sla g wa s poure d directl y fro m crucible s ont o th e sla g pile
, wher e i t wa s allowe d t o cool
, formin g a welde d slag

. 

### Reliabl e estimate s o f sla g generate d b y th e A V smelte r hav e no t bee n made

. Base d upo n aeria l photography
, th e pil e volum e i n th e lat e 1950s wa s approximatel y 1. 2

1- 9 

## TerraNex t

# Colo r

Map(s )

T h e followin g maps contai n colo r tha t does no t appea r i n th e scanned images

. T o vie w th e actua l image s pleas e contact th e Superfun d Recor d Cente r 

# a t (303 ) 312-6473

.N

520,00 0 -

N 515,00 0 -

N 510,00 0 - Lower Evan s Gulc h S)6t f jPil e x •..,-»•""••••. ,' •.*.:: ; **t v — \ \ 

### ) 4 " ^' X S ••Vv.-L..

.

:..-; * „.,.-.--•**

• ?' l
, • ~*3£&;^/''~

, ~

. -' \

/

. , V ? --' X f :.-- ! / tf*^*^^ 

### LEGEN D
RI/F S SIT E BOUNAR Y SLA G PILE
FIN E SLA G

o o o

,.~ ^ V"" " "YVi--~' 1 r";.:.:'""

. •-•'"? : li----'"'^":^- 1 ^'--'''''^'^.^^:--:'^-^^ "

.„..=••-" l' / ''T'';,/ i t" ^

--- V T ! '"1 \ V"2j.;' : ?y->*^ " ;"->Av-"j;',i,v.X- • -* 'i'"-\.\iy~~'%' : -'-~.**''*' " t,--=*

-' - V ^-••I'^'f^ i 'v'"" * f



### p Arkansa s Valle y Sla g Pil e

NOTE : .^..--'•-—" "

. - },

: TOPOGRAPHI C CONTOUR S AN D SURFAC E FEATURE S PROVIDED B Y INTRASEARC H

i '•""" " j ^ -}V * /> s [ l 505,00 0 « - .' —U

-

— J

— — I

— 

# A \^

\r 

# \ V 

# \ \ APPROXIMAT E SCAL E (FEET ) PROJ J 06 1 0480 9 SCALE : A S SHOW N FIL E NO

. 45809F2 A PAGE #

DRAW N BY : GS L DESIGNE D BY : DATE : 1/22/9 6 APPROVE D BY : 

# LTerraNexf j FIGUR E 1- 1 SLA G PIL E LOCATIO N MA P DENVE R & RI O GRAND E WESTER N RAILROA D

### millio n

cubi c yards

. Today

, approximatel y 423,00 0 cubi c yard s o f sla g remai n o n th e site

. Th e sla g pile wa s purchase d b y D&RGW fro m ASARC O i n 196 1 fo r us e a s ballast

. Thi s pil e is bounde d b y Leadvill e Sewag e Treatmen t Plan t propert y an d Stat e 

### Highwa y 2 4 t o th e south
, ol d smelte r work s t o th e north
, woode d propert y t o th e west , a n d othe r smelter-relate d wastes an d Stringtow n t o th e east

. Californi a Gulc h run s adjacen t t o th e slag pile vicinit y fo r approximatel y 1/ 5 it s length

. Throug h thi s reach
, a ber m compose d o f clea n fil l has bee n place d a t th e to e o f th e sla g pil e t o preven t t h e sla g fro m comin g int o direc t contact wit h Californi a Gulch

. T o construc t th e berm
, 

### t h e sla g wa s excavate d awa y fro m th e drainage

. Observation s take n afte r 

### constructio n o f th e ber m indicat e tha t surfac e wate r contac t wit h th e sla g pil e i s n o longe r occurring

. Th e ber m ha s relevanc e t o th e fina l remed y in tha t it prevent s stormwate r runof f fro m th e Smelter/slag pil e are a t o th e Californi a Gulch

. Thi s 

### remed y i s expecte d t o remai n in plac e fo r th e duratio n o f th e ballas t sortin g activitie s
at th e AV

. Th e A V pil e i s actuall y compose d o f a numbe r o f sub-piles

. Thes e sub-pile s ca n be divide d int o tw o majo r types : sorte d an d unsorted

. Unsorte d sla g refer s t o tha t sla g which ha s no t bee n processe d fo r ballas t purposes

. Sorte d slag i s slag tha t ha s bee n physicall y separate d int o siz e fraction s fo r th e purpos e o f railroa d ballas t 

### production

. Fin e sla g is sorte d sla g which is les s tha n 3/ 8 inch

. Furthermore

, th e sla g ca n be divide d int o pile s tha t wer e coole d b y tw o techniques : air-coolin g and
, i n 

### late r years , water-quenching

. Th e water-quenche d sla g i s a granula r materia l wit h 

### particl e size s generall y les s tha n 1/4-inch

. Th e air-coole d slag is a more blocky
, welde d material

. Th e A V pil e cover s a n area o f approximatel y 200,00 0 squar e yards

. 

### T h e maximu m dept h o f th e pil e i s approximatel y 5 0 feet
, bu t in som e area s th e dept h i s les s tha n on e foot

. 1-1 1 

## TerraNex t

### I n th e past , th e A V pil e ha s been sorte d fo r productio n o f railroa d ballast

. Railroa d ballas t i s a potentia l futur e us e fo r th e large
, block y A V slag

. Ballast-size d sla g i s define d a s tha t greate r tha n 3/ 8 inche s an d les s tha n 2-1/ 2 inche s i n diameter

. Materia l smalle r o r large r tha n this size i s separate d int o oversiz e an d fine s piles

. 

### Therefore
, th e subpile s o f th e A V sit e includ e sorte d fines
, water-quenche d fines
, ballast-size d material
, oversize d material
, an d unsorte d air-coole d slag

. Th e existin g 

### fine s pile s an d fine s potentiall y generate d fro m futur e ballas t productio n ar e th e focu s
o f thi s SFSFS

. Figur e 1- 2 depict s th e locatio n o f stockpile d fin e sla g a t th e A V Sla g 

### Pile

. Thi s i s th e onl y locatio n withi n th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site wit h 

### stockpile d fin e slag

. Th e volum e o f stockpile d fin e sla g is approximatel y 190,00 0 cubi c yards

.



### 1-1

2 

## TerraNex t

# \



# c
. A i ,^ % \\n/
^ ( ^\ \ \ \yi c \

- 

## x 

# r~~~^???V

^

•-' ~~ X s''<'• •

> J C W s'" ./' " ,4^%^»*S' _.,-•' ,..——„...-',..•"• "

j/jt\^ \' s ---K^/f ,* ,'• „..- , ^.

- •^'-•^^-^•A^'&'S/y

,- \ / ARKANSA S Vy< j 

# * ^ V *

\^v ^ .^ * i / •••^._---

1 O --APPROXIMATE

- LEGEN D
D

-—987 0 — - SORTED FINE S (AI R COOLED ) <3/8 "

- UNPROCESSE D

WATE R QUENCHE D

FINE S

- BUILDIN

G

- ROA D

- TREE S AN D SHRUB S

- RAILROA

D TRACK

S

- DEPRESSIO N

CONTOU

R

- INTERMEDIAT

E GROUN D SURFAC E ELEVATIO N CONTOUR

- INDE X GROUN D SURFAC E ELEVATIO N CONTOUR
V \ ../s

\ \

!

—— / SQRTE D FINES-

- ! \STOGKPlC E' \PPROXIMAT E OUTLIN E ? --SLA G PIL E BOUNDASy—

- 

## O

T

- 5x

_ y>< X i /

, J vr^

-
) / / «

~"^.__ '~sg§^£

~ 5l^gil^twots r

f > i^i^^rr:54 % ^sd k ^ ^g^s^ S ^lix-'r- 1 -'^®^-- ^ I W^TE R p j 

## L

. Q___100 20Q

_ APPROXIMAT E SCAI^FEET ) 40

0 I i PROJ. # 0610480 9 SCALE : A S SHOW N FIL E NO

. 4809F1 A DATE : 1/22/9 6 PAGE #

DRAW N BY : GS L DESIGNE D BY : APPROVE D BY : 

# TerraNex t FIGUR E 1- 2 ARKANSA S VALLE Y SLA G PIL E LOCATIO N O F STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G DENVE R & RIO GRAND E WESTER N RAILROA D

### 1. 4

Remedia l Investigation s


### 1.4. 1 Summar y o f Sla g Investigation s Severa l previou s investigation s withi n th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e hav e 

### addresse d th e sla g a t th e thre e D&RGW-owne d piles

. Thi s sectio n summarizes th e relevan t dat a an d discussion s presente d i n thos e investigatio n reports

. Th e notabl e conclusion s include : 

### Sla g i s ver y dens e and har d (> 7 on Moh s scale ) T h e p H o f pulverize d sla g i s slightl y basi c an d ha s a hig h bufferin g capacity

. Therefore

, th e aci d generatin g potentia l o f th e sla g i s fa r les s tha n th e neutralizatio n potentia l o f th e exces s carbonat e Sla g leache s t o a ver y limite d exten t unde r EPA' s Metho d 1312 , th e Syntheti c Precipitatio n Leachin g Procedure

, an d metal s concentration s i n th e leachat e ar e two t o fou r order s o f magnitud e lowe r tha n th e Toxicit y Characteristi c threshold s Concentration s o f metal s i n soil s beneat h sla g pile s ar e belo w th e 

### concentration s o f metal s i n th e sla g indicatin g minima l leachin g potentia l withi n th e rang e o f literatur e value s fo r naturall y occurrin g soil s Fine-graine d sla g does no t becom e airborn e T h e sla g does no t presen t majo r geotechnica l stabilit y concern s

1-1 4 

## TerraNex t

### T h e followin g section s summariz e th e various report s generate d b y bot h th e EP A an d D&RGW concernin g slag pil e investigation s a t th e Site

. 1.4.1. 1 State o f Colorad o Rl - 198 6 Sla g was no t considere d t o be a significan t source o f contaminatio n and
, therefore
, w a s no t studie d durin g th e Stat e R l (CDL

, 1986b)

. Pag e 3-1 8 o f th e Stat e R l repor t note s that : 

### "Much of the metal in slag has been oxidized in the smelting process and is in a relatively stable oxide mineral form. In addition, smelting results in the encapsulation of much of the metal in refractory sites and in the formation of silicate minerals. Therefore, although numerous 

### slag piles occur throughout the study area, they are not expected to be



### a major source of hazardous metal contamination."
1.4.1. 2 EP A Phas e I I RM98 9 I n 1986 , th e EPA' s contractor , CH2 M Hill
, sample d surfac e water , groun d water , an d

numerou s min e wast e piles
, an d thre e D&RG W sla g pile s (EPA

, 1989a)

. Th e objectiv e o f th e mine wast e an d sla g sampling was t o bette r characteriz e th e material s i n th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site

. Thi s wa s th e firs t tim e tha t th e EP A h a d sample d sla g a t th e site

. Thes e dat a ar e considere d useabl e onl y fo r limite d qualitativ e purpose s becaus e th e desig n an d implementatio n o f th e stud y did no t resul t i n collectio n o f representativ e data

. 

### Composit e sample s wer e collecte d fro m location s o n eac h o f th e thre e sla g pile s base d upo n a gri d syste m o r upo n a visua l approximatio n o f th e cente r an d
1-1 5 

## TerraNex t

### equidistan t

perimete r points

. Th e dept h interva l which sample s wer e t o b e collecte d

w a s specifie d i n CH2 M Hill' s wor k pla n a s zer o t o si x inches belo w th e surfac e o f th e material

. Sample s wer e analyze d i n th e fiel d fo r th e metal s o f concer n usin g a portabl e X-ray 

### fluorescenc e (XRF ) analyzer
, an d analyze d b y Contrac t Laboratory Progra m (CLP ) (EPA

, 1990b ) protocol s fo r metal s composition , extractio n procedur e (EP ) toxicit y 

### leachin g characteristics
, ASTM-modifie d

aci d shak e extractabl e metals
, an d AST M wate r shak e extractabl e metals

. Th e repor t state d tha t whil e mine wast e pile s 

### typicall y contai n th e highes t concentration s o f arsenic , cadmium
, copper , manganese , 

### a n d lead
, sla g typicall y contain s th e highes t level s o f iron an d zinc

. Sla g wa s als o show n t o contai n metal s suc h a s manganese , lead
, copper , an d arsenic

. Th e repor t noted tha t becaus e th e slag s wer e generall y a soli d mas s wit h a lo w surfac e are a t o volum e ratio , the y woul d have mor e limite d solubilit y tha n othe r min e wastes

. 

### 1.4.1. 3 Jame s P

. Wals h an d Associate s Soil s Investigatio n - (Walsh
, 1988 ) 

### T h e state d objective s o f this stud y wer e t o defin e potentia l actio n level s fo r soil
, t o determin e backgroun d metal s conten t o f soils
, t o delineat e th e exten t o f soil contamination , an d t o determin e source s o f soi l contamination

. Thre e sample s o f 

### sla g wer e collecte d a s par t o f thi s study : on e fro m th e Harriso n Stree t pile
, on e fro m th e L a Plat a pile
, an d on e fro m a n are a wes t o f Leadville

. A smal l an d 

### unrepresentativ e sampl e o f th e les s tha n 2 m m fractio n was extracte d wit h a nitri c 

### acid/perchlori c aci d solutio n an d analyze d fo r tota l lead
, cadmium
, arsenic , an d zinc

.

1-1 6 

## Terranext

### 1.4.1. 4

Jacob s Engineerin g Sla g Samplin g -(EPA

, 1990a ) I n Ma y 1989 , Jacob s Engineerin g performe d th e secon d samplin g o f sla g fo r th e 

### EPA

. Th e purpos e o f th e stud y wa s t o determin e th e concentration s o f metal s i n th e thre e D&RG W sla g pile s an d t o evaluat e th e potentia l fo r migratio n o f thes e metal s t o 

### soil
, water , o r air

. Potentia l hazard s t o th e environmen t an d publi c healt h fro m th e sla g i n Leadvill e wer e evaluated

. Mos t o f th e dat a fro m thi s stud y wer e o f goo d 

### qualit y an d considere d useabl e fo r th e intende d purposes

. Exception s include : 1 ) fiv e 

### sample s tha t wer e analyze d fo r E P toxicit y that
, fo r reason s discusse d below
, wer e unrepresentativ e an d o f questionabl e quality ; 2 ) acid-bas e accountin g dat a tha t was 

### conservativ e an d no t substantiate d b y spli t sampl e results ; 3 ) an d som e particl e siz e 

### dat a tha t wa s inadequat e t o evaluat e th e percen t o f respirable-size d slag

. I n orde r t o obtain a preliminar y evaluatio n o f th e variabilit y withi n th e sla g piles
, fou r location s wer e sample d a t eac h o f th e followin g piles : Harriso n Stree t pil e L a Plat a pil e 

### A V oversize d an d unprocesse d subpile s A V sorte d fine s subpil e A V ballast-size d subpil e 

### A V water-quenche d fine s subpile s 

### Sample s wer e collecte d fro m th e cente r o f individua l pile s o r pil e quadrant s usin g shovels
, a backhoe
, o r a rippe r blad e an d a backhoe

. Surfac e sample s (zero t o si x inches ) wer e collecte d a t al l locations

. Subsurfac e sample s (fro m a dept h o f approximatel y thre e feet ) wer e als o collecte d fo r eac h pile excep t th e A V sorte d fine s


### an d ballast-size d subpiles
, whic h wer e assume d t o be homogeneou s afte r sorting

. 1-1 7 

## TerraNex t

### Sample

size wa s determine d accordin g t o AST M D-7 5 (ASTM

, 1987 ) weigh t recommendations
, whic h ar e based o n particl e size o f the materia l t o b e sampled

. 

### Sample s wer e analyze d fo r 2 3 targe t analyt e lis t (TAL ) metal s accordin g t o CL P (EPA

, 1990b ) procedures

. Tota l sulfu r an d neutralizatio n potentia l wer e determine d usin g EP A Method s 3.2. 4 an d 3.2.3 , respectively

. Particl e size distributio n wa s determine d b y bot h th e siev e an d hydromete r tests , an d adjustin g th e hydromete r 

### reading s fo r th e specifi c gravit y o f slag
, teachabilit y wa s evaluate d wit h th e sam e thre e test s use d previousl y b y th e EPA : E P toxicit y 

### ASTM-modifie d aci d shak e extractio n AST M water shak e extractio n Leachin g test s wer e performe d onl y o n th e ballast-size d an d th e sorte d fine s samples

. Sampl e preparatio n deviate d fro m standar d procedure s i n a n effor t t o make 

### th e testin g mor e representative : sla g was no t groun d o r pulverize d prio r t o leachin g test extractions

. 

### T h e mos t significan t result s fo r th e particl e siz e analysi s ar e th e percentage s o f fin e materia l (passin g th e 20 0 mes h sieve ) in eac h pile

. Fo r th e Harriso n Stree t pile
, L a 

### Plat a pile
, an d A V ballast-sized
, oversized
, an d unprocesse d subpiles
, fine s wer e presen t a t approximatel y 0. 5 weigh t percent

. Th e A V sorte d fine s an d th e water

quenche d fine s subpile s showe d 5 an d 1. 5 weigh t percen t les s tha n 20 0 mes h fraction
, respectively

. 

### T h e result s o f th e thre e leachin g test s show tha t non e o f th e RCR A metal s leache d fro m sla g in concentration s exceedin g th e RCRA criteri a o f 10 0 time s th e drinking 1-1 8 

## TerrdNex t

### water

standards

. Fiv e additiona l E P toxicit y test s wer e performe d b y th e ER A tha t



### wer e no t specifie d in th e samplin g plan

. Th e test s wer e ru n o n materia l passin g th e 10-mes h siev e fro m sample s wit h th e highes t tota l metal s concentration s fro m eac h pil e o r subpil e tha t ha d no t bee n previousl y teste d fo r teachability

. Lea d was th e onl y 

### meta l tha t exceede d th e RCR A criteria an d thi s occurred i n thre e o f th e fiv e samples

. I t shoul d b e note d tha t th e percen t passin g a 10-mes h siev e range s fro m <0. 5 t o 6. 0 weigh t percen t fo r thes e thre e samples

. Therefore

, th e 10-mes h fractio n teste d fo r 

### E P toxicit y constitute s onl y a ver y smal l portio n o f th e sla g an d i s no t representativ e
o f th e piles

. Thes e fiv e sampl e result s ar e considere d unrepresentative

.

I n addition
, th e EP 

### toxicit y test conducte d i s als o ver y aggressiv e an d unrepresentativ e o f condition s i n 

### t h e Californi a Gulc h drainage

. Th e EP toxicit y tes t wa s designe d t o simulat e situation s i n whic h a wast e i s co-dispose d i n a municipa l landfil l an d saturate d wit h 

### organi c acid

. Statistica l evaluatio n o f th e dat a show s tha t th e sla g pile s diffe r i n composition , wit h 

### th e exceptio n o f som e o f th e A V subpile s (EP A 1990a)

. Chemica l an d particle-siz e variabilit y withi n pile s wer e no t significant
, no r wer e th e difference s betwee n surfac e
a n d subsurfac e chemistry

. Thus

, th e chemica l compositio n withi n a pil e i s similar
, however
, th e pile s appea r t o b e differen t fro m eac h othe r wit h th e exceptio n o f th e subpile s a t th e A V area
. 

### 1.4.1. 5 D&RG W Sla g Pil e Remedia l Investigatio n Activitie s T h e purpos e o f th e R l wa s t o characteriz e th e majo r lea d slag pile s a s wel l a s th e Hig h Schoo l zinc sla g pil e i n sufficien t detai l suc h tha t thei r chemica l an d physica l 

### propertie s coul d b e evaluate d fo r potentia l impact s o n huma n healt h an d th e 1-1 9 

## Terrawext

### environment

.

R l dat a wer e used t o asses s th e viabilit y o f fiv e potentia l releas e mechanism s identifie d i n th e sit e conceptua l model

. Thes e fiv e releas e mechanisms include d wind
, leaching
, mixin g b y huma n activities , runof f o f particulates
, an d direc t contact

. Direc t contac t ha d previousl y bee n eliminate d b y ERA i n th e Preliminar y Healt h Risk Assessment
, Leadvilie

, Colorad o (ASARCO

, 1991 ) leavin g th e fou r remainin g mechanisms t o b e evaluate d a s par t o f the Rl

. T h e investigatio n consiste d o f severa l majo r tasks
, including literatur e an d documen t review , fiel d investigatio n an d sampling
, laborator y testin g an d analysis
, an d dat a evaluatio n an d summary
. Availabl e literatur e was reviewed t o summariz e th e 

### historie s o f smelte r operation s an d sla g pil e developmen t an d t o assis t i n identifyin g potentia l pil e location s an d sla g usag e withi n th e site

. Aeria l photograph s wer e als o 

### examine d t o hel p locat e sla g pile s an d determin e gros s change s i n volum e ove r time

. 

### Informatio n develope d durin g this historica l revie w tas k wa s the n use d t o focu s th e sit e reconnaissanc e task

. Durin g sit e reconnaissance , forme r smelte r site s wer e investigate d fo r evidenc e o f 

### lea d slag
, othe r smelte r debri s o r byproducts
, genera l physica l properties , an d visua l indication s o f impac t t o th e surroundin g environment

. A fiel d geologis t mappe d 

### structura l feature s o f th e pile s t o inpu t fo r geotechnica l stabilit y determination s an d -professiona1~sanrey"crew

s surveye d thepite s t o accuratel y calculat e curren t pil e volumes

. 

### Result s o f th e historica l revie w an d sit e reconnaissanc e task s showe d tha t ther e ar e seve n majo r lea d sla g pile s an d th e Hig h Schoo l zin c sla g pil e withi n th e site , man y 

### o f which hav e significantl y decrease d in volum e du e t o us e o f th e slag

. Severa l o f th e lea d pile s hav e bee n use d fo r railroa d ballast
, however
, th e us e o f th e reason fo r t h e decreas e i n th e Hig h Schoo l zin c sla g pil e is unknown

. Thi s decreas e i n volum e 

### 1-20 

## TerraNex t

### i s primaril y du e t o th e us e o f sla g a s railroa d ballas t ove r a n approximat e 40-yea r period

. Indication s o f environmenta l impact s fro m slag
, particulat e movement fro m precipitatio n runoff
, an d majo r stabilit y concern s wer e no t observed

. A l l seve n majo r lea d sla g pile s a s wel l a s th e Hig h Schoo l zin c pil e withi n Californi a 

### an d Evan s Gulche s wer e the n sample d usin g eithe r han d tool s o r heav y equipment

. Sampl e location s an d volume s wer e selecte d t o be representativ e o f th e individua l piles

. A tota l o f 4 2 sla g sample s wer e collected
, whic h include d bul k sample s fro m 

### t h e surfac e t o a dept h o f 3 fee t an d bul k sample s fro m olde r area s o f th e piles

. Thi s approac h wa s take n i n a n effor t t o determin e i f variabilit y existe d within a pil e du e t o poorl y refine d earl y smeltin g techniques

. A t th e welde d L a Plat a pile
, tw o 

### undisturbe d cor e sample s wer e als o collected

. A tota l o f te n subsla g sample s fro m beneat h th e Harriso n Street

, L a Plata

, an d Arkansa s Valle y pile s wer e collected

. Th e 

### purpos e o f thes e te n sample s wa s t o determin e th e natur e o f materia l beneat h th e 

### pile s an d whethe r metal s fro m th e pile s ha d impacte d th e subsla g material

. Appropriate qualit y assuranc e procedure s wer e adhere d t o durin g th e sampling phases
, a s wel l a s the analytica l phas e o f the work

. Eac h o f the sample s wa s submitte d fo r laborator y compositiona l an d teachabilit y analyses

. Materia l fro m th e 

### fine r graine d sla g pil e an d subsla g materia l wa s als o submitte d fo r particl e siz e testing

. A portio n o f eac h sampl e was sen t t o th e Resurrectio n fiel d laboratory fo r incorporatio n i n th e Resurrection/ASARC O

metal s speciatio n program

. Compositiona l 

### analyse s include d tota l metals
, water-solubl e anions , an d acid-bas e accounting

. Leachabilit y testin g include d Syntheti c Precipitatio n Leachin g Procedur e (EP A Metho d 

### 1312 ) an d colum n leach tests , whic h wer e intende d t o simulate
, a s closel y a s possible
, in sit u conditions

.

1-2 1 

# TerraNex t

### Compositiona l

result s showed tha t th e sla g i s a n iro n magnesiu m silicate
, wit h residua l base metals

. Concentratio n ranges an d mean s fo r th e fou r primar y metal s o f

concer n collecte d fro m fin e sla g sampl e location s a t th e sit e ar e a s follows : Arseni c mean 43 5 mg/kg-sorte d fines
, 90 9 mg/k g wate r quenche d fine s Cadmiu m mea n 11. 9 mg/kg-sorte d fines
, 16. 6 mg/k g water-quenche d fine s Lea d mea n 10,80 0 mg/kg-sorte d fines
, 9,65 0 mg/k g water-quenche d fine s Zin c mean 44,00 0 mg/kg-sorte d fines
, 73,00 0 mg/k g water-quenche d fine s 

### T h e dominan t for m o f sulfu r i s non-extractable
, an d aci d generatio n potentia l (define d b y th e presenc e o f pyriti c sulfur ) i s mor e tha n compensate d fo r b y th e neutralizatio n potentia l o f exces s carbonate

. 

### Base d upo n a statistica l analysi s o f tota l metal s composition , al l lea d sla g pile s a t th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e ar e simila r i n composition , excep t fo r th e A V water

quenche d fine s an d th e L a Plat a piles

. T w o subsla g sample s (AVB10 3 an d AVB104 ) wer e collecte d fro m directl y underneat h t h e water-quenche d fine s a t th e A V pile

. Compositiona l result s fo r th e subsla g materia l showe d concentration s o f metal s o f concer n t o b e significantl y lowe r tha n 

### thos e fo r th e sla g materia l an d withi n th e rang e o f literatur e value s fo r metal s occurrin g naturall y i n soi l (MK

, 1992-Tabl e 4-15)

. Subsla g sample s collecte d fro m unde r th e A V water-quenche d fin e sla g showe d th e lowes t valu e fo r arsenic (5. 7 

### mg/kg)
, lea d (84. 8 mg/kg) an d fo r zinc(18 8 mg/kg) fro m al l subsla g sample s collected

. A s fo r th e slag
, th e subsla g sample s collecte d fro m beneat h th e wate r 

### 1-2 2 

## TerraNex t

### quenche d

fin e sla g a t A V exhibite d a negativ e acid-forming potential

. Site specifi c 

### backgroun d ha s no t ye t t o b e established
, however
, range s fo r metal s o f concer n i n Colorad o soil s ar e a s follow s arseni c (1.2-2 4 mg/kg)
, lea d 15-150 mg/kg) an d zin c (16-30 0 mg/kg)
, Conne r an d Shacklette

, 1975

. Leachin g analysis
, whic h include d bot h SPL P an d colum n leach studies
, showe d minima l leachin g o f metal s o f concern
. SPL P result s fo r al l element s teste d i n sla g
wer e belo w th e toxicit y characteristi c criteria , liste d i n 4 0 CF R 261.24

. Mea n value s fo r th e contaminant s o f concer n wer e generall y tw o orders o f magnitud e lowe r tha n thes e regulator y thresholds

. Colum n leac h test s showe d simila r lo w level s o f leaching

. Th e colum n leach test s wer e conducte d fo r tw o hundre d alternat e we t an d d r y cycles o f precipitation , simulatin g ove r eigh t year s o f rainfall

. I t shoul d b e noted tha t severa l tes t desig n factor s make th e leachin g result s more conservativ e tha n 

### wha t i s expecte d unde r normal sit e conditions

. Thes e factor s includ e th e following : T h e sulfuri c acid/nitri c aci d lixivian t used containe d none o f th e 

### carbonates typicall y foun d i n natura l rainwate r an d was , therefore
, a
mor e aggressiv e solution

. Th e leachin g test use d equa l period s o f we t an d dr y condition s simulating a n eigh t year perio d o f precipitation

. I n sit u condition s woul d indicat e tha t th e pile s ar e generall y dry th e majorit y o f th e time , althoug h th e testin g protoco l include d equa l period s o f we t an d dr y cycles

. Particl e size dat a an d site-specifi c meteorologica l dat a wer e use d t o determin e whethe r sla g in th e fine-graine d pile s ha s th e abilit y t o become airborne

. Threshol d frictio n velocitie s (th e win d spee d abov e whic h th e surfac e materia l becomes airborne ) wer e calculate d usin g th e mod e o f th e aggregat e siz e distribution

. Win d


### 1-2 3 

## Terranext

### dat a an d th e heigh t o f th e pile s wer e used t o calculat e th e frictio n velocity

. Result s f o r th e tw o fine s pile s are : Threshol d Frictio n Velocit y 

### sorte d fine s 1. 0

m/se c water-quenche d fine s 0.5 8 m/se c Frictio n Velocit y 0.5

5 m/se c A frictio n velocit y lowe r tha n th e threshol d frictio n velocit y demonstrate s tha t sustaine d win d gust s (0.5 5 m/sec
, M K 1992 ) in Leadvill e ar e no t fas t enoug h t o caus e win d erosio n o f th e sla g piles

. A s wit h th e leachin g tests , severa l factor s i n th e 

### calculation s mak e th e result s mor e conservativ e tha n what woul d b e expecte d at th e 

### Site

. Thes e factor s includ e th e following : I f value s mor e representativ e o f ai r flo w ove r roug h terrai n wer e used i n th e calculations
, th e frictio n velocit y woul d hav e bee n lowe r tha n estimated

. Therefore
, ther e woul d b e a greate r margi n tha t woul d exis t betwee n frictio n velocit y an d th e threshol d frictio n velocit y o f bot h th e 

### sorte d an d water-quenche d fines

. Sla g has a greate r densit y tha n th e sand an d grave l use d t o develo p th e mode l EP A emissio n factor s which wer e used b y default in th e 

### calculations

. A ir density
, an d therefor e th e liftin g forc e o f th e wind a t th e sam e speed
, i s lowe r i n Leadville

. Becaus e th e EP A mode l tes t (EPA

, 1988 ) was conducte d in Illinoi s a t a n elevatio n o f approximatel y 1,00 0 fee t above

1-2 4 

## TerraNex t

### se a

level
, th e ai r densit y woul d be greate r tha n i n Leadvill e wit h a n elevatio n o f 10,00 0 feet

. Period s o f hig h moisture , sno w cover, an d froze n groun d wil l limi t th e potentia l fo r dus t emissions

. 1.4. 2 Groun d Wate r 

### A site-wid e monitorin g progra m i s in effec t fo r surfac e an d groun d wate r a t th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site

. Groun d wate r i n th e vicinit y o f th e stockpile d fin e 

### sla g has no t bee n full y characterized

. A s note d above
, th e subsla g materia l showe d concentration s o f metal s o f concer n t o b e significantl y lowe r tha n thos e fo r th e sla g 

### materia l an d withi n th e rang e o f literatur e value s fo r metal s occurrin g naturall y in soils

. Thes e result s sugges t tha t surfac e wate r infiltratio n throug h th e sla g pile s doe s
n o t significantl y impac t groun d wate r no r doe s it impac t th e soil s beneat h th e sla g 

### pile s a s evidence d b y th e result s o f th e soi l analyses

. 

### A s note d earlier
, ther e i s activ e interchang e betwee n groun d wate r an d surfac e wate r i n lowe r Californi a Gulch

. Fo r tha t reason , a contaminan t transpor t pathwa y t o 

### groun d wate r doe s exis t fo r meta l contaminant s fro m an y upstrea m sourc e tha t contribute s metal s loading t o surfac e water

. Sit e groun d wate r qualit y i s strongl y influence d b y depth
, wit h poore r qualit y foun d a t th e shallowe r depths

. Generally

, th e 

### highes t meta l concentration s i n groun d water ar e withi n 2 5 t o 5 0 fee t o f the surfac e (EPA

, 1989a)

.

1-2

5 

## Terranext

### 1.4. 3

Surfac e Wate r 

### I n general
, "wate r qualit y i n th e uppe r Arkansa s River i s degrade d belo w th e discharg e fro m th e Leadville Drainag e Tunnel

, markedl y degrade d belo w Californi a 

### Gulc h drainage
, an d improve d b y th e clean-wate r inflo w fro m creek s furthe r downstrea m (EPA

, 1989a). " Th e highes t meta l concentration s occu r in th e sprin g 

### during snowmelt

. Durin g th e 1984, 1985 , an d 198 7 investigation s b y EPA

, primar y drinkin g water standard s fo r cadmiu m an d lea d wer e commonl y exceeded
, a s wer e t h e Aquati c Wate r Qualit y Criteri a (AWQC ) fo r cadmium
, copper , lead
, an d zin c (EPA

, 1989a)

. N o discree t conveyance s o f surfac e wate r runof f fro m th e A V are a have bee n noted
, additionally
, th e ber m place d alon g th e Californi a Gulc h i s designe d t o eliminat e surfac e wate r runof f fro m directl y enterin g th e Californi a Gulch

. 1.4. 4 Soil s 

### A significan t portio n o f th e soil s i n th e Leadville/Stringtow n

are a has elevate d heav y meta l concentrations

. Thes e concentration s declin e fro m wes t t o northwest
, wit h soil s closes t t o tailings
, wast e roc k piles
, an d forme r smelte r sites containin g th e highes t concentration s o f lead
, arsenic , an d cadmiu m (CDL

, 1986a)

. Analysi s o f soil s 

### fro m beneat h th e fin e sla g pile s sho w th e lowes t concentratio n fo r lead
, arsenic an d zinc o f an y o f th e subsla g sample s collected

. 1. 5 Fat e an d Transpor t 

### T h e sit e conceptua l mode l used i n th e Sla g Pil e R l wa s develope d b y EP A an d th e 

### Ris k Assessmen t Technica l Assistanc e Committe e an d presente d in th e wor k pla n fo r

1-2 6 

## TerraNex t

### t h e Sla g Pil e R l (M K 1991)

. Th e huma n healt h conceptua l sit e mode l fo r sla g piles
, presente d i n Figur e 1-3 , includ e fiv e potentia l releas e mechanisms :
win d leachin g mixin g b y huma n activitie s 

### runof f o f sla g direc t contac t 

### T h e Rl conclusion s wer e applie d t o eac h o f th e primary releas e mechanisms wit h th e followin g results :


### 1.5. 1 Releas e Mechanis m 1 - Win d 

### T h e air pathway analysi s result s indicat e tha t wind erosio n i s no t a significan t releas e mechanis m i n Leadville

. Hourl y averag e win d spee d dat a multiplie d b y th e 

### appropriate facto r t o determin e th e maximu m sustaine d win d gus t (0.55m/sec ) does
n o t mee t o r excee d th e velocit y necessar y t o lif t particle s of f th e stationary pil e (0.5 8 

### m/sec)

. Fro m this
, i t ma y be conclude d tha t win d erosio n i s no t a viabl e releas e mechanis m fo r th e lea d sla g piles
, includin g th e A V water-quenche d an d sorte d fine s piles

.

1-2 7 

## TerranextHUMA N HEALT H CONCHTTUA L 61T 1 MODEL

- UBADVlU J

EXPOSUR E POTENITA L RELATIVEL Y LO W EXPOSUR E POTENTIA L RELATIVEL Y HIG H PROJ. f 0610480 9 SCALE : A S SHOW N FIL E NO

. 4809F1- 3 DESIGNE D BY : DATE : 1/22/9 6 PAGE

f DRAW N BY : GS L APPROVE D BY : 

# TerraNex t FIGUR E 1- 3 ARKANSAS VALLE Y SLAG PIL E HUMAN HEALT H CONCEPTUAL SIT E MODE L DENVE R & RIO GRAND E WESTER N RAILROA D

### 1.5. 2

Releas e Mechanis m 2 - Leachin g 

### Testing in subsla g materia l does no t indicat e tha t leachat e fro m sla g contribute s t o 

### elevate d metal s concentration s i n th e vados e zone beneat h th e sla g piles

. This conclusio n i s supporte d b y th e lack o f aci d generatin g potentia l an d th e neutra l t o basic p H o f th e sla g an d subsla g materials

. I n fac t th e lowes t concentration s fo r 

### thre e metal s o f concern arsenic , lea d an d zin c wer e detecte d i n subsla g sample s 

### collecte d fro m beneat h th e A V water-quenche d slag

. 

### Leachin g o f metal s o f concer n wa s analyze d during tw o differen t leaching procedure s (SPL P an d colum n leach)

. Th e result s indicate d tha t eac h o f th e differen t slag s teste d ha d th e potentia l t o leach smal l quantitie s o f metals

. Additiona l consideration s 

### suc h as soi l sorption , evaporation , dilutio n b y groun d an d surfac e water , an d shee t 

### runof f requir e furthe r evaluatio n t o full y understan d th e potentia l impacts

. A t th e conclusio n o f th e Rl

, leachin g a s a potentia l releas e mechanis m wa s retained

. Additiona l dat a collectio n activitie s ar e currentl y bein g undertake n unde r othe r PR P



### wor k plan s t o bette r defin e th e hydrologi c syste m in th e vicinit y o f th e majo r sla g pile s


### a n d alon g th e Californi a Gulc h drainage

. Ke y additiona l dat a t o b e evaluate d includ e t h e identificatio n o f thos e portion s o f th e Californi a Gulc h strea m tha t ar e gainin g an d losing streams ; wate r qualit y dat a fro m piezometers , monito r wells
, an d surfac e wate r 

### sampling ; an d flo w rate s durin g th e course o f th e year
. Anothe r ke y consideratio n i s t h e calculatio n o f th e residua l sedimen t loa d an d th e contributio n fro m othe r sources (i.e

. tailing s an d soils ) t o th e strea m channel

.

1-2 9 

## Terranext

### 1.5. 3

Releas e Mechanis m 3 - Mixing b y Huma n Activitie s 

### Transpor t b y huma n activitie s has occurred
, as sla g was historicall y use d fo r roa d maintenanc e withi n th e Sit e b y Lak e Count y an d th e Colorad o Departmen t o f Transportation

. Characteristic s o f slag o n th e railroa d track s ar e represente d b y th e result s fo r th e A V ballast-size d subpil e samples

. Th e ballast-size d sampl e result s 

### show a lo w potentia l fo r leachin g (wel l belo w toxicit y characteristi c criteria)

. Base d upo n dat a collecte d fo r th e meta l speciatio n program , ER A 1995a , "th e
occurrenc e o f sla g i s significantl y increase d i n th e vicinit y o f majo r streets

. Thi s i s consisten t wit h th e documente d historica l us e o f sla g fo r roa d sanding. " Althoug h i n som e area s o f Leadville

, th e relativ e frequenc y o f sla g in residentia l soil s approximate s 15 % o f th e lea d bearin g phases
, les s tha n 2 % o f th e relativ e lea d mas s 

### i s attributabl e t o slag

. "Withi n residentia l soils
, sla g i s concentrate d most heavil y near 

### th e shoulder s o f majo r road s an d rai l lines
, i t does no t contribut e significantl y t o th e site' s lea d mass"

. ER A 1995a

. 1.5. 4 Releas e Mechanis m 4 - Runof f o f Sla g 

### N o evidenc e o f transpor t o f sla g fine s b y surfac e runof f was observe d a t an y o f th e pile s examined

. Sla g does no t appea r t o b e transporte d fro m pile s ont o adjacen t soil s i n rivulet s o r channels

. Pil e integrity , especiall y fo r fine s pile s wher e thi s is most critical
, appear s intact

. Thi s potentia l releas e mechanis m fo r sla g i s no t a concer n a t t h e Site

.

1-3

0 

## TerraNex t

### 1.5. 5

Releas e Mechanis m 5 - Direc t Contac t Direc t contact wit h th e sla g pile s wa s considere d insignifican t i n EPA' s Preliminar y 

### Baselin e Huma n Healt h Ris k Assessmen t (EP A 1991b)

. Therefore
, i t wa s eliminate d

a s a releas e mechanism

. 1. 6 Risk Assessmen t 

### I n 1995, EP A complete d tw o part s o f th e Risk Assessmen t fo r th e Californi a Gulc h 

### Superfun d Site

. Thes e ar e Part C Evaluatio n o f Recreational

, Worke r Scenario s (EP A 1995b)
, an d Part A Risk s t o Resident s fro m Lea d (EP A 1995c)

. 1.6. 1 Commercial/Industria l

Ris k Assessmen t 

### Risk assessment s fo r Recreationa l an d Worke r Scenario s fro m Lea d an d Arseni c exposur e hav e bee n complete d (EP A 1995b)

. Th e propose d actio n leve l fo r lea d in a 

### commercial/industria l applicatio n i s approximatel y 7,00 0 mg/k g lead

. EP A determine d 

### tha t ther e ar e n o identifie d area s withi n th e Superfun d Sit e whic h contain arseni c level s o f concer n unde r thi s scenario

. Th e resul t o f th e risk assessmen t wor k was a 

### propose d pla n leading t o a no-actio n RO D fo r area s withi n th e Superfun d Site currentl y zoned Commercial/Industrial

.

Th e propose d pla n wa s release d fo r publi c 

### commen t o n Augus t 9 , 199 5 an d publi c comment s wer e du e n o late r tha n Septembe r 1 2 , 1995

. Th e n o actio n propose d pla n specificall y exclude d fiv e commercial/industria l

area s becaus e the y ma y hav e extensiv e level s o f lea d tha t ar e


### a concer n fo r workers

. Thes e area s includ e D&RGW s Harrison
, L a Plata

, an d A V Sla g piles

.



### 1-3 1 

## TerraNex t

### T h e significanc e o f thi s risk assessmen t an d subsequen t no-actio n propose d pla n fo r th e sla g pil e area s ar e importan t becaus e i t set s actio n level s fo r remediatio n o f soil s i n an d aroun d th e sla g piles

. Base d upo n th e result s o f subslag samplin g conducte d during th e R l (M K 1992)
, th e maximu m concentration s o f lea d i n al l subslag sample s
was 79 4 mg/kg
, approximatel y on e orde r o f magnitud e belo w th e propose d actio n level

. Cos t estimate s fo r remedia l alternative s relate d t o th e slag pile s ar e extremel y sensitiv e t o th e finalizatio n o f a remedial-actio n leve l fo r soil s unde r an d i n th e vicinit y
o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g pile

. 1 . 7 Cultura l Resources Surve y A V Smelte r an d Sla g Sit e T h e objectiv e o f th e cultura l resource s surve y fo r th e A V smelte r an d sla g sit e was t o surve y al l area s tha t may b e impacte d visuall y and/o r b y potentia l groun d disturbin g activities , an d t o compl y wit h al l applicable Federa l legislatio n concernin g cultura l


### resources
. Federa l agencies , including th e U.S

. ERA

, ar e mandate d b y a numbe r o f Federa l regulations
, statute s an d executiv e orders t o inventory , evaluat e an d asses s cultura l resources locate d o n Federa l lands
, o r o n privat e land s tha t ma y b e impacte d 

### b y land-alterin g project s involvin g Federa l fundin g o r action

. This legislatio n include s t h e Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Ac t o f 196 6 (a s amende d 198 0 an d 1992)

. Al l o f t h e cultura l resources investigation s conducte d fo r ASARC O an d D&RG W fo r th e 

### Arkansa s Valle y Smelte r (AV ) site , OU 3 an d 5 , mee t o r exceed th e requirement s o f t h e above-cite d legislation

. T w o document s gover n th e cultura l resources requirement s t o mee t Sectio n 10 6 o f t h e Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Ac t fo r this project

. Th e firs t documen t is th e Programmati c Agreemen t (PA ) betwee n th e EPA

, Colorad o Stat e Histori c Preservatio n Office r (SHPO ) a n th e Nationa l Advisor y Counci l o n Histori c Preservatio n (amende d 7/94)

. Thi s agreemen t provide s guideline s fo r a n 1-3 2 

## Terranext

### identificatio n

an d evaluatio n process , assessin g th e effect s o n managemen t o f histori c properties , discover y o f histori c propertie s during actions , involvemen t o f intereste d parties , adherenc e t o standard s an d guidance
, an d professiona l qualifications

. I n addition
, th e P A allowe d fo r developmen t o f th e second document
, 

### a n Identificatio n an d Evaluatio n Pla n (ID& E Plan)

. Thi s documen t wa s finalize d i n 

### M a y 199 4 (Martaran o e t al

. 1994 ) an d al l wor k fo r this projec t was undertake n i n accordanc e wit h th e ID& E guidelines

. Recently

, th e SHP O ha s determine d tha t th e A V smelte r i s individuall y eligibl e a s a 

### cultura l resourc e an d th e followin g recommendation s

regardin g mitigation

. 1.7. 1 Sit e Documentatio n 

### A s par t o f th e cultura l resource s summar y fo r al l forme r smelte r sites , th e Arkansa s Valle y smelte r an d sla g pile s wer e recorded

. Th e Harriso n an d L a Plat a sla g pile s


### wer e not surveye d or recorde d becaus e no smelte r ruins remai n fro m the pas t operations

. 

### T h e Arkansa s Valle y Smelte r sit e consist s o f tw o separat e Operabl e Unit s (OU) ; OU 3 contain s th e A V sla g pile
, an d OU 5 contain s th e smelte r remains

. Fo r purpose s o f cultura l resource s assessment , i t i s necessar y t o examin e an d evaluat e aJ H feature s o f



### a site

. Prio r t o recording
, a sit e visi t was conducte d wit h severa l loca l resident s formerl y associate d wit h and/o r knowledgeabl e about th e site , including Mr

. Da n McEckern

, Mr

. Jo e Polagar

, an d Mr

. Ori n Deitrich

. Th e purpos e o f th e sit e visi t wa s t o hel p identif y th e feature s an d technolog y represente d a t th e sit e b y th e presen t physica l remains

. I n addition
, Sanbor n Insuranc e Map s o f th e sit e wer e examine d prio r t o field documentation

. Th e A V sit e wa s surveye d an d recorde d b y FE C personne l i n September

, 1995

. Tw o archaeologist s fro m FEC conducte d a n intensiv e 1-3 3 

## TerraNex t

### pedestria n

surve y o f th e sit e an d documente d th e structure s an d feature s remainin g 

### o n site

. Thi s include d th e completio n o f th e appropriat e Colorad o Stat e Histori c Preservatio n Offic e (SHPO ) resource forms
, preparatio n o f a sit e ma p based o n a n existin g CAD D map , an d phot o documentatio n o f existin g feature s an d materials

. T h e slag pil e wa s photographe d an d assigne d Featur e #11

. A t th e completio n o f fieldwork
, th e permanen t Smithsonia n numbe r o f 5LK89 2 wa s assigne d t o th e A V Smelte r sit e b y SHPO

. A complet e an d detaile d cultura l resource surve y repor t 

### documentin g th e sit e recordatio n i s currentl y in preparation

. 1.7. 2 Recommendation s 

### T o b e eligibl e fo r listing i n th e Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Places

, a histori c propert y 

### must b e significan t in America n history
, architecture
, archaeology
, engineering , o r culture
, an d mus t posses s integrit y evidence d in location
, design
, materials
, workmanship
, feeling
, an d associatio n an d mus t mee t on e o f th e fou r Nationa l Registe r criteria : 

### A

. b e associate d wit h event s tha t hav e mad e a significan t contributio n t o 

### the broad pattern s o f our history ; or B

. b e associate d wit h th e live s o f person s significan t i n ou r past ; o r C

. embod y th e distinctiv e characteristic s o f a type , period
, o r metho d o f construction , o r tha t represen t th e wor k o f a master , o r tha t posses s hig h artisti c values
, o r tha t represen t a significan t an d distinguishabl e entit y whose component s ma y lack individua l distinction ; o r

1-3 4 

## TerraNex t

### D

.

hav e yielded
, o r ma y b e likel y t o yield
, informatio n importan t i n prehistor y o r history

. 

### Sit e 5LK892

, th e Arkansa s Valle y Smelter

, i s recommende d a s individuall y eligibl e fo r t h e Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Place s (NRHP ) unde r criteri a B an d C

. Criterio n B requires tha t a sit e "b e associate d wit h th e live s o f persons significan t i n ou r past. " T h e A V smelte r meet s criterio n B becaus e th e successfu l developmen t o f th e A V Smelte r wa s strongl y associate d wit h th e Guggenhei m family
, importan t person s i n Colorad o an d U.S

. History

. Th e A V smelte r meet s criterio n C becaus e i t i s a sit e tha t 

### "embodie s th e distinctiv e characteristic s o f a type , perio d o r metho d o f construction " and/o r "represent s a significan t an d distinguishabl e entit y whos e component s ma y lac k individua l distinction. " Th e A V Smelte r wa s th e larges t an d longes t operatin g smelte r in th e Leadvill e distric t (187 9 t o 1961)
, processe d mor e mineral s tha n an y othe r smelter
, an d wa s a cornerston e o f th e ASARCO corporation

. Althoug h muc h o f 

### th e machinery
, equipmen t an d structure s hav e bee n removed
, th e sit e retain s sufficien t integrit y overal l t o conve y th e importanc e an d magnitud e o f th e site

. 

### Overall
, th e smeltin g industr y in Leadvill e playe d a n importan t rol e in th e developmen t

o f th e regio n an d o f th e minin g industr y i n Colorado

, an d th e A V sit e i s th e bes t remainin g exampl e i n th e Leadvill e minin g district

. Th e sla g pile
, Featur e 11 , i s recommende d a s a contributin g feature

. Thi s A V smelte r i s recommende d a s a contributin g componen t o f th e Leadvill e Histori c Minin g District

, 5LK856

. A fina l determinatio n o f th e NRH P eligibilit y wil l b e mad e b y EP A i n consultatio n wit h SHPO

. 

### N o furthe r wor k i s recommende d a t this time

. Th e sit e ha s bee n adequatel y mapped
, photographe d an d recorded

. Assuming tha t th e A V smelte r wil l b e determine d eligibl e fo r th e NRHP

, an d a remedia l action(s ) i s selecte d fo r th e site , a n 

### assessmen t o f effec t i s require d t o conside r th e resul t o f suc h actio n o n thos e characteristic s tha t mak e th e sit e eligible

. I f a remedia l actio n i s require d fo r th e sla g 

### 1-3 5 

## TerraNex t

### pile
,

tha t effec t mus t b e assesse d a s well

. While th e pile is no t th e primar y significan t characteristi c o f th e site , it doe s contribut e t o th e overal l feelin g o f th e magnitud e an d importanc e o f th e site

. N o additiona l wor k woul d b e require d fo r a findin g o f n o advers e effect

. A findin g o f a n advers e effec t ma y requir e som e for m o f mitigation

. Mitigatio n requirement s woul d b e determine d b y ER A i n consultatio n wit h SHP O an d 

### t h e Advisor y Counci l o n Histori c Preservation

. Mitigatio n o f effec t coul d includ e th e productio n o f archiva l qualit y photograph s documentin g th e existin g condition s prio r t o 

### remediation
, o r th e placemen t o f interpretiv e signag e fo r th e public

. 1 . 8 Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriate Requirement s (ARARs ) Evaluatio n
1.8. 1 Overview o f ARAR s 

### Sectio n 121(d ) o f CERCLA

, a s amende d b y SARA

, states tha t an y remedia l actio n 

### selecte d fo r a sit e must , a t a minimum , attai n a degre e o f cleanu p an d contro l o f 

### release s o f hazardou s substance s which assures protectio n o f huma n healt h an d th e environment

. I n addition
, a t th e completio n o f th e remedia l action , a leve l o r standar d



### o f contro l whic h meet s ARAR s mus t be attaine d fo r an y hazardou s substance
, 

### contaminant , o r pollutan t tha t remains onsite

. T h e Nationa l Contingenc y Pla n (NCP ) (see 4 0 CF R Par t 300)
, establishe s th e framewor k fo r th e identificatio n an d applicatio n o f federa l an d stat e requirement s fo r remedia l action s a t CERCL A sites

. CERCL A an d th e NC P als o specif y tha t onl y 

### thos e stat e cleanu p requirement s o r standard s tha t ar e bot h mor e stringen t tha n th e Federa l counterpar t an d ar e identifie d i n a timel y manne r ma y b e "applicable " o r "relevan t an d appropriate " t o th e remediatio n o f a CERCL A site

.

1-36 

## Terranex t

### ARAR s

ar e identifie d a s eithe r "applicable " o r "relevan t an d appropriate"

. Th e NC P give s th e followin g definition s o f "applicable " an d "relevan t an d appropriate " requirements : Applicabl e

requirement s mean s thos e cleanu p standards
, standard s o f control
, an d othe r substantiv e requirements , criteria , o r limitation s promulgate d unde r federa l environmenta l o r stat e environmenta l o r facilit y sitin g law s tha t specificall y addres s a hazardou s substance
, pollutan t o r contaminant , remedia l action , location
, o r othe r circumstanc e foun d at a CERCL A site

. Relevan t an d appropriate requirement s mean s thos e cleanu p 

### standards
, standard s o f control
, an d othe r substantiv e requirements , criteria , o r limitation s promulgate d unde r federa l 

### environmenta l o r stat e environmenta l o r facilit y sitin g law s that
, whil e no t "applicable " t o a hazardou s substance
, pollutant
, contaminant , remedia l action , location
, o r othe r circumstanc e a t a 

### CERCL A site , addres s problem s o r situation s sufficientl y simila r t o thos e encountere d at the CERCL A sit e tha t thei r us e i s wel l suite d t o th e particula r sit e (se e 4 0 CF R 300.5)

. T h e relevanc e an d appropriatenes s o f a requiremen t i s judge d b y evaluatin g severa l factors
, including th e characteristic s o f th e hazardou s substance s foun d a t th e site , 

### a n d th e physica l settin g o f th e site

. Onl y portion s o f requirement s ma y b e relevan t

a n d appropriat e fo r a remedia l action ; however
, an y requiremen t o r portio n thereo f tha t i s determine d t o b e relevan t and appropriat e mus t b e complie d wit h t o the sam e degre e a s i f i t wer e applicable

.



### 1-37 

## TerraNex t

### Ther e

ar e thre e type s o f ARARs

. Chemical-specifi c ARAR s establis h healt h o r risk



### base d concentratio n limit s fo r contaminant s foun d i n th e various environmenta l media
a t th e site

. Action

- specifi c ARAR s establis h control s o n th e remedia l activitie s whic h

ar e a par t o f th e remedia l solution

. Location-specifi c ARAR s se t limitation s o n remedia l activitie s a s a resul t o f th e locatio n o f th e contaminatio n o r th e locatio n o f 

### t h e activitie s bein g considered

. Location

- specifi c ARAR s ca n includ e restriction s fo r activitie s performe d i n wetlands
, floo d plains
, an d historica l sites

. Guidanc e an d criteri a which ar e no t ARAR s a t th e site , bu t ma y be usefu l in developin g CERCL A 

### remedie s ar e als o identified
, a s appropriate , an d evaluate d a s to-be-considere d (TBC ) criteria o r guidance

. 

### 1.8. 2 Summar y o f ARAR s fo r th e Stockpile d Fin e Sla g 

### A n ARAR s analysi s fo r th e Stockpile d Fin e Sla g i s presente d i n Appendi x B

. Table 1- 1 present s a summar y o f th e ARAR s t o be used fo r performanc e o f th e remedia l 

### actio n fro m th e discussion s presente d i n Appendi x B

. Wher e necessary , additiona l discussio n o f location

- an d action-specifi c ARAR s i s provide d i n conjunctio n wit h eac h

o f th e thre e retaine d alternatives

. 

### T h e ARAR s evaluatio n conclude d tha t consideratio n o f Bes t Managemen t Practice s (BMPs ) is indicate d b y th e Nonpoin t Sourc e Contro l Progra m fo r al l o f th e retaine d alternatives

. I n addition
, BMP-base d Bes t Availabl e Technolog y (BAT ) fo r stormwate r 

### contro l may b e applicabl e t o futur e reuse o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

. Stormwate r control s wil l b e require d i f th e stockpile d fin e sla g reuse o r reworkin g result s i n a 

### poin t sourc e discharge

. A t thi s tim e ther e i s n o evidenc e o f a discernabl e conveyanc e o r point-sourc e discharg e fro m th e stockpile d fin e sla g piles

.

1-3 8 

## TerranextStandards

,

Requirements

, Criteria

. Limitation s Colorad o Groun d Wate r Standard s
Surfac e Water : Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standard s TABL E 1- 1 POTENTIA L CHEMICA L SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Citatio n State : 5 CC R 1002- 8 § § 3.11.0-3.11. 8

State : 5 CC R 1002-8 , § § 3.1.0-3.1.1 7 Descriptio n

Establishe s a scheme fo r identifyin g groundwate r specifie d areas, fo r classificatio n o f Colorad o groundwate r and provide s numeri c standards

. Establishe s standard s an d classification s fo r Colorad o surfac e waters

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate No/Ye s

Yes/N o Commen t

S e e Appendi x B Sectio n 3.2

.

S e e Appendi x B Sectio n 3.1.1

.TABL E 1- 1 (cent.) CHEMICA L SPECIFI C CRITERI A TO-BE-CONSIDERE D

(TBC ) FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Advisorie s t o b e Considere d an d Guidanc e Interi m Guidanc e o n Establishin g Soi l Lea d Cleanu p Level s a t Superfun d Site s Revise d Interiu m Soi l Lea d Guidanc e fo r CERCL A Site s a n d RCR A Correctiv e Facilitie s Citatio n EP A Directiv e #9355.4-02 , Septembe r 1989

. OSWE R Directiv e #9355.4-1 2 Jul y 1994

. Descriptio n

Establishe s guidanc e cleanu p level s fo r lea d contaminate d soils

. Establishe s guidanc e cleanu p level s fo r lea d contaminate d soils

. T

o B e Considere d Considere d Considere d Commen t

S e e Appendi x B Sectio n 3.3

. S e e Appendi x B

, Sectio n 3.3

.Potentiall

y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Clea n Wate r Ac t Nationa l Pollutan t Discharg e Eliminatio n Syste m TABL E 1- 1 (cont. ) POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. Part s 122, 12 5 pursuan t t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 134 2 State : 5 CC R 1002-2 , §§6.1. 0 t o 6.18.0, pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-8-50 1 Descriptio n

Require s permit s fo r th e discharg e o f pollutant s fro m an y poin t source int o waters o f t h e Unite d State s includin g stormwater

. Potentiall y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate Yes/N o Commen t

S e e Appendi x B Section s 4.1 , 4. 2 an d 4.3

.

Clea n Ai r Ac t Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s Fugitiv e Paniculat e Emissions State :

5 CC R 1001 , Regulatio n N o

. 1 , Sectio n lll. D Require

s al l source s o f particulat e emissions t o appl y technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e control measures
. Yes/N

o Technicall

y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l measure s wil l b e applie d t o reus e o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

.TABL E l- l (cont. ) ACTIO N SPECIFI C CRITERI A TO-BE-CONSIDERE D

(TBC ) FO R STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G RETAINE D ALTERNATIVE S Advisorie s t o he Considere d an d Guidanc e Citatio n Clea n Wate r Ac t Nonpoin t Sourc e Managemen t E P A Requirement s fo r Wate r Qualit y Plannin g an d Management
, Nonpoin t Sourc e Managemen t an d Control

. 4 0

CF R Part s 130 , § 130.6(c)(4 ) Descriptio n

Establishe s Bes t Managemen t Practices a s a n acceptabl e CW A sectio n 20 8 an d 303(e ) Wate r Qualit y Managemen t Pla n elemen t fo r achievin g wate r qualit y goals

. T

o B e Considere d Considere d Commen t

T h e nonpoin t sourc e managemen t program , wit h th e regulatory an d nonregulatory applicatio n o f Bes t Managemen t Practice s i s a n approac h state s ma y us e i n developin g acceptabl e CW A Sectio n 20 8 Wate r Qualit y Managemen t Plans

. BMP s woul d onl y b e ARA R fo r nonpoin t sourc e management wher e a stat e ha s adopte d BMP s as par t o f a dul y promulgate d regulatory program

. Colorad o ha s not promulgate d BMP-base d nonpoin t sourc e control requirements

.TABL E 1- 1 (cont. ) POTENTIA L LOCATIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n Descriptio n Potentiall y Applicable / T o B e Considere d Commen t Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Act
, Executiv e Order 1159 3 1 6 U.S.C

. §47 0 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.301(b ) 3 6 C.F.R

. Par t 80 0 State : C.R.S

. 24-80-101-108

Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n Act 1 6

U.S.C

. § § 661-666 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(g ) E P A must accoun t fo r th e Yes/N o affect s o f an y actio n o n an y propert y wit h historic
, architectural
, archeologica l o r cultura l valu e that i s liste d or eligibl e fo r listing o n th e Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Places

, o r th e Colorad o Registe r o f Histori c Places

. Require s consultatio n whe n Yes/N o federa l departmen t o r agenc y propose s o r authorize s an y modificatio n o f an y strea m o r other water bod y t o provid e fo r adequat e provisio n fo r protectio n o f fis h an d wildlif e resources
. Effect s o f th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n o n liste d propertie s wil l b e considered

.

Prio r t o modificatio n o f wate r bodies appropriat e agencies wil l be considered

.

### Selecte d

implementatio n o f BMP s wil l als o ensur e attainmen t o f th e applicable Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Basi c Standar d whic h requires tha t "stat e water s shal l b e fre e 

### fro m substance s attributabl e t o
.. . non-poin t source discharge s i n amounts , concentration s o r combinations...(a ) whic h ca n settl e t o for m botto m deposit s detrimenta l t o th e beneficia l uses"

. (Se e §3.1.11)

. 

### Regulatio n 1 o f th e Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s require s al l sources o f particulat e emission s t o utiliz e technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l measures
. Thi s requiremen t is applicable t o fugitiv e emissions , i f any , resultin g fro m th e reus e o r reworkin g o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

. 

### T h e Colorad o Strea m Standard s wer e foun d applicabl e a s th e long-ter m goa l fo r 

### wate r qualit y i n Segmen t 2b o f th e Arkansa s River

. I n summary : BMP-base d BA T fo r stormwate r contro l wil l b e applicable i f futur e reus e o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g result s in a poin t source discharge

. 

### Cos t effectiv e BMP s pursuan t t o th e non-poin t sourc e progra m ar e to-be

considere d criteria

. 

### Technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e fugitiv e particulat e emissio n 

### contro l measure s ar e applicable t o futur e reuse o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

. Colorad o Strea m Standard s represen t th e lon g ter m goa l fo r wate r qualit y i n Segmen t 2 b o f th e Arkansa s River

.

1-40 

## Terranext2 . 0

IDENTIFICATIO N

AN D SCREENIN G O F TECHNOLOGIE S



### 2 . 1 Remedia l Actio n Objectiv e Base d upo n th e SF S an d Consen t Decree

, th e remedia l actio n objectiv e fo r th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s to : 

### Preven t leachin g o f metal s o f concern in concentration s tha t woul d hav e
a n advers e impac t o n soils
, surfac e o r groun d wate r i n th e vicinit y o f t h e sla g piles

. 2. 2 Genera l Respons e Action s 

### I n th e SFS

, th e six Genera l Respons e Action s (GRAs ) identifie d fo r th e Sit e a s a whole
, wer e employe d t o identif y technologie s an d proces s option s applicabl e t o th e slag : N o Actio n leave s source s i n thei r existin g conditio n wit h n o 

### contro l o r cleanu p planned

. Thi s genera l respons e actio n serve s


### a s a baselin e for compariso n but ma y als o b e a selecte d remedia l actio n fo r resource s tha t pos e n o ris k t o huma n healt h o r th e 

### environment

. Institutiona l Control s ar e lega l an d physica l restriction s t o contro l o r preven t presen t an d futur e us e an d acces s t o hazardou s substance s remainin g o n site

.



### 2- 1 

## Terrawex t

### Containmen t

involve s physica l measures t o preven t an d contro l th e releas e o f o r direc t exposur e t o hazardou s substances
, pollutant s o r contaminant s o f concern
. 

### Removal

, Transport

, an d Disposa l involve s a complet e o r partia l

remova l o f sourc e materia l followe d b y transportatio n an d disposa l a t a differen t location

. 

### Treatmen t involve s physica l o r chemica l measure s applie d t o th e sourc e 

### material s tha t reduc e toxicity , mobility
, and/o r volum e o f th e contaminant s present

. Resourc e Utilizatio n involve s us e o r reuse o f th e sourc e materia l a s a commercia l produc t which remove s th e sourc e partiall y o r totall y fro m t h e Site

.

2-

2 

## TerraNex t3 . 0 DEVELOPMEN

T AN D SCREENIN G O F PRELIMINAR Y

REMEDIA L ACTIO N ALTERNATIVE S FO R AL L SLA G PILE S (EPA

, 1993 ) 

### T h e technologie s an d proces s option s retaine d i n th e SF S fo r al l slag pile s wer e the n assemble d int o si x preliminar y remedia l actio n alternatives : Alternativ e 1 - N o Actio n 

### Alternativ e 2 - Institutiona l Control s Alternativ e 3 - Containmen t 

### (Surfac e Wate r Controls/Sourc e Surfac e Controls/Surfac e Barrier ) Alternativ e 4 - Removal/Transport/Disposa l 

### Alternativ e 5 - Treatmen t Alternativ e 6 - Resource Utilizatio n 

### Followin g development
, eac h o f th e si x preliminar y remedia l actio n alternative s wer e screene d fo r effectiveness
, implementability
,

an d cost , agai n usin g th e criteri a define d 

### i n th e Screenin g Feasibilit y Stud y Th e result s o f tha t evaluatio n i s presente d i n Table 3-1

. Th e alternative s retaine d b y th e SF S fo r detaile d analysi s include : Alternativ e 1 - N o Actio n 

### Alternativ e 2 - Institutiona l Control s Alternativ e 6 - Resourc e Utilizatio n (incorporate s physica l separatio n fro m Alternativ e 5 - Treatment

.



### 3- 1 

## TerrdNex tTabl e 3-1

. DEVELOPMEN T AN D SCREENIN G O F PRELIMINAR Y

REMEDIA L ALTERNATIVE S REMEDIA L ALTERNATIVE S

& PRIMAR Y COMPONENT S DESCRIPTION

O F PROCES S FINA L DISPOSITIO N EFFECTIVENESS IMPLEMENTABILIT Y COS

T

1 ) N o actio n 2 ) Institutiona l Control s N

o actio n • Unknow n Combinatio n o f on e Unknow n or mor e o f the following : Fencing

, Deed Restrictions

, a n d Us e Restrictions

, Monitoring
, Managemen t Practice s Implementable Non e Conventiona l procedure s Lo w t o moderate
, depending o n material s an d O& M cost s Retaine d Retaine d

3 ) Surfac e Wate r Controls/Sourc e Surfac e Controls/Surfac e Barrie r

4)Removal/Transport

/ Disposa l

atmen t 

# i Cove r

pile s wit h soil/cla y mixture , revegetat e Diversio n Ditche s Margina l

reductio n i n infiltratio n

Remova l o f pile s fo r consolidatio n on-sit e o r on-sit e repositor y Physica l separatio n o f sla g Neutralizatio n Surfac e

wate r run-on onl y importan t a t certai n piles
, effectivenes s unknow n Depending upo n characteristic s o f repository an d engineerin g control s leachin g ma y no t b e minimize d Effectiv e i n sizin g particle s Additio n o f lim e woul d no t b e effectiv e a t neutralizing sla g becaus e o f hig h intrinsi c neutralizatio n capacity

. Increase s volum e o f material

. Medium
,

Pil e non-uniformity
, woul d lea d t o larg e quantitie s o f soil/cla y cove r material
, Stee p slope s woul d b e difficul t t o cover
. Medium
, Conventiona l technology
, diversio n ditche s ma y be difficul t du e t o surface/groun d wate r interaction s Medium
, permittin g lan d use , transportatio n ar e al l problem s associate d wit h implementabilit y High
, conventiona l technolog y f o r sortin g sla g Mediu m

cost N o t

Retaine d

Lo w implementatio n an d O& M cos t Hig h Cos t N o t

Retaine d

N o t Retaine d

Mediu m Capita l an d O& M Incorporate d int o Alternativ e 6 Hig h Capita l an d Mediu m O & M N o t

Retaine dTabl e 3-1

. DEVELOPMEN

T AN D SCREENIN G O F PRELIMINAR Y

REMEDIA L ALTERNATIVE S REMEDIA L ALTERNATIVE S

& PRIMAR Y COMPONENT S DESCRIPTIO

N O F PROCES S FINA L DISPOSITIO N EFFECTIVENES S IMPLEMENTABILIT

Y COS

T

6 ) Resourc e Utilizatio n -Railroa d Ballas t -Additiv e materia l fo r constructio n Undersize d materia l
as additiv e materia l i n constructio n Sor t

slag
, obtai n greate r tha n 3/8 " bu t les s tha n 2 1/2 " fo r rai l roa d ballast

. Sourc e

Remova l off-sit e o r usag e withi n th e sit e High
,

conventiona l technolog y f o r ballas t operation s fo r larg e block y slag
, an d fin e materia l used fo r aggregat e in concrete/asphal t o r stand alon e materia l a s roa d fill
, etc

. Lo w

Cos t Retaine d



# I4 . 0

DETAILE D ANALYSI S O F ALTERNATIVE S

FO R D&RG W STOCKPILE D FINE SLA G



### 4. 1 Introductio n T h e thre e retaine d alternative s fro m th e SF S have bee n evaluate d i n detai l fo r stockpile d fin e sla g a t th e A V sla g pile

. Th e detaile d analysi s o f alternative s wa s conducte d usin g th e nine evaluatio n criteri a fro m th e Nationa l Contingenc y Pla n (NCR) :

• Overal l protectio n o f huma n healt h an d th e environmen t • Complianc e wit h ARAR s 

### • Long-ter m effectivenes s an d permanenc e • Reductio n o f toxicity , mobilit y o r volum e 

### • Short-ter m effectivenes s 

### • Implementabilit

y • Cos t 

### • Stat e acceptanc e • Communit y acceptanc e
4. 2 Evaluatio n Criteri a Eac h o f th e thre e retaine d alternative s i s evaluate d agains t th e nin e NC R evaluatio n criteria describe d below

.



### 4- 1 

## Terranex t

### 4.2. 1

Overal l Protectio n o f Huma n Healt h an d th e Environmen t This threshol d evaluatio n criterio n assesses th e abilit y o f eac h alternativ e t o adequatel y protec t huma n healt h an d th e environment

. Th e overal l assessmen t o f 

### protectio n draws o n th e othe r evaluatio n criteria , especiall y long-ter m effectivenes s
a n d permanence , short-ter m effectiveness
, an d complianc e wit h ARARS

. 

### Evaluatio n o f overal l protectivenes s focuse s o n th e manne r tha t sit e risk s ar e eliminated
, reduce d o r controlle d throug h treatment , engineerin g o r institutiona l 

### controls

. This evaluatio n als o consider s whethe r a n alternativ e pose s any unacceptabl e short-ter m o r cross-medi a impacts

. 4.2. 2 Attainmen t o f ARAR s 

### T h e secon d threshol d criterio n evaluate s th e attainmen t o f applicabl e o r relevan t an d 

### appropriat e requirement s (ARARs)

. A s discusse d earlier
, CERCL A Sectio n 121(d ) 

### require s attainmen t o f Federa l an d Stat e requirement s o r justificatio n o f waiver

. Th e evaluatio n include s chemical
, actio n an d location-specifi c ARARs

. 4.2. 3 Long-Ter m Effectivenes s an d Permanenc e T h e thre e alternative s wil l b e assesse d fo r th e long-ter m effectivenes s an d permanenc e tha t ar e afforde d b y each
, alon g wit h th e degre e o f certaint y tha t th e alternativ e wil l prov e successful

. Factor s tha t ar e considere d includ e th e following : T h e magnitud e o f residua l ris k remainin g fro m untreate d wast e o r 

### treatmen t residual s remainin g a t th e conclusio n o f th e remedia l activities

. Th e characteristic s o f th e residual s shoul d b e 4- 2 

## Terranext

### considere d

t o th e degre e tha t they remain hazardous
, takin g int o
accoun t thei r volume
, toxicity , mobilit y an d propensit y t o bioaccumulate

. T h e adequacy an d reliabilit y o f control s (i.e.
, containmen t systems an d institutiona l controls ) necessar y t o manag e 

### treatmen t residual s an d untreate d waste

. Thi s facto r focuse s in 

### particula r o n th e uncertaintie s associate d wit h th e assessmen t o f th e potentia l nee d t o replac e th e technica l component s o f th e 

### alternativ e an d th e potentia l exposur e pathway s an d risks pose d 

### shoul d th e remedia l actio n nee d replacement

. 4.2. 4 Reductio n o f Toxicitv

. Mobilit y o r Volum e T h e degre e t o which alternative s emplo y recyclin g o r treatmen t tha t reduce s toxicity , mobilit y o r volum e o f hazardou s substance s shal l b e assessed
, includin g ho w 

### treatmen t i s use d t o addres s th e principa l threat s pose d b y th e Site

. Factor s tha t wil l b e considere d includ e th e following
, a s appropriate : T h e treatmen t o r recyclin g processe s tha t th e alternativ e employ s an d material s the y wil l treat

. T h e amoun t o f hazardou s substances
, pollutants
, o r contaminant s tha t wil l be destroyed
, treate d o r recycled

. T h e degre e o f expecte d reductio n i n toxicity , mobility
, o r volum e o f th e hazardou s substanc e du e t o treatmen t o r recyclin g an d th e identification s o f which reduction s ar e occurring

. 4- 3 

## TerraNex t

### T h e

degre e t o which th e treatmen t i s permanent

. 

### T h e typ e an d quantit y o f residual s tha t wil l remain followin g treatment , 

### considerin g th e persistence , toxicity , mobilit y an d propensit y fo r bioaccumulatio n o f th e hazardou s substances

. 

### T h e degre e t o whic h treatmen t reduce s th e inheren t hazard s pose d b y
a n y principa l threat s a t th e Site

. 4.2. 5 Short-Ter m Effectivenes s 

### T h e short-ter m effectivenes s o f th e alternative s wil l b e assesse d considerin g th e following : Short-ter m

risk s tha t migh t be pose d t o th e communit y durin g implementatio n o f a n alternative

. 

### Potentia l impact s o n worker s durin g remedia l actio n an d th e effectivenes s an d reliabilit y o f protectiv e measures
. Potentia l environmenta l impact s o f th e remedia l actio n an d th e 

### effectivenes s an d reliabilit y o f mitigativ e measure s during implementation

. 

### Tim e unti l protectio n i s achieved

.

4- 4 

# TerraNex t

### 4.2. 6

Implementabilit y 

### T h e eas e o r difficult y o f implementing th e alternative s wil l b e assesse d b y considerin g t h e followin g type s o f factors : Technica l feasibility
, including technica l difficultie s an d unknowns 

### associate d wit h th e constructio n an d operatio n o f a technology
, th e reliabilit y o f th e technology
, th e eas e o f undertakin g additiona l remedia l 

### action , an d th e abilit y t o monito r th e effectivenes s o f th e remedy

. Administrativ e feasibility
, includin g activitie s neede d t o coordinat e wit h othe r office s an d agencie s an d th e abilit y an d tim e require d t o obtai n 

### a n y necessar y approval s fro m othe r agencies

. Availabilit y o f service s an d materials
, including : adequat e storag e capacit y an d services ; necessar y equipmen t an d specialists ; an d prospectiv e technologies

. 4.2. 7 Cos t 

### T h e type s o f cost s tha t shal l b e assesse d includ e th e following : capita l costs , includin g bot h direc t an d indirec t costs ;

annua l operatio n an d maintenanc e costs ; an d

n e t presen t valu e o f capita l an d O& M costs

.

4- 5 

## Terranext

### 4.2. 8 Stat e Acceptanc e CDPH E comments , a s provide d durin g th e RI/F S process , shal l b e assesse d an d addresse d during th e alternative s analysis

. 4.2. 9 Communit y Acceptanc e This assessmen t determine s whic h component s o f th e alternative s intereste d person s i n th e communit y support, hav e reservation s about
, o r oppose

. Thi s criterio n canno t be evaluate d unti l th e comment s o n this F S ar e received

. 4 . 3 Individua l Analysi s o f Alternative s
4.3. 1 Alternativ e 1 - N o Actio n
4.3.1. 1 Descriptio n 

### Thi s alternativ e leave s th e stockpile d fin e slag i n plac e wit h n o remediation
, engineerin g o r institutiona l controls

. Ther e wil l no t b e an y long-ter m maintenance

. However
, a site-wid e surfac e an d groun d water monitorin g progra m wil l continu e unti l 

### E R A determine s suc h monitorin g i s n o longe r necessar y t o ensur e tha t huma n healt h

an d th e environmen t ar e protected

. 4.3.1. 2 Assessmen t 

### Protectio n o f huma n healt h an d environmen t - N o complet e huma n exposur e pathway s hav e been identified

. Based upo n th e chemica l compositio n o f th e sla g
a n d soil samplin g conducte d beneat h th e slag
, th e potentia l fo r releas e o f metal s i n 4-6 

## TerraNex t

### leachat

e fro m th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s minimal

. Th e stockpile d fin e sla g has
, a t most , insignifican t non-poin t sourc e impac t o n wate r quality

. T h e physica l feature s o f th e slag pile s have remaine d relativel y unchange d fo r man y decades

. Tha t fact
, combine d wit h th e determinatio n tha t th e onl y potentia l releas e 

### pathwa y i s throug h leachate
, suggest s tha t th e statu s o f th e slag i s no t likel y t o chang e in th e nea r o r long term

. N o actio n i s protectiv e o f huma n healt h an d th e environment

. Attainmen t o f ARAR s - N o Actio n a t th e stockpile d fin e slag doe s no t impac t attainmen t o f ARARs

. Groun d wate r qualit y i s a functio n o f th e activ e interchang e wit h surfac e wate r degrade d b y th e releas e o f mor e mobil e meta l specie s fro m th e 

### multitud e o f othe r contaminan t source s i n th e vicinity

. Similarly

, th e potentia l fo r minima l non-poin t sourc e metal s loadin g fro m stockpile d fin e slag leachat e woul d a t
mos t represen t a n insignifican t loadin g t o surfac e water

. Non-poin t source , BM P to-be-considere d criteri a have bee n implemente d alon g th e sla g pile s contactin g Californi a Gulch

. Long-ter m effectivenes s - N o Actio n is a n effectiv e long-ter m alternative

. Th e onl y identifie d releas e pathway determine d t o hav e an y potentia l t o contribut e t o huma n o r environmenta l risk s i s th e potentia l fo r metal s t o leac h fro m th e stockpile d fin e slag

. Based upo n subsla g sampling
, metal s hav e no t leache d an d wil l no t leac h fro m th e stockpile d fin e sla g i n concentration s tha t wil l have a n advers e impac t o n soils
, o n surfac e wate r o r o n groun d wate r in th e vicinity

. Base d upo n th e hardnes s
o f th e slag
, th e lac k o f aci d generatin g potentia l an d th e absenc e o f significan t metal s

4- 7 

## Terranex t

### i n soil s beneat h th e slag
, th e potentia l fo r exposur e t o metal s o f concer n foun d i n th e slag i s unlikel y t o chang e i n th e lon g term

. Fo r tha t reason , n o actio n represent s a reliabl e alternative

. 

### Reductio n o f Toxicity
, Mobilit y o r Volum e - N o Actio n doe s no t furthe r reduc e t h e ver y limite d toxicit y o r mobilit y o f metal s o f concer n i n th e stockpile d fin e slag

. I n 

### t h e absenc e o f complet e exposur e pathways
, ther e i s n o indicatio n tha t toxicit y an d 

### mobilit y o f hazardou s substance s i n th e slag pos e a huma n healt h risk

. Fro m a lan d


### us e perspective , th e sla g volum e i s no t a n issu e as tourist s com e specificall y t o observe histori c minin g practices

. Implementatio n o f th e N o Actio n alternative
, 

### however
, wil l no t reduc e th e volum e o f th e fin e slag foun d a t th e site

. Short-ter m effectivenes s - N o Actio n doe s no t creat e additiona l risk t o th e Leadville communit y during implementation

. N o workers ar e involve d an d n o shor t 

### ter m measures requir e evaluatio n fo r reliability

. Implementabilit y - N o Actio n i s technicall y feasibl e a s it doe s no t rel y o n an y technology

. A s th e statu s quo , n o actio n i s implementable

. Cos t - N o Actio n i s cos t effective

. Ther e ar e n o cost s associate d wit h thi s remediatio n option

. 

### Stat e Acceptanc e - CDPH E comments , a s provide d durin g th e RI/F S process , shal l b e assesse d an d addresse d during thi s alternative s analysis

. Communit y Acceptanc e - Communit y acceptanc e wil l b e incorporate d a t th e 

### clos e o f publi c commen t period

.

4-

8 

## TerraNex t

### 4.3. 2

Alternativ e 2 - Institutiona l Control s
4.3.2. 1 Descriptio n 

### Institutiona l control s involv e restrictin g acces s o r activitie s tha t coul d increas e th e 

### potentia l fo r leachin g fro m stockpile d fin e slag

. Control s includ e fencing
, land-us e restrictions , an d dee d restrictions

. Additionally
, communit y awarenes s program s 

### coul d b e implemente d t o aler t th e communit y t o an y physica l hazard s associate d wit h t h e fin e slag

. Control s coul d b e implemente d separatel y o r i n combination

. Coordinatio n wit h stat e an d loca l agencie s woul d b e required

. Periodi c monitorin g
ma y b e require d t o ensur e tha t an y restriction s remai n i n force

. 4.3.2. 2 Assessmen t 

### Protectio n o f huma n healt h an d environmen t - Implementatio n o f institutiona l control s woul d b e protectiv e o f huma n healt h an d th e environment

. N o complet e huma n exposur e pathway s hav e bee n identified

. Base d upo n th e chemica l compositio n o f th e slag an d soil samplin g conducte d beneat h th e stockpile d fin e slag
, t h e potentia l fo r releas e o f metal s i n leachat e fro m th e stockpile d fin e slag is ver y minimal

. Relativ e t o th e othe r source s presen t in th e vicinity , th e stockpile d fin e sla g has
, a t most , a n insignifican t non-poin t sourc e impac t o n wate r quality

. 

### Tha t fact
, combine d wit h th e determinatio n tha t th e onl y potentia l releas e pathway i s 

### throug h leachate
, suggest s tha t th e statu s o f th e sla g i s no t likel y t o chang e in th e nea r o r lon g term

. 

### Fencin g woul d eliminat e th e smal l potentia l fo r direc t contac t wit h th e stockpile d fin e slag
, bu t direc t contac t i s no t a n exposur e pathwa y o f concer n (EPA

, 1991b)

. 

## TerraNex t 4- 9

### Fencin g

doe s no t minimiz e o r reduc e any potentia l fo r th e stockpile d fin e slag t o produc e leachate

. 

### Attainmen t o f ARAR s - Implementatio n o f institutiona l control s doe s no t impac t 

### attainmen t o f ARARs

. Th e potentia l fo r non-poin t sourc e metal s loadin g t o surfac e 

### wate r fro m stockpile d fin e sla g leachat e is minima l t o nonexistent

. Th e us e o f institutiona l control s o n th e stockpile d fin e sla g wil l no t hav e an y effec t o n groun d 

### wate r quality

. Non-poin t source , BM P to-be-considere d criteri a hav e been implemente d alon g th e sla g pile s contactin g Californi a Gulch

. Long-Ter m effectivenes s - Institutiona l control s ca n b e effectiv e in th e lon g term , bu t ar e no t permanent

. Fencin g require s inspections , maintenanc e an d communit y awarenes s an d must b e renewe d o r replace d periodically

. 

### Reductio n o f Toxicity

, Mobilit y o r Volum e - Althoug h institutiona l control s d o
n o t furthe r reduc e th e ver y limite d toxicit y o r mobilit y o f th e stockpile d fin e slag
, i n th e 

### absenc e o f complet e exposur e pathways
, ther e i s n o indicatio n tha t toxicit y an d mobilit y o f hazardou s substance s i n th e sla g pos e a huma n healt h risk

. Fro m a lan d
us e perspective , th e sla g volum e i s no t a n issu e a s tourist s com e specificall y t o 

### observ e histori c minin g practices

. Implementatio n o f institutiona l control s wil l no t reduc e th e volum e o f th e fin e sla g foun d a t th e Site

.
• Short-Ter m effectivenes s - Institutiona l control s ca n b e implemente d wit h n o additiona l ris k t o th e Leadvill e community

. Worker s an d th e communit y ca n b e adequatel y an d reliabl y protecte d i f fencing wer e t o b e installed

. Implementability - Institutiona l control s ar e technicall y feasibl e a s reliabl e 

### fencin g ca n b e procure d an d installe d readil y b y availabl e loca l contractors

. Deed
4-1 0 

## TerraNex t

### restriction s

have alread y bee n recorde d fo r th e stockpile d fin e slag

. Lan d us e restriction s woul d requir e actio n b y eithe r th e Lak e Count y Commissioner s o r th e Leadville Tow n Council

. Therefore

, becaus e furthe r actio n i s neede d b y a 3r d party , t h e potentia l o f implementabilit y o f lan d us e restriction s canno t b e predicted

. 

### Cos t - Mos t o f th e cos t associate d wit h th e institutiona l control s relate s t o fencin g an d fenc e maintenanc e wit h som e cos t attributabl e t o transporting , consolidating
, an d fencin g th e stockpile d fin e sla g material s i n a singl e area
. 

### T h e optio n tha t is considere d is t o fenc e an d maintai n th e stockpile d fin e sla g locate d

a t th e Arkansa s Valle y (AV ) slag pile

. 

### Fencin g th e A V pil e woul d hav e presen t valu e capita l an d labo r cost s o f $161,00 0
an d inspectio n an d maintenanc e cost s o f $8,50 0 t o inspec t an d maintai n ove r a 30

- 

### yea r perio d indicate d in th e summar y in Appendi x A

. State Acceptanc e - CDPH E comments , a s provide d during th e RI/F S process , shal l b e assesse d an d addresse d during th e alternative s analysis

. Communit y Acceptanc e - Communit y acceptanc e wil l be incorporate d a t th e clos e o f th e publi c commen t period

. 4.3. 3 Alternativ e 3 - Resourc e Utilizatio n
4.3.3. 1 Descriptio n 

### T h e utilizatio n o f stockpile d fin e sla g a s a resourc e coul d involv e a numbe r o f activitie s and/o r processes

. A t present , severa l option s have been identified
, 4-1 1 

# TerraNex t

### althoug h

i t i s no t possibl e t o ascertai n i f o r when th e entir e volum e o f stockpile d fin e sla g woul d be reused

. Option s no w include : th e us e o f fin e sla g as aggregat e fo r asphalt
, aggregat e fo r concret e constructio n fill
, roadbas e material
, pip e bedding
, o r manufactur e o f concret e block

. On e o f th e mos t feature s o f resourc e utilizatio n i s th e 

### requiremen t fo r genera l widesprea d acceptanc e tha t th e materia l doe s no t an d wil l



### no t creat e a n environmenta l concern
. T o thi s end
, i f resourc e utilizatio n i s t o be 

### implementable
, th e ER A need s t o determin e which use s o f fin e slag ar e unacceptabl e
a n d more importantl y which use s ar e acceptable

. Th e releas e o f thi s materia l b y E R A fo r certain specifie d use s i s crucia l t o bot h buye r an d selle r prio r t o resourc e utilizatio n bein g a viabl e alternative

. 

### 4.3.3. 2 Assessmen t Protectio n o f huma n healt h an d environmen t - A s wit h N o Action
, huma n healt h

an d th e environmen t woul d be protecte d i f stockpile d fin e sla g i s used as a resourc e 

### wit h appropriate environmenta l controls

. N o complet e huma n exposur e pathway s hav e bee n identifie d fo r stockpile d fin e sla g i n it s curren t condition

. Base d upo n th e chemica l compositio n o f th e sla g an d soi l sampling conducte d beneat h th e stockpile d 

### fin e slag
, th e potentia l fo r releas e o f metal s i n leachat e fro m th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s ver y minimal

. Relativ e t o th e othe r sources presen t in th e vicinity , th e stockpile d fin e sla g has
, a t most , a n insignifican t non-poin t sourc e impac t o n wate r quality

. 

### Ove r time , an y potentia l impac t woul d b e furthe r decrease d a s th e stockpile d fin e sla g is utilized

. 

### Attainmen t o f ARAR s - A s wit h N o Action
, resource utilizatio n doe s no t impac t attainmen t o f ARARs

. Ground-wate r qualit y i s a functio n o f th e activ e interchang e 

### wit h surfac e wate r degrade d b y th e releas e o f more mobil e meta l specie s fro m th e multitud e o f contaminan t sources i n th e vicinity

. Similarly

, th e potentia l fo r minima l
4-1 2 

## TerraNex t

### non-poin t

source metal s loadin g fro m stockpile d fin e sla g leachat e presentl y 

### represent s a t mos t a n insignifican t impac t t o surfac e wate r quality

. T h e requiremen t tha t fugitiv e particulat e emission s b e controlle d usin g technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e control s ca n b e achieved

. Similarly

, BMP

base d BA T fo r stormwate r contro l wil l b e applicable an d attainabl e i f futur e us e o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g 

### result s i n a poin t sourc e discharge

. Non-poin t sourc e BM P to-be-considere d criteri a 

### hav e bee n implemente d alon g sla g pile s contactin g Californi a Gulc h stream

. 

### Long-Ter m effectivenes s - Resourc e utilizatio n represent s a reliabl e alternativ e whic h use s know n technologies
, limite d onl y b y th e regiona l marke t deman d fo r th e 

### feedstock

. Resourc e utilizatio n wil l no t hav e dramati c effec t o n th e residua l ris k as 

### t h e pre-resourc e utilizatio n risks ar e ver y limited

. Reductio n o f Toxicity

, Mobilit y o r Volum e - Ove r time , reus e coul d reduc e th e
ver y limite d potentia l toxicit y an d potentia l mobilit y o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

. I n th e 

### absenc e o f complet e exposur e pathways
, ther e i s n o indicatio n tha t toxicit y an d mobilit y pos e a huma n healt h concern
. Fro m a lan d us e perspective , th e chang e i n 

### t h e tota l volum e o f al l type s o f sla g wil l no t b e significan t i f onl y th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s utilized

. 

### Short-ter m effectivenes s - Resourc e utilizatio n ca n b e implemente d wit h n o additiona l ris k t o th e Leadvill e community

. Worker s an d th e communit y ca n be 

### adequatel y an d reliabl y protecte d fro m fugitiv e particulate s an d change s i n stor m wate r drainag e whe n th e stockpile d fin e slag is utilized

.

4-1 3 

## TerraNex t

### Implementabilit

y - Resourc e utilizatio n i s technicall y feasibl e bu t ther e ar e 

### unknowns a s t o th e marketabilit y o f th e resource
. Deman d fo r th e stockpile d fin e sla g wil l be dependan t o n a numbe r o f factors
, including bu t no t limite d to , th e leve l o f constructio n activit y in th e vicinit y o f Leadville

. Cos t - Effort s conducte d t o identif y market s hav e been unsuccessfu l t o date

. 

### Resourc e utilizatio n doe s no t presentl y appea r t o b e a cost-effectiv e optio n eve n i f marke t demand s fo r th e materia l ar e identified

. T h e option s considere d ar e 1 ) t o process sla g fo r us e as a concret e o r asphal t 

### aggregat e in construction , an d 2 ) t o utiliz e sla g material s fo r a stand-alon e materia l in construction , suc h as a backfil l o r pip e bedding

. 

### T h e cos t effectivenes s o f thes e option s i s hindere d b y th e distanc e th e sla g materia l i s locate d fro m a majo r marke t an d th e cos t associate d wit h sortin g th e slag

. Cos t estimate s an d a cos t summar y ar e include d i n Appendi x A

. Estimate s hav e been provide d fo r us e o f th e fin e sla g fo r aggregat e ($1,120,00 0 los s afte r resale ) an d fo r u s e i n fil l materia l ($244,62 5 los s afte r resale)

. 

### Stat e Acceptanc e - CDPH E comments , a s provide d during th e RI/F S process , have been assesse d an d addresse d during thi s alternative s analysis

. Communit y Acceptanc e - Communit y acceptanc e wil l b e incorporate d a t th e clos e o f th e publi c commen t period

.

4-1

4 

## TerraNex t5 . 0 COMPARATIV

E ANALYSI S O F ALTERNATIVE S 

### Afte r th e alternative s hav e bee n describe d an d individuall y assesse d agains t th e criteria , th e comparativ e analysi s i s use d t o evaluat e th e performanc e o f eac h alternativ e i n relatio n t o eac h specifi c evaluatio n criterion

. Thi s analysi s is performe d qualitatively
, i n contras t t o th e precedin g analysis
, which analyze d eac h alternativ e independentl y withou t a consideratio n o f th e othe r alternatives

. Th e purpos e o f thi s 

### comparativ e analysi s i s t o identif y th e advantage s an d disadvantage s o f eac h alternativ e relativ e t o on e anothe r s o tha t th e ke y tradeoff s ca n b e identified

. Table 5- 1 provide s a grid compariso n metho d t o ran k th e alternative s an d thei r attainmen t 

### relativ e t o th e followin g criteria

. Protectio n o f Huma n Healt h an d th e Environmen t - Al l thre e alternative s ar e protectiv e o f huma n healt h an d th e environment

. Attainmen t o f ARAR s - Al l thre e alternative s attai n ARARs

. Ther e is minima l potentia l metal s loadin g fro m stockpile d fin e sla g an d it s leachat e ha s a n insignifican t impac t o n wate r quality

. Resource utilizatio n ma y marginall y decreas e th e minima l metal s concentration s in th e stockpile d fin e sla g leachat e becaus e o f volum e reduction

. 

### BMP-base d BA T fo r stormwate r contro l wil l b e applicabl e an d attainabl e i f th e stockpile d fin e slag utilizatio n result s i n a poin t sourc e discharge

. Similarly

, technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e particulat e emissio n control s woul d b e require d fo r resourc e utilization

. 

### T h e non-poin t source BM P to-be-considere d criterio n ha s bee n implemente d alon g 

### sla g pile s contactin g Californi a Gulc h stream

. Th e nee d fo r stormwate r control s wil l
5- 1 

## TerrdNex tTABL E 5- 1 GRI D COMPARISO N METHO D FO R ALTERNATIVE S

ANALYSI S Criterio n

1 ) Protectio n o f Huma n Healt h an d Environmen t 2 ) Attainmen t o f ARAR s 3 ) Lon g ter m Effectivenes s 4 ) Reductio n o f Toxicity

, Mobilit y o r Volum e 5 ) Shor t ter m Effectivenes s 6 ) Implementabilit y 7 ) Cos t 8 ) Stat e Acceptanc e 9 ) Communit y Acceptanc e Tota l Alternativ e

1 N o Actio n

4 1 Alternativ e

2 Institutiona l Control s

3 9 Alternativ e

3 Resourc e Utilizatio n

5
4
2 5

4
2 5

5
2

5 5 5 5 5

4 5 5 3

3 5 5
3 6 Notes : Scal e o f 1-5 , wher e 5 = Highes t Attainmen t



## TerraNex t• Long-Ter m Effectivenes s - Al l three alternative s hav e simila r long-ter m effectiveness

. Reus e o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g woul d marginall y reduc e th e residua l ris k becaus e o f volum e reduction

. Non e o f the alternative s ar e subjec t t o technolog y failur e fro m ag e o r wea r an d tear

.

• Reductio n o f Toxicity
, Mobilit y o r Volum e - Non e o f th e three alternative s reduc e th e toxicit y an d mobilit y o f metal s o f concer n foun d i n th e fin e slag

. However
, th e toxicit y an d mobilit y o f metal s i n th e fine s d o no t pos e huma n healt h concerns
. I f reused
, th e volume o f stockpile d fin e sla g locate d i n Leadvill e woul d b e reduce d ove r time

.

• Short-Ter m Effectivenes s - Al l three alternative s can b e implemente d i n a manne r whic h protect s th e Leadvill e communit y an d th e worker s implementin g th e remedy

. Th e N o Actio n alternativ e eliminate s disturbance s o f th e fin e grai n sla g an d require s no workers

. Conversely

, resource utilizatio n wil l creat e noise , th e type s o f hazard s associate d wit h earth-movin g activities , an d th e potentia l fo r fugitiv e paniculat e emissions

.

• Implementabilit

y - Al l three alternative s are implementable

. Dee d restriction s are i n effect

. Lan d us e restriction s ma y not b e implementabl e fro m an administrativ e perspectiv e a s the y require approva l b y th e Lak e Count y Commissioners

. Reus e require s tha t there b e a commercial marke t or internal nee d for the stockpile d fin e sla g which
, at thi s time , i s uncertain

.

• Cos t - N o Actio n i s the mos t cost-effectiv e approac h t o meetin g the remedial action objective s an d attainin g ARARs

. Ther e ar e essentiall y n o cost s associate d wit h thi s remedia l option

. Th e principa l cos t associate d wit h institutiona l control s i s fo r fencin g material s an d labor

. However
, th e benefit s associate d wit h fencin g are no t directe d a t th e remedial action objectives

. Currently

, a no-cos t o r low-cos t us e o f the stockpile d sla g ha s not bee n identifie d i n th e vicinit y o f Leadville

. Furthe r wor k regardin g us e o f fin e sla g i n constructio n material s i s warrante d i f thi s optio n i s t o b e pursued

. Cost s for th e thre e option s are a s follows :

5- 3 

## TerranextN

o Action

- Cost s $ 0 Institutiona l Control s $161,00 0 Resourc e Utilizatio n $l,120,000-aggregate ;

$245,00 0 fil l materia l

• Stat e Acceptanc e - CDPH E comments , as provide d durin g th e RI/F S process , hav e bee n assesse d an d addresse d durin g thi s alternativ e analysis

.

• Communit y Acceptanc e - Communit y acceptanc e wil l b e incorporate d at the clos e o f the publi c commen t period

.

5- 4 

## TerraNex t6 . 0 BIBLIOGRAPH

Y 

### U.S

. Distric t Cour t fo r th e Distric t o f Colorado

, 10t h CIR

, Decembe r 1993

. State o f Colorado vs. ASARCO, Inc., et.al., Consent Decree with Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad. ASARCO

, 1991

. Preliminary Health Risk Assessment, Leadville, Colorado, Prepare d b y Woodward/Clyde

, Decembe r 1991

. 

### ASTM

, 1987

. Standard Practice fo r Sampling Aggregates, Designatio n D-75-87

, Annua l Boo k o f AST M Standards

, Decembe r 1987

. CDL

, 1986a

. Leadville/Stringtown

Soils Investigation, Stat e o f Colorad o Departmen t


### o f Law

, Prepare d b y Engineerin g Science

, Decembe r 1986

. CDL

, 1986b

. Ya k Tunnel/California Gulch Remedial Investigation, Stat e o f Colorad o Departmen t o f Law

, Prepare d b y Engineerin g Science

, 1986

. 

### EPA

, 1995a

. Draf t Fina l Finding s o f Meta l Speciatio n Investigation s a t th e Californi a Gulc h NP L Site

, Prepare d by Joh n W

. Drexle r an d Ro y F

. Weston
, Inc

. Octobe r 1995

. E P A 1995b

. Baselin e Huma n Healt h Risk Assessmen t fo r th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e - Par t C
- Evaluatio n o f Recreationa l an d Worke r Scenario s prepare d b y Roy F

. Westo n Apri l 17 , 1995

. 

### E P A 1995c

. Baselin e Huma n Healt h Risk Assessmen t fo r th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Site - Par t A
- Risk s t o Resident s fro m lea d prepare d b y Ro y F

. Weston
, Draf t fina l Novembe r 6 , 1995

. 6- 1 

## TerraNex t

### ERA

, 1993

. Sitewid e Screenin g Feasibilit y Study

, U S ER A Regio n VII I 1993

. 

### ERA

, 199 1 a
. Administrative Order o n Consent fo r Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (Operable Unit for Slag), CERCLA-92-06

, Decembe r 1991

. 

### ERA

, 1991b

. Preliminar y Huma n Healt h Baselin e Ris k Assessmen t fo r th e Californi a Gulc h NP L Site

, Leadville

, Colorado

. Prepare d b y Ro y F

. Weston
, Inc

. fo r U.S

. ERA

, Decembe r 1991

. ERA

, 1990a

. Data Tabulation Report fo r Sampling an d Analysis o f Major Slag Piles
- 

### California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, U.S

. ERA

, Prepare d b y Jacob s Engineerin g Group

, Inc.
, Februar y 1990

. 

### ERA

, 1990b

. Contract Laboratory Program Statement o f Work fo r Inorganics Analysis, SOW-4/90

. 

### ERA

, 1990c

. Interpretive Report fo r th e Sampling an d Analysis o f th e Major Slag Piles
- California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, U.S

. ERA

, Prepare d b y Jacob s 

### Engineerin g Group

, Inc.
, September

, 1990

. ERA

, 1989a

. Draft Phase I I Remedial Investigation Technical Memorandum, 1986- 

### 1987, California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado, U.S

. EPA

, Prepare d b y CH2 M Hill
, M ay 1989

. EPA

, 1989b

. CERCL A Complianc e wit h othe r Laws Manual
, OSWE R Directiv e 9234.1-0 1

6- 2 

## TerraNex t

### ERA

, 1988

. Compilatio n o f Ai r Pollutan t Emissio n Factors

, Volum e 1 : Stationar y 

### Poin t an d Are a Sources

, fourt h edition

. AP-42

. U.S

. Environmenta l Protectio n 

### Agency
, Researc h Triangle Park

, Nort h Carolina

, 27711

. Updat e o f Fugitiv e Dus t Emissio n Factor s i n AP-4 2 Sectio n 11. 2 - Win d Erosion

, MR I No

. 8985-K
, Midwes t 

### Researc h Institute
, Kansa s City

, Missouri
, 1988

. Martoran o et

. al

. 1994

. Identificatio n an d Evaluatio n Work Plan

, Foothill s Engineerin g Consultants

, 1994

. 

### Medine
, 1994

. Conceptual Model an d th e Development o f a Contaminant Transport Model fo r Metals i n California Gulch, Prepare d b y A.J

. Medine
, 1994

. MK

, 1992

. Final Report for Lead Slag Pile Remedial Investigation a t th e California Gulch Site, Leadville

, Colorado

, prepare d b y Morriso n Knudse n Corporatio n fo r Denve r an d Ri o Grand e Wester n Railroa d Company

, Decembe r 1992

. MK

, 199 1 a
. Work Plan fo r Slag Pile Remedial Investigation a t California Gulch Site, 

### Leadville, Colorado, Prepare d b y Morriso n Knudse n Corporatio n fo r Denver an d Ri o Grand e Wester n Railroa d Company

, Octobe r 1991

. M K

, 1991b
, Samplin g an d Analysi s Pla n fo r Slag Pil e fo r Slag Pil e Remedia l 

### Investigatio n a t Californi a Gulc k Site

, Leadville

, Colorado

, Prepare d b y Morriso n Knudse n Corporatio n Environmenta l Service s Divisio n fo r Denve r & Ri o Gran d Wester n Railroa d Company

, Novembe r 1991

. Res-ASARCO

, 1991

. Draft Remedial Investigation Scoping Document California 

### Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado, Prepare d b y Woodward-Clyd e Consultants

, April 1991

. 6- 3 

## Terranext

### Resurrection

,

1992

. Fina l Work Pla n - Metal s Speciatio n an d Source s 

### Characterizatio n a t Californi a Gulc h CERCL A Site

, Leadville

, Colorado

, Prepare d b y Camp

, Dresse r an d McKee

, Inc

. fo r Resurrectio n Minin g Corporation

, Januar y 20 , 1992

. Walsh
, 1988

. Draft Soil Investigations i n th e Leadville Study Area, Lake County, Colorado. Prepare d b y Jame s P

. Wals h an d Associate s fo r Bradley

, Campbel l an d Carney

, March
, 

### 1988

.

6- 4 

## TerraNex tAPPENDI X A COS T



## TerraNex tESTIMATES OP COSTS FOR REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES OPTION 1 CALIFORNIA GULCH ARKANSAS VALLEY SLAG PILE LEADVILLE, COLORADO ALTERATIVE: ITEM: INSTITUTIONALCONTROLS (I) FENCE THE AV FINE SLAG PILE DIRECT CAPITAL COSTS: (Includes Labor, Equipment and Materials, Unless Otherwise Noted) COSTS COMPONENT
1. Mobilize Materials 2. Office/Storage trailer (8'x30') 3. Earthwork (450 hp bulldozer) 4. Utilities Electric Phone Sanitary Station 5. Fence Materials Fencing Corner Posts Braces Double Swing Gates Locks TOTAL DIRECT COSTS UNIT

Lump Lump Cubic Yards Month Month Month Lineal Feet Each Each Opening Each INDIRECT CAPITAL COSTS (% of Direct Capital Costs)
1. Engineering and Design (10% of Capital Costs) 2. Contingency Allowance (20% of Capital Cost) 3. Other Indirects Regulatory License/Permits (5% of Direct Capital Costs) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS PRESENT VALUE OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS Annual inspection and maintenance Year TOTAL COSTS ASSUMPTIONS/COMMENTS: QUANTITY I 1 5,000 1 1 1 5,300 SO 106 3 3

30 UNIT

COSTS $2,700.00 $1,800.00 $2.50 $1,300.00 $600.00 $90.00 $16.00 $95.00 $35.00 $970.00 $15.00 TOTAL

CAPITAL COSTS $2,700 $1,800 $12,500 $1,300 $600 $90 $84,800 $4,750 $3,710 $2,910 $45

$750.00 $115,205

$11,521 $23,041 $5,760 $46,082 $8,443 $163,970

1. Eight (8) loads of fencing materials will be hauled using flatbed trailers. 2. Includes mob & demob, set-up and leveling, tear-down and monthly leasing charge. 3. Earthwork consists of consolidating sorted and water-quenched fine slags before fencing; no mob or demob, onsite contractor utilized. 4. Fencing is 6 ga. Galvanized wire, 6' high, no barbed wire. 5. Gates are 20'wide and include posts and hardware.ESTIMATES OP COSTS FOR REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES PROJECT: SLAG PILE OPERABLE UNIT LEADVILLE, COLORADO ALTERATIVE: ITEM: RESOURCE

UTILIZATION (I) FINE SLAG ADDITIVE MATERIAL IN CONSTRUCTION (Aggregate for concrete or asphalt, additive to building materials, additive to grout, concrete and slurry formulations) DIRECT CAPITAL COSTS: (Includes Labor, Equipment and Materials, Unless Otherwise Noted) COMPONENT
1. Rescreen material 2. Load and haul TOTAL DIRECT COSTS UNIT

Cubic Yards Cubic Yards INDIRECT CAPITAL COSTS (% of Direct Capital Costs) 1. Engineering and Design (10% of Capital Costs) 2. Contingency Allowance (20% of Capital Cost) 3. Other In directs Regulatory License/Permits (5% of Direct Capital Costs) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL COSTS(Direct plus Indirect) CREDITS FROM SALE OF PRODUCT MATERIAL: Cubic Yard Cubic Yard QUANTITY

190,000 190,000

171,000 19,000 COSTS

$5.68 $3.25 TOTAL

COSTS $1,079,200 $617,500

$6.50 $3.10 1. Additive 2. Backfill Material TOTAL CREDIT TOTAL COST$/PROFIT($) ASSUMPTIONS/COMMENTS:
1. AVfute slag pile volumes are used to compute costs. 2. 90% of material \vul be suitable for use as additive. 3. 10% of material used as backfill material. 4. No operations and maintenance costs are necessary over an extended period. 5. Credits from sale of product material have been reduced to reflect transportation costs to a major market. $1,696,700

$169,670 $339,340 $84,835 $593,845 $2,290,545 $(1,111,500) $(58,900) $(1,170,400) $1,120,145ESTIMATES OP COSTS FOR REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES PROJECT: SLAG PILE OPERABLE UNIT LEADVILLE, COLORADO ALTERATIVE: ITEM: RESOURCE

UTILIZATION (2) USED AS STAND ALONE MATERIAL IN CONSTRUCTION (Fill material) DIRECT CAPITAL COSTS: (Includes Labor, Equipment and Materials, Unless Otherwise Noted)
COMPONENT
1. Load and Haul UNIT

Cubic Yards QUANTITY

190,000 CAPITAL

COSTS $3.25 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS INDIRECT CAPITAL COSTS (% of Direct Capital Costs) 1

. Engineering an d Design (10% o f Capital Costs) 2. Contingency Allowance (20% of Capital Cost) 3. Other Indirect! Regulatory License/Permits (5% of Direct Capital Costs) TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL COSTS(Direct plus Indirect) CREDITS FROM SALE OF PRODUCT MATERIAL:
1. Backfill Material Cubic

Yard 190,000

$3.10 TOTAL CREDIT TOTAL COST$/PROF1T($) ASSUMPTIONS/COMMENTS:
1. AV Fine slag volumes are used to compute costs. 2. 100% of material will be suitable for use as backfill. 3. Load and haul is for conveyance to suitable rail loading dock. 4. Credits from sale of product material have been reduced due to transportation costs to a major market. 5. Annual Operations and Maintenance costs are not included in estimate. TOTAL COSTS 5617,500 $617,500

$61,750 $123,500 $30,875 $216,125 $833,625 ($589,000) ($589,000) $244,625APPENDI X B

ARAR S EVALUATIO N FO R STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G



## TerraNex tTABL E O F CONTENT S APPENDI X B
1 . 0 IDENTIFICATIO

N O F ARAR S

............................. . B- l 2 . 0 DEFINITIO N

AN D CRITERI A FO R EVALUATIO N OF APPLICABILIT

Y O R RELEVANC E AN D APPROPRIATENES

S

................... .

B- 2 2. 1 Definitio n o f ARARs
............................... . B- 2 2. 2 Categorie s o f ARAR s
............................... . B- 4 2. 3 Waive r o f ARAR s
................................. . B- 5 3 . 0 CHEMICAL-SPECIFI

C ARAR S AN D TBC S

..................... .

B- 6 3. 1 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs an d Guidanc e t o be Considere d fo r Surfac e Wate r
......................................... . B- 6 3.1. 1 Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standard s (CWQS )

............. .

B- 6 3.1.1. 1 Basi c Standard s
..................... .

B- 7 3.1.1. 2 Criteri a fo r Strea m Classificatio n
........... .

B- 8 3.1.1. 3 Us e Attainabilit y Analysi s
.............. .

B-10 3.1.1. 4 Classificatio n

o f Surfac e Water s a t th e Californi a Gulc h Sit e
........................ .

B-l l 3.1.1. 5 Numeri c Wate r Qualit y Standard s
......... .

B-1 2 3.1.1. 6 Antidegradatio n

.................... .

B-1 3 3.1. 2 Federa l Wate r Qualit y Criteri a
.................... .

B-1 4 3.1. 3 Chemica l Specifi c Surfac e Wate r ARARs fo r Segmen t 2 b o f th e Arkansa s Rive r
.............................. . B-1 4 3. 2 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Groun d Wate r
........................................ . B-1 4 3.2. 1 Colorad o Groundwate r Standard s - Identificatio n o f Specifie d Area s an d Groundwate r Classification s
............... .

B-l 6 3.2.1. 1 Groun d Wate r Specifie d Area s
........... .

B-1 7 3.2.1. 2 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs fo r Alluvia l Groun d Wate r
.......................... . B-1 9 

## TerraNex tTABL E O F CONTENT S (continued ) 3. 3 Chemica l Specifi c ARARs an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Soi l

. . . B-2 0 3. 4 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Ai r
.. . B-2 0 4 . 0 ACTION-SPECIFI

C ARAR S AN D TBC S

...................... .

B-21 4 . 1 Nationa l Pollutan t Discharg e Eliminatio n System

, Direct Discharg e Requirement s
................................... . B-2 1 4.1. 1 Poin t Sourc e Discharges Relate d t o Stockpile d Sla g
........ . B-2 2 4.1. 2 BMP s fo r Ancillary Industria l Activitie s Associate d wit h Direc t Discharge s
................................ . B-2 3 4. 2 NPDE S Stormwate r Permittin g Requirement s
................ .

B-2 4 4. 3 Colorad o Discharg e Permi t Syste m Regulations
.............. .

B-2 6 4. 4 Clea n Wate r Act Nonpoin t Sourc e Control

................. .

B-2 6 4. 5 Clea n Wate r Ac t Sectio n 40 4 Dredg e an d Fil l Requirement s
....... . B-2 7 4 . 6 Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s fo r Fugitiv e Particulat e Emission s
..................................... . B-2 7 4. 7 Colorad o Mine d Lan d Reclamatio n
...................... .

B-2 7 5. 0 LOCATION-SPECIFI

C AN D T O B E CONSIDERE D ARAR s
.......... .

B-2 9 5 . 1 Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n Ac t

...................... .

B-2 9 5. 2 Histori c an d Cultura l Preservatio n
...................... .

B-2 9 5. 3 Endangere d Specie s
............................... . B-3 0 5. 4 Specie s o f Specia l Concer n and Undetermine d Statu s
........... .

B-3 0 5. 5 Colorad o Natura l Are a Progra m
........................ .

B-3 1 5. 6 Protectio n o f Floodplain s an d Wetland s
................... .

B-3 1 5. 7 Cultura l Resource s
................................ . B-3 1

n 

# TerraNex tAPPENDI X B ARAR S EVALUATIO N FO R STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G

1. 0 IDENTIFICATIO

N O F ARAR S Sectio n 121(d ) o f th e Comprehensiv e Environmenta l Response

, Compensatio n an d Liabilit y Ac t (CERCLA ) a s amended b y th e Superfun d Amendment s an d Reauthorizatio n Ac t o f 198 6 (SARA ) require s tha t CERCL A remedia l action s compl y wit h federa l requirement s an d thos e stat e requirement s tha t ar e mor e stringen t than thei r federa l counterparts

. The federa l o r
mor e stringen t stat e requirement s mus t b e either legall y applicabl e o r relevan t an d appropriat e unde r the circumstance s o f the release for an y hazardou s substance or pollutan t that wil l remai n onsit e at th e completio n o f th e remedia l activities

. Thi s ARAR s evaluatio n wa s conducte d consisten t wit h th e Nationa l Contingenc y Pla n (NCP )

and additiona l interpretiv e discussion s presen t i n the preambl e t o the propose d rul e and the preambl e t o the fina l rule

. (Se e 4 0 CF R Par t 300 , Section s 300.400(g)
, an d 300.430(g) ; 5 3 F R 51394 ; an d 5 5 F R 866 6 respectively)

. I n addition
, th e ARAR s evaluatio n employe d th e identificatio n methodolog y provide d i n th e CERCL A Complianc e wit h Othe r Law s Manual
, Par t I
, Augus t 8 , 1988 an d th e CERCL A Complianc e wit h Othe r Law s Manual
, Par t II
, Augus t 9 , 1989

. T h e scop e o f thi s evaluatio n include s groun d water , surfac e water , ai r an d soi l ARARs

.

B-l 

## Terranex t2 . 0 DEFINITIO

N AN D CRITERI A FO R EVALUATIO N O F APPLICABILIT

Y O R RELEVANCE AN D APPROPRIATENES

S 2 J

. Definitio n o f ARAR s T h e NC P define s applicabl e requirement s as : Thos e cleanu p standards
, standard s o f control
, an d othe r substantiv e requirements , criteria , o r limitation s promulgate d unde r federa l environmenta l

o r stat e environmental o r facilit y sitin g law s that specificall y addres s a hazardou s substance
, pollutant
, contaminant , remedia l actio n locatio n o r othe r circumstanc e foun d at a CERCL A site

. (Se e 4 0 CF R Sectio n 300.5)

. T h e preambl e t o th e propose d NC P furthe r explain s th e impor t o f applicabilit y as : Basically

, i n determinin g applicability
, th e questio n i s whethe r a regulatio n woul d b e legall y enforceabl e at the sit e (o r fo r the contaminan t o r action ) i f a privat e part y wer e remediatin g the sit e apart fro m an y CERCL A authority

. (Se e 5 3 F R 51436 , lef t column
, center)

. T h e NC P als o define s relevan t an d appropriat e as : Thos e cleanu p standards
, standard s o f control
, an d othe r substantiv e requirements , criteria , o r limitation s promulgate d unde r federa l environmenta l

o r stat e environmenta l o r facilit y sitin g laws that
, whil e no t "applicable " t o a hazardous substance
, pollutant
, contaminant , remedial action , location
, o r othe r circumstanc e at a CERCL A site , addres s problem s o r situation s B- 2 

## TerraNex tsufficientl

y simila r t o thos e encountered at the CERCL A sit e that thei r us e i s wel l suite d t o th e particula r site

. (Se e 4 0 CF R Sectio n 300.5)

. The NC P provide s eight factor s tha t mus t b e considered
, wher e pertinent , i n evaluatin g whethe r a requiremen t i s bot h sufficientl y simila r an d wel l suited

. Eac h o f th e factor s i s
mor e o r les s pertinen t dependin g o n whethe r the requiremen t addresse s a chemical
, location
, o r action

. The factor s include :

• the purpos e o f the requiremen t an d the purpos e o f the CERCL A action ; • th e mediu m regulate d or affecte d b y th e requiremen t and th e mediu m contaminate d or affecte d a t th e CERCL A site ; • th e substance s regulate d b y th e requiremen t an d th e substance s foun d a t th e CERCL A site ; • th e action s o r activitie s regulate d b y th e requiremen t an d th e remedia l actio n contemplate d a t th e CERCL A site ; • an y variances , waivers , o r exemption s o f th e requirement s an d thei r availabilit y fo r th e circumstances a t th e CERCL A site ; • th e typ e o f plac e regulate d an d th e typ e o f plac e affecte d b y th e releas e o r CERCL A action; • the typ e or siz e o f facilit y regulate d b y the requirement ; • an y consideratio n o f use or potentia l use o f affecte d resource s i n th e requirement an d th e us e o r potentia l us e o f th e affecte d resourc e a t th e CERCL A site

. (Se e 4 0 CF R 300.400(g))

.

B-3 

## Terranext2. 2

Categorie s o f ARAR s ARAR s ar e divide d int o thre e categories :

• Chemica l Specifi c • Actio n Specifi c • Locatio n Specifi c I n addition
, th e NC P has identifie d a fourt h categor y o f informatio n "t o b e considered"
, know n a s TBCs

. Chemical-specifi c ARAR s includ e health

- o r risk-base d narrativ e standards
, numerica l values
, o r methodologie s that
, whe n applie d t o site-specifi c conditions
, establis h th e acceptabl e
amoun t o r concentratio n o f a chemica l tha t ma y remai n o r ca n b e release d t o th e environment

. Actio n specifi c ARAR s ar e technolog y o r activity-base d requirement s o r limitation s o n action s taken wit h respec t t o hazardou s material s foun d at CERCL A sites

. Fo r example
, RCR A land disposa l restrictions ma y requir e applicatio n o f bes t demonstrate d availabl e technology
, o r fillin g o f wetland s coul d invok e Clea n Wate r Ac t requirements

. Locatio n specifi c ARARs ar e restriction s place d o n th e concentratio n o f hazardou s substances
o r th e conduc t o f activitie s solel y because the y occu r i n specifi c locations

. Example s o f specia l location s includ e floodplains
, wetlands
, histori c places
, an d sensitiv e ecosystems o r habitats

. TBC s represen t Federa l an d Stat e advisories
, criteria o r guidanc e that ar e no t ARARs

, bu t

a r e usefu l in developin g CERCL A remedies

. (Se e 4 0 CF R 300.430(g)(3))

. B- 4 

## TerraNex t2, 3 Waive r o f ARAR s Sectio n 121(d ) o f SAR A an d §300.430(f)(l)(C ) o f th e NC P allo w waive r o f ARAR s wher e specifi c condition s ar e met :

• th e alternativ e i s a n interim measure ; • complianc e wil l resul t i n greate r ris k t o huma n healt h and the environment ; • complianc e i s technicall y impracticabl e fro m a n engineerin g perspective ; • th e alternativ e wil l attain a standar d o f performanc e equivalen t t o that require d b y the ARAR ; • th e ARA R i s a stat e ARA R whic h ha s no t bee n consistentl y applied ; or • at Superfun d fund-finance d sites , attainmen t o f the ARA R does not strik e a balanc e betwee n protectivenes s an d th e availabilit y o f fun d monies

. I f required
, the appropriatenes s o f applyin g a waive r o r waiver s i n relatio n t o the stockpile d fin e sla g wil l b e full y assesse d durin g remed y selection

.

B-5 

## TerraNex t3 . 0

CHEMICAL-SPECIFI

C ARAR S AN D TBC S T h e chemical-specifi c ARAR s an d TBC s presente d belo w ar e groupe d o n a medi a specifi c basis

. Th e medi a considere d include :

• surfac e water • ground wate r • surfac e soil s • ai r The universe o f chemical-specifi c ARAR s and TBC s reviewe d are presente d i n Appendix B

, Table s 1 an d 2

. Onl y thos e standard s determine d t o b e potentiall y applicabl e o r relevan t an d appropriat e t o th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n ar e discusse d below

. 3. 1 Chemical-Specifi c

ARAR s an d Guidanc e t o be Considere d fo r Surfac e Wate r T h e followin g potentia l chemical-specifi c surfac e wate r ARARs wer e identifie d an d considered :

• Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standards

, Classification s an d Numeri c Standards

, Arkansas River Basin

, Uppe r Arkansa s River

, Regio n 1 3 • Federa l Wate r Qualit y Criteri a (FWQC){Primar y

an d Secondary drinkin g wate r standard s and maximu m contaminan t level goals }

3.1. 1 Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standard s (CWOS ) T h e Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standard s (CWQS ) establis h basi c standard s applicabl e t o al l stat e surfac e waters ; a syste m fo r classifyin g stat e surfac e waters ; procedure s an d criteri a fo r B-6 

## TerraNex tu s e

attainabilit y analysis ; procedure s fo r establishin g o f numeri c water qualit y standards ; an d

an antidegradatio n rul e and implementatio n process

. (Se e 5 CC R 1002-8 , Section s 3.1. 0 throug h 3.1.17)

. The CWQ S ar e structure d t o provid e broa d discretio n t o th e Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Contro l Commissio n (WQCC ) t o craf t appropriat e numeri c standard s that reflec t naturall y impacte d

an d bot h reversibl e an d irreversibl e human-induce d impact s t o Colorad o surfac e wate r quality

. 3.1.1. 1 Basi c Standard s T h e basi c standard s appl y t o al l surfac e water s in th e Stat e o f Colorado

. Th e basi c standard s mandat e that "stat e water s shal l be fre e fro m substances attributabl e t o human-caused poin t
sourc e o r non-poin t sourc e discharge s i n amounts , concentrations o r combinations : ( a ) whic h ca n settl e t o for m botto m deposit s detrimenta l t o th e beneficia l
uses...
. whic h includ e
.. . min e slurr y o r tailings
, silt
, o r mud... ; o r (b ) whic h for m floatin g debris
, scum , o r othe r surfac e material... ; o r (c ) whic h produc e color
, odor
, o r condition s i n suc h a degre e a s t o creat e a nuisanc e or har m existin g beneficia l uses... ; or (d ) whic h ar e harmfu l t o the beneficia l use s o r toxi c t o humans
, animals
, plant s o r aquati c life ; o r
.. . ( f ) whic h caus e a fil m o n th e surfac e o r produc e a deposi t o n shorelines. " (Se e §3.1.11)

. B- 7 

# TerraNex tT h e

limitation s impose d b y th e basi c standard s ar e applicabl e t o th e Californi a Gulc h stream

. T h e basi c standard s als o includ e limit s o n allowabl e radiatio n an d organi c pollutants

. Because radioactiv e constituent s o r organic pollutant s ar e no t associate d wit h th e stockpile d fin e slag
, the y wil l no t b e considere d further

.
3.1.1. 2 Criteri a fo r Strea m Classificatio n The CWQ S requir e tha t surfac e water s be : classifie d fo r th e presen t beneficia l use s o f th e water , o r th e beneficia l use s tha t ma y b e reasonabl y expecte d i n th e futur e for whic h th e wate r i s suitabl e i n it s presen t conditio n or the beneficia l use s for whic h i t i s t o becom e suitabl e a s
a goal

. (Se e §3.1.6)

. For eac h watershed
, the WQC C ha s the responsibilit y t o assig n use classification s and t o revie w the previousl y assigne d us e classification s onc e ever y three year s a s par t o f a "triennia l review"

. Th e numeri c wate r qualit y standard s ar e subsequentl y promulgate d based upo n the us e classification

. T o tha t end
, th e CWQ S employ fou r broa d type s o f beneficia l us e t o fram e th e classificatio n process

. Th e fou r type s o f us e include :

• recreationa l • aquati c lif e • agricultur e • domesti c wate r suppl y

B- 8 

## TerraNex t• Recreationa l

Us e - Th e recreationa l use s ar e divide d int o tw o classifications : 1 ) Recreationa l Use

, Clas s 1 - Primar y Contact

, addresse s surfac e wate r qualit y concern s wher e ingestio n o f smal l quantitie s o f water durin g th e us e i s likel y t o occur ; 2 ) Recreationa l Use

, Clas s 2 - Secondar y Contact

, focuse s o n streamsid e activitie s wher e ingestio n o f wate r i s unlikel y t o occur
. Th e effec t o f th e recreatio n classificatio n o n numeri c wate r qualit y criteria i s limited
, th e primar y consideratio n bein g th e concentratio n o f feca l colifor m bacteria

. Th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s unlikel y t o contribut e bacteria l contaminatio n t o th e watershed

. Fo r tha t reason, the recreationa l us e classification s wil l not b e considere d further

.

• Aquati c Lif e - Clas s 1 col d water aquati c lif e i s define d as :
...water s that (1 ) currentl y ar e capabl e o f sustainin g a wid e variet y o f col d wate r biota
, includin g sensitiv e species , o r (2 ) coul d sustai n suc h biot a but fo r correctabl e wate r qualit y conditions

. Water s shal l b e considere d capabl e o f sustainin g suc h biot a wher e physica l habitat
, water flow s o r levels
, an d water qualit y condition s resul t i n no substantia l impairmen t o f the abundanc e and diversit y o f species

. (Se e §3.1.13(l)(c)(i))

.

• Domestic Wate r Suppl y - Domestic wate r suppl y i s define d as : ...suitabl e o r intende d t o becom e suitabl e fo r potabl e wate r supplies

. Afte r receivin g standar d treatmen t

.. . thes e water s wil l mee t Colorad o drinkin g wate r regulations..

. (Se e §3.1.13(l)(d))

.

• Agricultura l

Us e - Agricultura l us e i s define d as : ...suitabl e o r intende d t o becom e suitabl e fo r irrigatio n o f crops usuall y grow n B- 9 

## Terranex ti

n Colorad o and whic h are no t hazardous a s drinkin g water for livestock..

. (See

3.1.1. 3 Us e Attainabilit y Analysi s The CWQ S requir e tha t th e classificatio n mus t no t jeopardiz e downstrea m classification s o r actua l uses , an d the classification s mus t b e fo r the highes t wate r qualit y available

. (Se e §3.1.6((l)(c ) an d (e))

. T o tha t end
, onc e evidenc e has bee n provide d t o th e Commissio n an d t h e Commissio n assign s that thes e surfac e water s ar e suitabl e fo r aquati c lif e an d ful l contac t recreatio n the n a required "us e attainabilit y analysis " woul d b e conducte d whenever the stream segment i n questio n wil l not carr y eithe r the aquati c lif e o r the ful l contac t recreatio n classification s a s beneficia l uses
. (Se e §3.1.6(3)(a)(ii))

. Two principa l concern s ar e evaluate d a s part o f a us e attainabilit y analysis

.
1 ) (a)ttainabilit y i s t o b e judge d b y whethe r o r no t th e use classificatio n ca n b e attaine d i n approximatel y twent y (20 ) year s b y an y recognize d control technique tha t i s environmentally
, economically
, an d sociall y acceptabl e a s determine d b y th e Commissio n afte r publi c hearings

. (Se e §3.1.6(l)(e))

. 2 )

.. . use s ar e deeme d attainabl e i f the y ca n b e achieve d b y th e impositio n o f effluen t limit s unde r th e Federa l Ac t fo r poin t source s an d cost-effectiv e an d reasonabl e bes t management practice s fo r nonpoin t source control

. (Se e
I n othe r words
, a n aquati c lif e classificatio n i s deeme d attainabl e i f th e us e ca n be achieved
, whe n th e Bes t Availabl e Technolog y (BAT ) i s applie d t o poin t sourc e discharge s an d cost

effectiv e Bes t Managemen t Practice s (BMPs ) ar e applie d fo r nonpoin t sourc e control

. Thi s B-1 0 

## TerraNex tprovisio n

wil l be discusse d furthe r in conjunctio n wit h th e evaluatio n o f nonpoin t source control requirements

. I n effect
, a finding o f nonattainabilit y act s as a variance , an d allow s th e WQC C t o declin e t o adop t Tabl e Valu e Standard s (TVS ) o r ambient-base d numeri c standards

. Instead
, a findin g
o f nonattainabilit y allow s th e WQC C t o adop t Site-Specific-Criteria-Base d

numeri c standards
, o r t o no t adop t numeri c standard s fo r th e stream segment i n question

. Additiona l discussio n
o f the type s o f numeri c standard s i s provide d belo w i n sectio n 3.1.1.5

. 3.1.1. 4 Classificatio n

o f Surfac e Water s a t th e Californi a Gulc h Sit e T w o principa l surfac e water s ar e impacte d b y Californi a Gulc h drainage

. Segmen t 6 , th e "Mainstrea m o f Californi a Gulc h fro m th e sourc e t o th e confluenc e wit h th e Arkansa s River"

, an d Segmen t 2b
, th e "Mainste m o f th e Arkansas Rive r fro m a poin t immediatel y abov e Californi a Gulch stream t o a poin t immediatel y abov e the confluenc e wit h Lak e Creek"

. (Se e Figur e 3-1. ) A t th e present time , Segmen t 6 , Californi a Gulch stream, i s classifie d fo r agricultura l use , and recreatio n clas s 2 , but does not carr y eithe r an aquati c lif e classificatio n or a drinkin g wate r suppl y classification

. (Se e Classificatio n an d Numeri c Standard s fo r Arkansa s River Basin

, 3.2.0 , a s amende d throug h October 30 , 1993)

. T h e WQC C ha s decline d t o assig n a n aquati c lif e classificatio n t o Segmen t 6 , despit e th e fac t that th e WQC C ha s no t performe d a forma l us e attainabilit y analysis

. I t shoul d b e note d tha t th e WQC C ha s use d th e "equivalen t o f a use attainabilit y analysis " a s th e substantiv e an d procedura l basi s fo r no t assignin g aquati c lif e classificatio n t o othe r Colorad o stream s impacte d b y minin g activities

. (Se e Classificatio n an d Numeri c Standard s fo r Ri o Grand e Basin

, 3.6.0 , a s amende d throug h Marc h 30 , 1994 , pag e 40)

. Regardless

, th e WQC C B-l l 

## TerraNex t

# 1 1 1 

# 1 1
1 1 

# 1 1 T 

# T 1 T COLORAD O 

## nort

h

INDE X MA P SCAL E MIL E 2 M l A.PROS1UAT E SCAL E --.^J.f 0610480 9 SCALE : A S SHOW N

- _ £ NO

. 4809F1- 4 (DESIGNE D

BY :

:-.— : ',/22/9 6 DRAW

N BY : GS L APPROVE D BY : FIGUR E 3- 1 ARKANSA S VALLE Y SLAG PIL E STREA M SEGMENTATIO N

AN D CLASSIFICATIO N DENVE R & RI O GRAND E WESTER N RAILROADexpressl

y acknowledge d th e existin g uncontrolle d non-point source s o f pollutio n whe n declinin g t o adop t a n aquati c lif e classificatio n i n Segmen t 6

. (Se e Classificatio n an d Numeric Standard s for Arkansas Rive r Basin

. 3.2.0 , a s amended throug h Octobe r 30 , 1993 , pag e 24)

. Segmen t 2 b i s tha t reac h o f th e Arkansas Rive r immediatel y belo w th e confluenc e wit h Californi a Gulc h stream

. Althoug h Segmen t 2b i s heavil y impacte d b y metal s loadin g fro m Californi a Gulc h stream, i t i s classifie d fo r Aquati c Lif e Col d 1 an d fo r Agricultur e uses
. The Aquatic Lif e Col d 1 classificatio n wa s establishe d a s a goal
, a s evidence d b y the temporar y modification s t o th e TVS

. Specifically : (w)here th e use classificatio n i s base d upo n a futur e use fo r whic h th e water s
ar e t o becom e suitable
, th e numeri c standard s assigne d t o suc h water s t o protec t th e use classificatio n ma y requir e a temporar y modificatio n t o th e underlyin g numeri c standard..

. (Se e §3.1.6)

. Segmen t 2 b wa s no t classifie d for drinkin g wate r suppl y due t o th e presenc e o f manganese a t concentration s renderin g th e wate r no t palatabl e an d th e absenc e o f existin g us e a s a domesti c wate r supply

. (Se e Classificatio n an d Numeric Standard s fo r Arkansas Rive r Basin

, Sectio n 3.2.0 , Statemen t o f Basi s and Purpose

, Page 10.57)

.
3.1.1. 5 Numeric Wate r Qualit y Standard s T h e CWQ S provide s a three-tiere d structure fo r establishin g numeri c wate r qualit y standards

. Fo r unimpacte d hig h qualit y waters , th e WQC C ha s adopte d numeri c level s know n a s th e "Tabl e Valu e Standards " (TVS ) whic h ar e presume d t o be protectiv e o f aquati c life

. Fo r impacte d water s wher e pollutan t concentration s excee d TV S value s but the beneficia l use s ar e adequatel y protected
, th e WQC C ma y adop t Ambient Quality-Base d Standards

. Wher e B-1 2 

## TerraNex tclassifie d

use s ar e no t bein g protecte d an d a us e attainabilit y analysi s ha s foun d nonattainability
, Site-Specific-Criteria-Base d

Standard s ma y b e developed

. Finally
, temporar y modification s t o numeri c standard s ma y als o be adopted

. T h e TV S ar e effectivel y equivalen t to , an d ar e based upo n th e Federa l Wate r Qualit y Criteri a
an d hav e bee n adjuste d t o protec t th e beneficia l use s o f Colorad o waters

. (Se e §3.1.7(b)(i))

. I t i s importan t t o not e that man y o f th e TV S promulgate d t o protec t aquatic lif e fro m metal pollutant s ar e hardness dependent

. Th e TV S ar e th e basi s fo r th e promulgate d surfac e wate r standard s i n Segmen t 2 b o f th e Arkansa s River

, belo w Californi a Gulch

. The WQC C ha s decline d t o adop t ambient-base d standard s fo r Segmen t 2b

. Temporary modification s t o th e underlyin g TV S hav e bee n adopte d fo r metal constituent s in Segmen t 2b

. Thes e temporar y modification s expir e o n Decembe r 31 , 1998

. Th e CWQS s stat e a preferenc e fo r temporar y modification s o f numerica l standard s ove r permanent downgradin g o f a classificatio n wher e th e condition s causin g th e degrade d water qualit y "ma y be temporary " i n a twent y yea r time frame

. (Se e §3.1.7(3))

. Th e TV S i n Segmen t 2b remai n th e lon g ter m goal s fo r Arkansa s Rive r wate r quality

. T h e WQC C has decline d t o adop t numeri c water qualit y standard s (wit h th e exceptio n o f feca l colifor m limits ) fo r Segmen t 6 , Californi a Gulch

. 3.1.1. 6 Antidegra d at i on Th e provision s relatin g t o antidegradatio n ar e no t relevan t t o curren t remedia l response s give n th e presentl y degrade d wate r quality

. Al l o f th e strea m segment s impacte d b y th e Californi a Gulc h Superfun d Sit e carr y a Use-Protecte d designatio n an d as suc h ar e no t governed b y th e antidegradatio n revie w procedures

. (Se e §3.1.8 )
B-1 3 

## TerrdNex t3.1. 2

Federa l Wate r Qualit y Criteri a T h e preambl e t o th e propose d NC P states : ( a ) Stat e numerical WQ S ar e essentiall y a site-specifi c adaptatio n o f a FWQC

, subjec t t o EP A approval
, and
, whe n available
, i s generall y th e appropriat e standar d fo r th e specifi c bod y o f water. " (Se e 5 3 F R 51442, righ t column
, top)

. A s noted above
, the FWQ C woul d onl y b e relevant and appropriat e i n the absence o f current , segment-specifi c CWQSs

. I n thi s circumstance , current , segment specifi c CWQS s
ar e availabl e and wil l b e applie d a s the surfac e water qualit y ARARs fo r the site

.
3.1. 3 Chemica l Specifi c Surfac e Wate r ARAR s fo r Segmen t 2 b o f th e Arkansa s Rive r T h e TVS-base d chemica l specifi c ARARs

, applicabl e t o Segmen t 2 b o f th e Arkansa s River for contaminant s o f concern , are presente d i n Tabl e 3-1

. 3. 2 Chemical-Specifi c

ARAR s an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Groun d Wate r I n th e preambl e t o th e propose d NC P th e EP A recognize d tha t Stat e ground wate r classification s ma y b e relevant an d appropriat e a t Superfun d sites : (t)he classificatio n schem e describe d abov e ma y b e supersede d b y othe r classificatio n scheme s whic h ma y hav e bee n promulgate d b y a Stat e an d ar e applicabl e or relevant and appropriat e t o the CERCL A response

. (5 3 F R 5143 3 cente r column
, middle
, emphasis added)

.

B-1 4 

## TerraNex tTABL E 3- 1 CHEMICAL-SPECIFI

C ARAR S FO R SEGMEN T 2 b O F TH E ARKANSA S RIVE R META L Agricultur e Arsenic
, acut e Cadmium

, acut e Cadmium

, chroni c Copper

, acut e Copper

, chroni c Iron
, chronic Lead

, acut e Lead

, chroni c Manganese
, chronic Zinc

, acut e Zinc

, chroni c N /A

N / A N / A N /A N /A N / A N / A N /A N/A 3 N / A N /A Domesti c

Wate r Suppl y 5 0 ug/l
, (1-day) 1 N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A N / A Col

d Wate r Aquati c Lif e Clas s 1 (TVS ) N / A 3.9ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 1 . 1 ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness2 18ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 12ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 1,000ug/l
, tota l recoverabl e 96ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 3.9ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 1000ug/l
, (30-day ) 117ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness2 106ug/ l dissolve d @ 100mg/ l hardness

2 'Thi s segmen t doe s no t carr y th e Domesti c Wate r Suppl y Classification

. Regardless

, whe n promulgated
, th e regulation s include d thi s domestic wate r suppl y value

. 2 Base d upo n a n estimat e o f 100mg/ l hardness

. (Se e Fina l Screenin g Feasibilit y Stud y fo r Remediatio n Alternativ e a t th e Californi a Gulc h NP L Site

, Leadville

, Colorado

, USEPA

, Septembe r 1993)

. 'Although thi s segmen t doe s carr y a n Agricultura l classification
, an d th e chroni c agricultura l manganes e standar d i s mor e stringen t than th e aquati c lif e standard
, th e WQC C did no t adop t th e mor e stringen t agricultura l value

.

B-1 5 

## Terranex tT h e

Colorad o Groun d Wate r Standard s (CGWS ) provid e fo r classificatio n o f groun d waters
an d th e adoptio n o f water qualit y standard s t o protec t existin g an d potentia l beneficia l use s o f groun d waters , th e Colorad o Interi m Narrative s Standar d (INS ) ( 5 CC R 1002-8 , §3.11.2)

. Because Colorad o ha s promulgate d a schem e fo r classifyin g groundwate r an d fo r assignin g groun d wate r qualit y standards
, bot h th e classificatio n approac h an d associate d ground wate r qualit y standard s are relevant and appropriat e t o groun d water s presen t a t the Californi a Gulc h Site

. 3.2. 1 Colorad o Groundwate r Standard s - Identificatio n o f Specifie d Area s an d Groundwate r Classification s §3.11. 4 o f th e CGW S identifie s fiv e classe s o f groundwaters :
1 ) Domesti c Us e - Qualit y 2 ) Agricultura l Us e - Qualit y 3 ) Surfac e Wate r Protectio n 4 ) Potentiall y Usabl e - Qualit y 5 ) Limite d Us e an d Quality

. Thes e classification s are applie d t o "specifie d areas " a concep t identifie d i n the definition s at §3.11.3
, an d full y develope d in §3.11.4(C)(1) : (w)he n a n activit y exist s o r i s proposed
, th e shape
, depth
, boundarie s an d extent o f a specifie d are a shal l b e determine d b y considering :

a
. the presence , exten t and nature o f existin g use s o f groun d wate r that

ma y b e affecte d b y th e activity , an d th e reasonabl y expecte d futur e use s
o f ground wate r that ma y b e affecte d b y the activity ; and B-1 6 

## TerraNex tb

.

the natur e and locatio n o f the activit y and o f it s discharge ; and

c
. existin g ground-wate r qualit y tha t ma y b e affecte d b y the activity ; and d

. relevant geologi c and hydrogeologi c conditions
, includin g but not limite d t o th e presenc e o f ground water hydrologicall y connecte d t o surfac e waters and recharg e areas
. I n additio n t o §3.11.4(C)(l)(d)

, th e CGW S furthe r acknowledg e th e potentia l fo r interconnectio n betwee n groun d wate r and surfac e wate r b y providin g an the optio n t o classif y ground wate r fo r "Surfac e Wate r Protection"

. Th e Surfac e Wate r Protectio n classificatio n i s define d as : A propose d or existin g activit y doe s or wil l impac t ground water s suc h that the wate r qualit y standard s o f classifie d surfac e wate r bodie s within th e specifie d

are a wil l b e exceeded

. (Se e §3.11.4(B)(3))

. 3.2.1. 1 Groun d Wate r Specifie d Area s The groun d wate r i n the vicinit y o f the Californi a Gulch strea m and it s tributaries i s comple x
and ha s not bee n full y characterized

. Overall

, the geolog y i n the vicinit y o f the Stockpile d Fin e Sla g ca n b e characterize d a s wel l drained
, cobbled
, glacia l alluvia l deposits

. Th e uppermos t alluvia l aquife r i s interconnecte d t o a limite d exten t wit h ground water containe d withi n th e underlyin g fracture d bedrock
, an d t o a grea t exten t wit h surfac e water s i n th e area
. I t i s ver y commo n i n Colorad o fo r stream s an d river s t o gai n wate r fro m groun d wate r durin g dr y season s an d t o los e wate r t o groun d wate r (recharg e th e groundwater ) durin g sprin g runof f and wette r seasons
. Becaus e o f this
, there exist s a seasonal zon e i n the ground wate r tha t extend s outwar d beyon d the rive r bank s wher e the groundwate r qualit y i s B-1 7 

# TerraNex tinfluence d

o r perhap s controlle d b y Californi a Gulc h stream wate r quality

. Th e breadt h an d

seasona l characteristics o f that zon e o f influenc e i s unknown

. Ther e i s clear potentia l fo r Californi a Gulch surfac e water s t o negativel y impac t alluvia l groundwate r durin g th e variou s period s an d i n th e variou s location s wher e Californi a Gulc h

ma y b e a losin g stream

. (See Conceptua l Mode l and the Developmen t o f a Contaminan t Transpor t Mode l fo r Metal s i n Californi a Gulch

, A.J

. Medine
, 1/94)

. Likewise

, impacte d alluvia l groundwate r ha s th e potentia l t o contribut e metal s loadin g durin g th e period s an d a t thos e location s wher e Californi a Gulc h i s a gainin g stream

. Base d upon th e abov e facts
, i t i s relevan t an d appropriat e t o classif y groun d wate r i n th e vicinit y o f Californi a Gulc h fo r Surfac e Wate r Protection

. First

, ground water in th e vicinit y
o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s no t use d a s a sourc e o f domestic wate r an d i s no t likel y t o serv e
a s sourc e o f domesti c wate r i n the future

. Domesti c water i s supplie d b y the Parkvill e Wate r District

. (Se e §3.11.4(C)(l)(a))

. Second

, th e alluvia l groun d wate r i s hydraulicall y connecte d t o surfac e water s and recharg e areas
. I t i s difficul t t o distinguis h wha t ar e the source s o f contaminatio n and whic h medi a
are receivin g th e contamination

. I n fact
, th e source s an d th e receivin g medi a ma y revers e roles dependen t upon th e season , weather an d other poorl y define d attribute s o f th e hydrologi c regime

. (Se e §3.11.4(C)(l)(d ) an d Medine
, 1/94)

. Additionally
, th e nature an d locatio n o f th e stockpile d fin e sla g i s suc h that i f groundwate r contaminatio n i s attributabl e t o leachate
, the contaminan t contributio n fro m the stockpile d fin e sla g i s insignifican t i n compariso n t o th e influ x o f metal s contaminatio n associate d wit h surfac e water s an d recharge fro m other nonpoint sources
. (Se e §3.11.4(C)(l)(b))

. Also
, the existin g ground wate r qualit y i n the vicinit y i s degrade d and unlikel y t o improv e B-1 8 

## TerraNex tsignificantl

y give n th e multitud e o f othe r poin t an d nonpoin t source s in th e vicinity

. Th e availabilit y o f metal s fro m othe r source s i s dramaticall y highe r tha n th e availabilit y o f vitrifie d metal s associate d wit h th e slag

. (Se e §3.11.4(C)(l)(c))

. 3.2.1. 2 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs fo r Alluvia l Groun d Wate r A s note d above
, i t i s relevant and appropriat e t o classif y the alluvia l groundwate r specifie d

area , locate d in th e vicinit y o f th e Stockpile d Fin e Slag

, fo r surfac e wate r protection

. Th e alluvia l groundwate r impacts , an d i s impacte d b y Californi a Gulc h an d it s tributaries

. Th e WQC C di d no t believ e i t wa s appropriat e t o classif y th e surfac e water i n Segmen t 6 a s a drinkin g water supply
, an d did no t classif y Segmen t 6 fo r aquati c life

. Althoug h Segmen t 6 i s classifie d fo r agricultura l use , th e WQC C decline d t o adop t numeri c standard s fo r drinkin g wate r use , for aquati c life
, or for agricultura l use
. Absent a significan t chang e i n the contaminan t distributio n i n Stray Hors e an d Californi a Gulches

, ther e are n o fact s t o contraven e th e curren t classificatio n o f Segmen t 6 , o r th e WQCC' s decisio n t o declin e t o promulgat e numeri c standards

. Consisten t wit h th e WQCC' s surfac e wate r classifications
, th e enormou s uncertainties as t o the contributio n o f variou s poin t and nonpoin t source s t o bot h groundwate r and surfac e wate r contaminatio n mak e i t inappropriat e t o establis h groundwate r ARAR s derive d fro m downstrea m wate r qualit y standards

. Similarl y th e inabilit y t o attribut e contaminatio n appropriatel y als o dictate s agains t establishmen t o f numerical groundwate r ARARs

. T h e WQC C has acknowledge d that muc h o f th e contaminatio n i n Californi a Gulc h i s nonpoint

. (Se e Classificatio n an d Numeri c Standard s fo r Arkansa s River Basin

, 3.2.0 , a s amended throug h October 30 , 1993 , pag e 24)

. The Federa l and Colorad o policie s are t o employ BMP s t o addres s nonpoin t sources
. Further
, EPA' s finding that BMP s ar e BA T fo r stormwate r permittin g strongl y sugges t tha t BMP s woul d b e mor e appropriat e than poorl y B-1 9 

## TerraNex tunderstoo d

an d poorl y justifie d groundwate r o r surfac e wate r numeri c standards

. The us e o f BMP s as ARAR s an d TBC s wil l be full y evaluate d i n Sectio n 4.0

. 3. 3 Chemica l Specifi c ARARs an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Soi l Neithe r federa l no r Colorad o chemica l specifi c ARARs fo r soi l contaminatio n wer e identifie d f o r contaminant s o f concer n fo r th e stockpile d fin e slag

. A TB C criterio n wa s identifie d fo r soi l lea d contamination

. Specifically

, th e "Revised Interi m Soil Lead Guidanc e fo r CERCL A Site s an d RCR A Correctiv e Actio n Facilities, " Jul y 14 , 199 4 (Directiv e #9355.4-12 ) wil l b e considered

. 3. 4 Chemical-Specifi c

ARARs an d Guidanc e T o B e Considere d fo r Ai r Federa l and stat e ARAR s wer e identifie d for constructio n and generatio n o f particulat e matte r (PM10 ) at th e site

. A n emissio n permi t wil l b e require d i f temporar y constructio n activitie s
exceed mor e than tw o year s (Se e 5 CC R 1001 , §3(I)(B)(3)(e))

.

Contro l measure s t o minimize dust an d ai r monitorin g wil l b e implemented
, i f necessary, durin g remedial constructio n activities

.

B-2

0 

## TerraNex t4 . 0 ACTION-SPECIFI

C ARAR S AN D TBC S A s note d above
, actio n specifi c ARAR s ar e triggere d b y specifi c activitie s o r the applicatio n
o f specifi c technologie s t o sit e conditions

. Thos e actio n specifi c ARAR s reviewe d an d determine d neithe r applicabl e nor relevan t and appropriat e ar e presente d i n Appendi x B

, Tabl e 3

. T h e potentiall y applicabl e o r relevan t an d appropriat e action-specifi c requirement s identifie d f o r th e retaine d alternative s fo r th e stockpile d fin e sla g include :

• Clea n Wate r Act
, Nationa l Pollutio n Discharg e Eliminatio n Syste m (NPDES)

, Direct Discharg e Requirement s • NPDE S Stormwate r Permittin g Requirement s • Colorad o Discharg e Permi t Syste m Regulations • Clea n Wate r Ac t Nonpoin t Sourc e Managemen t an d Contro l • Clea n Wate r Act Sectio n 40 4 Dredg e and Fil l Requirement s • Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s fo r Fugitiv e Paniculat e Emission s
4. 1 Nationa l Pollutan t Discharg e Eliminatio n System

, Direc t Discharg e Requirement s T h e Clea n Wate r Ac t Nationa l Pollutan t Discharg e Eliminatio n Syste m (NPDES ) govern s th e discharg e o f pollutants
, fro m an y poin t source, int o th e water s o f th e Unite d States

. (Se e 4 0 C F R §122.1(b))

. Applicatio n o f Bes t Availabl e Technolog y Economicall y Achievabl e (BAT ) t o the poin t sourc e discharg e o f toxi c pollutant s i s required

. BA T criteria , als o know n a s categorica l standards
, hav e bee n develope d fo r direc t discharge s fro m specifi c industria l categories

. Wher e categorica l standard s hav e not bee n established
, case-by-case technolog y determination s ar e based upo n best professiona l judgmen t (BPJ)

. (Se e 4 0 CF R §125.3)

. I n additio n t o categorica l standards
, bes t management practice s ca n b e required on a cas e b y B-2 1 

# Terranextcas

e basi s fo r ancillar y industria l activitie s a t facilitie s wit h direc t discharg e NPDE S permits

. (See40CF R §125.103(b))

.
4.1. 1 Poin t Sourc e Discharge s Relate d t o Stockpile d Sla g Categorica l standard s hav e no t bee n promulgate d fo r sla g reuse
. I n addition
, th e applicabilit y o r relevanc e o f technology-base d BA T o r BP J criteri a requires, a t a minimum , a pollute d discharg e fro m a poin t source
. Withou t pollute d wate r fro m a poin t source, BA T wate r treatmen t technologie s coul d no t be foun d applicable

. Similarly

, BA T water treatmen t technologie s canno t b e foun d relevant i n the absence o f a poin t sourc e discharge
, especiall y i n ligh t o f th e clear Nonpoin t Sourc e Contro l dictat e fo r applicatio n o f BMP s t o nonpoint
sourc e control

. (See the discussio n o f Nonpoin t Sourc e Contro l at sectio n 4.4)

. "Point source " i s define d as :

.. . an y discernible
, confine d an d discret e conveyance , includin g bu t no t limite d to , an y pipe , ditch
, channel
, tunnel
, conduit
, well
, discret e fissure
, container , rollin g stock....

. (Se e 4 0 CF R §122.2))

. Cour t case s hav e furthe r interprete d th e ter m poin t source
. I n th e preambl e t o th e NPDE S Applicatio n Regulation s fo r Stor m Wate r Discharges

, 5 5 F R 47990 , Novembe r 16 , 1990 , E P A cited languag e fro m a decisio n t o clarif y it' s position : "Simpl e erosio n ove r th e materia l surface
, resultin g i n th e discharg e o f wate r
an d othe r material s int o navigabl e waters , does no t constitut e a poin t sourc e discharge
, absen t som e effor t t o chang e th e surface
, t o direc t th e wate r flo w o r otherwis e imped e it s progress...

. Gravit y flow
, resultin g in a discharg e int o a navigabl e bod y o f water , ma y b e part o f a poin t sourc e discharg e i f the B-2 2 

## Terranext(discharger

) at leas t initiall y collec t o r channele d the water and other materials

. A poin t source o f pollutio n ma y als o be presen t wher e (dischargers ) desig n spoi l pile s fro m discarde d overburde n suc h that durin g period s o f precipitation , erosion o f spoil pil e wall s result s i n discharge s int o a navigabl e bod y o f wate r b y mean s o f ditches
, gullie s an d simila r conveyances
. (Emphasi s added)

. Discernible

, confined
, an d discret e conveyances tha t resul t i n discharge s t o wate r o f th e Unite d State s ar e no t foun d in associatio n wit h th e sla g piles

. First

, th e sla g pile s hav e
enormou s porosit y and the sla g itsel f ha s an extremel y hig h density

. A s a resul t precipitatio n quickl y infiltrate s an d doe s no t obtai n sufficien t forc e or momentu m t o creat e discret e conveyances
. Second

, th e underlyin g cobbled
, glacia l alluvia l deposit s ar e porous an d an y infiltratio n t o th e sla g pile s i s quickl y exchanged int o th e underlyin g glacia l alluvium

. Third

, th e curren t locatio n wher e sortin g an d reus e occur s i s high o n a relativel y fla t hilltop

. The locatio n and constructio n o f the acces s road s and railroa d tracks at tha t locatio n are configure d without discernabl e conveyances
. I t i s conceivabl e tha t futur e locations fo r sla g sortin g an d reus e coul d resul t i n discernibl e conveyance s an d poin t sourc e discharges

. Regardless

, poin t source discharge s ar e not currentl y occurring

. 4.1. 2 BMP s fo r Ancillar y Industria l Activitie s Associate d wit h Direc t Discharge s T h e direc t discharg e BMP s fo r ancillar y industria l activitie s ar e simila r t o th e Stormwate r Permi t Requirement s i n their purpose , their coverage , an d their impositio n o f BMPs

. Regardless

, th e optiona l direc t discharg e BMP s coul d no t b e applicabl e i n th e absence o f a poin t sourc e discharg e an d ar e no t relevan t an d appropriat e t o th e sla g pile s fo r th e sam e B-2 3 

## Terranext :reason

s that EP A determine d i t i s inappropriat e t o includ e stormwate r infiltratio n i n the definitio n o f stor m water

. (Se e th e discussio n o f Stormwate r Permi t Requirements

, below)

.
4. 2 NPDE S Stormwate r Permittin g Requirement s Sectio n 40 5 o f th e Wate r Qualit y Ac t o f 198 7 require s tha t stor m water discharge s associate d wit h industria l activit y b e controlle d wit h usin g th e Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technology (BAT)

. Stor m wate r i s define d i n the NPDE S progra m a s "stor m wate r runoff
, surfac e runoff
, sno w mel t runoff
, an d surfac e runof f an d drainage"

. (Se e 4 0 CF R §122.26(b)(13))

. Industria l activit y i s als o broadl y define d an d include s material s handlin g an d processin g area s an d rai l line s and acces s road s use d or travele d b y carrier s o f raw materials
, manufacture d products
, wast e materia l o r by-product s use d o r create d b y th e facility

. (Se e 4 0 CF R §122.26(b)(14))

. T h e stormwate r requirement s onl y appl y t o poin t sourc e discharges : "EP A nee d clarif y i n thi s rul e makin g onl y tha t a stor m wate r discharg e subjec t t o NPDE S regulatio n does not includ e stor m water tha t enter s the water s o f th e Unite d State s vi a mean s othe r than a poin t source"

. (Se e 5 5 F R 47996)

. EP A ha s specificall y conclude d tha t i t i s inappropriat e t o addres s groundwate r infiltratio n caused b y stormwate r through th e poin t source, BAT-technolog y based requirements : " I n today' s rule
, th e definitio n o f stor m water exclude s infiltratio n sinc e pollutant s i n thes e flow s wil l depen d o n a larg e numbe r o f factors
, includin g interaction s wit h soi l an d pas t lan d us e practice s a t a give n site"

. (Se e 5 5 F R 47996)

. B-2 4 

## TerraNex tA s discusse d earlier
, poin t discharge s hav e no t bee n identifie d i n associatio n wit h th e sla g o r
curren t sla g reus e activities

. Th e complex
, il l define d interactio n o f nonpoin t sources , surfac e waters , an d stormwate r infiltratio n associate d wit h th e sla g pile s ar e th e factor s tha t convince d EP A t o remov e infiltratio n fro m th e stormwate r permittin g program

. I f th e reus e activitie s ar e relocate d i n th e future
, i t i s possibl e tha t poin t sourc e discharge s coul d occur
. I n tha t circumstance, the stormwate r permi t requirement s woul d b e applicabl e t o th e newl y created poin t source s created b y relocatin g th e reus e activities

. I n that instance , the rule s require applicatio n o f BA T t o that discharge

. EP A ha s enumerate d it s rational e an d approach t o stormwate r permittin g th e preambl e t o th e Fac t Shee t Fo r Multi-Secto r Stormwate r Genera l Permits

, a t 5 8 F R 61146 : "Fo r othe r discharge s covere d b y th e permit , th e propose d permi t condition s reflec t EPA' s decisio n t o selec t a numbe r o f bes t managemen t practices an d traditiona l stor m wate r managemen t practices whic h prevent pollutio n i n storm wate r discharge s as th e BAT/BC T leve l o f control fo r th e majorit y o f stor m water discharge s covere d b y thi s permit

. Th e propose d permi t condition s applicabl e t o thes e discharge s are not numeri c effluen t limitations
, but rathe r
a r e flexibl e requirement s fo r developin g an d implementin g sit e specifi c plan s t o minimiz e an d contro l pollutant s i n stor m wate r discharge s associate d wit h industria l activity

. Thi s approac h i s consisten t wit h th e approac h use d i n th e baselin e genera l permits...

. (Se e 58 F R 61146)

.

B-2 5 

# Terranex t4. 3 Colorad o Discharg e Permi t Syste m Regulation s T h e Colorad o Discharg e Permi t Syste m Regulation s (CDPSR ) ar e b y definition
, "designe d t o be i n conformity
, wit h that ac t an d th e Federa l Clea n Wate r Act"

. (Se e Cod e o f Colorad o Regulations

, Titl e 5 , Articl e 2 , Sectio n 6.2.0 , as amended)

. Because th e CDPS R ar e no t

mor e stringen t tha t their Federa l counterpart , th e CDPS R wil l no t be considere d further

.
4. 4 Clea n Wate r Act Nonpoin t Sourc e Contro l The impact o f nonpoin t sourc e pollutio n i n Californi a Gulch stream i s widel y recognized

. Whe n assignin g us e classification s t o Californi a Gulch stream th e WQC C acknowledge d th e existenc e o f non-poin t sources
. Similarl y Medine
, 1994 , als o recognize d th e widesprea d existenc e o f non-poin t source s (calle d "diffus e sources" ) in Californi a Gulc h stream

. EP A ha s required
, a s a pan o f it s nonpoin t sourc e management and contro l program , tha t stat e Wate r Qualit y Managemen t Plan s includ e regulatory an d nonregulator y programs an d BMPs

. (Se e 4 0 CF R §130.6(b)(4)(i))

. Becaus e th e progra m an d applicatio n o f BMP s ar e electiv e t o the states , the nonpoin t progra m i s not a potentia l ARAR

. Regardless

, a s a matte r
o f EP A policy
, consideratio n o f BMP s a s a mean s t o contro l nonpoin t source s i n Californi a Gulch strea m i s indicated

. Ther e ar e tw o promulgate d Colorad o regulation s th e addres s nonpoin t source s o f pollution

. First
, th e Colorad o Basi c Standar d require tha t "stat e water s shal l be fre e fro m substances attributabl e t o
.. . non-point sourc e discharge s i n amounts , concentration s o r combinations...(a ) whic h ca n settl e t o for m botto m deposit s detrimenta l t o th e beneficia l
uses.... " (Se e §3.1.11)

. Thi s general prohibitio n i s a n applicabl e requirement , mandatin g measure s t o preven t th e nonpoin t depositio n o f deleteriou s substances i n streams

. B-2 6 

## TerranextSecond

, a s noted earlier
, th e WQC C ma y no t perfor m a us e attainabilit y analysi s an d fin d nonattainabilit y unles s BA T i s applie d t o al l poin t sourc e discharges
, and unless BMP s are implemente d fo r al l nonpoin t sourc e discharges

. Althoug h thi s provisio n ca n functio n as a varianc e fro m th e Colorad o TVS

, i t i s no t a n ARAR

. 4. 5 Clea n Wate r Act Sectio n 40 4 Dredg e and Fil l Requirement s Sectio n 40 4 o f the Clea n Wate r Act regulate s the discharg e o f dredge d or fil l materia l t o the water s o f the Unite d States

. I t state s tha t no discharg e o f dredge d or fil l material shal l b e permitte d i f ther e i s a practicabl e alternativ e t o th e propose d discharg e that does no t hav e othe r significan t advers e environmenta l effects

. "Practicable " i s define d b y th e regulatio n t o
mea n availabl e and capabl e o f bein g don e afte r takin g int o consideratio n cost , existin g technology
, an d logistic s i n ligh t o f overal l projec t purposes

. The clea n wate r ac t i s no t retained a s an ARA R because n o dredg e or filling o f th e water s o f th e Unite d State s i s considere d fo r th e retaine d alternatives

. 4 . 6 Colorad o Air Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s fo r Fugitiv e Particulat e Emissions Regulatio n 1 o f th e Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulations require s al l source s o f paniculat e emission s t o utiliz e technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l

measures
. The requiremen t t o utiliz e technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l measure s i s applicabl e t o futur e reus e o f the stockpile d fin e slag

. 4. 7 Colorad o Mine d Land Reclamatio n Th e Colorad o Mine d Lan d Reclamatio n (MLR ) regulation s a t 2CC R 407- 1 require th e reclamatio n o f mine d areas
. Th e ML R detail s requirement s fo r reclamatio n measure s an d reclamatio n performanc e standard s i n §3.1. 5 (Remediatio n Measures-Material

s Handling)
, B-2 7 

# TerrciNex t3.1. 9

(To p soiling ) an d 3.1.1 0 (Revegatation)

. Th e ML R i s no t considere d applicabl e becaus e no minin g an d relate d reclamatio n activitie s wil l occu r at the site

.

B-2 8 

## TerrdNex t5. 0 LOCATION-SPECIFI

C AN D T O B E CONSIDERED ARARs Location-specifi c ARAR s ar e restriction s place d o n th e conduc t o f activitie s solel y because the y occu r i n specifi c locations

. Th e potentiall y applicabl e o r relevant an d appropriat e locatio n specifi c requirement s identifie d fo r stockpile d fin e sla g included :

• Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n Ac t • Histori c and Cultura l Preservatio n • Threatene d and Endangere d Specie s • Specie s o f Specia l Concer n an d Undetermine d Statu s • Colorad o Natura l Areas Progra m • Protectio n o f Floodplain s an d Wetland s
5 . 1 Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n Ac t T h e Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n Ac t serve s t o protec t fis h an d wildlif e whe n federa l action s resul t i n th e contro l o r structural modificatio n t o natura l stream s o r wate r bodies

. Federa l agencie s mus t develo p measure s t o prevent , mitigat e o r compensat e fo r project

relate d losse s o f fis h an d wildlife

. Specificall y include d ar e project s involvin g strea m relocatio n an d water diversio n structures

. I f appropriate , prio r t o modificatio n o f wate r bodies
, th e appropriat e agencies wil l be consulted

. 5. 2 Histori c an d Cultura l Preservatio n T h e Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Ac t (NHPA ) require s federa l agencies t o accoun t fo r th e effect s o f an y federall y assiste d undertakin g o n districts
, sites , buildings
, structures o r object s tha t ar e include d o n the Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Places

. Executiv e Order 1159 3 als o require s consideratio n o f th e cultura l environment

. Similarly

, th e Colorad o Registe r o f B-2 9 

## TerraNex tHistori c

Place s establishe s requirement s fo r protectio n o f propertie s o f stat e historica l interest

. I n addition
, th e Histori c an d Archeologica l Dat a Preservatio n Ac t o f 1974 establishe s procedure s t o preserv e historica l and archeologica l dat a whic h migh t b e destroye d throug h alteratio n o f terrai n a s a resul t o f federa l constructio n projects

. Impact s o n historic
, cultura l and archeologica l resource s wil l b e considered

.
5. 3 Endangere d Specie s T h e Endangere d Specie s Ac t require s that federa l agencies ensur e tha t federa l actions wil l no t jeopardiz e th e continued existenc e o f an y threatene d o r endangere d specie s o r impac t critical habitat

. Potentia l impact s t o threatene d o r endangere d species an d critica l habitat wil l b e considered

. Th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t jeopardiz e th e continued existenc e o f an y threatene d o r endangere d specie s o r destroyin g o r adversel y modif y critica l habitat

. 5. 4 Specie s o f Specia l Concer n an d Undetermine d Statu s Unde r Colorad o La w (o r policy)
, th e Colorad o Department o f Natura l Resource s (CDNR ) ha s establishe d two designation s t o protec t wildlif e species

. Thes e two designation s ar e "species o f specia l concern " an d "species o f undetermine d status"

. Specie s o f specia l

concer n ar e define d a s nativ e specie s o r subspecie s whic h have bee n threatene d o r endangere d o r coul d becom e threatene d o r endangere d du e t o lo w populatio n levels

. Specie s
o f undetermine d status ar e specie s abou t whic h to o littl e i s know n t o accuratel y determin e their status i n th e state

. Colorado' s Divisio n o f Wildlif e maintains a lis t o f specie s whic h hav e bee n determine d t o fi t thes e categories

. I f specie s o f specia l concer n o r o f undetermine d status are foun d a t the sit e and remova l activitie s coul d potentiall y impac t thos e specie s (o r thei r habitats)
, th e Divisio n o f Wildlife' s Directiv e E-l

, 198 5 (modified)
, shoul d b e take n int o consideratio n an d coordinatio n wit h th e Divisio n implemented

. Thes e interna l B-3 0 

# Terranextdesignation s

woul d b e potentia l T o B e Considere d (TBCs ) fo r thi s removal actio n onl y i f specie s i n eithe r categor y ar e foun d nea r the A V sla g pile

. 5. 5 Colorad o Natura l Are a Program T h e Colorad o Natura l Areas Progra m maintains a lis t o f Plan t Specie s o f Specia l Concer n t o the Stat e o f Colorado

. I t i s not authorize d b y statut e an d i s considere d a plannin g an d managemen t tool

. I f remova l activitie s impac t plan t specie s maintaine d o n th e list
, th e progra m i s a T o B e Considere d (TBC ) an d coordinatio n wit h th e Colorad o Divisio n o f Park s
an d Outdoo r Recreation ma y b e required

. 5. 6 Protectio n o f Floodplain s an d Wetland s Executiv e Orde r No

. 1198 8 an d Executiv e Order No

. 1199 0 requir e federa l agencies t o evaluat e th e potentia l advers e effect s o f propose d action s o n Floodplain s an d Wetlands
, respectively

. Th e potentia l advers e effect s o f th e propose d actio n o n Floodplain s an d Wetland s mus t considered

. Th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t impac t an y identifie d wetland s i n th e vicinit y o f th e stockpil e fin e sla g pile

. 5. 7 Cultura l Resource s Sectio n 10 6 o f th e Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Ac t (NHPA ) i s a potentia l ARA R fo r an y potentia l removal actio n because : 1 ) al l respons e actions a t a Superfun d sit e ar e considere d federa l actions o f th e NHPA ; an d 2 ) i t has bee n determine d tha t th e A V Smelte r (an d sla g pile ) ma y b e individuall y eligible

. Sectio n 110(f ) o f th e NHPA

, whic h establishe s procedure s t o minimize har m t o Nationa l Histori c Landmarks

, i s not applicabl e t o the A V sla g pil e becaus e i t doe s no t li e withi n th e Leadvill e Nationa l Histori c Landmar k District

. B-3 1 

## Terranex

tExecutiv e

Orde r 1159 3 on the Protectio n and Enhancement o f the Cultura l Environmen t i s a potentia l ARA R an d require s consultatio n wit h th e Council o n th e preservatio n an d enhancemen t o f histori c resource s i f remova l activitie s shoul d threate n them

. I f historica l and/o r archeologica l dat a ar e impacte d b y remova l activities , th e Historica l an d Archeologica l Dat a Preservatio n Ac t woul d als o be a potentia l ARAR

. Th e Archeologica l Resource s Protectio n Ac t o f 197 9 provide s fo r th e protectio n o f cultura l resource s o n publi c
o r India n lan d an d ma y b e a potentia l ARA R wit h respec t t o remova l action s impactin g suc h properties

. Th e A V sla g pil e lie s entirel y withi n privat e property

. Th e Stat e Historical
, Prehistorical

, an d Archeologica l Resource s Ac t addresse s th e loanin g o f archeologica l resource s on state-owne d lan d t o scientifi c or educationa l institutions

. Shoul d

an y potentia l remova l actio n endange r an archeologica l sit e that ma y necessitat e remova l o f th e resource , th e procedure s outline d b y th e Ac t woul d b e a potentia l ARAR

. I n addition
, shoul d potentia l remova l action s uncove r an y huma n remain s tha t ar e o f archeologica l interest , the procedure s for excavatio n o f remain s unde r the act woul d als o b e applicabl e or relevan t an d appropriate

. Finally

, th e State' s Registe r o f Histori c Place s is a potentia l ARA R i f removal activitie s ma y impac t an are a liste d on the Register

.

B-3 2 

# TerraNex tAPPENDI X B

, TABL E I POTENTIAL CHEMICAL SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLAG Standards

, Requirements

, Criteria

, Limitation s Groundwater : Nationa l Primary Drinkin g Wate r Standard s

Nationa l Secondar y Drinkin g Wate r Standard s Maximu m Contaminan t Level Goal s Colorad o Groun d Wate r Standard s



# 3 \ Citatio n

40C.F.R

. Part 141 , Subpar t B pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § § 300g- i ancl300j-9

. State : 5 CC R 1003- 1 pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-l-107(l)(x )

4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 143 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §§300g-l(c)
an d 300J- 9
4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 141 , Subpar t F

, pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 300g- l State : 5 CC R 1002- 8 § § 3.11.0-3.11. 8 Descriptio n

Establishe s numeri c standard s f o r publi c wate r systems

. Maximu m contaminan t level s (MCLs ) ar e establishe d t o protec t huma n life-tim e drinkin g wate r exposure

. Establishe s aesthetics-relate d standard s fo r publi c wate r system s (secondar y maximum contaminan t level)

. Establishe s drinkin g wate r qualit y goal s set at level s o f no know n o r anticipate d advers e healt h effects
, wit h a n adequat e margin o f safety

. Establishe s a schem e fo r identifyin g groundwate r specifie d areas , fo r classificatio n o f Colorad o groundwate r an d provide s numeri c standards

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e No/N o

No/N o
No/N o
No/Ye s Commen t

T h e shallo w alluvia l aquife r a t th e sit e i s no t use d a s a drinkin g wate r sourc e an d th e Stat e o f Colorad o ha s a comprehensiv e groun d wate r classificatio n syste m an d promulgate d numeri c standard s equivalen t t o (MCLs)

. Protect s aestheti c character
, n o t relevan t t o protectio n o f huma n healt h or environment

. N o non-zero MCLG s se t a t level s les s tha n MCL s wer e identifie d fo r contaminant s o f
concern
. See sectio n 3.2

.

Tabl e 11- 1APPENDI X B

, TABL E 1 , continue d POTENTIA L CHEMICA L SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R THE STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Standards

, Requirements

, Potentiall y Applicable / Criteria

. Limitation s Citatio n

Descriptio n

Relevan t

an d Appropriat e Commen t RCR A Groundwatc r Protectio n 4 0 CF R §§ 264.9 2 - 264.10 1 Establishe s standard s fo r No/N o Th e

Stat e o f Colorad o ha s a Standar d (RCR A GPS ) groundwate r qualit y relate d t o comprehensiv e ground wate r State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 RCR A

hazardous wast e classificatio n syste m facilities

. includin g numeri c standard s equivalen t t o MCL s an d RCR A GPS

.



# 3 I Tabl e 1 1- 2Standards

,

Requirements

, Criteria

. Limitation s Surfac e Water ; Colorad o Wate r Qualit y Standard s Federa l Wate r Qualit y Criteri a

Air : Nationa l Primar y an d Secondar y Ambien t Ai r Qualit y Standard s
Nationa l Emissio n Standard s fo r Hazardou s Ai r Pollutant s
Q 

# i APPENDI X B

, TABL E 1 , continue d POTENTIA L CHEMICA L SPECIFIC ARAK s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Citatio n State : 5 CC R 1002-8 , § § 3.1. 0 - 3.1.1 7 Descriptio n

Establishe s standard s an d classification s fo r Colorad o surfac e waters

. 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 131 , pursuan t Set s criteri a fo r surfac e wate r t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 131 4 qualit

y base d on toxicit y t o aquatic organism s and huma n health

.

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 50 , pursuan t t o 42 U.S.C

. § 7409

. State : C.R.S

. 25-7-108 , 5 C C R 1001-14

. 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 61 , Subpart s N
, O
, P pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 7412

. State : C.R.S

. 25-7-108 , 5 CC R 1001-1 0 Establishe s

standard s fo r ambien t air qualit y t o protec t publi c healt h an d welfar e (includin g standard s fo r paniculat e matte r an d lead)

. Set s emissio n standard s fo r designate d hazardous pollutants

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e Yes/N o No/N o

No/N o

No/N o Commen t

S e e sectio n 3.1.1

. T h e Stat e o f Colorad o ha s a comprehensiv e regulatory framework fo r strea m classificatio n an d assignmen t o f ambien t wate r qualit y criteri a addressin g th e contaminant s o f concern
. Atmospheri c emission s o f particulate s wa s not a contaminan t transpor t pathwa y retaine d fo r consideration

. Atmospheri c emission s wa s no t a contaminan t transpor t pathwa y retaine d fo r consideration

.

Tabl e 1 1- 3APPENDI X B

, TABL E 2 CHEMICA L SPECIFI C CRITERI A TO-BE-CONSIDERED

(TBC ) FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Advisorie s t o b e Considere d an d Guidanc e Soils : Toxi c Substance s Contro l Act
, P CB Spil l Cleanu p Polic y Interi m Guidanc e o n Establishin g Soi l Lead Cleanu p Level s a t Superfun d Site s Revise d Interi m Soi l Lea d Guidanc e fo r CERCL A Site s an d RCR A Correctiv e Facilitie s Citatio n

5 2 F R 1068 8 Apri l 2, 198 7 E P A Directiv e #9355.4-02 , Septembe r 1989

. OSWE R Directiv e #9355.4

- 1 2 July
, 199 4 Descriptio n Establishe s guidanc e cleanu p level s fo r PC B contaminate d soils

. Establishe d guidanc e cleanu p level s fo r lea d contaminate d soils

. Establishe s guidanc e cleanu p level s fo r lead contaminate d soils

. T

o Be Considere d N o t considere d Considere d Considere d Commen t

Ther e i s n o evidenc e tha t PC B spill s hav e occurred

. Se e sectio n 3. 3 Se e sectio n 3. 3



# 3 ? 

# 3 I Tabl e 2 2- 1APPENDI X B

, TABL E 3 POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Soli d Wast e Disposa l Ac t Guideline s fo r th e Therma l Processin g o f Soli d Waste s Guideline s fo r th e Lan d Disposa l
o f Soli d Waste s Colorad o Regulation s Pertainin g t o Soli d Wast e Disposa l Site s an d Facilitie s Guideline s fo r th e Storag e an d Collectio n o f Residential

, Commercial

, an d Institutiona l Soli d Wast e Sourc e Separatio n fo r Material s Recover y Guideline s Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 240 , pursuan t t o 42 U.S.G

. § 6901 , et seq
. 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 241 , pursuant t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §6901
, e t seq
. State : 6 CC R 1007-2 pursuan t toC.R.S

. 30-20-10 1 e t seq
.

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 243 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §6901

. etseq

.

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 246 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §6901
, et seq
. Descriptio n Prescribe s guideline s fo r therma l processin g o f municipa l soli d wastes

. Establishe s requirement s and procedure s fo r lan d disposa l o f solid waste s at federa l facilities

. Establishe s requirement s an d procedure s fo r lan d disposa l o f solid waste s an d th e sitin g o f disposa l facilities

. Establishe s guideline s fo r collectio n o f residential
, commercial
, an d institutiona l soli d wastes

. Establishe s requirement s an d recommended procedure s fo r source separatio n b y federa l agencie s o f residential
, commercial
, an d institutiona l soli d wastes

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e No/N o No/N o
No/N o
No/N o
No/N o Commen t

Therma l processin g i s no t
amon g th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideration

. The sit e i s not a federa l facility

. T h e lan d disposa l o f soli d wastes i s not amon g the alternative s retaine d fo r consideration

. N o t relevant

.
N o t relevant

. Create s n o substantiv e cleanu p requirements

. Q Z & Tabl e 3 3- 1Potentiall

y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Guideline s fo r Developmen t an d Implementatio n o f State Soli d Wast e Managemen t Plan s Criteri a fo r Classificatio n o f Soli d Wast e Disposa l Facilitie s an d Practice s Hazardou s Wast e Managemen t System : Genera l Identificatio n an d Listin g o f Hazardou s Wast e

Standard s Applicable t o Generator s o f Hazardou s Wast e (V 

# 3 \ Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 256 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §6901
, e t seq
.

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 257 , pursuan t t o 42 U.S.C

. § 6901

. e t seq
.

4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 260 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. §692 1 State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 Part 26 0 4 0 C.F.R

. Part 261 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 692 1 State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 Part 261 , pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-15-30 2 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 262 , pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 692 2 State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 Par t 262, pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-15-302 Descriptio n

Establishe s requirement s fo r federa l approva l o f stat e program s t o regulat e ope n dumps

. Establishe s criteri a fo r soli d wast e disposa l facilitie s an d practices

. Establishe s procedure s an d criteri a fo r modificatio n o r revocatio n o f an y provisio n i n part s 260-265

. Define s thos e soli d wastes whic h ar e subjec t t o regulatio n a s hazardou s waste s unde r 4 0 C.F.R

. Part s 262-26 5 an d Part s 124 , 270 , 271

. Establishe s standard s fo r generator s o f hazardou s waste

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate No/N o
No/N o
No/N o

No/N o

No/N o Commen t

Create s n o substantiv e cleanu p requirements

. T h e lan d disposa l o f soli d waste s i s no t amon g th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideration

. Create s n o substantiv e cleanu p requirements

.
T h e fin e sla g i s no t a soli d waste

.

T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t resul t in th e generatio n o f hazardou s waste

.

Tabl e 33- 2Potentiall

y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n Standard s Applicabl e t o 4 0 C.F.R

. Part 263, pursuan t Transporter s o f Hazardou s Wast e t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 6923 State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 Part 263 , pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-15-302 , 4 CC R 723-1 8 Standard s fo r Owner s an d Operators o f hazardou s Wast e Treatment

, Storage

, an d Disposa l Facilitie s
Interi m Standard s fo r Owner s a n Operator s o f Hazardou s Wast e Treatment

, Storage

, an d Disposa l Facilitie s Standard s fo r th e managemen t o f Specifi c hazardou s Waste s an d Specifi c Type s o f Hazardou s Wast e Managemen t Facilitie s IntelH i Standard s fo r Owner s andaperator s o f Ne w Hazardou s W a Q Lan d Disposa l Facilitie s 4 0

C.F.R

. Par t 264, pursuan t t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 6924 , 692 5 State : 6 CC R 1007- 3 Par t 264, subpart s B

, C

, D

, E

, F

, G

, K

, L

, an d N
, pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-15-30 2 4 0 C.F.R

. Part 26 5 State : 6 CC R 1007-3 , Part 26 5 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 26 6 State : 6 CC R 1007-3 , Part 26 7

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 267 State : 6 CC R 1007-3 , Part 26 7 Descriptio n

Establishe s standard s which appl y t o person s transportin g hazardou s wast e withi n th e U.S

. i f th e transportatio n require s a manifes t unde r 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 262

. Establishe s standard s whic h defin e th e acceptabl e managemen t o f hazardous wast e fo r owner s ajn d operator s o f facilitie s whic h treat , store , o r dispos e o f hazardou s waste

. Establishe s standard s fo r management o f hazardous wast e durin g interi m status

. Establishe s requirement s whic h appl y t o recyclabl e material s tha t are reclaime d t o recove r economicall y significan t amount s o f preciou s metals
, includin g gol d an d silver

. Establishe s minimu m nationa l standard s tha t defin e acceptabl e managemen t o f hazardou s wast e fo r ne w land disposa l facilities

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e No/N o

No/N o

No/N o
No/N o

No/N o Commen t

T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t resul t in transpor t o f hazardou s waste s offsite

. T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t involv e th e treatment , storag e o r disposa l o f hazardou s waste

.
T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t involv e t h e managemen t o f hazardou s wastes

. Recover y o f preciou s metal s wa s no t retaine d fo r consideration

.
Part 26 7 regulation s ar e n o longe r effectiv e afte r February 13 , 1983

.
Tabl e 3 3- 3APPENDI X B

, TABLE 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFIC ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Hazardou s Wast e Permi t Progra m Undergroun d Storag e Tank s Saf e Drinkin g Wate r Ac t Undergroun d Injectio n Contro l Regulation s Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 270 State : 6 CC R 1007-3 , Par t 10 0 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 28 0 Descriptio n

Establishe s provision s coverin g basi c EP A permitting requirements

. Establishe s regulation s relate d t o undergroun d storag e tanks

.

4 0 C.F.R

. § § 144.12 , Establishe s

requirement s fo r 144.24 , an d 144.25 , pursuan t injectio n o f wast e wate r int o t o 4 2 U.S.C

. § 12 1 (e)(l ) well s an d aquifers

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate No/N o
No/N o

No/N o Commen t

A permi t i s no t require d fo r onsit e CERCL A respons e actions

. The us e o f or remediatio n o f undergroun d storag e tank s i s no t anticipated

. Undergroun d injectio n i s no t anticipated

.



# I Tabl e 3 3- 4APPENDI X B

, TABLE 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n Descriptio n Potentiall y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e Commen t Clea n Wate r Ac t Nationa l Pollutan t Discharg e Eliminatio n Syste m
Effluen t Limitation s
Dredg e o r Fil l Requirement s (Sectio n 404 ) 4 0

C.F.R

. Part s 122, 12 5 pursuan t t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 134 2 State : 5 CC R 1002-2 , § § 6.1. 0 t o 6.18.0 , pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-8-50 1 4 0 C.F.R

. Par t 440 , pursuan t t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 131 1 State : 5 CC R 1002-3 , § § 10. 1 t o 10.1.7 , pursuan t t o C.R.S

. 25-8-50 3 4 0 C.F.R

. Part s 230 , 231 ; 33 CF R § § 320-33 0 an d 3 3 C.F.R

. Par t 323 , Pursuan t t o 33 U.S. C § 1344 Require

s permit s fo r th e Yes/N

o discharg e o f pollutant s fro m an y poin t sourc e int o water s o f t h e Unite d State s includin g stormwater

. Set s technology-base d effluen t No/N o limitation s fo r categories o f industria l poin t sourc e discharges

. Require s permit s fo r discharg e No/N o o f dredge d o r fille d materia l int o navigabl e waters

. See sectio n 4.1 , 4. 2 and 4.3

.

Ther e i s no discernibl e discharg e and categorica l standard s hav e not bee n establishe d fo r sla g reuse
. T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n d o no t involv e t h e dredg e o r fil l o f material s in waters o f Unite d States

. 

# 3 I Tabl e 3 3- 5APPENDI X B

, TABLE 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Nationa l Pretreatinen t Standard s

Toxi c Pollutan t Effluen t Standard s Clea n Ai r Ac t Colorad o Ai r Pollutio n Contro l Regulation s Fugitiv e Paniculat e Emission s Marin e Protection

, Researc h & Sanctuar y Ac t P C Substance s Contro l Ac t equirement s 

# I Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 403 , pursuan t t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 131 7

4 0 C.F.R

. Part 129, pursuan t t o 3 3 U.S.C

. § 131 7

State : 5 CC R 1001, Regulatio n No

. 1 , Sectio n III. D

1 3 U.S.C

. § § 1401-144 5
1 5 U.S.C

. § 2605(e ) 4 0 C.F.R

. Part 761 Descriptio n

Set s standard s t o contro l pollutant s whic h pas s throug h
o r interfer e wit h treatmen t processe s i n publicl y owne d treatmen t work s o r whic h ma y contaminat e sewag e sludge

. Establishe s effluen t standard s o r prohibition s fo r certai n toxi c pollutants : aldrin / dieldrin
, DDT

, endrin
, toxaphene
, benzidine
, PCBs

. Require s al l source s o f paniculat e emission s t o appl y technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l measures
. Regulate s ocea n dumping

. Establishe s disposa l requirement s fo r PCB s Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e No/N o

No/N o

Yes/N o

No/N o No/N o Commen t

N o discharg e t o a publicl y owne d treatmen t work s i s anticipated

.
T h e discharg e o f specifie d pollutant s i s no t anticipated

.

Technicall y feasibl e an d economicall y reasonabl e contro l measures wil l be applie d t o reuse o f th e stockpile d fin e slag

. Ocea n dumping wil l no t occur
. A t thi s tim e it i s no t anticipate d tha t remedia l activitie s wil l involv e th e disposa l o f PCBs

. Tabl e 3 3- 6APPENDI X B

, TABLE 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFIC ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n Descriptio n Potentiall y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate Uraniu m Mil l Tailing s Radiatio n 4 2 U.S.C

. § § 7901-794 2 Contro l Act 42

U.S.C

. § 202 2 Surfac e Minin g Contro l an d Reclamatio n Ac t Occupationa l Safet y an d Healt h A c t 3 0

U.S.C

. § § 1201-132 8

2 9 U.S.C

. § § 651-678

Federa l Min e Safet y an d Healt h 3 0 U.S.C

. §§ 801-96 2 A c t Hazardou s Material s Transportatio n Act
, D.O.T

. Hazardou s Material s Transportatio n Regulation s Colaijd o Nois e Abatemen t Stat f 4 9

U.S.C

. § § 1801-1813 , 49C.F.R

. Part s 107 , 171

- 17 7 State : C.R.S

. 25-12-101 , e t seq
. Q 

# I Establishe s requirement s No/N

o relate d t o uranium mil l tailings

. Establishe s provision s designe d No/N o t o protec t the environment fro m th e effects o f surfac e coa l minin g operations

. Regulate s worker healt h an d No/N o safety

. Regulate s workin g condition s No/N o i n undergroun d mine s t o assure safet y an d healt h o f workers

. Regulate s transportatio n o f No/N o hazardou s material s Establishe s standard s fo r No/N o controllin g noise

. Commen t Uraniu m mil l tailing s ar e no t presen t a t the site

. N o t relevant

. Create s n o substantiv e cleanu p requirements

. While no t a n ARAR

, thes e requirement s wil l appl y durin g implementatio n o f remedie s a t th e site

. While no t a n ARAR

, th e requirement s wil l b e me t i f it become s necessar y t o acces s undergroun d min e workings

. T h e offsit e transpor t o f hazardou s materia l i s no t anticipated

. Whil e no t a n ARAR

, applicabl e standard s wil l b e me t durin g activitie s a t th e site

. Tabl e 3 3- 7APPENDI X B

, TABL E 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Potentiall y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n

Descriptio n

Relevan t

an d Appropriate Commen t Colorad o Mine d Lan d State :

C.R.S

. 34-32-10 1 Regulate s

al l aspect s o f mining , No/N o Minin g

an d relate d Reclamatio n Act e t

seq
. 2 CC R 407- 1 includin

g locatio n o f reclamatio n activitie s wil l not operations , reclamation
, an d occu r a t th e site

. othe r environmenta l and socioeconomi c impacts

.



# 3 I Table 3 3- 8APPENDI X B

, TABL E 3 , continue d POTENTIA L ACTIO N SPECIFIC ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G
Advisorie s t o b e Considere d an d Guidanc e Citatio n Clea n Wate r Ac t Nonpoin t Sourc e Managemen t E P A Requirement s fo r Wate r Qualit y Plannin g an d Management
, Nonpoin t Sourc e Managemen t an d Contro l 4 0

CF R Par t 130, §130.6(c)(4 ) Descriptio n

Establishe s Bes t Managemen t Practice s a s a n acceptabl e CW A sectio n 20 8 an d 303(e ) Wate r Qualit y Managemen t Pla n elemen t fo r achievin g water qualit y goals

. T

o B e Considere d Considere d Commen t

T h e nonpoin t source management program , wit h th e regulator y an d nonregulator y applicatio n o f Bes t Managemen t Practice s i s a n approac h state s ma y us e i n developing acceptabl e CW A Sectio n 20 8 Wate r Qualit y Managemen t Plans

. BMP s woul d onl y b e a n ARA R fo r nonpoin t source managemen t where a stat e ha s adopte d BMP s as par t o f a dul y promulgate d regulator y program

. Colorad o lia s no t promulgate d BMP-base d nonpoin t source contro l requirements

.

Tabl e 3 3- 9APPENDI X B

, TABL E 5 POTENTIA L LOCATIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Nationa l Histori c Preservatio n Act
, Executiv e Orde r 1159 3 Citatio n 1 6 U.S.C

. 40C.F.R

. 36C.F.R

. §47 0 § 6.301(b ) Part 80 0 State : C.R.S

. 24-80-101-10 8
Archeologica l an d Histori c Preservatio n Act o f 197 4 1 6 U.S.C

. § 46 9 40C.F.R

. §6.301(c )

Histori c Site s Ac t o f 1935 , 1 6 U.S.C

. § § 46 1 c t se q 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.301(a )


# 3 

# i Descriptio n E P A must accoun t fo r th e effect s o f an y actio n o n an y propert y wit h historic
, architectural
, archeologica l o r cultura l valu e tha t i s liste d o r eligibl e fo r listin g o n th e Nationa l Registe r o f Histori c Places

, o r th e Colorad o Registe r o f Histori c Places

. Establishe s procedure s t o preserve historica l an d archeologica l dat a whic h migh t be destroye d throug h alteratio n o f terrai n a s a resul t o f a federa l constructio n projec t o r a federall y license d activit y o r program

. Require s federa l agencie s t o conside r th e existenc e an d locatio n o f landmark s o n th e Nationa l Registr y o f Natura l Landmark s t o avoi d undesirabl e impact s on suc h landmarks

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevant an d Appropriat e Yes/N o

No/N o

No/N o Commen t

Effect s o f th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n o n liste d propertie s wil l b e considered

.

T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t destro y archeologica l dat a as a resul t o f alteration s in terrain

.

Natura l landmark s wil l no t be impacte d b y th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideration

.

Tabl e 5 5- 1APPENDI X B

, TABL E 5 continue d POTENTIA L LOCATIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicable o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Citatio n Colorad o Wildlif e Enforcemen t Stale : C.R.S

. 33-1-101 , an d Penaltie s e

t sen
. Wildlif e Commissio n Regulation s Fis h an d Wildlif e Coordinatio n A c t State :

2 CC R 405- 0

1 6 U.S.C

. §§661-66 6 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(g )

Endangere d Specie s Ac t 

# ! I 1 6

U.S.C

. § § 1531-154 3 5 0 C.F.R

. Part s 17 , 402 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(h ) State : C.R.S

. 33-2-101 , e t seq
. Descriptio n Potentiall y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e Prohibit s action s detrimenta l t o No/N o wildlife

. Establishe s specifi c No/N

o requirement s fo r protectio n o f wildlife

. Require s consultatio n when Yes/N o federa l departmen t o r agenc y propose s or authorize s an y modificatio n o f an y strea m o r othe r wate r bod y t o provid e fo r adequat e provisio n fo r protectio n o f fis h an d wildlif e resources
. Requires tha t federa l agencie s No/N o insur e tha t an y actio n authorized
, funded
, o r carrie d
out b y the agenc y i s not likel y t o jeopardiz e th e continue d existenc e o f an y threatene d or endangere d specie s o r destro y o r adversel y modif y critica l habitat

. Commen t Wildlif e wil l no t b e impacte d b y th e remedie s retaine d fo r consideration

. Wildlif e wil l no t b e impacte d b y th e remedie s retaine d fo r consideration

. Prio r to * modificatio n o f wate r bodie s appropriat e agencies wil l b e consulted

.

T h e alternative s retaine d fo r consideratio n wil l no t jeopardiz e th e continue d existenc e o f an y threatene d o r endangere d specie s o r destro y o r adversel y modif y critica l habitat

.

Tabl e 5 5- 2APPENDI X B

, TABL E 5 continue d POTENTIA L LOCATIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriat e Coasta l Zon e Managemen t Ac t Citatio n 1 6 U.S.C

. § § 1451-146 4

Wild an d Sceni c River s Ac t

Wildernes s Ac t
Executiv e Orde r o n Protectio n o f Wetlands
, Executiv e Order N o

. 1199 0 1 6

U.S.C

. § § 1271-128 7 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(e ) 3 6 C.F.R

. Part 29 7

1 6 U.S.C

. §1311
, 1 6 U.S.C

. §66 8 5 0 CF R Par t 53 , 5 0 CF R Part 2 7 4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(b ) and Appendi x A Descriptio n

Prohibit s federa l agencies fro m undertakin g an y activit y tha t i s n o t consisten t wit h a state' s approve d coasta l zon e management program

. Establishe s requirement s applicabl e t o wate r resourc e developmen t project s affectin g wild
, scenic, or recreationa l river s withi n o r studie d fo r inclusio n i n th e Nationa l Wil d
a n d Sceni c River s System

. Limit s activitie s withi n area s designate d a s wildernes s or withi n Nationa l Wildlif e Refuges

. Requires federa l agencies t o evaluat e th e potentia l effect s o f action s the y ma y tak e i n wetland s t o minimiz e advers e impact s t o th e wetlands

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriat e No/N o

No/N o

No/N o
No/N o Commen t

T h e sit e i s no t i n th e vicinit y o f
a coasta l zone
.
T h e sit e i s no t a wild
, scenic , o r recreational rive r i n th e National"Wild an d Sceni c Rive r Systems

.
T h e fin e sla g stockpil e ar e no t locate d in eithe r a wildernes s are a o r a Nationa l Wildlif e Refuge

. Wetlan d ar e no t presen t an d wil l no t b e impacte d b y th e remedie s retaine d fo r consideration

.

Tabl e 5 5- 3APPENDI X B

, TABL E 5 continue d POTENTIA L LOCATIO N SPECIFI C ARAR s FO R TH E STOCKPILE D FIN E SLA G Potentiall y Applicabl e o r Relevan t an d Appropriate Executiv e Orde r o n Floodplai n Management
, Executiv e Orde r N o

. 11,98 8 Citatio n

4 0 C.F.R

. § 6.302(b ) and Appendi x A

River s an d Harbor s Ac t o f 1899 , Sectio n 1 0 Permi t 33 U.S.C

. § 40 3 3 3 C.F.R

. Part s 320-33 0 Descriptio n

Require s federa l agencie s t o evaluat e th e potentia l effect s o f action s the y ma y tak e i n a floodplai n t o avoid
, t o th e maximu m exten t possible
, th e advers e impact s associate d wit h direc t an d indirec t developmen t o f a floodplain

. Require s permi t fo r structure s o r wor k i n o r affectin g navigabl e waters

. Potentiall

y Applicable / Relevan t an d Appropriate No/N o Commen t

Floodplain s wil l no t b e impacte d b y th e alternative s retaine d fo r consideration

.

No/N o Surfac e

water s a t Californi a Gulc h ar e no t navigabl e withi n th e meanin g o f th e River s an d Harbor s Ac t o f 1899

.

Q 

# I Tabl e 5 5- 4