DOE OSTI2013
The Mound Site facility near Miamisburg, Ohio, opened in 1948 to support early atomic weapons programs. It grew into a research, development, and production facility performing work in support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) weapons and energy programs. The plant was in operation until 1995. During the course of operation, an onsite landfill was created. The landfill was located over a finger of a buried valley aquifer, which is a sole drinking water source for much of the Miami Valley. In the 1980's, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were discovered in groundwater at the Mound site. The site was placed on the National Priorities List on November 21, 1989. DOE signed a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Federal Facility Agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. The agreement became effective in October 1990. The area that included the landfill was designated Operational Unit 1 (OU-1). In 1995, a Record of Decision was signed that called for the installation and operation of a pump and treatment (P and T) system in order to prevent the VOCs in OU-1 groundwater from being captured by the onsite water production wells. In addition to the P and T system, a soil vapor extraction (SVE) system was installed in 1997 to accelerate removal of VOCs from groundwater in the OU-1 area. The SVE system was successful in removing large amounts of VOCs and continued to operate until 2007, when the amount of VOCs removed became minimal. A rebound study was started in February 2003 to determine how the groundwater system and contaminants would respond to shutting down the P and T system. The rebound test was stopped in February 2004 because predetermined VOC threshold concentrations were exceeded down-gradient of the landfill. The P and T and SVE systems were restarted after the termination of the rebound test. In 2006, the remediation of the Mound site was completed and the site was declared to be protective of human health and the environment, as long as the institutional controls are observed. The institutional controls that apply to the OU-1 area include provisions that no soil be allowed to leave the site, no wells be installed for drinking water, and the site may be approved only for industrial use. The onsite landfill with the operating CERCLA remedy remained. However, the Mound Development Corporation lobbied Congress for funds to remediate the remaining onsite landfill to allow for property reuse. In 2007 DOE received funding from Congress to perform non-CERCLA removal actions at OU-1 to excavate the site sanitary landfill. In 2009, DOE received American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding to complete the project. Excavation of the landfill occurred intermittently from 2006 through 2010 and the majority of the VOC source was removed; however, VOC levels near the P and T system remained greater than the EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). Presently, groundwater is contained using two extraction wells to create a hydraulic barrier to prevent down-gradient migration of VOC-impacted groundwater. Since the primary contamination source has been removed, the feasibility of moving away from containment to a more passive remedy, namely monitored natural attenuation (MNA), is being considered. A second rebound study was started in June 2011. If contaminant and groundwater behavior met specific conditions during the study, MNA would be evaluated and considered as a viable alternative for the groundwater in the OU-1 area. From June through December 2011, the second rebound study evaluated the changes in VOC concentrations in groundwater when the P and T system was not in operation. As the study progressed, elevated concentrations of VOCs that exceeded predetermined trigger values were measured along the down-gradient boundary of the study area, and so the P and T system was restarted. It was determined that a discrete area with VOC concentrations greater than the MCLs was present in groundwater down-gradient of the extraction wells. The source was not identified, but the contamination was thought not to be caused by residually contaminated soil beneath the former landfill. The data collected so far supports the consideration of MNA as a viable alternative to hydraulic containment. Additional investigations are being performed to identify possible sources or pathways of VOCs in groundwater that may be contributing to the elevated VOC levels measured down-gradient of the extraction well system. Data from this additional investigation will be used to determine whether the VOCs detected down-gradient of the hydraulic boundary are the result of residual soil contamination, a previously unknown contribution of VOC-contaminated water entering the groundwater outside the capture zone of the extraction wells, or a pulse of VOC-contaminated groundwater from the OU-1 landfill that occurred during the rebound study. (authors)
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗