Laserfiche WebLink
This assumption was obtained from computer modeling regarding the <br /> site. As is well established, output from a computer model is <br /> dependent on input parameters. <br /> If the input parameters do not accurately reflect conditions at <br /> the site, then conclusions generated by the model will not be <br /> accurate. Board staff feel that the following parameters were <br /> not representative of conditions at the site: <br /> 1) There is approximately 264, 000 cubic yards of <br /> untreated ASW currently in place at the site. <br /> The computer model is based on treated ASW. Treated ASW has <br /> a PH of 11.0 to 11.5, much higher then untreated ASW. The <br /> high PH of treated ASW in conjunction with the proposed <br /> cementing agent will significantly reduce the mobility of <br /> the metal contaminants in the treated ASW. Metals contained <br /> in untreated ASW are more mobile than those in treated ASW. <br /> For this reason, the Modeling using treated ASW is not <br /> representative of the actual conditions at the site. A <br /> complete characterization of the untreated ASW must be done. <br /> Part of the characterization must be to sample the untreated <br /> ASW and run the Waste Extraction Test (WET test) on the <br /> waste to determine the actual mobility of the metals in the <br /> waste and to determine if other hazardous constituents exist <br /> at the site. <br /> 2) The computer model used a 12 foot clay separation layer <br /> between the existing ASW and ground water with a <br /> permeability of 1x10-5 cm/sec. Cross sections of the site <br /> included in the 12/90 Report of Disposal Site Information <br /> (RDSI) and a statement in the Solid Waste Assessment Test <br /> (SWAT) indicate that ASW has been and currently is in <br /> contact with ground water (Attachment 4) . <br /> Therefore, the clay separation layer must to removed from <br /> the Model. <br /> Other information submitted by Cove does not support the <br /> conclusion of no impact on ground water for instance, levels <br /> detected in monitoring well MW-5 located between the landfill <br /> and Walker Slough exceeded the MCL for Barium (1 mg/1) and levels <br /> detected in -9 located along the north property boundary, <br /> exceeded the MCL for Cadmium (0.01 mg/1) . A surface water sample <br /> (SW-2) collected from Walker Slough exceeded the MCL for Barium <br /> and Lead (0. 05 mg/1) (SWAT) . The location of the monitoring <br /> wells and surface water samples are shown in Attachment 5. this <br /> data does not corroborate the conclusion that no impact to ground <br /> water or surface water has occurred. <br /> The ground water model concluded that the site will not <br /> significantly impact ground water for an additional 10 years. <br /> Due to the incorrect input parameters and the inconsistent <br /> analytical data, Board staff can not agree with Coves conclusion, <br /> of no significant impact on ground water. <br /> 2 <br />