HomeMy WebLinkAboutGarbage Committee Minutes 03.21.1994MINUTES
GARBAGE COMMITTEE
MARCH 21, 1994 5:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Graham, Chairman
Ed Steffans L.D. Collins
Larry Thomas David Michael
Albert Ehrlick John Minch
Gay Easton Marvin Carter (late)
OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Shaffer, GEO Research
Discussion was held on Dave Michael's letter to the Department of
Health and Environmental Science (see attached).
Dave Michael stated that the cost of testing will come out of the
sewer budget.
There is a concern that the rainy season may create problems.
The Committee recommends we make sure we have the proper place to
dump the jet rodder. Dave will check with the State to see if we
can dump the jet rodder at the sewer plant.
Jim Schaffer from GEO Research gave a report on the soil samples
taken at the old Landfill site. (see attached)
Motion by L.D. Collins, seconded by Albert Ehrlick, to enter
into a contract with GEO Research to do step 2 of the testing.
Motion carried.
Small garbage can's will replace the large cans on Casa Linda
Circle and 2 homes south of there.
Dave asked the committee to buy a truck from the City of Billings
to replace the white truck.
Motion by Gay Easton„ seconded by Marvin Canter, to approve
the purchase of a truck from the City of Billings. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Bob Graham, Chairman
11
EORESEARCH, IN..
March 3, 1994
Mr. David Michael
City of Laurel
P. O. Box 10
Laurel, MT 59044
Re: Additional Copies: H dro eolo 'cal Stud Feb. 1994
City of Laurel, Landfill, License #203
Dear Mr. Michael:
At the request of the Garbage Committee for the City of Laurel, herewith please find
five copies of the general text and hydrogeological discussion for the subject landfill. Also,
as requested, copies of the appendices are not included with this transmittal. However,
should the committee or its members desire copies of the Appendices please feel free to
contact me.
As we discussed on February 288, during the site visit and staking of soil sampling
sites, analysis of the samples will be performed by Energy Labs on an expedited basis.
Results of the tests are expected to be available by March 9. I will contact you upon our
receipt of the lab results to arrange a time to discuss the findings with the committee and
formulate recommendations to the MT Solid Waste Program.
The expedited analysis service will result in a 50 percent increase in the analytical cost
for each sample. The normal cost (for two-week turnaround) for each sample is $7.50, plus
$5.00 sample digestion charges. With the expedited service, the cost per sample will be
$18.25. GeoResearch conducted sampling at the staked locations on March 1, a total of 12
samples were collected and delivered to the laboratory. Laboratory charges for analysis of
the soil samples is estimated at $229.00. GeoResearch labor for sampling is estimated at
$315.00. The increase in field labor charges, from the estimate provided at our February
22 meeting, was due to frozen ground conditions at depth and difficulties in obtaining
suitable samples.
If you have any questions concerning the project please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
James D. Shaffer
Sr. Hydrogeologist
Enc: H dro eolo$n 'cal And Soils Stud Laurel Land
Y g y, fill
115 North Broadway
Billings, MT 59101
TEL. (406) 248-6771
FAX (406) 248-6770
FIRE/AMB/POLICE
217 W. 1ST. ST.
#ONE: 62$-8737
CITY HALL
115 W. 1ST ST.
PHONE: 6288791
City of Laurel
P.O. BOX 10
LAUREL, MONTANA 59044
PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH 16, 1994
Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences
Solid Hazardous Waste Bureau
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, Mt. 59620-0901
Attention: Edward A. Thamke
Dear Edward:
DEPAR'T'MENT
`This.is a compliance schedule as per your letter of
March 3;. 1994,1or unlawful disposal of jet rodder waste' pumpings
clean up as.directed..
1): Stake out the areas to be excavated:
The staking.of the areas were done
approximately the week of February
7th through 14th, 1994, by the sewer
foreman Phil curry.
.2) Construct a stockpile pad for the materials. to
be excavated:' The City has selected a site
for the prepared pad and will construct the
pad, with a controlled.berm for run-on/run-off
of moisture, around the perimeter. The City
will line the pad and control bern with,.
visqueen.
3) Excavate the areas of the unlawful disposal
and any surrounding soils that appear to have
been impacted by the ..disposal: The sewer
'working foreman, Phil Curry, and equipment
operator, Don Nelson, will do the excavating
and stockpiling of material upon.the prepared'
pad.. The. work will be scheduled as. soon as
possible`after.the City has the prepared pad....
constructed and availability of Energy Labs to
provide. a. technician to do the sampling,
hopefully the week of March 21, 1994.
11
City of Laurel is an EEO Employer
4) Temporarily stockpile the excavated materials on 40
the prepared pad:
On the day the material is excavated it will
be placed on the prepared pad and covered with
visqueen. The visqueen will be secured after
the sampling is completed by an Energy Labs
technician.
5) Sample the stockpiled waste materials: The
City will contract with Energy Labs, in
Billings, Montana to provide a qualified
technician to collect the samples and Energy
Labs will test the sample materials as
directed.
The City will schedule the work to be done
when Energy Labs has the technician available.
6) The stockpile will be securely covered after
sampling event and no access by City employees
or the public will be allowed:
The City will place the prepared pad in an
area where City employees or the public have
no reason to be in.
7) Ultimate disposition or disposal of the
stockpile will be determined through
consultation with the Solid Waste program
after evaluation of the analytical results:
Disposition or disposal of stockpile material
will be determined at a later date after
evaluation of the analytical results.
If you have any questions or concerns please call me at 628-
8791.
SinceFely,
Dave Michael
Ass't. Public Works Director
DAM/cl
CC:
C:
GEoREsEARcx,,,
s
March 10, 1994
Mr. David Michael
City of Laurel
P. O. Bog 10
Laurel, MT 59044
Re: 1 Results of Soil Sam li and Anal g s for Nitrates and
V _-Task Orders 6a and. fib at the
Cit of Laurel Landfill-4
ven Nos. 24 and 203
Dear Mr. Michael:
Following our meeting of February 22, at the request of the Garbage
Committee for the City of Laurel, GeoResearch, Inc,, conducted near-surface and
shallow depth sampling of soils at selected locations within the subject license areas.
Sampling was conducted on March 1. A total of 14 soil samples were collected at
depths ranging from three-inches to 21-inches below the graded land surface. The
attached figure shows the location of the sampling locations. At the request of the
City, all samples were analyzed for nitrates (EPA method 353.2) on an expedited lab
turnaround basis. The results of the testing were received by GeoResearch on Friday,
March. 4.
History of Nitrates and Drainage at the Landfill;
Several historical activities have been conducted on the subject sites which may
be considered sources or contributors to the levels of nitrates detected in groundwater
monitoring well MW-2. Activities at the site have included the operation of a pig
farm and holding pens near the eiisting container/ixansfer site, and the addition of
dried sewage sludge as an amendment to the soil cap placed on license No. 24.
During operation of license No, 24, surface water runoff reportedly accumulated or
ponded in. a localized area at the extreme northeast corner of license No. 203. This
"ponding" area may have acted as a deposition site for nitrate-containing sediments
transported in runoff from license No. 24. Runoff associated with the former pig farm
is not clearly documented, and may have occupied the same general surface route;
however, °ponding" is not Imown to have occurred,
E
115 NOtlh $roadway
Billings, MT 59101
TEL. (406) 248-6771
Fax (406) 248.6770
As you stated during the site visit of February 28, the "ponding" site has been
reconfigured and sediments buried, but not removed, in conjunction with soil capping
and compacting at license No. 203. Several committee members who were formerly
employed at the landfill during that time have indicated that the application of
sludge as a soil amendment was not practiced on license No. 203. Where applied on
license No. 24, sludge was dumped on the surface and spread by means of a
grader/scraper. This method of application probably resulted in a varying thickness
and uneven distribution and in some places may be entirely lacking. On license No.
24, runoff from precipitation and uptake by the established vegetation may have
further acted to remove or reduce the level of nitrates now present in soils.
Previous and existing drainage character at the landfill is such that runoff
from license Nos. 24 and/or 203 does not extend significantly, if at all, across the
other. Runoff from the south balf of No. 24 and approximately the extreme northern
one-third of No. 203 may commingle in the vicinity of the former "panding" area
before continuing to drain to the southeast and passing in the vicinity of wells MW-2
and 93MW2D.
Sampling Objectives;
Sampling and analysis of the soils at the landfill were conducted in an attempt
to characterize the level of nitrates present in. 1) the near-surface and shallow soils
above any buried waste; 2) those areas which drained and may have accumulated in
the northeast corner of license No. 203; and, 3) areas that appear to now drain
through the same area as a result of the established surface topography.
Sampling and analysis of soils were initially planned at depths within the
expected average root depth, i.e., 3 to 6 inches and from 21 to 24 inches. Comparison
of the teat results on a depth and location basis, was expected to suggest horizontal
and vertical (migration or leaching) distribution of nitrates, and the potential for
license No. 24 as a source of nitrates detected in the groundwater at MW-2.
Sampling and analysis of soils in the "ponding" area and up slope of the site were
conducted to provide information on the "ponding" site as a potential nitrate source.
Vadose water or groundwater was not collected or encountered during the
sampling activities. However, below 6 inches, the soil was frozen at several of the
locations. At several locations, buried waste was encountered at less than 21 inches
depth and sampling was performed at depths less than originally planned. All
samples were collected above any landfill waste encountered. All samples were
planned to be three inches in length at depths of 3 and 21 inches, Please refer to the
sample location map included as an attachment to this letter.
2
?I
L
MAR 11 '94 14!17 GEORESEARCH MT USA 406-248-6770 P.4i10
0 Evaluation of Analysis Results:
Sample identification numbers (e.g., 24»BN+40+03) provide information as to
the landfill license number on which the sample is positioned, its location, and depth.
The first number of the sample, either "24" or "203" indicate the license number, the
letters "BY indicates the sample is located at the approximate boundary of the two
licenses. The single letter "B" indicates the sample is located north of the TN"
location. The number "+40" or "+80" designate the number of average stride lengths
(paces) from the "BN" location. Sample sites south of the "BN" location do not
contain an alphabetic character in the sample number. The alphanumeric symbols
"Pl" or "P2" designate samples collected in the vicinity of the former "ponding" area.
The P1 and P2 sites are separated by approximately 40 paces. The last two numbers,
i.e., "+03", "+21", etc., indicate the upper sampling depth in inches.
Nitrates were not detected above the method detection limit (4.1 ppm) in any
of the near-surface or shallow depth samples collected on license No. 24. The two
sampling locations are positioned 40 and 80 paces, approximately 100 and 200 feet,
respectively, north of the southern boundary of license No. 24. These locations were
selected because they occur within the site of the last, or most recent waste cell
operated on the license.
Minor levels of nitrates were detected in the 3-inch depth sample collected on
the boundary ("BN") of the two licenses. Nitrates were not detected in the sample
collected at the 12-inch depth.
On license 230 in the sample collected 40 paces (est. 100 feet) south of the "BN"
location, nitrates were detected at concentrations of 7.7 and 10.5 ppm. Although the
concentration is highest in the deeper sample, these results are inconclusive to
suggest that vertical migration of nitrates may have occurred. The sample located
80 paces (est. 200 feet) south of the "BIT' location did not detect nitrates in either the
near-surface or shallow depth sample. Results from the samples collected on license
No. 203 suggest that nitrate-containing materials, such as fertilizers, decomposing
animal or plant ells, or sewage/livestock waste, may have been applied or disposed
at or near sample location 203+40.
Nitrates were detected in all of the near-surface and shallow depth soil ?.
samples collected in the vicinity of the farmer surface water "ponding" site. Again,
the results are inconclusive to: 1) determine if vertical leaching has or is occurring
at the site, 2) to assess the nature and extent or level of nitrate-containing sediments
deposited at the pond site, or 3) if the sediments are impacting groundwater in the
vicinity of the landfill. Nitrate levels at the "PI" location, within the designated
"ponding" site, range for 5.0 to 1.8 ppm. Approximately seven to ten feet higher, and
up-slope, to the southwest, nitrate levels at the '72" location range from 1.7 to 15.8
ppm. The latter result is the highest that was observed during this sampling effort.
3
The source of nitrates observed in the "Pl" samples is suspected to have
originated from runoff, transport, and deposition at the site. The nitrate-containing
sediments at "Pl" appear to be confined to the near-surface sediments. Currently,
site drainage originates from licenses No. 24 and 203 and the rangeland to the north.
Runoff from these areas commingle in the vicinity of the "ponding" site. Surface
runoff no longer accumulates at the site; drainage continues to the southeast exiting
license No. 203 midway between wells MW-2, 93MW-2D, and MW 1. The adjacent
rangeland is currently used for cattle grazing. On several occasions, these cattle, and
heavy accumulations of manure, have been observed throughout license 203 and in
the immediate vicinity of well MW-2. Use of fertilizers on either the landfills or
rangeland is not known.
Considering the distance and topographic differences between the "P1" and
"P2" locations, the levels of nitrates detected in the "P2" samples are not believed to
bean extension of that observed in "Pl". The source of the "P2" nitrates is unknown
considering that sewage sludge reportedly was not used as a soil amendment on
license No. 203. Dried animal wastes were not observed in the vicinity of any of the
sample location, especially "72" and "203+40". However, animal waste cannot be
ruled out entirely as a potential or partial source of the nitrates detected on license
No. 203,
On license No. 24, nitrates were not detected; the materials containing nitrates
which, were reported to have been applied have apparently been taken-up by
vegetation or removed by runoff. The former application of nitrate-containing
materials as a source of nitrates in groundwater at well MW-2 or the pond site "P1"
cannot be demonstrated with the data collected.
Recommendations:
Pursuant to MS'WP letter dated February 1, the implementation ofAssessment
Monitoring at the landfill is required to be initiated before April 1, 1994. Previously,
GeoResearch submitted a scope of work and cost estimate in the form of Tasks ? and
Sa to conduct the monitoring. These tasks were verbally authorized and subsequently
deferred, pending the results of the soil tests presented above.
The preliminary results discussed above do not provide strong indications to
suggest conclusively that significant nitrates are absent in the soils on license No.
203, and that they are not a potential contributing source of the nitrate
concentrations detected in monitoring well MW-2. For the reasons expressed in our
meeting of February 22, GeoResearch is in agreement with the City of Laurel and
oIT6rs the following recommendations as the next step in determining the source(s)
extent, and level of nitrates occurring in groundwater at the landfill. GeoResearch
recommends:
•
4
• Installation of an additional monitoring well, MW94-1, located directly
upgradient of MW-2 to replace well MW-4 as the background water quality
well for license No. 203 and well MW-2. It is important to locate this well on
license No. 24 to permit its usage as a background well and to comply with
ARM 16.14.704 (i.e., "...well must be located...that has not been affected by
leakage from the unit.").
• Install a second monitoring well, MW94-2, north and slightly upgradient of
MW-2 on the adjacent rangeland. This well should provide the following
information: 1) to assess if groundwater from the rangeland also contains
nitrates and is a potential background source to MW-2, and 2) if 94MW 1 is
clean of nitrates to assist in defining the nature and extent of the nitrate
problem at the landfill. Determining nature and extent for assessing corrective
action purposes is a future regulatory requirement which the landfill may
anticipate should the results of assessment monitoring confirm concentrations
of constituents in the groundwater in excess of background quality,
enforcement standards, or preventative action limits.
• Sample and analyze both new wells for MSWP Table 1 constituents. The
results for the listed constituents will then compare with those available for
other wells at the landfill.
Collect and analyze drill cutting (soil) samples for nitrates from the wellbores
on five foot intervals from below the level of buried waste to the uppermost
groundwater table.
• Inform MSWP of the intent to install additional monitoring wells and obtain
its approval for the intended purpose and objectives of the wells. Request that
MSWP temporarily defer implementation of assessment monitoring pending
the evaluation and reporting of the groundwater results.
Cost of the Recommendations and Nitrates Study:
To assist the City of Laurel in planning and budgeting the investigations and
activities associated with the landfill,, GeoResearch has attached a proposed cost for
installing the additional monitoring wells, Task 6b. The estimated costs incurred to
conduct the soil sampling and testing for nitrates, Task 6A, have been included and
identified separately for your formal authorization. Total cost for both tasks is
estimated at $6,435 on a time-and-materials basis.
? .J
5
Authorization-to-Proceed:
If the City of Laurel is in agreement with the recommendations of this report,
please signify its acceptance and authorization-to-proceed with Tasks 6a and 6b in
accordance with the terms and conditions the existing
return one copy to GeaRe c3a..
1.993. Please sign both copies of the Task Order If you have any questions regarding the proposed activities, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Sincerely,
ameg D, Shaffer
Sr. Hydrogeologist
atch. Sample Location Map
Energy Labs Report #94-7312-25
Subtask Orders 6a and 6b
Acceptance of Terms, Conditions, and Costs:
CLIENT: City of Laurel CONSULTANT: GeoResearebs Inc.
By..
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Authorization-to-Proceed:
Task 6a:
Task 6b:
Name: James D. Shaffer
Title: Senior H dra eolo 'st
Date: Febrtita 16 j994"
•
6
Task Order 6a
Soil Sampling and Analysis for Nitrates
City of UmM I,andtll, Montana
hmmse: This task was conducted, by GeoResearch, Inc., on March 1, 1994 on a
time-and-materials basis. The objective was to conduct a preliminary
assess of the elewtence and levels of nitrates in soils within the soil cap
on landfill licenses Nos. 24 and 203. Results of the testing were
reported to the City of Laurel on March 10, 1994. A detailed estimated
budget is presented below.
Imo: Unit oltAl- U.? Cost
Sampling (March 1994):
Prgject Manager (meetings) 70/hr 6 hrs 420
Hydrogeologi.st (data eval.) 65/hr 8 hrs
Technician (samplin
) 4 520
g
5/hr 8 hrs
Clerical 25/hr 1 h 360
r
Vehicle mileage 0.35/mi 60 mi
Laboratory Analyses: 25
21
Natural samples'? (soil) 7.50/ea. 14 smpls 105
.
Preparation Charge 5.00/ea. 14 smpls.
Expedited Analysis (+50%) 6
2 70
.
5/ea. 14 smpls, 88
Estimated total - Subtask 6a: $ 10609
1) Nitrate as N
•
7
Task Order fb
Installation of Groun4water Monitoring Wells
City of Laurel LandM Montana
P=ose : This task will, be conducted by GeoResearch on a time-and-materials
basis. Plans are proposed to install two monitoring wells upgradient of
well MW'-2 and to collect groundwater and soil samples. Analysis of
groundwater will be pursuant to MSWP Fable 1 with soils, below the
level of any buried waste, tested for nitrates. A brief letter report
updating hydrogeology at the landfill and a comparison of existing
analytical results will be provided for submittal to MSWP. A detailed
budget is presented below.
Item Unit Cost Units Cost
Drill & Install Two Monitoring Wells (April 1994):
Project Manager 701hr 2 hrs 7.40
Sr. Hydrogeologist 65/hr 10 hrs 650
Technician 45/hr 4 hrs 180
Clerical 25/hr 1 hr 25
vehicle mileage 0.35hni 30 mx 11
Well Probe 25/day 1 day 25
Stainless Steel Bailer 10/day 1 day 10
Acrylic Bailer 10/day 1 day 10
Water Filtration Unit 10/day 1 day 10
Disposables 10/well 2 wells 20
Ph meter 10/day I day 10
Sc meter 101day 1 day 10
Drlg. ContrJWell MatI. 25/ft 50 ft 1,250
Laboratory Analyses:" a?
Natural samples (water) 490 ea. 2 smpls. 480
QA/QC duplicate (water) 490 ea. 1 smpl. 490
Soil sample? 12.50 ea. 4 sznpls. 50
$ 3,871
Data Evaluation and Characterization Report (August 1994):
Project Manager 70 hr 2 hrs 140
Sr. Hydrogeologist 55/hr 12 hrs 520
Technician 45/hr hra 270
Clerical 25/hr 1 hr 25
$ 955
Estimated total - Task Bb: $ 4,826
1) Table 1 Constituent Dist - $4$0 per sample.
2) XSWP additions] analytes: Chloride, Iron, Nitrate (as N), Sulfate, Ph,
Specific Cond.. Temp._(lield & lab) - $N per sample.
11
•
BE RGY ENERGY LABORATORIES"',
LARGRATONES P.O- GC0X 300IFS - 1 lUr SOt)TW BROADWAY • WL.L.1NGM. MY '.0107.00i6 . PHONE (406),262-a325
PAX (406) 252-9060 - i.800-735-448a
LABORATORY REPORT
TO: Jim Shaffer LAB NO.: 94-7312 -25
ADDRESS: GeoResearch, Inc. DATE: 03/03/94 da
115 North Broadway -
Billings, MT 59101
lv ElaBAR - ?L ,g94
SOIL ANALYSIS
Laurel Landfill
Sampled 03/01194
Submitted 03/02/94
Analyzed 03/03/94
Nitrate as N,
Lab No. Identification ua/a loom?
94-7312 24-B + 80 + 03, Sampled @ 1 106 [ 1
94-7313 24-8+80+12, Sampled @ 1147 <1
94-7314 24-8+40-03, Sampled @ 1206 <1
94-7315 24•B+40+21, Sampled @ 1214 <1
94-7316 24-BN + 0 + 3, Sampled @ 1242 1.8
94-7317 24-SN-0-18, Sampled @ 1307 <1
94-7318 203+40+03, Sampled @ 1351 7.0
94-7319 203-40-18, Sampled @ 1505 10,5
94-7 320 203 + 80 + 03, Sampled @ 1357 1.1
94-7321 203+80+12, Sampled @ 1431 [ 1
94-7322 203+P1 +03, Sampled @ 1533 5.0
94-7323 203-P1.10, Sampled @ 1550 1.8
94-7324 203-P2+03, Sampled @ 1514 1.7
94-7325 203-P2+15, Sampled @ 1521 15.5
QUALITY ASSIJR ; C5 CA i k
94-7320 Duplicate Analysis 1.1