TRANSFORMING A PAINT FACTORY TO PLAYING FIELDS

A CASE STUDY

Presented By: Thomas HoldenHaley & Aldrich, San Diego, CA

Coauthors: Deborah GevaltMark HaleyHaley & Aldrich, Boston, MABarry MonahanWellesley College, Wellesley, MA

Outline

■ Project vision

■ Site history

■ Nature and extent of contamination

■ Remediation activities

■ Completed athletic complex

■ Remediation and construction costs

■ Lessons learned and conclusions

■ Questions

Project Vision

Pre-Construction Conditions

PROPOSED SITE

Pre-remediation photo May 2001

CAMPUS

RECLAIM 30+ ACRES

Project Vision

■ Reclaim and reuse land consistent with Master Plan

■ Construct an NCAA-caliber athletic complex to attract students

■ Create additional educational opportunities

■ Mitigate existing liability and risks

Physical 3-D modelFencing and warning signs

Site History

Historical Site UsageHenry Wood’s Sons Paint Factory 1848 to 1928

Paint factory engraving

Dam and remnant foundation, prior to remediation

On-Site Paint Pigment Manufacturing

Numerous other colors and shades were discovered at the former paint factory

Yellow Building

Lead Melting

Manufacturing Building

Storage Building

Residential Buildings

1920 Sanborn map

Marseilles Green

Color Common

Name Chemical Formula

YellowChrome Yellow

(Lead Chromate)

PbCrO4

Red Red Lead(Minium)

Pb3O4

BluePrussian

Blue(Ferric

Ferrocyanide)

Fe4[Fe(CN)6]3

Red Bldg

Paint Factory Demolition (photo circa 1935)

LAKE WABAN

CAMPUS

FORMER PAINT FACTORY

Pre-construction Site Conditions (2001)

Nature and Extent of Contamination

Characterization Elements

■ Multiple sources of contamination

■ Primary contaminants of concern:● Heavy metals and cyanide in soil

● Hexavalent chromium in groundwater

■ Innovative approaches to:● Develop alternative exploration and

analytical techniques

● Differentiate leachability potentials

● Develop conceptual site model

Impacted Areas (22± acres)(Excluding Remainder of Lake Waban)

Pigment-Impacted Soil

Innovative Approaches

■ Negotiation and use of Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP)

■ Application of Scanning Electron Microscope coupled with Energy Dispersive X-Ray (SEM/EDX) to differentiate chromium compounds

● Leachable (calcium/potassium chromate)

● Non-Leachable (lead chromate)

■ Calcium chromate is ~3 million times more soluble than lead chromate

Scanning electron microscope

Magnified image of soil particles

Typical calcium chromate EDX

Calcium

Chromium

Typical lead chromate EDX

Chromium

Lead

Lead

Innovative Approaches (Cont.)

■ Detailed groundwater profiling program to define the location and limits of source material

■ Bench-scale treatability studies to evaluate chemical reduction of CrVI

● Calcium polysulfide

● Ferrous sulfate

● others

Groundwater profiling to define plume and sources

Remediation Activities

Primary Contaminants of Concern and Remediation Goals

Cyanide

Chromium, Total

Chromium, Hexavalent

Lead

1,300200

110,0008,635

31,700200

220,000400

Max Soil/Sed. Conc. (mg/kg)

Soil Remedial Goal (mg/kg)

Treatment Goal:

Chromium, Hexavalent 200 mg/kg

1.0 mg/l SPLP

Remedial Solution

Surface water diversion (10 sq. mile watershed)

Cofferdam installationConsolidation area construction

Remove contaminated sediment from Paintshop Pond in the dry

Excavate and consolidate 200,000 cy of contaminated soils

Remediation of additional impact areas discovered

Dredge 6,500 cy from Lake Waban Treat 30,000 cy of leachable CrVI contaminated soils (15% of total volume)

Five-Acre engineered barrier (cap) over contaminated soils

Remediation and Construction Costs

Cost Summary

Generalized Scope Est. Cost (Millions)

Pre-construction Services 3.6

Remediation

1. Treatment (30,000 cy) ~ $75/cy2. Earthmoving (450,000 cy), Dam, Wetlands3. Engineered Barrier Cap (5 ac.) ~ $132K/ac.

Subtotal:

2.212.50.7

15.4

Construction Administration 4.4

Athletic Fields 7.3

Total: 30.7

Excludes Legal, Remedial Investigation, Risk Assessment, and Wellesley College Internal Management Costs.

Completed Athletic Complex

… an Extreme Makeover

Completed Project (October 2002)

CAP

WETLAND REPLACEMENT

DAM RESTORATION

TREATMENT AREA

Views of Lake Waban

Before remediation

After remediation

Project Benefits■ Reclaimed 30 acres of the campus that was

restricted from use due to exposure to contaminants

■ Developed athletic fields, open space, and wetland habitat for use by the College and surrounding community

■ Irrigation of fields from on-site surface water source

■ Restoration of historic mill dam

■ Created 7.35 acres of wetland replacement including a boardwalk within the area being utilized today as a learning environment by the College

Restored wetland habitat, October 2003

Restored mill dam structure

Lessons Learned and Conclusions

… there were many

Lessons Learned and Conclusions

■ On-site remedy combined with suitable land use and control resulted in cost effective solution

■ Successful dust control

■ Treatment rates impacted more by physical than chemical constraints

■ Contingency planning for discovery of additional contaminated material necessary

Lessons Learned and Conclusions(Cont.)

■ Combination of SEM-EDX, SPLP, and CrVI analyses were useful tools for conceptual site model development and delineating leachable CrVI

■ Field XRF and other on-site mobile lab analyses useful in guiding remediation

■ Groundwater has dramatically improved

■ Beware of the snapping turtles!

Questions