CEAA PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Rev. 1)
5 WING GOOSE BAY REMEDIATION PROJECT
Project Leaders: DIRECTOR GENERAL ENVIRONMENT / ASSISTANT CHIEF of AIR STAFF
Project Management Service Provider: DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT
December 2008
CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Layout of the Project Description...... 1 1.3 Background and Site Overview ...... 1 1.4 Goose Bay Remediation Project ...... 3 1.4.1 Locations and Contaminants of Concern...... 3 1.5 Project Schedule ...... 4 1.6 Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator...... 4
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION ...... 6 2.1 Climate...... 6 2.2 Topography and Drainage...... 6 2.3 Geology...... 7 2.4 Hydrogeology ...... 7 2.5 Land Use...... 7 2.6 Receptors ...... 8 2.7 Wildlife and Species at Risk...... 8 2.7.1 Habitat Descriptions ...... 8 2.7.2 Species-at-Risk ...... 10 2.8 Aboriginal Peoples...... 10 2.8.1 Innu...... 10 2.8.2 Inuit...... 10 2.8.3 Métis ...... 11 2.9 Regulatory Environment...... 11 2.9.1 Government of Canada ...... 11 2.9.2 Government of Newfoundland and Labrador ...... 12
3.0 PROJECT ACTIVITIES ...... 13 3.1 Pre-Remediation Activities...... 13 3.1.1 Environmental Management Plan...... 13 3.1.2 Health and Safety Plan...... 13 3.1.3 Site Infrastructure ...... 14 3.2 Remediation Activities...... 14 3.2.1 Product Recovery...... 15 3.2.2 Remediation Technologies ...... 15 3.2.3 Soil and Sediment Remediation Technologies ...... 16 3.2.4 Groundwater and Surface Water Remediation Technologies...... 18 3.3 Post Remediation Activities...... 20 3.3.1 Equipment Removal and Decontamination ...... 20 3.3.2 Removal of Site Facilities...... 20 3.3.3 Hazardous Materials / Wastes...... 21 3.3.4 Long-term Monitoring and Maintenance...... 21 3.4 Off-Site Resource Requirements ...... 21 3.4.1 Resources/Materials...... 21 3.4.2 Waste Disposal ...... 22
4.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION ...... 23
December 2008 Page i CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 Summary of Habitat Types at 5 Wing Goose Bay...... 8 TABLE 2 Potential Species at Risk at 5 Wing Goose Bay...... 10 TABLE 3 Potential Remediation Technologies ...... 16
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1.1 Location Plan FIGURE 1.2 Generalized Locations of Contaminants
December 2008 Page ii CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to provide a Project Description for the proposed remediation of contaminated sites at 5 Wing Goose Bay.
1.1 Purpose of the Project Description
A Project Description serves two important functions in the federal environmental assessment process: 1) the Project Description will form part of the process to determine the need for an environmental assessment; and 2) it will help facilitate the promotion of efficient coordination of the Environmental Assessment.
In addition, the Project Description may also sometimes be utilized as an internal and external communications tool to identify responsible authorities within the federal government and to communicate information to the general public.
This document provides a detailed description of the proposed activities to facilitate the review requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, as well as the review by other regulating authorities. The Project Description will also be included as part of any required Environmental Screening report.
1.2 Layout of the Project Description
This report presents the Project Description of the remediation of contaminated sites at 5 Wing Goose Bay. The report includes the following major elements; • Section 1 – Introduction - Background information on 5 Wing Goose Bay including an overview of site conditions. • Section 2.0 – Environmental Description – A description of the biophysical and regulatory environments surrounding 5 Win Goose Bay. • Section 3.0 – Project Activities – An overview of the remediation technologies that will be assessed for implementation at 5 Wing Goose Bay.
1.3 Background and Site Overview
The United States Air Force (USAF) constructed the military base at Goose Bay in the 1940s. From 1976 to 1987 Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) and Transport Canada (TC) operated the Base on behalf of its tenants, the Canadian Forces (CF), USAF, and Allied Participants. In 1987, Goose Bay became a Canadian Forces Base (CFB) 5 Wing Goose Bay that continues to support Allied low level flight training.
CFB 5 Wing Goose Bay is located in central Labrador at the southwestern limit of Hamilton Inlet (see Figure 1.1), approximately 200 kilometres inland from the Labrador coast, on a flat-lying terrace plateau at an average elevation of 40 metres above sea level (masl). The Goose River is situated to the north of the site, and the Churchill River is situated to the south. Terrington Basin (an extension of Hamilton Inlet) borders a portion of the Base to the north-northeast.
Due to the remote location of the Base and the fact that environmental standards were different than those considered acceptable today, most of the waste materials generated were disposed of on the property until about the 1990’s. This was commonplace and considered acceptable at the time. It is these waste disposal activities and miscellaneous releases of a variety of contaminants (e.g. petroleum hydrocarbons),
December 2008 Page 1
CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project combined with normal Base operations over the last 60+ years, that are now manifested in the environmental contamination that is documented on the Base.
Many of these issues are currently being addressed by the Department of National Defence (DND) through investigation, mitigation, and risk management activities.
The current land use at 5 Wing Goose Bay is predominantly military use (i.e. commercial/industrial) with some residential (e.g. PMQs). Forest, lakes, streams, and wetlands surround the Base – these areas are categorized as recreational, as access is unrestricted and can be used for recreational purposes. No designated wetlands are located in the area. Farms are located south of the Base, between the Trans Labrador highway and the Churchill River. A golf course is located immediately southeast, adjacent to the Base. The Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, originally located 8 kilometres (5 miles) from the Base, has expanded to where it now is located adjacent to the Base boundary. In fact, Town property surrounds the Base on all sides.
1.4 Goose Bay Remediation Project
The historical activities associated with operating the Base during the 60+ year period have resulted in numerous contaminated sites. While contamination at several of the sites is well documented (e.g. type, location and volume of affected media), environmental concerns at most of the sites are unknown, as evidenced by the investigation status of various sites (e.g. range from the initial testing phase to full-scale remediation). The Goose Bay Remediation Project (GBRP) will address these issues through the following key objectives: 1. Use the results of the past and future investigations to develop and implement a comprehensive remedial action plan for the entire site; 2. Oversee ongoing remedial work at the Upper Tank Farm (UTF) concurrent to the investigation phase and implement remedial activities where possible; and 3. Undertake “Due Diligence” remedial or risk management work where necessary.
1.4.1 Locations and Contaminants of Concern
The history of contamination at 5 Wing Goose Bay is well known and has a high profile with the public, media, and regulatory agencies. The majority of contamination at the Base can be attributed to several sources. Major hydrocarbon plumes can be attributed to leaking underground and aboveground tanks, leaking or ruptured pipelines, and historical general management and containment practices. Heavy metals and other chemical contamination (e.g. polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)) are due to historical waste disposal practices and the existence of numerous dumpsites.
Many of the resulting contaminated sites are being investigated and mitigated or managed by DND. Of particular relevance are the five following areas that are identified as the main legacy contaminated sites: 1) The South Escarpment (SES) waste disposal sites – a series of dump sites near the southern Base boundary containing a variety of wastes. Contaminants include fuels, VOCs, PAHs, PCBs, pesticides, and heavy metals. 2) The Upper Tank Farm (UTF) – the main tank farm on the upper part of the Base. Contaminants include primarily fuels. 3) The Survival Tank Farm (STF) – one of two tank farms located off the escarpment, to the northeast of the Main Base. The STF tanks and pipelines have been removed. Contaminants include primarily fuels and PAHs.
December 2008 Page 3 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
4) The Ex-hydrant Area – a series of four fuel hydrants and infrastructure (Heavy Bomber Hydrant, Medium Bomber Hydrant, Fighter Hydrant, and Transport Hydrant) formerly used for refuelling airplanes. Contaminants include primarily fuels and PAHs). 5) The Lower/Main Tank Farm (LTF) – the second and largest of two tank farms located off the escarpment, north of the Main Base. Some of the tanks and infrastructure remain in service. Contaminants include primarily fuels, PAHs and heavy metals.
Numerous other areas such as the North Escarpment, the Former Canadian Side, the Civil Aviation Area, Alexander Lake, Dome Mountain (radar base), Private Military Quarters (PMQs), various waste disposal sites, Fire Fighter Training Areas (FFTAs), and some adjacent provincially regulated lands (e.g., Main Gate and Hamilton River Road) also have associated environmental issues. Contaminants at these sites may or may not include: petroleum hydrocarbons, PAHs, PCBs, VOCs, heavy metals, pesticides, and several other compounds. Contamination exists in soil, sediment, surface water, groundwater, and biota, both on the plateau (i.e. on the main Base) and in the surrounding environment at the toe of the escarpment and remote locations.
The generalized location of the various contaminated sites is shown in Figure 1.2.
1.5 Project Schedule
The proposed project schedule is shown below. It is anticipated that remediation will be complete in approximately 2020.
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Project Commencement Site Assessments Remedial Options Analysis Interim Cleanup Environmental Assessment Site Engineering / Design Full Scale Cleanup Cleanup Completion
1.6 Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator
All correspondence regarding the Project Description can be forwarded to:
Wing Environment Officer 5 Wing Goose Bay Building 512, CFB Goose Bay Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador A0P 1S0 Fax: 709-896-6974
December 2008 Page 4
CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
The information in this section of the report is general, for the most part, in that it discusses the 5 Wing Goose Bay area and not specific contaminated sites. This information is important in that it provides an overview of the biophysical environment in which the Base is situated. These features will have a direct effect on the assessment and remediation of the contaminated sites.
2.1 Climate
The climate of Labrador is more Arctic than Atlantic. Due to the fact that Labrador is located on the eastern side of the continent, it experiences strong seasonal contrasts in the characteristics and movement of air masses. Climate normals available from Environment Canada for the period of 1971 to 2000 provide the following information: • Temperature: Average daily temperatures in Goose Bay range from -18.1C (January) to 15.5C (July). The average daily temperatures remain below freezing from November to April. The extreme maximum and minimum temperatures experienced in Goose Bay are 37.8C and -39.4C, respectively. • Precipitation: On average, a total of 949 mm of precipitation falls in Goose Bay, consisting of 560 mm of rain and 459 mm of snow. Rainfall is greatest from June to September, accounting for almost 400 mm of the total. Snowfall is greatest in December and January. Typically, snow covers the ground from November to May.
2.2 Topography and Drainage
The ground surface rises to the west across the Base. Bedrock outcrops are encountered to the west of the Base. The Goose River flows from west to east to the north of the Base, while the Churchill River flows from west to east to the south of the Base. Terrington Basin and the peninsula, on which the Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay is located, lie to the east of the Base.
The Base and subject Site lie on a raised terrace (upper plateau) that slopes gradually down towards escarpments to the south and north, which drop by as much as 35 m. The low-lying lands to the south are occupied by a number of lineal surface water bodies (called Stillwaters) and those to the north by a tank farm (Lower Tank Farm [LTF]) and the former Survival Tank Farm [STF]).
Over most of the Base area, surficial sands promote rapid infiltration of rainwater, recharging local groundwater. Highly permeable sands in the upper plateau area promote rapid infiltration of rainwater which discharges as groundwater to the low-lying areas to the east and south of the escarpment. Runoff from paved areas is channelled to storm drains and roadside ditches. Land cover at the present time consists of both open and forested areas, wetlands and several large dyked areas around active tanks. In the areas below the terrace (LTF, STF and Stillwater areas), more surface water bodies exist. These include the Stillwaters running parallel to the Churchill River, streams, wetlands (swamps and marshes) and the Churchill and Goose Rivers.
It is anticipated that several hydrologic divides exist across the Base. These separate the three main watersheds (Churchill River, Goose River and Terrington Basin/Lake Melville). Surface and groundwater flow from the north-northwest portion of the Base would be toward the Goose River, from the northeast toward Terrington Basin and from the south to the Churchill River.
Groundwater discharge provides flow to small streams and bogs located at the toe of the escarpment. Drainage from the toe of the South Escarpment is west along Spring Gulch Brook to the Churchill River. Drainage from the North Escarpment is, generally, northeast towards Terrington Basin. Numerous wet
December 2008 Page 6 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project areas and surface water channels (including roadside ditches and intermittent watercourses) are present in the Lower Tank Farm and Survival Tank Farm areas.
2.3 Geology
Drilling programs conducted on the Base and surrounding area have not encountered bedrock. Bedrock is estimated to be present at an elevation of greater than 40 metres below sea level. The inferred bedrock lithology is similar to the metamorphosed granites, monzonites, and monzodiorites of the Dome Mountains that rim the western end of Terrington Basin. The inferred character of the bedrock is dark, medium-to-coarse grained massive, competent, and resistant to erosion.
Based on available information, the surficial materials overlying the bedrock consist of glacio-fluvial, interbedded, stratified sands and silts. Most investigations conducted at the Base characterize the material as fine-to-medium grained sand with discontinuous silt layers. Low permeability silts and sandy silts are encountered towards the shoreline of Terrington Basin and in the northwest corner of the Base. Some clay in small quantities is reported near Otter Creek, north of the main Base. Peat bogs are found in the low-lying areas surrounding the Base.
2.4 Hydrogeology
Individual contaminated sites at 5 Wing Goose Bay have variable conditions, such as artesian conditions at the North Escarpment and complex hydrogeological conditions at the South Escarpment. The information below is a generalized description of the hydrogeology at 5 Wing Goose Bay.
The aquifer at Goose Bay is defined as an unconfined, unconsolidated fine-grained sand aquifer, with only minor horizontal anisotropy. Hydraulic conductivities (K) vary somewhat throughout the area. Based on available information, K values in the range of 10-2 centimetres per second (cm/s) are common on the upper plateau. The effective porosity of the sands is in the order of 25 to 30%.
The depth to the water table is controlled by topography. The depth to the water table ranges from about 28 metres below ground surface (mbgs) at the edge of the plateau near the South Escarpment to near ground surface in the low lying areas near Terrington Basin and Spring Gulch. Perched water table conditions have been encountered at a depth of about 12 mbgs at some areas on the upper plateau.
There is minimal infiltration of precipitation during the winter months due to the frozen ground conditions. Horizontal groundwater flow through the permeable sands to Terrington Basin and the Churchill River results in the lowest groundwater levels occurring during March or early-April. Rapid groundwater recovery occurs during the spring thaw and continues into the fall. The highest groundwater elevations occur in November. The groundwater flow velocity is in the order of 0.1 to 1.5 metres per day (m/day), depending on location.
2.5 Land Use
Prior to development of the Base, the area was forested and undeveloped. The community of Goose Bay began when the military Base was built in the early 1940s. A 30 square kilometre plateau of sand called Uncle Bob's Berry Patch was chosen as the site for the air Base. The permanent settlement of Happy Valley began during construction when workers moved to the area for construction-related employment. During the establishment of the Base all workers were required to build their houses at least 8 km from the Base. The majority of workers settled on the bank of the Hamilton River. The population of the community has grown over time to its present size of approximately 9,000 inhabitants.
December 2008 Page 7 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
The current land use at 5 Wing Goose Bay is predominantly military use (i.e., commercial/ industrial) with some residential (i.e., PMQs, Spruce Park). Forest, lakes, streams, and wetlands surround the Base – these areas are categorized as recreational, as access is unrestricted and can be used for recreational purposes. No designated wetlands are located in the area. Farms are located south of the Base, between the Trans Labrador highway and the Churchill River. A golf course is located immediately southeast, adjacent to the Base. The Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, originally located 8 kilometres (5 miles) from the Base, has expanded to where it now is located adjacent to the Base boundary. In fact, Town property surrounds the Base on all sides.
2.6 Receptors
Contamination has been identified at 5 Wing Goose Bay in soil, sediment, surface water, groundwater, and biota. Although the main part of the Base is fenced, relatively unobstructed access by the general public is permitted to many parts of the Base. Receptors at 5 Wing Goose Bay include the following: • Human – Adult workers (on site) and local residents (in unrestricted areas) – examples include Base personnel and snowmobilers/hikers in areas surrounding the Base; • Human – Child (in unrestricted areas) – examples include snowmobilers/hikers in areas surrounding the Base; • Aquatic organisms – in surface water bodies in close proximity to contaminated sites – examples include fish, invertebrates, and waterfowl in areas surrounding the Base; and • Terrestrial organisms – in close proximity to contaminated sites – examples include bear, moose, and muskrat in areas surrounding the Base.
The Stillwaters, the RCAF sites, the Happy Valley sites, and the Survival Tank Farm are particularly noteworthy as having a variety of receptors because of their proximity to contaminated sites and their relatively unobstructed access to the public.
2.7 Wildlife and Species at Risk
The habitat at 5 Wing Goose Bay is located within the High Boreal Forest - Lake Melville Ecoregion, which includes the Churchill River Valley and the coastal plain surrounding Lake Melville. The River terraces are composed of coarse-textured, alluvial soils, while the uplands have shallow, well-drained soils, making this area’s forests highly productive. With cool summers and cold winters, this region has the most favourable climate in Labrador, with a growing season of between 120 and 140 days.
2.7.1 Habitat Descriptions
There are 12 different habitat types identified at 5 Wing Goose Bay. Table 1 provides a summary of the each habitat including the main characteristics, location and percent coverage in comparison with the Base area.
TABLE 1 Summary of Habitat Types at 5 Wing Goose Bay Amount and Area of Base Land Habitat # Habitat Type Main Characteristics Occupied Non-Wetland Habitats 1 Black Spruce-Lichen 21% • open canopy distributed over a rich carpet of mosses; Forest Found in large areas to the west of the • representative of undisturbed areas; main runway and surrounding Spring • limited number of other plant species; Gulch area. • associated with higher elevations where growing conditions are influenced by the dry sandy soils.
December 2008 Page 8 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
TABLE 1 Summary of Habitat Types at 5 Wing Goose Bay Amount and Area of Base Land Habitat # Habitat Type Main Characteristics Occupied 2 Black Spruce Forest 26% • canopy may be either open or closed influencing Found along the top of the Southern understorey composition. Escarpment and scattered remnants throughout more developed areas of the Base. 3 Mixed Forest 4% • dominant tree species include black spruce, white birch, Found along the South Escarpment trembling aspen and balsam poplar; and in certain areas on the Base, • high, closed canopy structure; including the golf course and Lower • large amount of leaf litter on the forest floor; Tank Farm. • well draining; • rich composition of understorey species. 4 Mixed Forest – 2% • distinguishable riparian zone; Riparian Zone Apparent in and around the Still • unique nutrient levels, moisture regimes and landscape Waters area and in areas at the toe of terrain allow for plant communities to be established that the South Escarpment, and Lower are different enough from those of the bog-fen complexes Tank Farm. to be given their own sub-habitat delineation. 5 Grassland 13% • grasses are the predominant plant species Includes lawn areas, roadside areas and those areas in and around the airfield runways. 6 Disturbed Area – 7% • no plant community present Sand Found throughout the Base where land • dry conditions was used for training facilities, road infrastructure, construction yards, and in those areas where sand deposits are being extracted. 7 Disturbed Area – 3% • diverse; Recolonized Numerous places including the top of • plant community includes mixed deciduous trees and Dome Mountain. shrubs; understories are usually thick herbaceous in nature and rich in species diversity. 8 Disturbed Area – 11% • most likely at one time either Black Spruce Forest Recolonized - Found in the western portion of the (bottom of the South Escarpment) or Black Spruce- Burnover Base around the EOD Range. Lichen Forest; • burnt stumps and fallen trees in slow stages of decomposition; • no tree canopy; • in some instances, hardwoods, grasses and fireweed have become established, while in other situations, lichens and mosses completely consume the decomposing remains. Wetland Habitats 9 Bog-Fen 5% • generally comprised of string fen, horizontal fen, mound Throughout the Base. bog and blanket bog; • acidic water; • supports a limited range of vegetation species, typically black spruce, shrubs and other ericaceous species dominated by acid tolerant non-vascular plants and some woody vascular plants. 10 String Fens 3% • readily identifiable due to the presence of the fen water Dominant type of wetland habitat on track s (depressions that have become zones of preferred the Base. flow); • characterized by a series of alternating low ridges oriented perpendicular to flow; • locally high water table. 11 Shallow Open Water <1% • typically quite shallow Prominent in many of the ribbed fen • characterized by sedges, buck bean and marsh cinquefoil complexes. as the protruding emergent vegetation. 12 Estuarine Marsh <1% • shoreline sedges in coastal habitat; Only one along the shores of • confined to intertidal and supra-tidal zones of estuaries; Terrington Bay. • brackish to fresh water; • water levels are influenced by tidal but less pronounced than in tidal marshes.
The predominant habitats are the Black Spruce Forest and the Black Spruce-Lichen Forest. Much of the Base lands have been disturbed at some point in time from Base-related activities, resulting in a mosaic of habitats ranging from sand dunes to riparian corridors. The wetlands, which occupy much of the Base
December 2008 Page 9 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project lands below the plateau, are vast expanses of bog-fen complexes with no clear delineation between string fens and island bogs. These wetlands are typical to that found in the Happy Valley-Goose Bay area and contribute significantly to the overall ecological make-up of the Base.
2.7.2 Species-at-Risk
There are several species-at-risk (SAR) that could be found present on Base at 5 Wing. The potential for avian species was based on habitat requirements and/or migration patterns, and although there is some question as to the likelihood of encountering any of mammalian species, there is a possibility due to the existence of appropriate habitat, and/or are known to access areas within range of the study area. All species and their current status, as identified by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), are listed in Table 2.
TABLE 2 Potential Species at Risk at 5 Wing Goose Bay Species COSEWIC Status Listing Birds Eskimo Curlew (Numerius borealis) Endangered Barrows Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica) Special Concern Short Eared Owl (Asio flammeus) Special Concern Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Threatened. Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) Special Concern Mammals Wolverine (Gulo gulo) Endangered Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Special Concern Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) Threatened
2.8 Aboriginal Peoples
Labrador is home to three groups of people of Aboriginal ancestry: the Innu, the Inuit, and the Métis.
2.8.1 Innu
The Innu are descended from Algonkian-speaking hunter-gatherers who inhabited Labrador at the time of European arrival. There are two Innu First Nations in Labrador, the Mushuau Innu First Nation located in Natuashish and the Sheshatshiu Innu First Nation located in Sheshatshiu.
2.8.1.1 Innu Nation Comprehensive Land Claim
The Innu Nation is the political association of the Labrador Innu and is authorized to negotiate a treaty on behalf of its members. In 1977, the Innu submitted a land claim to the federal government. The claim was conditionally accepted for negotiation in 1978, subject to the completion of a land use and occupancy study and the participation of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador in the negotiation process. The Innu submitted a land use and occupancy study in October 1990. The federal and provincial governments and the Innu Nation began negotiation toward a Framework Agreement in July 1991. In 1995 negotiators initialed a Framework Agreement. In 1996 the Framework Agreement was ratified by the Innu Nation and the federal and provincial governments. Self-government and land claims negotiations continue as of this date.
2.8.2 Inuit
The Labrador Inuit live in the northern reaches of the Labrador peninsula. The present day Labrador Inuit are descendants of the prehistoric Thule, hunters who were drawn to Labrador by its abundance of whales and other wildlife.
December 2008 Page 10 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
2.8.2.1 Labrador Inuit Land Claim
A Labrador Inuit Land Claim was filed in 1977. On May 26, 2004 the Labrador Inuit voted in support of the Final Agreement, paving the way for ratification by the federal and provincial governments. The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement and the Labrador Inuit Constitution came into effect on December 1, 2005 at the first Assembly of the Nunatsiavut Transitional Government.
2.8.3 Métis
The Labrador Métis are of mixed Inuit and European ancestry whose Inuit ancestors resided in south and central Labrador prior to European contact.
2.8.3.1 Labrador Métis Nation Comprehensive Land Claim
The Labrador Métis Nation (LMN), a not-for-profit corporation, was formed in the early 1980s. In 1991, the LMN filed a Comprehensive Land Claim with the federal government. The LMN submitted supplementary documentation in 1996 and research has continued since that time.
2.9 Regulatory Environment
The remediation of contaminated soils, sediments, groundwater and surface water will occur on federally owned land at 5 Wing Goose Bay. In some instances, contamination has crossed the DND boundary onto provincial and private lands, and it is possible that more off-site contamination will be identified as the GBRP proceeds. Remediation criteria will be set in accordance with federal and provincial regulatory authorities.
Federal government departments or agencies often consult with provincial governments to determine relevant environmental approvals that could have a bearing on the proposed activities, especially when the activities on federal lands could result in potential off-site impacts. An example of such an activity would be the discharge of contaminant-laden water from federal lands to a provincially regulated watercourse.
The information below summarizes the environmental regulatory approval requirements for both the Government of Canada and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for remediation activities that would occur at 5 Wing Goose Bay. It is noted that this information is preliminary in nature and more detailed consultation with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and federal government departments such as Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Environment Canada will be required to determine the complete list of permits and/or approvals that will be necessary.
2.9.1 Government of Canada
Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, a CEAA assessment is required for any federal authority undertaking on federal lands, any federally funded undertaking or where federal authorization is required (e.g. Fisheries Act HADD Authorization). The assessment will likely have to address wetlands, migratory birds, species-at-risk, heritage resources, wildlife habitat, transportation of dangerous goods, and a variety of other issues. Consultation with federal regulatory agencies will be required to determine the scope of any required assessment.
Under Section 35 of the Fisheries Act, no person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat. The Minister may authorize HADD with an acceptable plan that adequately addresses DFO’s No Net Loss Policy. HADD determination by the DFO would require that all fish and fish habitat be quantified and all potential effects on fish and fish
December 2008 Page 11 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project habitat be evaluated as part of any Environmental Assessment (EA). If a HADD is determined, a Compensation Plan will be required to address the HADD.
2.9.2 Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
Discussions with the provincial Government Services Centre (GSC) indicate that there are no permits required relating to the remediation of contaminated sites per se, however, the discovery of fuel contamination should be reported to the GSC and subsequent remediation must follow procedures as set out in the Contaminated Sites Cleanup Criteria. Disposal of contaminated groundwater must comply with the Environmental Control Water and Sewer Regulations and contaminated soil must be disposed of at an approved soil treatment facility.
The provincial Environmental Protection Act requires that the undertaking of remediating contaminated soil and water be registered under the Act and that an Environmental Assessment may be required. Undertakings within the province cannot proceed unless it has been exempted under this Act. The Minister must advise the proponent of their decision not more than 45 days after the registration of the undertaking. If an assessment is required, the timeline can become considerable (e.g. up to 12 months to complete the assessment and get approval). Exemptions to the Act are outlined in Part III of the Environmental Assessment Regulations (Designated Undertakings and Exemptions). While certain decommissioning undertakings may be exempt (including the rehabilitation of a site, exemption is the Minister’s determination.
As required under Section 48 of the Water Resources Act, approval must be granted via permitting for any activity, construction, alteration or development to any body of water (including wetland), or if the activity comes within 15 m of a body of water. Other provincial permits that may apply, depending on the activities required for remediation: 1. Approval for Fording a Watercourse; 2. Environmental Permit for Stream Modifications or Diversions; 3. Permit for Constructing a Non-Domestic Well; and 4. Water Use License.
December 2008 Page 12 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
3.0 PROJECT ACTIVITIES
The Project Description refers to the all-inclusive scope of work and services that might reasonably be included in the GBRP. It addresses the planning and implementation of investigations, remediation, and long-term monitoring. The responsibility for post remediation monitoring is not part of the GBRP.
3.1 Pre-Remediation Activities
The following information describes activities that will be completed prior to remediation activities at 5 Wing Goose Bay.
3.1.1 Environmental Management Plan
An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for remediation will be developed that will outline the remediation activities to be undertaken at 5 Wing Goose Bay and the appropriate mitigation measures for the technology being applied in specific locations. Mitigative measures identified during the EA process will also be incorporated into the EMP.
3.1.2 Health and Safety Plan
A Master Health and Safety Plan has been developed for the Project that covers all phases and elements of the Project. The Master Health and Safety Plan (HASP) will ensure adequate precautions are taken for the protection of workers and the general public. The Plan will be maintained over the life of the proposed remediation activities at 5 Wing Goose Bay as new information becomes available for improved worker protection. The objectives of the plan will be to: • Define activities which are likely to represent risks to worker safety and health, requiring planning, design, inspection or supervision by an engineer, competent person (as defined by regulations) or other professional; • Provide guidelines for completing a project health and safety analysis at initiation and at critical stages of a remediation activity; • Establish a decision-making process to identify worker and public protection measures; • Establish supervisor and employee training requirements according to the project plan including recognition, reporting and avoidance of hazards, and knowledge of applicable Standards and the project-specific HASP; • Provide general guidelines for controlling the most commonly identified hazardous operations, such as: trenches, confined spaces, hot work, explosives, hazardous materials, leading edges, etc.; • Establish processes to ensure that hazards are identified and corrected with preventive measures that are implemented in a timely manner; • Provide a process for reporting near-misses and accidents; • Identify documentation requirements for training, permits, hazard reports, inspections, uncorrected hazards, incidents and near misses; • Establish the need for project-specific emergency response plans; • Define the requirement for a designated competent person responsible for and capable of implementing the program/plan; • Establish a communications plan to provide preventative and emergency information to the general public;
December 2008 Page 13 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
• Establish a decision-making process to identify public protection measures; and • Provide public information regarding measures taken to prevent hazards, requirements according to the project plan, reporting and avoidance of hazards, and knowledge of applicable Standards and the project-specific HASP.
Each contractor and consultant retained for the project will be required to submit for review, a project- specific HASP for its workforce, and will be responsible for its implementation. The HASP will meet the requirements of the Master HASP. Audits will be completed to ensure compliance with the project- specific HASP.
The Master HASP will identify adequate precautions to be taken for the protection of the general public. It will include a monitoring program and communication plan for providing information to the general public. The Plan will be modified over the life of the project as new information becomes available.
3.1.3 Site Infrastructure
Prior to commencing remediation activities, any required infrastructure will be designed and constructed at 5 Wing Goose Bay. If required, these facilities may include: • Storage areas on and off the sites for equipment and supplies; • Security facilities and/or procedures to control and log the entry and exit of personnel and vehicles to the contaminated sites; • Clean areas outside of the contaminated areas. Personnel will have access to safe, clean facilities for meals and hygiene; • Decontamination facilities for personnel to leave the contaminated areas. Sufficient storage will be provided for retaining soiled personal protective equipment such as coveralls and gloves prior to disposal. Disposal will be accomplished at an approved facility; • Onsite utilities such as water and electricity may be required at some locations. Selected contractor(s) will address the service requirements of specific treatment technologies or construction activities; • Equipment decontamination pads for cleaning equipment prior to leaving the site; and • Water treatment facilities, as required, to handle contaminated water pumped from various contaminated sites throughout 5 Wing Goose Bay during remediation activities. Treatment will be required to ensure that liquid effluent discharges are in compliance all agreed performance standards.
3.2 Remediation Activities
The purpose of the GBRP is to remediate or risk manage the contamination at 5 Wing Goose Bay to the extent that it does not pose an immediate or ongoing risk to human health or the environment. The end point of the GBRP is not to restore a pristine environment at the Base.
Numerous remediation activities will be conducted. Some of these will be very large in their scope; others will be relatively small. Common to each of these remediation activities is that there will likely be residual contamination left in the environment that is too expensive or time consuming to remove. In these cases, the sites will be managed by DND to promote long-term remediation and/or to ensure that risks are controlled and do not adversely affect human health or the environment.
December 2008 Page 14 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
The primary contaminant sources/ groups found at 5 Wing Goose Bay include: • Petroleum hydrocarbons (BTEX/TPH); • Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs); • Inorganics (metals); • Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); and • Non-hazardous and hazardous wastes in waste disposal sites.
In general, remediation technologies for implementation at Goose Bay will be selected on the basis of the following performance criteria: • Destruction or alteration of contaminants (e.g. thermal, biological or chemical treatment); • Mass transfer (e.g. physical extraction or separation) of contaminants from environmental media (e.g. soil vapour extraction); and • Immobilization of contaminants (e.g. containment, solidification).
Additional factors that will be considered include contaminant type, contaminant phase (i.e. free phase, adsorbed, dissolved, solid, etc), contaminant volumes, contaminated media (soil/sediment {sand, silt and/ or clay} and groundwater/surface water), source of contamination, proximity to sensitive receptors and infrastructure, site-specific soil characteristics (e.g. organic content, grain size, permeability, soil porosity, etc.), depth to groundwater, and timeline and budgetary constraints.
3.2.1 Product Recovery
Prior to remediation of soil and groundwater, it is imperative that the presence of free-product be addressed. Free-product cannot be biologically degraded as it is toxic to most naturally occurring petroleum degrading bacteria, and any chemical treatment would result in increased mobility of contaminants (e.g. increase in solubility potential of hydrocarbons) and significantly increased contamination of soil and groundwater. Free-product must be recovered by passive or active means using a combination of engineered equipment and/or gravity driven directional flow. Free-product recovery may be accomplished using the following technologies, or other technologies that may be developed in the future: • Vapour Extraction • Multi-Phase Vapour Extraction (Bioslurping) • Dual Phase Extraction (depress aquifer and actively pump product) • Barrier Walls/Interceptor Trench (create preferred flow and collection system for product) • Pump and dispose of free-product from wells or open excavations
3.2.2 Remediation Technologies
After free product removal is complete, additional remediation will be required to manage residual contamination of soil, sediment, groundwater, and/or surface water, depending on the specific site characteristics. Table 3 summarizes the technologies that are being considered for implementation at Goose Bay to remediate contamination. Other technologies might be developed in the future will also be considered.
December 2008 Page 15 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
TABLE 3 Potential Remediation Technologies Treatment Category Soil and Sediment Groundwater and Surface Water In-Situ Biological Treatment Bioventing Enhanced Biodegradation Enhanced Bioremediation Natural Attenuation In-Situ Physical/Chemical Treatment Soil Flushing Air Sparging Soil Vapour Extraction (SVE) Bioslurping Solidification /Stabilization Dual Phase Extraction Passive / Reactive Treatment Walls In-Situ Thermal Treatment Thermal Treatment with SVE --- Ex-Situ Biological Treatment Biopiles Bioreactors Composting Constructed Wetlands Landfarming Slurry Phase Biological Treatment Ex-Situ Physical/Chemical Treatment Chemical Extraction Advanced Oxidation Processes Chemical Reduction / Oxidation Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) / Liquid Phase Solidification / Stabilization Carbon Adsorption Ion Exchange Precipitation/ Coagulation / Flocculation Ex-Situ Thermal Treatment Thermal Desorption --- Containment Landfill Cap Physical Barriers Off-Site Disposal. Off Site Disposal Off Site Treatment On-Site Disposal Engineered Landfill ---
3.2.3 Soil and Sediment Remediation Technologies
In-Situ Biological Treatment
Bioventing - Bioventing stimulates the natural in situ biodegradation of any aerobically degradable compounds in soil by providing oxygen to existing soil microorganisms. Bioventing uses low air flow rates to provide only enough oxygen to sustain microbial activity. Oxygen is most commonly supplied through direct air injection into residual contamination in soil. In addition to degradation of adsorbed fuel residuals, volatile compounds are biodegraded as vapours move slowly through biologically active soil.
Enhanced Bioremediation - Enhanced bioremediation uses naturally occurring or inoculated micro- organisms fungi, bacteria, and other microbes metabolize organic contaminants found in soil and/or groundwater, converting them to harmless end products. Nutrients, oxygen, or other amendments are used to enhance bioremediation. The process typically involves the percolation or injection of groundwater or uncontaminated water mixed with nutrients and saturated with dissolved oxygen. An infiltration gallery or spray irrigation is used for shallow contaminated soils and injection wells are used for deeper contaminated soils.
In-Situ Physical / Chemical Treatment
Soil Flushing - In situ soil flushing is the extraction of contaminants from the soil with water or other suitable aqueous solutions. Soil flushing is accomplished by passing the extraction fluid through in-place soils using an injection or infiltration process. Extraction fluids must be recovered from the underlying aquifer and, when possible, they are recycled. Cosolvent flushing involves injecting a solvent mixture (e.g., water plus a suitable organic solvent such as alcohol) into the soil or groundwater, or both, to extract organic contaminants. The cosolvent mixture is normally injected upgradient of the contaminated area, and the solvent with dissolved contaminants is extracted downgradient and treated above ground. Recovered ground water and flushing fluids with the desorbed contaminants may need treatment to meet appropriate discharge standards. To the maximum extent practical, recovered fluids are often reused in the flushing process.
Soil Vapour Extraction - Soil vapour extraction (SVE) is an in situ unsaturated zone soil remediation technology in which a vacuum is applied to the soil to induce the controlled flow of air and remove
December 2008 Page 16 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project volatile and some semi-volatile contaminants from the soil. The gas leaving the soil may be treated to recover or destroy the contaminants, depending on air discharge regulations.
Solidification / Stabilization - Solidification/stabilization (S/S) reduces the mobility of hazardous substances and contaminants in the environment through both physical and chemical means. Unlike other remedial technologies, S/S seeks to trap or immobilize contaminants within their "host" medium (i.e., the soil, sand) using additives such as cement instead of removing them through chemical or physical treatment. S/S techniques can be used alone or combined with other treatment and disposal methods. In situ vitrification (ISV) is another in situ S/S process which uses an electric current to melt soil or other earthen materials at extremely high temperatures (1,600 to 2,000 °C or 2,900 to 3,650 °F) and thereby immobilize most inorganics and destroy organic pollutants by pyrolysis. The vitrification product is a chemically stable, leach-resistant, glass and crystalline material similar to obsidian or basalt rock.
In-Situ Thermal Treatment
Thermal Treatment with SVE - Thermally enhanced SVE uses electrical resistance/electromagnetic/ fiberoptic/radio frequency heating or hot-air/steam injection to increase the volatilization rate of semi- volatiles and facilitate extraction. The process is otherwise similar to standard SVE, but requires heat resistant extraction wells.
Ex-Situ Biological Treatment
Biopiles - Biopile treatment is a technology in which excavated soils are mixed with soil amendments and placed on a treatment area that includes leachate collection systems and some form of aeration. It is used to reduce concentrations of petroleum constituents in excavated soils through the use of biodegradation. Moisture, heat, nutrients, oxygen, and pH can be controlled to enhance biodegradation.
Composting - Composting is a controlled biological process by which organic contaminants are converted by microorganisms to harmless, stabilized byproducts. Soils are excavated and mixed with bulking agents and organic amendments, such as wood chips, animal, and vegetative wastes, to enhance the porosity of the mixture to be decomposed. Maximum degradation efficiency is achieved through maintaining oxygenation (e.g., daily windrow turning), irrigation as necessary, and closely monitoring moisture content, and temperature.
Landfarming - Landfarming is a bioremediation technology, which usually incorporates liners and other methods to control leaching of contaminants, which requires excavation and placement of contaminated soils, sediments, or sludges. Contaminated media is applied into lined beds and periodically turned over or tilled to aerate the waste. Soil conditions are often controlled to optimize the rate of contaminant degradation.
Slurry Based Biological Treatment - Slurry phase biological treatment involves the controlled treatment of excavated soil in a bioreactor. The excavated soil is first processed to physically separate stones and rubble. The soil is then mixed with water to a predetermined concentration dependent upon the concentration of the contaminants, the rate of biodegradation, and the physical nature of the soils. The solids are maintained in suspension in a reactor vessel and mixed with nutrients and oxygen. If necessary, an acid or alkali may be added to control pH. Microorganisms also may be added if a suitable population is not present. When biodegradation is complete, the soil slurry is dewatered.
Ex-Situ Physical / Chemical Treatment
Chemical Extraction - Chemical extraction does not destroy wastes but is a means of separating hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges, and sediments, thereby reducing the volume of the hazardous
December 2008 Page 17 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project waste that must be treated. The technology uses an extracting chemical (e.g., acid or cosolvent) and differs from soil washing, which generally uses water or water with wash-improving additives.
Chemical Reduction / Oxidation - Reduction/oxidation (Redox) reactions chemically convert hazardous contaminants to nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile, and/or inert. Redox reactions involve the transfer of electrons from one compound to another. Specifically, one reactant is oxidized (loses electrons) and one is reduced (gains electrons). The oxidizing agents most commonly used for treatment of hazardous contaminants are ozone, hydrogen peroxide, hypochlorites, chlorine, and chlorine dioxide.
Solidification / Stabilization - As for in situ solidification/stabilization (S/S), ex situ S/S contaminants are physically bound or enclosed within a stabilized mass (solidification), or chemical reactions are induced between the stabilizing agent and contaminants to reduce their mobility (stabilization). Ex situ S/S, however, typically requires disposal of the resultant materials.
Ex-Situ Thermal Treatment
Thermal Desorption - Thermal desorption is a physical separation process and is not designed to destroy organics. Wastes are heated to volatilize water and organic contaminants. A carrier gas or vacuum system transports volatilized water and organics to the gas treatment system. Contaminants are then captured for further treatment or destruction. The temperatures and residence times designed into these systems will volatilize selected contaminants but will typically not oxidize them.
Containment
Landfill Cap - Landfill Capping is the most common form of remediation because it is generally less expensive than other technologies and effectively manages the human and ecological risks associated with a remediation site. The design of landfill caps is site specific and depends on the intended functions of the system. Landfill Caps can range from a one-layer system of vegetated soil to a complex multi-layer system of soils and geosynthetics. Landfill caps are often applied to waste masses that are so large that other treatment is impractical.
Off Site Disposal
Off Site Disposal - Contaminated material is removed and transported to permitted off-site treatment and/or disposal facilities. Some pretreatment of the contaminated media usually is required in order to meet land disposal restrictions.
On Site Disposal
Engineered Landfill - Landfills are engineered structures designed to retain waste materials for long term storage and management. A variety of landfill liners have been used to prevent contaminant movement such as man-made geosynthetics, clay, and bentonite-cement slurries. Landfills are also constructed using a cap.
3.2.4 Groundwater and Surface Water Remediation Technologies
In-Situ Biological Treatment
Enhanced Biodegradation - Enhanced bioremediation uses naturally occurring or inoculated micro- organisms fungi, bacteria, and other microbes metabolize organic contaminants found in soil and/or groundwater, converting them to harmless end products. Nutrients, oxygen, or other amendments are used
December 2008 Page 18 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project to enhance bioremediation. Oxygen enhancement can be achieved by either sparging air below the water table or circulating hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) throughout the contaminated groundwater zone. Nitrate is also sometimes circulated throughout the ground water contamination zone to enhance bioremediation. Additionally, solid-phase peroxide products (e.g., oxygen releasing compound (ORC)) can also be used for oxygen enhancement and to increase the rate of biodegradation.
Natural Attenuation - Natural subsurface processes such as dilution, volatilization, biodegradation, adsorption, and chemical reactions with subsurface materials reduce contaminant concentrations to acceptable levels. Consideration of this option usually requires modeling and evaluation of contaminant degradation rates and pathways and predicting contaminant concentration at downgradient receptor points. In addition, long term monitoring must be conducted throughout the process to confirm that degradation is proceeding at rates consistent with meeting cleanup objectives. Natural attenuation is not the same as "no action".
In-Situ Physical/Chemical Treatment
Air Sparging - Air sparging is an in situ technology in which air is injected through a contaminated aquifer. Injected air traverses horizontally and vertically in channels through the soil column, creating an underground stripper that removes contaminants by volatilization. This injected air helps to flush (bubble) the contaminants up into the unsaturated zone where a vapour extraction system is usually implemented in conjunction with air sparging to remove the generated vapour phase contamination.
Bioslurping - Bioslurping is the adaptation and application of vacuum-enhanced dewatering technologies to remediate hydrocarbon-contaminated sites. Bioslurping utilizes elements of both bioventing and free product recovery to address two separate contaminant media. Bioslurping combines elements of both technologies to simultaneously recover free product and bioremediate unsaturated soils. Vacuum- enhanced pumping allows floating contaminants to be lifted off the water table and released from the capillary fringe. Bioventing of soils is achieved by drawing air into the soil due to withdrawing soil gas via the recovery well.
Dual Phase Extraction - A high vacuum system is applied to simultaneously remove various combinations of contaminated groundwater, separate-phase petroleum product, and hydrocarbon vapour from the subsurface. Dual-phase extraction (DPE) uses a high vacuum system to remove various combinations of contaminated ground water, separate-phase petroleum product, and hydrocarbon vapour from the subsurface. Extracted liquids and vapour are treated and collected for disposal, or reinjected to the subsurface.
Passive/Reactive Treatment Walls - Reactive barriers allow the passage of water while causing the degradation or removal of contaminants. A permeable reaction wall is installed across the flow path of a contaminant plume, allowing the water portion of the plume to passively move through the wall. These barriers allow the passage of water while prohibiting the movement of contaminants. Passive treatment walls are generally intended for long-term operation to control migration of contaminants in groundwater.
Ex-Situ Biological Treatment
Bioreactors - Contaminants in extracted groundwater are put into contact with microorganisms in attached or suspended growth biological reactors. In suspended systems, such as activated sludge, contaminated groundwater is circulated in an aeration basin. In attached systems, such as rotating biological contractors and trickling filters, microorganisms are established on an inert support matrix. Nutrients are often added to the bioreactors to support the growth of microorganisms.
December 2008 Page 19 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
Constructed Wetlands - Constructed wetlands use natural geochemical and biological processes inherent in an artificial wetland ecosystem to accumulate and remove metals, explosives, and other contaminants from influent waters. The process can use a filtration or degradation process.
Ex-Situ Physical/Chemical Treatment
Advanced Oxidation Processes - Advanced Oxidation Processes including ultraviolet (UV) radiation, ozone, and/or hydrogen peroxide are used to destroy organic contaminants as water flows into a treatment tank. If ozone is used as the oxidizer, an ozone destruction unit is used to treat collected off gases from the treatment tank and downstream units where ozone gas may collect, or escape.
Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) / Liquid Carbon Adsorption Ion Exchange - Groundwater is pumped through a series of canisters or columns containing activated carbon to which dissolved organic contaminants adsorb. Periodic replacement or regeneration of saturated carbon is required.
Precipitation/Coagulation/Flocculation - This process transforms dissolved contaminants into an insoluble solid, facilitating the contaminant's subsequent removal from the liquid phase by sedimentation or filtration. The process usually uses pH adjustment, addition of a chemical precipitant, and flocculation.
Containment
Physical Barriers - These subsurface barriers consist of vertically excavated trenches filled with slurry or some other impermeable materials such as a geosynthetic or metal sheet piling. The slurry, usually a mixture of bentonite and water, hydraulically shores the trench to prevent collapse and retards ground water flow. Physical barriers (or slurry walls) are used to contain contaminated or divert groundwater and/or provide a barrier for a groundwater treatment system.
3.3 Post Remediation Activities
3.3.1 Equipment Removal and Decontamination
In cases where contaminated equipment or buildings are to be re-used, contamination will be removed by various decontamination methods.
Specific surface decontamination criteria will be identified. Swab samples of the surfaces of decontaminated equipment will be collected and analysed prior to release from the site or reuse in a clean area. Surfaces not meeting the decontamination level will be re-cleaned.
A formal release form with appropriate signatures will document this process and decontaminated equipment will be safely and confidently released from the site or reused.
3.3.2 Removal of Site Facilities
At the end of a remediation activity, the facilities used during the cleanup activities will be removed. • Building and Structures: Buildings and structures that have the potential for contamination will be cleaned prior to demolition. Swab samples will be taken over the surface areas to confirm that they meet site decontamination criteria. Scrap materials will be salvaged where possible and the remaining debris will be disposed at a licensed facility. Where decontamination is impossible or impractical, the materials will be transported to an approved waste facility. • Parking Lots, Equipment and Materials Storage Areas: Where applicable, gravel, paving, or concrete from these areas will be removed.
December 2008 Page 20 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
• Maintenance and Repair Areas: These will be decontaminated and removed from the site. Swab samples will be taken to confirm the method of disposal. • Security: Where they are no longer required, security kiosks and facilities will be removed. Fencing that is no longer required will be removed and recycled. • Municipal Services (Power, Potable Water, Sewage): Utilities installed as part of the remediation will be removed unless there is a need or want to retain them. • Decontamination Facilities (Personnel and Equipment): These facilities will be decontaminated and removed from site. • Offices, Washrooms, Lunchrooms: These facilities will be removed from site unless they are to be used in the future on the site.
3.3.3 Hazardous Materials / Wastes
Any hazardous material generated as a result of a remediation/treatment activity will be managed and disposed of either on-site in an approved manner, or where necessary disposed of off-site at licensed facilities. Ideally, the opportunity for this to occur will be minimized as much as possible.
3.3.4 Long-term Monitoring and Maintenance
A long-term monitoring and maintenance plan will be developed for 5 Wing Goose Bay and will include all facilities, engineered structures, containment structures, and contaminant exposure control systems that require long-term operation subsequent to the completion of the remediation activities. The primary objective of the monitoring and maintenance plan will be to ensure their effective operation and long-term integrity in terms of their desired goals and objectives.
3.4 Off-Site Resource Requirements
3.4.1 Resources/Materials
A partial list is provided below of the resources and materials that may be used during remediation activities: • Potable water for showers, lunchrooms, and washrooms may be required. Water may also be used for decontamination of vehicles and equipment leaving the site. • A connection to the municipal sewer or portable washrooms may be required for sewage from non-contaminated areas of the site such as washrooms and lunchrooms. • Materials such as gravel, sand, clay/silt, rip rap, etc. will be used for required activities as part of the remediation process. • Clay and bentonite may be utilised for cut-off walls and trenches • Geomembranes and geotextiles will be used to prevent erosion and to prevent cross contamination of materials. • Piping might be used for well casings and for management of surface and groundwater containment/management. • Fill, topsoil, plantings may be used as part of the final site restoration and landscaping. • Fuel will be used for vehicles and equipment used during the remediation activities.
December 2008 Page 21 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
• Sheet piling may be used for support of excavations and fill materials and vertical cut-off walls. • Power may be required at some of the sites.
3.4.2 Waste Disposal
Waste generation and off-site disposal of wastes will be minimized where feasible. The anticipated waste streams and proposed methods of disposal are as follows: • Non-hazardous domestic wastes (administration, lunch room, etc.) will be sent to the local licensed facility. • Contaminated combustible materials that are generated during the cleanup, such as personal protective equipment and carbon from the water treatment plant, will be decontaminated, if possible, and removed from site and transferred to a waste facility licensed to accept them. • Sanitary sewage from washroom facilities will be disposed through the Base /municipal system. • Maintenance wastes, such as oils and filters from excavating equipment that are generated on the contaminated site, will be recycled where possible, or disposed of in an appropriate disposal location. • Process wastes from remediation systems.
December 2008 Page 22 CEAA Project Description Goose Bay Remediation Project
4.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
DND has consulted with stakeholders in Labrador since at least 2004 regarding the issues at 5 Wing Goose Bay. Regular meetings have been held with the public, the Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the Innu, the Inuit, the Métis, other federal government departments (Health Canada, Environment Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada), and representatives of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. The consultation will continue throughout the environmental assessment and throughout implementation of the Project.
A federal Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has been coordinated through DND and includes representatives of Environment Canada, Health Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The principal function of TAG is to provide a technical forum for the Goose Bay Remediation Project Team to disseminate information on project status, and specific activities to TAG members, who have a regulatory interest in the GBRP. TAG meets on a regular basis, at least twice per year.
December 2008 Page 23