1. TRANSFORMING A PAINT FACTORY TO PLAYING FIELDS A CASE STUDY Presented By: Thomas Holden Haley & Aldrich, San Diego, CA Coauthors: Deborah Gevalt Mark Haley Haley & Aldrich, Boston, MA Barry Monahan Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA

2. Outline ■ Project vision ■ Site history ■ Nature and extent of contamination ■ Remediation activities ■ Completed athletic complex ■ Remediation and construction costs ■ Lessons learned and conclusions ■ Questions

3. Project Vision

4. Pre-Construction Conditions PROPOSED SITE Pre-remediation photo May 2001 CAMPUS RECLAIM 30+ ACRES

5. 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 model Fencing and warning signs

6. Site History

7. Historical Site Usage Henry Wood’s Sons Paint Factory 1848 to 1928 Paint factory engraving Dam and remnant foundation, prior to remediation

8. 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 Yellow Chrome Yellow (Lead Chromate) PbCrO 4 Red Red Lead (Minium) Pb 3 O 4 Blue Prussian Blue (Ferric Ferrocyanide) Fe 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] 3 Red Bldg

9. Paint Factory Demolition (photo circa 1935) LAKE WABAN CAMPUS FORMER PAINT FACTORY

10. Pre-construction Site Conditions (2001)

11. Nature and Extent of Contamination

12. 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

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

14. Pigment-Impacted Soil

15. 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

16. 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

17. Remediation Activities

18. Primary Contaminants of Concern and Remediation Goals Cyanide Chromium, Total Chromium, Hexavalent Lead 1,300 200 110,000 8,635 31,700 200 220,000 400 Max Soil/Sed. Conc. (mg/kg) Soil Remedial Goal (mg/kg) Treatment Goal: Chromium, Hexavalent 200 mg/kg 1.0 mg/l SPLP

19. Remedial Solution Surface water diversion (10 sq. mile watershed) Cofferdam installation Consolidation 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

20. Remediation and Construction Costs

21. Cost Summary Generalized Scope Est. Cost (Millions) Pre-construction Services3.6 Remediation 1. Treatment (30,000 cy) ~ $75/cy 2. Earthmoving (450,000 cy), Dam, Wetlands 3. Engineered Barrier Cap (5 ac.) ~ $132K/ac. Subtotal: 2.2 12.5 0.7 15.4 Construction Administration4.4 Athletic Fields7.3 Total:30.7 Excludes Legal, Remedial Investigation, Risk Assessment, and Wellesley College Internal Management Costs.

22. Completed Athletic Complex … an Extreme Makeover

23. Completed Project (October 2002) CAP WETLAND REPLACEMENT DAM RESTORATION TREATMENT AREA

24. Views of Lake Waban Before remediation After remediation

25. 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

26. Lessons Learned and Conclusions … there were many

27. 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

28. 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!

29. Questions