Archived
This content is available here for research, reference, and/or recordkeeping.
Location
Lexington, Kentucky
Start Date
6-5-2026 11:30 AM
End Date
6-5-2026 12:00 PM
Description
Illinois Administrative Code Part 845 requires owners and operators of coal combustion residual (CCR)-containing impoundments with groundwater protection standard (GWPS) exceedances to perform a Corrective Action Alternatives Analysis (CAAA) to evaluate viable remedies prior to selecting and implementing corrective action. The goal of a CAAA is to holistically evaluate a range of factors for the various corrective actions being considered at an impoundment. This presentation summarizes two CAAAs conducted for surface impoundments (SIs) at two power plants. Each CAAA applied a consistent decision framework that evaluates corrective action options using multiple performance criteria, such as: • Magnitude of Reduction of Existing Risks; • Effectiveness of the Remedy in Controlling the Source; • Short-Term Risks to the Community or the Environment During Implementation of Remedy; • Time To Achieve Groundwater Protection Standards; • Long-Term Reliability of the Engineering and Institutional Controls; • Potential Need for Replacement of the Remedy; • The Ease or Difficulty of Implementing a Remedy; • The Degree to Which Community Concerns Are Addressed by the Remedy; and • Disturbance to sensitive ecosystems. A CAAA is a decision-making tool that is designed to aid in the selection of a corrective action alternative. For the two example SIs, multiple corrective action alternatives were evaluated. . At Site 1, the evaluated alternatives included Source Control with Groundwater Polishing (Source Control-GWP), Source Control with Groundwater Extraction (Source Control-GWE), and Source Control with Phytoremediation (Source Control-Phytoremediation). At Site 2, the evaluated alternatives included Source Control-GWP and Source Control with a Groundwater Extraction Trench (Source Control-GWET). The analysis was a scientifically-defensible approach that resulted in the selection of the most appropriate corrective action alternative at each site.
Document Type
Presentation
Archival?
Archival
Included in
Energy Systems Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, Mining Engineering Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, Structural Materials Commons, Sustainability Commons
Corrective Action Alternative Evaluation for Surface Impoundment Remedy – Two Case Study Examples
Lexington, Kentucky
Illinois Administrative Code Part 845 requires owners and operators of coal combustion residual (CCR)-containing impoundments with groundwater protection standard (GWPS) exceedances to perform a Corrective Action Alternatives Analysis (CAAA) to evaluate viable remedies prior to selecting and implementing corrective action. The goal of a CAAA is to holistically evaluate a range of factors for the various corrective actions being considered at an impoundment. This presentation summarizes two CAAAs conducted for surface impoundments (SIs) at two power plants. Each CAAA applied a consistent decision framework that evaluates corrective action options using multiple performance criteria, such as: • Magnitude of Reduction of Existing Risks; • Effectiveness of the Remedy in Controlling the Source; • Short-Term Risks to the Community or the Environment During Implementation of Remedy; • Time To Achieve Groundwater Protection Standards; • Long-Term Reliability of the Engineering and Institutional Controls; • Potential Need for Replacement of the Remedy; • The Ease or Difficulty of Implementing a Remedy; • The Degree to Which Community Concerns Are Addressed by the Remedy; and • Disturbance to sensitive ecosystems. A CAAA is a decision-making tool that is designed to aid in the selection of a corrective action alternative. For the two example SIs, multiple corrective action alternatives were evaluated. . At Site 1, the evaluated alternatives included Source Control with Groundwater Polishing (Source Control-GWP), Source Control with Groundwater Extraction (Source Control-GWE), and Source Control with Phytoremediation (Source Control-Phytoremediation). At Site 2, the evaluated alternatives included Source Control-GWP and Source Control with a Groundwater Extraction Trench (Source Control-GWET). The analysis was a scientifically-defensible approach that resulted in the selection of the most appropriate corrective action alternative at each site.
