vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5305W)
EPA530-R-96-053A
November 1996
Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Scoping Study
Appendices
Recycled/Recyclable Printed with Vegetable Based Inks on Recycled Paper (20% Postconsumer)
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
APPENDIX A: ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASE DESCRIPTIONS A-l
A.I State Industrial Solid Waste and State Superfund Release Descriptions A-l
Florida Descriptions A-5
Louisiana Descriptions A-17
Michigan Descriptions A-34
New Mexico Descriptions A-45
New York Descriptions A-53
North Carolina Descriptions A-67
Pennsylvania Descriptions A-75
Tennessee Descriptions A-77
Texas Descriptions A-95
Virginia Descriptions A-108
Wisconsin Descriptions A-l 14
A.2 Construction and Demolition Landfill Release Description A-153
A.3 California Solid Waste Assessment Test Release Description A-169
APPENDIX B: METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING RELEASES USING
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES B-l
B.I RCRA Corrective Action B-l
B.2 Other Federal and State Data Sources B-2
B.3 Newspapers B-5
B.4 Other Literature Searches B-6
APPENDIX C: COMPARISON OF ICR CHARACTERISTICS DEFINITIONS TO
RELATED DEFINITIONS C-l
Tablet: Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus DOT Hazardous
Materials Definition C-2
Table 2: Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus OSHA Health
Hazard Definition C-7
Table 3: Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus Selected State
Hazardous Waste Characteristics C-12
Table 4: Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus Based Convention
Hazardous Characteristics C-16
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASE DESCRIPTIONS
-------
-------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency developed this appendix to illustrate the contamination
caused by releases from the management of non-hazardous industrial wastes. The appendix contains
112 release descriptions from 12 states, covering groundwater, surface water, and soil contamination from
a variety of industries, waste management practices, and constituents. This appendix has three sections:
Section A.1 presents 73 release descriptions compiled from file reviews of state industrial
solid waste programs and state Superfund programs;
Section A.2 contains six release descriptions for construction and demolition landfills, which
are taken from another draft Agency report; and
Section A.3 lists 29 California "designated waste" landfills that the State's Solid Waste
Assessment Test (SWAT) database identifies as having releases to groundwater or surface
water above regulatory standards.
Within each of the three sections, the release descriptions are organized by state in alphabetical order and
within each state by alphabetical order of facility name.
The Agency contacted the states and facility owners/managers to solicit comments on draft
versions of the release descriptions. The Agency also released a draft version of the individual release
descriptions to the public for comment and review on October 29, 1996 (see 61 Federal Register 55800).
This final report reflects all relevant facility-specific comments that were received as of November 8, 1996.
Page A-l
-------
SECTION A.1:
STATE INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE
AND STATE SUPERFUND
RELEASE DESCRIPTIONS
Page A-2
-------
AGRICO CHEMICAL SITE
FLORIDA
Facility Name: Agrico Chemical Site
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Waste Stream: Wastewater
Media Affected: Soil and groundwater
Facility Overview
The 35-acre Agrico Chemical Site was
used for the production of sulfuric acid and
fertilizers from 1889 through 1975. The former
plant buildings and process equipment were
removed by 1979, leaving only concrete
foundations.
In 1889, the founding company's industrial
processes included producing sulfuric acid.
Fertilizer production was the main activity from 1920 to 1975. The American Agricultural Chemical
Company began fertilizer production in 1920 and operated the plant until 1963. Continental Oil Company
owned and operated the facility from 1963 to 1972. Agrico Chemical Company bought the facility in 1972
and continued production until June 1975. The site was then sold in August 1977 to a privately held firm.
Due to the age of the facility, plant processes are not well documented. Operations from 1889 to
1920 included the production of sulfuric acid from pyrite. By 1920, sulfuric acid was produced from
elemental sulfur instead of pyrite. Also in 1920, the plant began manufacturing normal superphosphate
fertilizer. Superphosphate was produced through the digestion of the source rock with sulfuric acid and
water. The reaction produced anhydrite (calcium sulfate) and fluoride as by products. The anhydrite was
sold with the superphosphate. From 1972 to 1975 the facility manufactured monoammonium phosphate
in addition to superphosphate. In later years, the plant began adding micronutrients (zinc and
magnesium) to the monoammonium phosphate.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Industrial wastewater was discharged to low-lying areas in the vicinity of the former process
buildings. The wastewater ponded in four areas. The wastewater contained process products and by-
products and was likely characterized by low pH levels and greater than background concentrations of
sulfate, calcium, fluoride, silica, phosphate, sodium, chloride, and a relatively high total dissolved solids
content.
Extent of Contamination
By early 1957, Pensacola City officials noted declining pH levels, increasing lime requirements,
and increasing concentrations of sulfate and fluoride in a public water supply well. Phase I field work was
conducted from mid-1990 and completed by October 1990. The Phase I Report was presented to EPA on
March 13,1992. The results of the Phase I report suggested that additional sampling activities were
necessary to adequately characterize the site.
Phase II sampling and analyses conducted in February 1992 consisted of more than 100 soil
borings and the sampling of 34 existing and recently installed groundwater monitoring wells. The Phase II
Remedial Investigation more fully identified the nature and extent of contamination associated with former
site processes. Soil and groundwater contamination have resulted from wastewater discharge. Sludge
has accumulated in previous wastewater discharge areas and infiltration of wastewater has caused a
plume in the upper aquifer.
The table provided below shows that aluminum, chloride, fluoride, iron, manganese, nitrite/nitrate,
and sulfate are above EPA's maximum contaminant level. In addition to the monitoring results presented
below, the groundwater has been tested for EPA's Target Compound List and Hazardous Substance List,
Page A-3
-------
cyanide, PCBs, semi-volatiles, and pesticides. Groundwater pH levels have ranged from 3.35 to 10.7.
Several nearby sources may have contributed to the existing groundwater contamination, therefore, not all
the constituents identified below may be attributed to the Agrico site.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium (total)
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Nitrite/nitrate
Phenol
Potassium
Radium-226 (pCi/l)
Radium-228 (pCi/l)
Sodium
Sulfate
Xylenes
Zinc
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
Gross-alpha (pCi/l)
Gross-beta (pCi/l)
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
110
0.164
0.069
0.0015
130
270
0.038
0.031
98
1.9
0.0066
11
0.33
0.00071
0.055
47
0.02
38
8.4
12.4
180
680
0.013
0.026
0.025
1.3
29.6
FL Standard
(mg/l)
0.2
2.0
0.001
--
250
0.1
1.0
4.0
0.3
0.015*
0.050
0.002
0.1
10
0.01
5**
~
160
250
10
5.0
0.002
15
MCL
(mg/l)
-
0.05
2
0.005
~
-
0.1
1.3*
4
-
0.015*
--
-
0.002
0.1
10
-
~
-
-
500
10
15
4 mrem
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05 to 0.2
-
-
~
250
~
--
2
0.3
0.05
-
0.05
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
250
0.02
5
~
~
--
'Action level
"Combined level for Radium 226 and 228
In addition to the groundwater sampling results presented above, the soil has been tested for
volatile- and semi-volatile organics, pesticides, gross alpha- and beta-activity, radium 226, and uranium
238.
SOIL CONTAMINANT LEVELS
Contaminant
Fluoride
Nitrate
Sulfate
Highest Detected Level
(mg/kg)
300,000
12
9,100
Page A-4
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In 1989, EPA listed the site on the CERCLA National Priority List. Conoco Inc. and Freeport
McMoRan R P Ltd., former operators of the plant, entered into an Administrative Consent Order on
September 29,1989 to conduct a remedial investigation/feasibility study. A Consent Decree was signed in
June 1993 for soil cleanup. Remediation of Operable Unit 1 addresses the principal threat at the site by
treating the most highly contaminated soils and wastes. Stabilized waste materials and soils
contaminated at low levels will be consolidated on-site under a RCRA cap. Components of the on-site
remediation have included:
1. Excavation and solidification/stabilization of approximately 125,000 cubic yards of
contaminated sludge and soil from the four ponds;
2. Consolidation of all stabilized sludge and soil into one containment area;
3. Construction of a slurry wall;
4. Installation of a RCRA cap over the containment area; and
5. Implementation of institutional controls to include security fencing access and deed
restrictions.
Operable Unit 2 addresses groundwater concerns. The groundwater plume is discharging to
Bayou Texar located one mile from the site. There are no active water supply wells between the site and
the groundwater discharge point, therefore, the contamination does not pose a risk as a current drinking
water source. The grbundwater remedy selected consists of monitoring groundwater conditions as natural
attenuation, flushing, and dispersion occur since contaminant loadings to the groundwater have been
eliminated. Selected components of the groundwater remedy include:
1. Groundwater monitoring of the sand and gravel aquifer;
2. Groundwater monitoring of Bayou Texar;
3. Door-to-door survey of irrigation wells;
4. Request access from private landowners to plug and abandon impacted irrigation wells;
5. Utilization of institutional controls to restrict new wells; and
6. Advisory program.
Sources of Information
Draft Phase II Remedial Investigation; Agrico Chemical Site, Pensacola, Florida, Volume I of III. Geraghty
& Miller, Inc. for Conoco Inc. and Freeport-McMoRan, April 29,1992.
EPA Region IV Superfund Proposed Plan Fact Sheet, Agrico Chemical Site, prepared by U.S. EPA
Region IV, February 1994.
Final Phase II Remedial Investigation; Agrico Chemical Site, Pensacola, Florida, Volume II of IV.
Geraghty and Miller, Inc. November 1993.
Final Phase II Remedial Investigation; Agrico Chemical Site, Pensacola, Florida, Volume III of IV.
Geraghty and Miller, Inc. Appendix F, November 1993.
Record of Decision: Operable Unit 1; Agrico Chemical NPL Site, Pensacola, Escambia County, Florida.
EPA Region 4, September 29,1992.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-5
-------
ARIZONA CHEMICAL
FLORIDA
Facility Name: Arizona Chemical Company
Location:
Panama City, Florida
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The facility was established in 1936 to
process International Paper mill by-products into
useable chemicals. The first operation established
was a crude sulfate turpentine unit to process
terpene chemicals that can be found in household
cleaners, solvents, flavorings, and fragrances. In
1945, the plant moved into a second area of paper
mill by-products recovery, the conversion of black
liquor soap from the pulping process into crude tall
oil. The crude tall oil is further refined into high purity fatty acids and rosins used in printing inks,
adhesives, protective coatings, and synthetic rubber. A polyterpene resin production unit was added in
1971, raising facility employment to approximately 280. Limonene, a citrus by-product, was later added to
the raw material base. Three Florida Class III surface water bodies exist within a one-half mile radius of
the site, and are designated to be managed for recreation and propagation of healthy fish and wildlife.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Prior to December 1990, a rosin sump received wastewater from the plant and discharged to an
unlined industrial wastewater holding pond. No information was available in the State files on the pond
other than a map showing it to be approximately 200 feet by 100 feet, with depths ranging from 3 to 10
feet.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater samples collected from four monitoring wells around the pond were analyzed
pursuant to the 1990 Consent Order and are summarized below. Concentrations of benzene, iron,
manganese, sodium, and total dissolved solids (TDS) exceeded Florida guidance standards. Pond sludge
and sediment samples revealed elevated concentrations of inorganics, ethylbenzene, xylenes, and
chlorinated pesticides. The Preliminary Contamination Assessment Report (PCAR) states that a
comparison of the material in the pond with the adjacent groundwater quality suggests that the pond is not
a source of contamination because ethylbenzene and xylenes were not detected in the groundwater. The
suspected source of these purgeable compounds in the semi-solid material is a result of accidental
releases of process water entering the stormwater system from the resin sump. Chlorinated pesticides
found in bottom layer sediments of the pond could not be traced to any historical usage of DDT at the site.
Concentrations of metals found in the sludge are believed to be due to the adsorption concentration effect
of organic material on metal concentrations in the incoming wastewater. The metals are believed to be
from two major sources, cooling water flows into the pond containing corrosives from the heat exchangers,
and stormwater runoff from roads and parking lots.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Benzene
Iron
Manganese
Sodium
TDS
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0043
48
0.068
260
910
FL Standard (mg/l)
0.001
0.3
0.05
160
500
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
~
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.3
0.05
500
Page A-6
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The resin sump, which received wastewater from the resin plant, was taken out of service on
December 1,1990. Wastewater from the resin plant is now treated within a permitted treatment system.
A January 8,1990 Consent Order required that Arizona Chemical Company implement a groundwater
study at the industrial wastewater holding pond. The facility continues in a remedial phase of the Consent
Order.
Sources of Information
Preliminary Contamination Assessment Report, 1990.
FDEP Northwest District Site Summary Memorandum, September 20,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-7
-------
CENTRAL PACKING
FLORIDA
Facility Overview
Central Packing Company is a meat
packing plant. No major surface water bodies exist
near the site. Several isolated, wet weather ponds
in the vicinity contain soils with low infiltration
potential.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Central Packing
Location: Sumter County, Florida
Waste Stream: Slaughterhouse wastewaters
Media Affected: Groundwater
The plant generates wastewater from
washing and rinsing slaughtered animals. All drains in processing areas are routed to the wastewater
treatment plant. One drain in the animal holding pen area is designated for washdown; it sends
wastewater directly to the retention pond. The process wastewater is filtered through a rotary drum filter,
recycled in concrete vats, chlorinated, discharged to a polishing pond, and pumped to a sprayfield for land
application. The sprayfield has a berm around the Southern and Eastern sides to prevent surface runoff
to low lying adjacent lands. The polishing pond is sealed with clay, and polishing pond sludge is either
disposed of in an approved landfill or sold. Solid wastes such as bones, cartilage, and fat are collected
and sold.
Extent of Contamination
Wastewater characteristics are monitored at six different locations along the treatment process.
The results are submitted monthly to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Constituent
concentrations of samples taken from treatment plant effluent, as it was applied to the sprayfield, are listed
below. Concentrations of chloride, iron, manganese, sodium, and sulfate exceeded Florida guidance
standards.
GROUND WATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Barium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nitrate
Silver
Sodium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.28
0.0011
121
446.5
0.001
0.062
0.32
0.38
0.008
12.7
0.23
0.197
0.002
500
FL Standard
(mg/l)
2.0
0.005
250
0.1
1.0
primary = 4.0,
secondary = 2.0
0.3
0.015
0.05
10
0.1
160
MCL
(mg/l)
2
0.005
--
0.1
1.3*
4
~
0.015*
--
10
--
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
-
-
250
--
1.0
2
0.3
-
--
0.05
--
0.1
~
Page A-8
-------
GROUND WATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Sulfate
Sulfide
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
291
3.27
0.38
FL Standard
(mg/l)
250
5
MCL
(mg/l)
500
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
~
5
*Action levels
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Several site investigations (4/92,10/92, 6/94, and 11/95) noted that wastewater from the holding
pens was being sent directly to the retention pond without treatment. The wastewater treatment plant was
in disrepair according to the 6/94 inspection, and the 11/95 inspection noted that the retention pond was
filled with manure.
Sources of Information
Central Packing Groundwater Monitoring Plan, June 20, 1984.
FDER Site Inspection Reports: April 1992, October 1992, June 1994, and November 1995.
Page A-9
-------
FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY
FLORIDA
Facility Name: Florida Industrial Machinery
Location:
Fort Walton Beach, Florida
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Florida Industrial Machinery (FIM) rebuilds
heavy engines. Several small surface water bodies
exist on the site, including a small storm water pond
and a filled gravel pit from former mining operations.
A stocked fishing pond is also located near the site.
Wetlands to the northeast, north, and south of the
site are near the eastern margin of East Bay
Swamp. The on-site man-made ponds and the off-
site wetlands qualify for protection as Class III
(Fresh) Surface Waters to be managed for "Recreation and for Propagation and Maintenance of a
Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife."
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The principal wastewater stream is discharge water from the engine teardown and washrack
facility. All process wastewaters including engine test stand cooling water and waste oils formerly were
discharged to the septic tank disposal system. The facility now uses a wastewater treatment and
recycling system with an oil sump and skimmer to remove waste oils for recycling. Waste oil is collected
by a used oil recycling contractor. The system also contains a treatment facility to remove other impurities
from the wastewater stream.
Extent of Contamination
Sampling of the former septic disposal area, considered the source of groundwater contamination,
revealed elevated levels of lead and carbon tetrachloride, and low pH. No carbon tetrachloride
concentration data were available in Florida files, however.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
oH
Total phenols
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.032
0.0091
0.04
0.060
4.9
0.013
0.19
FL Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
0.005
0.1
0.015
6.5 - 8.5
0.01
5
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.005
0.1
0.015*
-
-
:
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
~
--
6.5-8.5
~
5
Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In March 1989, a representative of FDER inspected the FIM facility for compliance with FDER
industrial wastewater standards. Following that inspection, FDER issued a Warning Notice notifying FIM
that (1) the facility was operating improperly without a permit, and (2) the groundwater contamination
violated Chapter 403, Florida Statutes, and the Rules of FDER. Subsequently, FIM and FDER reached an
agreement and a Consent Order was signed in August 1989 requiring a Preliminary Contamination
Assessment, which was completed in 1990. Soon after, FIM installed a closed-loop recycling system for
Page A-10
-------
cooling water, replacing the old septic tank disposal system. Cleanup is complete at the site, except for
remediation of petroleum-contaminated soil which is being land farmed.
Sources of Information
Contamination Assessment Report for Florida Industrial Machinery, Inc. Nassef Engineering &
Environment Company, Inc., Pensacola, Florida, June 1991.
FDEP Northwest District Site Summary Memorandum, September 20,1995.
PageA-11
-------
FLORIDA WIRE AND NAIL
FLORIDA
Facility Name: Florida Wire and Nail
Location:
Quincy, Florida
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Florida Wire and Nail (FWN) produced
nails from 1978 to 1989. The nail manufacturing
process consisted of purchasing rolled wire in bulk,
cold drawing of the rod for sizing, cold cutting, and
shaping the wire into nails. Prior to 1989, a portion
of the nails were zinc galvanized using one of two
processes. From 1978 until 1986, nails to be
galvanized were "hot dipped," a process which
heated a combination of nails, zinc powder, and an
ammonium chloride flux in a gas fired furnace. The zinc coated nails were then quenched in a water
solution to solidify the coating. The "hot dip" process was removed and replaced with mechanical cold
galvanizing in 1986.
FWN ceased its nail production and galvanizing operations in 1989. At this time the nail
manufacturing and zinc galvanizing equipment were removed and weaving looms were installed in the
former nail production area. Since 1989, this facility has only manufactured woven fabric for the paper
industry.
Five private wells are within one mile of the site, two of which are located in the direction of the
zinc plume, which is described below. These wells have not been confirmed as active or drinking water
wells. The City of Quincy provides potable water service to this area. FWN monitors the groundwater
between the source area and the well area on a quarterly basis.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
From 1978 to October 1980, effluent from the galvanizing process was released out the back of
the plant onto company land. No treatment occurred before release into the environment. From October
1980 until 1983, effluent was directed to a Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER)
permitted on-site holding pond. A sludge settling tank, a 10,000 gallon underground settling tank, and a
150,000 gallon retention pond were operated under this permit. On April 15,1983, the pond was closed,
and pond sludge was stored in a lined landfill. In December 1992, FWN removed the buried sludge
containing zinc and nitrate and disposed of this waste in a permitted landfill. From 1983 to 1986, the
wastewater was recycled through a filter press without discharge. When the "hot dip" process was
replaced, a permitted water treatment system was incorporated to treat all water prior to discharge into the
city sewer system. A sludge settling tank and a 10,000 gallon underground settling tank operated under
this permit.
Extent of Contamination
In 1983, unacceptable levels of zinc, nitrates, and chlorides were found in the unlined pond
perimeter monitoring wells. Groundwater contamination was traced to waste disposal of zinc galvanizing
sludge and wastewater between 1978 and 1983, during the use of the "hot dip" process.
Page A-12
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Nitrate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1170
33.1
83.9
FL Standard (mg/l)
250
10.0
5.0
MCL
(mg/l)
10
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Two effluent and sludge disposal practices have caused violations of Florida regulations due to
excessive amounts of zinc and chlorides leaching into the groundwater. Consent Order 89-0614, signed
in 1989, required FWN to complete a Preliminary Contamination Assessment Plan for groundwater
contamination at the site. FDEP has required quarterly monitoring of groundwater at this site since 1990.
Sources of information
Preliminary Contamination Assessment Plan, 1989.
Site Rehabilitation Completion Report, December 20,1992.
FDEP Northwest District Site Summary Memorandum, September 20,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-13
-------
STONE CONTAINER
FLORIDA
Facility Name: Stone Container Corporation
Location:
Panama City, Florida
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Stone paper mill has been in.
operation since 1931. Prior to that time a lumber
mill was located at the site. Southern Kraft
Company owned the paper mill when it was
constructed. International Paper purchased it
some time later, and then sold it to Southwest
Forest Industries in 1979. Stone purchased the
mill from Southwest Forest Industries in 1987. The
mill produces Kraft liner board and bleached
market pulp. Chemicals used in the paper manufacturing process since the mill was constructed include
aluminum sulfate, calcium carbonate, calcium oxide, chlorine, chlorine dioxide, elemental oxygen,
hydrogen peroxide, rosinsize, sodium carbonate, sodium chlorate, sodium hydroxide, sodium hypochlorite,
sodium sulfate, sodium sulfide, and sulfuric acid.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
In 1955, primary clarification to remove settleable solids from the mill's effluent began. The
treated effluent was discharged to St. Andrews Bay. Over the years, a small bayou in the area of the
pretreatment pond was reclaimed using fill materials. A permit issued December 31,1986 expired June 1,
1988. A timely operating permit renewal application was filed prior to the expiration of the 1986 operating
permit. The facility operated without a permit until May 1990, when a Consent Order was signed.
The facility now operates an industrial wastewater pretreatment system associated with pulp and
paper manufacturing. It consists of a lime pond, emergency clarifier, primary clarifier, pump station
holding pond, ash sluice pond, stormwater ditch, and a primary clarifier ditch which conveys industrial
wastewater and stormwater to the primary clarifier for treatment. Primary treated effluent from the facility
is discharged to Bay County Regional WWTF for additional treatment prior to discharge into St. Andrews
Bay.
Extent of Contamination
Pits, ponds, and lagoons are in contact with groundwater. Groundwater sampling indicates
plumes of contamination from the facility affecting the intermediate aquifer. The sampling revealed
concentrations of several contaminants above Florida guidance standards including chloride, iron,
manganese, sodium, and sulfate.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Chloride
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.962
9150
3.3
26.6
0.051
0.23
0.84
FL Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
250
0.1
0.3
0.015
0.05
0.10
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
--
0.1
0.015*
0.10
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05
250
--
0.3
-
0.05
0.10
Page A-14
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FLORIDA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
5600
1140
0.08
FL Standard
(mg/l)
160
250
5
MCL
(mg/l)
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
5
*Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The facility received a Notice of Violation in November 1988 for direct discharges of wastewater
from the facility to the groundwater. Stone currently operates under a Consent Order requiring sampling
every 90 days, implementation of corrective actions if sampling reveals continuing contamination, and
reimbursement to FDEP for expenses.
Sources of Information
Stone Container Corporation Industrial Wastewater Pretreatment Facility Groundwater Investigation
Report, Volume I, undated.
FDEP Northwest District Site Summary Memorandum, September 20,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-15
-------
ZELLWOOD FARMS
FLORIDA
Facility Overview
Zellwood Farms is a water-intensive
mushroom growing, processing and packaging
industry producing fresh mushrooms for human
consumption. The farm has conscientiously
reduced raw water usage and improved
wastewater management over the past five years.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Media Affected:
Zellwood Farms
Zellwood, Florida
Process wastewater
Groundwater
The mushroom growing and processing operation generates varying flows and a high strength
organic wastewater as a result of the growing process and the raw materials used at the farm. Before the
current wastewater treatment system was constructed, these process wastewaters were discharged to the
groundwater through four infiltration cells. In the current industrial wastewater treatment and disposal
system, upgraded in 1992, process wastewater is pumped and screened and some fresh water added
before the mixture is stored in two 12,000-gallon tanks for reuse. The remaining wastewater is conveyed
to a 1.5 acre, clay-lined, constructed wetlands treatment system (CWTS). Treated effluent is discharged
to groundwater through two of the existing high-rate infiltration cells. Impacts on local groundwater
associated with past use of the infiltration basins for wastewater treatment and disposal resulted in
Zellwood Farms' constructing the CWTS and implementing water conservation and reuse practices.
Extent of Contamination
Nitrate levels in the groundwater, as determined through sampling of the monitoring wells, have
fluctuated widely over the last several years. In November 1989, the highest level was detected in MW-10
on the western portion of the site. This level (431.5 mg/l) is believed to be an "outlier." Three months
later, the well detected nitrate at 11.75 mg/l supporting the outlier conclusion. The state and federal
drinking water standard for nitrate is 10 mg/l.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Through implementation of water-conservation and wastewater recycling practices, the farm has
reduced water use by about 33 percent. Zellwood installed a water recycling system in 1987 to reduce
water use and the volume of water entering the wastewater treatment system. Concrete curbs were
constructed around the perimeter of the wharf area to prevent runoff from leaving the wharf and directly
entering the groundwater system prior to any treatment. Runoff is now routed with process wastewater to
the CWTS and some is used in the recycling system. In October 1994, Zellwood Farms (Terry Farms)
was awarded a 1994 Florida Environmental Award in the Environmental Program Achievement Category,
based on the success of their continuing Water Conservation and Wastewater Management Improvement
Program.
Sources of Information
FDER Permit for Zellwood Farms, Inc., November 30 ,1982.
Zellwood Farms Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility Study, Dames and Moore, 1992.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-16
-------
ATLAS PROCESSING COMPANY
LOUISIANA
Facility Name: Atlas Processing Company
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Waste Stream: Refinery sludge and process
waste water
Media Affected: Groundwater and soil
Facility Overview
Atlas Processing Company operates an oil
refinery in Shreveport, Louisiana. The refinery has
operated since 1923.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility disposes of wastewater and
sludges from the process of refining oil from crude.
The facility treats process water in a series of
wastewater surface impoundments and discharges
the effluent through a permitted NPDES outfall. The surface impoundments have been in existence for
approximately 16 years. Past waste management practices have utilized an area adjacent to the surface
impoundments known as the South Dirt Pile Area as a temporary waste storage area for the storage of
non-hazardous waste generated from the cleaning of the surface impoundments. In addition, impacted
soils resulting from spills and leaks in the facility have also been temporarily stored in the South Dirt Pile
Area in the past. The wastes in the South Dirt Pile Area as well as the wastewater in the adjacent surface
impoundments were tested and were determined not to be hazardous under TCLP. Sludges generated
from the surface impoundments are disposed of off-site at a permitted facility. Prior to the existence of the
wastewater impoundments and the South Dirt Pile Area, this area was used as a process wastewater
pond up until the 1970's. Presumably, the majority of the contamination to the soil and groundwater is
related to the former wastewater pond. However, the South Dirt Pile Area may have also contributed
volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds in the soil and groundwater.
In 1987, six (6) groundwater monitor wells were installed around the wastewater treatment
impoundments. Four of these wells are up-gradient and two are down-gradient of the surface
impoundments. In 1995, four (4) permanent groundwater monitor wells were installed in the vicinity of the
South Dirt Pile Area and down gradient of the surface impoundments. One of the wells was located in the
middle of the South Dirt Pile Area and the other 3 were located down gradient of the South Dirt Pile Area.
In August 1995, soil samples were continuously collected from the ground surface to the
termination depth of each borehole. Groundwater monitoring wells were installed in each of the four soil
boring holes. Groundwater is sampled quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater - In 1995, groundwater samples were analyzed for metajs and volatile and semi-
volatile organics. Two of eight metals were detected above the method detection limit. Volatile and semi-
volatile organics were also detected, however, none of the samples exceeded the MCL. A thin layer of
phase-separated hydrocarbons (PSH) equal to 0.01 foot was found in one monitoring well.
Since installation of the groundwater monitor wells around the impoundments, the facility has
been sampling groundwater for chlorides, sulfate, pH, phenols, and BTEX quarterly and the results
continuously reported to LaDEQ. Specific conductance and MEK were added to this list in 1993 and
1994, respectively. Sample results from 1996 indicated that chloride and sulfate exceeded the SMCL and
specific conductance exceeded the SMCL and specific conductance exceeded the MCL in some of the
wells. However, it should be noted that the detected values have not changed significantly from the first
sampling event in 1987.
Page A-J7
-------
The table below presents groundwater monitoring data from the 1995 sampling of the wells in the
South Dirt Pile Area and the 1996 sampling of the wastewater impoundments groundwater monitor wells.
All wells are down gradient of the wastewater treatment impoundments except the well indicating high
chlorides and specific conductance which were from an up-gradient well.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthene
Barium
Carbon disulfide
Chlorides
Di-n-butylphthalate
Fluorene
Lead
Naphthalene
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
Sulfate
Xylene
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.011
0.010
0.39
0.024
1,350
0.006**
0.007
0.052
0.006
4,480
1,234
0.016
MCL
(mg/l)
2.0
..
~
0.015
~
3,000
500
10
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
~
~
250
Also detected in laboratory blank
"Action level
Currently, the facility is sampling groundwaterfor chlorides, sulfate, specific conductance, phenols, BTEX,
and MEK.
The following table presents sampling results from the free-floating PSH found in monitoring well
95-2. There are no established SMCLs for the following constituents.
PHASE SEPARATED HYDROCARBON LEVELS
Contaminant
1 ,3-Dithiolane, 2-methyl-2-
2-Butanone
2-Chloroethane
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acetone
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Chrysene
Fluorene
lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Methylene chloride
Naphthalene, 1 methyl-
Naphthalene, 1 ,5 dimethyl-
Naphthalene, 2 methyl-
Phenanthrene
Highest Detected Level
(ng/0
250
140,000
180,000
1,500,000
1,100,000
210,000
210,000
110,000
80,000
300,000
280,000
70,000
52,000
4,800
3,200
4,000
1,300,000
MCL
(mg/l)
..
..
0.0001
0.002
0.0002
~
0.0004
..
--
Page A-18
-------
PHASE SEPARATED HYDROCARBON LEVELS
Contaminant
Propanoic acid, 2-methyl
Pyrene
Thiophene, tetrahydro-2-
methyl-
Unknown hydrocarbon
Highest Detected Level
(H9/I)
84
560,000
130
5,300
MCL
(mg/l)
-
--
~
Please note that the laboratory report filed with LaDEQ indicated that 1,3 Dithiolane, 2-methyi-2-,
naphthalene, 1-methyl-, naphthalene, 1,5-dimethyl-, naphthalene, 2-methyl-, and propanoic acid, 2-
methyl-, were tentatively identified and that the identification and concentration of these compounds was
based on the spectroscopists opinion due to presumptive evidence only. Further, the concentration of
unknown hydrocarbons identified from this analysis was also based on presumptive evidence.
A product identification analysis conducted on the PSH sample indicated the sample resembles a
combination of diesel range organics and motor oil.
Soil - In 1995, during the installation of the 4 monitoring wells in the South Dirt Pile Area soil
samples were continuously collected from the ground surface to the termination depth of each borehole.
The samples were analyzed for the Skinner List Metals and copper, silver, tin, and zinc. Detectable
concentrations were reported for 11 of the 16 metals analyzed: arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt,
copper, lead, nickel, selenium, tin, vanadium, and zinc. Numerous volatile and semi-volatile organic
compounds were also detected in the soil samples. In addition, total petroleum hydrocarbons were
detected.
SOIL CONTAMINANT LEVELS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium
Benzo(a)anthracene
2-Butanone
Carbon disulfide
Chromium
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Ethylbenzene
Lead
1 -Methylnaphthalene
Naphthalene
Nickel
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Selenium
Tin
TPH-Gasoline
TPH-Lube Oil
TPH-Diesel
Highest Detected
Level (ng/kg)
*
*
5,500
28
12
*
9,100
*
*
22
*
44,200
4,500
*
42,000
18,000
*
*
560(mg/kg)
22,000(mg/kg)
9,600(mg/kg)
Page A-19
-------
SOIL CONTAMINANT LEVELS
Contaminant
TPH-Kerosene
Vanadium
Xylene
m,p-Xylene
o-Xylene
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (ng/kg)
1,400(rng/kg)
*
1,200
720
74
*
*Detected at levels above the detection limit, no specific
concentrations were provided in the LDEQ records
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The LDEQ Office of Solid Waste ordered Atlas to close the South Dirt Pile Area. The facility
conducted a subsurface investigation down gradient of the South Dirt Pile Area in early 1996. The results
of this investigation indicates that there is no apparent off-site migration from either the surface
impoundments or the South Dirt Pile Area. LDEQ is allowing the site to conduct a comprehensive
groundwater investigation to determine the facility-wide groundwaterflow, site geology, and other factors.
This investigation will required the installation of additional groundwater monitor wells throughout the
facility. Facility perimeter groundwater monitor wells will be installed at the conclusion of these additional
studies. The LDEQ will reassess the closure order upon reviewing the investigation findings.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-20
-------
BEAIRD INDUSTRIES
LOUISIANA
Facility Name: Beaird Industries
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Waste Stream: Spent blasting sand and steel
grit dust
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Beaird Industries manufactures steel
vessels for the nuclear power industry at its
Shreveport, Louisiana facility. As part of this
manufacturing process, the facility sandblasts only
non-painted, virgin metal surfaces. It does not
reline, resurface, or repaint any metal surfaces.
Historically, blasting sand has accumulated in and
around the sand blasting building.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The accumulated spent blasting sand and steel grit dust were placed in an on-site waste pile.
Previously, the facility used its spend blasting sand as fill-in on roads and low areas within the plant
boundaries. This practice has ceased as a result of a compliance order from the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality (LDEQ). Currently, the site operates under an exemption from the Louisiana solid
waste regulations. LDEQ granted an exemption because the site developed an environmentally sound
method of recycling the blasting sand. Beaird now incorporates the waste in concrete or asphalt, or
disposes of the waste in a permitted off-site C & D landfill.
Extent of Contamination
The facility maintains that lead is a naturally occurring constituent in the sand. The site samples
groundwater annually at 8 shallow wells and 4 deep wells. The groundwater data presented below from
the January 1990 sampling event show high levels of chromium and lead. 1993 test results indicate that
chromium is below regulatory standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chromium
Lead
Barium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.41
0.14
0.37
MCL
(mg/l)
0.1
0.015*
2
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
~
-
*Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
LDEQ requires continued groundwater monitoring at the site, but does not plan to require
remediation of groundwater.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Personal communication with Solid Waste Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality,
August 1996.
Page A-21
-------
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-22
-------
CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION - LOUISIANA REFINERY
LOUISIANA
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Media Affected:
Citgo Petroleum Corp.
Louisiana Refinery
Lake Charles, Louisiana
Refinery wastes
Soil and groundwater
Facility Overview
Citgo Petroleum Corporation owns and
operates a crude oil refinery. The plant's
operations are separated into two functional areas:
the Lube Plant and the Refinery. The Refinery is
the nation's sixth largest. It was built in 1944 to
produce aviation fuel. Through the years, new
process units and unit upgrades have enabled the
Refinery to increase its capacity from 70,000
barrels to the present 320,000 barrels per day.
The refinery processes a high-sulfate crude from
Venezuela. The site is located near the Calcasieu River and the Indian Marais Bayou runs through the
site boundaries.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The Citgo facility has six separate non-hazardous waste management areas:
1. Refinery Secondary Wastewater Treatment Surface Impoundments (P-0275). This area
consists of four solid waste surface impoundments. The impoundments include a settling
basin, polishing pond, aerobic sludge digester, and aerobic sludge settling basin. Semi-
annual sampling occurs at four monitoring wells.
2. Lube Plant Clay Pond No. 3 (P-0277) operates under a standard permit issued on March 9,
1992.
3. Lube Plant Clay Ponds No. 1, 2, and 4 (OC-0091) completed final closure on September 23,
1992 and a closure certification was issued by LDEQ on October 2, 1995. Semi-annual
groundwater sampling occurs at six monitoring wells.
Lube Plant Secondary Wastewater Treatment Surface Impoundments (P-0276). The facility
was allowed to operate under an interim operational plan while they comply with a Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) Upgrade Order. A Standard Permit was issued
for these facilities on March 9, 1992, which superseded the order to upgrade.
Refinery Land Treatment Plots No. 1, 2, and 3 (OU-0120). Semi-annual groundwater
sampling is conducted at four monitoring wells.
Refinery Cooling Tower Sludge Basin (OC-0185). The closure plan for the Lake Charles
facility was submitted on November 11, 1991. A Notice of Deficiencies (NOD) was issued on
March 1,1996. CITGO responded to these NOD's on April 2,1996. Semi-annual
groundwater sampling is conducted at two monitoring wells.
In 1990, two Lube Plant wastewater treatment surface impoundments were reclassified from non-
hazardous to hazardous. This reclassification was based on the promulgation of the Primary Sludge Rule.
Extent of Contamination
Widespread groundwater contamination has been detected at the facility. Several areas of
groundwater contamination have been attributed to the non-hazardous waste management practices at
4.
5.
6.
PageA-23
-------
the facility. Groundwater sampling at the facility's monitoring wells analyzes pH, specific conductance,
total dissolved solids, total organic carbon, total organic halogens, sulfate, chloride, sodium, phenols, iron,
and manganese. Total organic carbon levels in the downgradient wells of the Lube Plant Clay Pond Nos.
1, 2, 3, and 4, the Lube Plant Secondary Wastewater Treatment Surface Impoundments, and the Refinery
Cooling Tower Sludge Basin have been higher than in the upgradient wells at each area. The tables
provided below indicate the highest detected levels of several groundwater monitoring constituents in
downgradient wells. The data presented below represent semi-annual sampling events from 1992
through mid-1995.
REFINERY SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Constituent
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
Naphthalene
pH
Phenols
Sodium
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TOC
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
2,829
55.5
6.74
14.2
4.71
0.415 .
1,270
8,230
366
132.25
7,712
0.52
MCL
(mg/l)
-
-
-
-
--
-
-
~
500
~
~
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
--
--
250
500
LUBE PLANT CLAY POND NO. 3
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Constituent
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
pH
Phenols
Sodium
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
390
21.1
7.07
4.92
0.011
419
2,500
73*
2,004
202.75
0.295
MCL
(mg/l)
-
--
--
-
~
~
500
~
-
-
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
. 6.5-8.5
~
"
250
500
~
--
*Higher concentrations were found in upgradient well
Several constituents were detected in groundwater monitoring wells associated with Lube Plant
Clay Ponds Nos. 1,2, and 4 (see table below). A brine pipeline lies adjacent to the southern border of
these facilities. The constituents detected in the monitoring wells on the southern boundary of the Lake
Charles facility are consistent with a release of brine. LDEQ has not investigated the claim at this writing.
Page A-24
-------
LUBE PLANT CLAY PONDS NO. 1 , 2, AND 4
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Constituent
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
PH
Phenols
Sodium
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TOO
Total dissolved solids
Total organic halogens
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
26,242
85
21.9
4.92
0.693 .
15,600
57,900
575
247.25
98,164
2.74
MCL
(mg/l)
~
~
--
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
--
250
500
--
REFINERY LAND TREATMENT PLOTS NO. 1. 2, AND 3
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Constituent
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
PH
Phenols
Sodium
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TOO
Total dissolved solids
Total organic
halogens
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
5,060
69.80
1.95
5.97
0.004
3,520
20,800
6,205
83
25,236
0.084
MCL
(mg/l)
--
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
..
500
~
REFINERY COOLING TOWER SLUDGE BASIN
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Constituent
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
PH
Phenols
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
574
2.79*
1.11*
4.98
0.009
MCL
(mg/l)
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
--
Page A-25
-------
REFINERY COOLING TOWER SLUDGE BASIN
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Sodium
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TOC
Total dissolved solids
Total organic halogens
409
2,148
91
166.5
1,694
0.16*
500
~
~
-
~~
250
-
500
*Higher concentrations were found in upgradient well
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A closure plan was submitted and approved by LDEQ. The closure for this Lake Charles facility
has been completed on September 23,1992, and a closure certification by LDEQ was issued on October
2,1995. LDEQ also issued an Order to Close for the Refinery Cooling Tower Sludge Basin on September
11,1991.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June, 1996.
Semi-Annual Groundwater Report - Solid Waste Facilities. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, January 1995-
June 1995.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-26
-------
DUPONT BURNSIDE PLANT
LOUISIANA
Facility Overview
The Burnside Plant is owned by E.I.
DuPont de Nemours & Company, Inc. The plant
produces sulfuric acid from processes involving
sulfur and spent sulfuric acid.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
DuPont maintains two permitted industrial
non-hazardous waste surface impoundments to
contain and treat process wastewater. Seven
groundwater monitoring wells located around the two impoundments are sampled on a semi-annual basis.
Three of the wells are located upgradient.
Extent of Contamination
The table below presents data from the semi-annual sampling events from 1986 to 1995.
Sampling has revealed concentrations of sulfate and total dissolved solids above Federal standards.
Facility Name: DuPont Burnside Plant
Location: Darrow, Louisiana
Waste Stream: Sulfuric acid production
wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
TDS
Chromium
PH
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TOG
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1,750
0.061*
6.75-7.19
1,785
1,018
138
MCL
(mg/l)
--
0.1
~
500
~
SMCL
(mg/D
500
6.5-8.5
~
250
~
* Higher concentrations of chromium were found in one upgradient well. LDEQ is not certain that the
chromium levels in groundwater can be attributed to the two surface impoundments.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
LDEQ is considering requiring the site to remediate groundwater due to continued sulfate
exceedances.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Second Semi-Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc.
Burnside Facility, January 20,1996.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Page A-27
-------
GEORGIA GULF LANDFARM
LOUISIANA
Facility Name: Georgia Gulf Landfarm
Location: Iberville Parish, Louisiana
Waste Stream: Process wastes, including
biosludge, brine solids, lime
solids, and desiccant
Media Affected: Soil and groundwater
Facility Overview
Georgia Gulf operates a 170-acre
landfarm with 130 acres useable for disposal. The
landfarm is located a little over 1 mile from the
Mississippi River. The landfarm was formerly used
for sugar cane farming. The site is in a recharge
zone of the Mississippi River. As a result, the
groundwater flow varies seasonably. The
groundwater table is very shallow (7 feet to 9 feet
depth). There is no known potential source of
contamination to groundwater in the vicinity, other
than the landfarm.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The following wastes were disposed of in the landfarm in 1994:
Biosludge 578.3 tons (dry sludge basis)
Brine solids 2,386.0 tons (dry sludge basis)
Lime solids 5,262.1 tons (dry sludge basis)
Desiccant 1.0 tons
The facility samples the groundwater semiannually from five monitoring wells installed in 1985 and
at an additional three wells installed in 1986. The soil is sampled semi-annually. The permitted capacity
of the landfarm is 1,020,000 wet-weight tons. Approximately 63.28 dry tons/acre were applied in 1994.
Extent of Contamination
Soil and groundwater contamination has been detected at the facility. Contaminants of concern
include chlorides and sodium. In general, LDEQ believes that the impact to soil and groundwater can be
attributed to the landfarm. Fluctuations in the groundwater flow direction can, however, affect sampling
results. The table below presents groundwater monitoring data from January to June 1996.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chlorides
PH
Sodium
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
TDS
Total hardness
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
TOC
Zinc
Highest Detected Level
(mg/l)
590
6.2-6.6
160
2330
1,660
1020
2.73
6.3
0.147
MCL
(mg/l)
-
^_
~
~
~
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
6.5-8.5
-
-
500
~
~
5
Page A-28
-------
The table below presents soil sampling data from 1994.
SOIL CONTAMINANT LEVELS (1994)
Constituent
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Magnesium
Mercury
PH
Sodium
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
TOC
Highest Detected Level (mg/kg)
2.0
180,000
28
23.6
14,000
0.106
9.3
5,590
1,010
508
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
LDEQ requires continued sampling of groundwater and soil. No remedial action is currently
planned.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-29
-------
GRETNA MACHINE AND IRON WORKS
LOUISIANA
Facility Name: Gretna Machine and Iron
Works
Location:
Harvey, Louisiana
Waste Stream: Washwater from production of
heavy metal products
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Gretna Machine and Iron Works
facility is owned by Trinity Industries. Gretna
reconditions barges at the Harvey, Louisiana site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Gretna generated paint wastes and burned
waste oils in two boilers. A 1.5 acre surface
impoundment had been used as a
dewatering/evaporation pit since before 1957. The
impoundment contains oily solid residues from past
waste management activities. Wastes were generated during the degassing and cleaning of barges. The
unlined pit received washwater from gas-freeing and barge-cleaning operations. Historically, it has been a
repository for wastes from barges such as gasoline, diesel, #6 oil, and creosote.
In 1986, the site was required to characterize the wastewater in the impoundment. The analysis
indicated the presence of hazardous constituents, but not at levels to be considered hazardous waste.
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) could not successfully document that the site
was receiving hazardous wastes from barges. Gretna claims to have received only oil and gas products,
no listed hazardous waste. Gretna also states that the impoundment never received washwater that
tested positive for hazardous characteristics. The site was deactivated in 1987, before the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure Test became effective, and remains under the jurisdiction of the
Louisiana State Office of Solid Waste.
Extent of Contamination
The table below presents 1994 ground water sampling data from downgradient wells. Benzene
and pentachlorophenol were both above Federal drinking water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
2,4-DichIorophenol
2,4-Dimethylpheno!
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
4-Nitrophenol
Benzene
Pentachlorophenol
pH
Phenol
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
TOG
TOX
Highest Detected Level
(mg/l)
0.0736
0.0089
0.0575
0.010
0.0036
0.0552
0.157
0.0083
6.1-7.3
0.0024
17,030
37.5
0.224
MCL
(mg/l)
-
--
0.005
0.001
~
--
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
~
~
-
~
--
~
6.5-8.5
-
-
~
~
Page A-30
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The impoundment was capped in 1993. A 1994 State inspection noted artesian conditions in the
monitoring wells, which were attributed to the capping of the impoundment. No remediation of the
groundwater or upgrade of the monitoring wells is planned. LDEQ plans to continue requiring post-
closure groundwater monitoring.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Page A-31
-------
INTERNATIONAL PAPER - LOUISIANA MILL
LOUISIANA
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
International Paper -
Louisiana Mill
Bastrop, Louisiana
Inorganic light metal salts
Inorganic liquids
Lime kiln slake
Solid waste from digester
Bark and other wood waste
Facility Overview
The International Paper, Louisiana Mill
plant in Bastrop, Louisiana is a pulp and paper mill.
Manufacturing unit operations include wood
processing, pulping, bleaching, power and steam
generation, chemical recovery, paper machine
operation, roll finishing, sheet finishing, and
shipping. The nearest surface water body is
Stalkinghead Creek. The grbundwater table
ranges from 30 to 80 feet in depth in Bastrop.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility disposed of the following
wastes in two inorganic settling basins: inorganic
light metal salts, inorganic liquids, lime kiln slake, solid waste from a digester, bark, and other wood waste.
These settling basins were operated for approximately 18 years before closing in 1989.
Extent of Contamination
Eight groundwater monitoring wells are sampled quarterly by International Paper personnel using
LDEQ approved sampling methods. Data are reported semi-annually. Levels of arsenic, chromium,
manganese, iron, selenium, and sulfates were above Federal drinking water standards. In the table
below, data are presented from quarterly groundwater sampling results from 1990-1995.
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium
Calcium
Chlorides
Chromium
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
PH
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Sulfates
TDS
Highest Detected Level
(mg/l)*
0.148
0.371
186
207
0.115
8.6
57.1
34.4
5.3-10.7
3.62
0.08
796
1,081
2,396
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
2
'
0.1
0.05
500
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
..
0.3
0.05
6.5 - 8.5
..
250
500
*Some of the maximum detected levels were found in upgradient wells, however, the LDEQ indicated
that the upgradient wells were installed too close to the impoundment. The exceedances presented in
this table are generally attributed to the inorganic settling basins, according to the LDEQ.
Page A-32
-------
An alum plant owned by a third party is located upgradient to International Paper's facility.
Reports on file with the Louisiana DEQ from that facility show an apparent mounding and release from
their solid waste impoundment which flowed toward International Paper's monitoring system. International
Paper believes that parameters such as sulfates, TDS and sodium are contributed to by the off-site plant.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The mill closed two inorganic settling basins on August 15,1989. Pond closure involved the
drainage and removal of sludge from the south pond followed by removal of 6,000 cubic yards of soil. The
site installed a concrete vault where wastewater is now disposed. The LDEQ is currently evaluating
statistical analyses provided by the site to determine whether any remedial action will be required.
Sources of Information
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Division files, June 1996.
Personal communication with Groundwater Protection Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, August 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-33
-------
DEAN FOODS - PILGRIM FARMS SITE
MICHIGAN
Facility Name: Dean Foods - Pilgrim Farms
Site
Location: Bentheim, Michigan
Waste Stream: Pickle brine wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Dean Foods-Pilgrim Farms Site was
originally a pickle processing facility; however, its
operations have gradually been downsized to
include only pickle washing and handling. On May
26,1989, the facility ceased its treated process
wastewater spray irrigation operations; on January
18,1991, the facility ceased its relishing
operations; and in 1993, the facility ceased its
pickling operations. Dean Food's Inc. bought the
site in 1990.
Located downgradient from the site, approximately 75 feet away from the seepage lagoons, is
Black Creek, a tributary of Rabbit River. The top of the uppermost aquifer is 3.5 to 20 feet below surface.
Groundwater flows east and southeast from the lagoons toward Black Creek. A localized mound occurs
beneath the seepage lagoons with groundwater flowing radially away from the lagoons. The soils
underlying the site consist of fine to medium-grained yellow-brown sand with thin clay and silt layers to
depths ranging from 17 to 41 feet. Clay underlies the sand beneath most of the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Wastewater consisting of pickle brine from the pickling vats (until 1993) and then washwater from
pickle washing operations (to present) was treated on-site in settling and groundwater seepage lagoons.
The facility had a Michigan groundwater discharge permit and currently has a permit for washwaters
without additives.
Extent of Contamination
Results from sampling conducted in 1994 showed that chloride from the seepage lagoons was
contaminating groundwater east of the facility. This contaminated groundwater was migrating toward
Black Creek. Water samples taken from Black Creek in 1994 showed that levels of chloride were not
exceeding State water quality standards. In fact, sampling revealed that a significant portion of the brine
constituents were actually migrating beneath Black Creek, not into it. Sampling results from previous
years, however, showed levels of total dissolved solids in Black Creek to be exceeding water quality
standards. The impact to the aquifer was found to extend to the clay layer.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Bicarbonate, alkalinity
Calcium
Chloride
Iron, dissolved
Magnesium, dissolved
Nitrogen, ammonia
Nitrogen, nitrate
Nitrogen, nitrite
PH
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
984
291
6,950
31.1
70
49
33
0.17
7.68
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
--
--
420*
~
10*
1*
--
MCL
(mg/l)
..
~
_.
10
1
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
Page A-34
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Phosphorus, total
Potassium, dissolved
Sodium, dissolved
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
5.4
140
4520
17.192
894
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
-
160*
MCL
(mg/l)
-
~
--
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
-
--
~~
250
: Generic State drinking water standards, which should be reevaluated if conditions at a particular site do
not meet the criteria used to set the generic standards
In addition, residents near the site have complained of a serious mosquito biting problem. The
Michigan Department of Public Health investigated the problem and determined that the species Aedes
Dorsalis, which breeds in a salt water environment, was found in large populations at nearby residences.
It was determined that the wall of one of the site's pickle brine seepage lagoons was leaking salt water to
a nearby wetland, creating the breeding environment for the mosquitoes.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Fiberglass tanks were installed to replace the leaking wooden vats that previously stored the
pickles and brine. In November 1987, Pilgrim Farms was placed on Michigan's Act 307 Priority List with a
rating of 31 (on a scale of 0-48, with 48 being the most severe). No treatment of contaminated
groundwater has been proposed.
As a temporary corrective action for the mosquito problem, Pilgrim Farms applied larvicide to the
wetland that was serving as the mosquitoes' breeding habitat. A suggested long-term treatment was
draining the wetland.
Sources of Information
Letter from the Michigan Department of Public Health to the Director of Environmental Health, Allegan
County Health Department, May 20,1985.
Site Description/Executive Summary for Pilgrim Farms Pickle Plant; Groundwater Quality Division of the
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, October 22,1985.
Letter from the Permits Section of the Waste Management Division to Pilgrim Farms, November 24, 1987.
Pilgrim Farms' Proposal for Bentheim Permit Renewal, August 15,1989.
Act 307 Master Data Form and attached Site Scoring Documentation Sheet; Environmental Response
Division, December 17, 1990.
Department of Natural Resources Waste Management Division Staff Report, January 15,1991.
Letter from Pilgrim Farms, Inc. to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and attached sampling
data, April 25, 1991.
Attached sampling data letter from WW Operation Services to Dean Foods, November 15, 1991.
Page A-35
-------
Map included in letter from WW Operation Services to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources,
Waste Management Division, September 3,1992.
Sampling data from the Hydrogeological Investigation Report for the Pilgrim Farms Site. Bentheim.
Michigan: WW Engineering & Science, November 1993.
Letter from Dean Foods to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, November 18,1993.
Letter from WW Operation Services to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, December 21,
1993.
Letter from Earth Tech to the Permits Section of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources regarding
NPDES permit application, August 10,1994.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-36
-------
FLAMM PICKLE AND PACKING COMPANY
MICHIGAN
Facility Name: Flamm Pickle Company
Location:
Waste Stream:
Eau Claire, Berrien County,
Michigan
Pickle process wastewater
(brine)
Media Affected: Vegetation
Facility Overview
Flamm Pickle and Packing Company is
located in Eau Claire, Berrien Co., Michigan. The
facility has been producing pickles and relishes for
institutional and wholesale distribution since 1922,
and its ownership has not changed in that time.
Cucumbers are trucked to the plant where they are
washed, sorted, and stored in tanks containing
brine. They are subsequently washed and
desalted, flavored, packed, and shipped. Usable
aquifers are believed to be located in the vicinity of
the plant, which is also located in close proximity to
both the St. Joseph River and its tributary, Love Creek.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Wastewater is derived from the heavy usage of water in most stages of the pickle-production
process. Cucumbers arrive at the plant, are washed, and are placed into brine tanks to cure for a period
varying from ten days to over one year. When they are removed, they are washed and desalted, which
requires steam, fresh water, and the addition of alum. Some, of the brine from processing is used as
starter brine for fresh cucumbers. Wastewater is also produced as a result of the various processes to
flavor, prepare, and pack the whole or sliced pickles, and relishes. These processes may include the use
of sugar, additional salt, and/or vinegar. Wastewater that is not to be reused is strained to remove solids
which are hauled away, and is stored in a collection tank. Seepage from the brine tanks is also pumped to
this collection tank.
From approximately 1978 to approximately 1990, the wastewater flowed from the tank by gravity
to the two-cell seepage lagoon area located along the St. Joseph River bottom land. Waste Management
Division experts of the Plainwell, Michigan District believe the lagoons provided inadequate treatment and
did not protect the groundwater.
Extent of Contamination
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) inspected the seepage lagoons on August 16,1984.
Inspectors found the first of the two lagoons to be turbid blue in color. This pond flowed into the second
lagoon which was a muddy pink color. Both ponds had an odor and were full to capacity with evidence of
overflow at lower edges and salt crystallized in nearby soils. An overflow was observed in progress by the
inspectors, who noted wet ground for about ten feet from the pond. They further noted that this discharge
was the likely cause of death for many trees in a nearby marsh.
DNR's August 16,1984, inspection, and a subsequent January 3,1985, inspection of the seepage
lagoons led to issuance of a letter on January 23,1985, from a Water Quality Specialist in the Plainwell
District. In this letter, DNR pointed to continued evidence of repeated overflow as an apparent violation of
the facility's groundwater discharge permit.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Efforts continue on the part of the State to work with the facility to establish a new system of
proper treatment, but as of April, 1996 the issue had yet to be resolved.
Page A-37
-------
Sources of Information
Report of Wastewater Survey, Michigan Water Resources Commission (WRC), May 8,1968.
Briefing Memo, Michigan WRC, October 3,1974.
Report of an Industrial Wastewater Survey, Michigan DNR, November 24-25, 1975.
Letter from Township of Sodus, Michigan to Michigan DNR, July 28,1984.
Michigan WRC Facility Inspection Report, August 16,1984.
Michigan DNR Interoffice Communication, September 4,1984.
Letter from Plainwell DNR to Flamm Pickle, January 23,1985.
Diagram of wastewaterflow through facility and map of facility and surrounding area from permit
application, undated.
Letter from Michigan DNR to Flamm Pickle, June 29,1990.
Michigan DNR Interoffice Communication, April 25,1996.
Page A-38
-------
MURCO, INC.
MICHIGAN
Facility Name: Murco, Inc.
Location:
Waste Stream:
Plainwell, Allegan County,
Michigan
Paunch, animal manure solid
waste, and process
wastewater from meat
packaging and rendering
Media Affected: Groundwater, surface water,
soil
Facility Overview
Murco has operated in Plainwell, Michigan
for over 70 years. Facility operations include on-
site kill, processing, and packaging of beef for
human consumption and rendering facilities for the
processing of meat scraps, bones, viscera, and
blood for the animal food and cosmetics industries.
The Chart Drain and its East Branch tributary
merge on-site and have associated wetlands. The
Chart Drain merges with the Kalamazoo River one-
fourth mile east of the property. A confined aquifer
is beneath the clay till that underlies the site
(except in the immediate vicinity of the Chart
Drain). This aquifer serves as the major water
source for most domestic wells in the immediate
area. Solid wastes from the raising of animals, including animal manures, are not hazardous wastes when
returned to the soils as fertilizer (40 CFR 261.4(b)(2)(ii)).
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The on-site waste stream includes approximately 1,000,000 gallons per day of process
wastewater, paunch (undigested food materials remaining in the rumen of the cattle's stomach at the time
of slaughter), animal manure solid waste, and settleable solids from the initial collection stages of the
wastewater treatment system. Wastewater is treated through a series of clarifiers; one anaerobic and four
subsequent aerobic ponds. Treated wastewater is currently applied to agricultural fields owned by Murco
using spray irrigation under a discharge permit issued by the State in 1976. Solid wastes are also applied
to the land using soil injection.
Extent of Contamination
The land application of liquid and solid waste has elevated concentrations of constituents in the
groundwater, surface water, and soil at the site. ;
Groundwater - All groundwater constituents sampled for were found regularly to exceed
background concentrations for groundwater in the area. In addition, iron, nitrate, nitrite, sodium, and total
dissolved solids (TDS) were found to exceed State or Federal drinking water standards as specified
below.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia
Bicarbonate
Chloride
COD
Dissolved calcium
Iron
Magnesium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
142
1420
148
210
205
5.31
57.8
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
~
420
MCL
(mg/l)
~
--
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
250
~
0.3
--
Page A-39
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Nitrate
Nitrite
pH
Sodium
TDS
Total phosphorus
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
104
1.4
7.8
163
2700
7.08
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
10
160
-
MCL
(mg/l)
10
1
-
-
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
6.5-8.5
--
500
Surface Water - Nitrate levels in two of the five samples taken along the Chart Drain were found to
exceed both groundwater background levels for the site as well as State and Federal drinking water
standards. Nitrate is reduced as the Chart Drain flows east prior to discharge to the Kalamazoo River.
This decline may be caused by uptake of the nitrogen by the wetland vegetation.
SURFACE WATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia
COD
Nitrate
Nitrite
TDS
Toluene
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
10.0
127.0
45.7
0.02
3092.0
<.005
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
~
10
--
1.0
MCL
(rng/l)
--
~
10
1
--
1.0
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
-
500
-
Soil - The constituents of concern at Murco's agricultural fields that received treated wastewater
via spray irrigation and solid wastes via soil injection are phosphorous, nitrates, and ammonia. As shown
in the table below, all three were found in concentrations exceeding background levels at the site;
however, calcium, magnesium, and potassium were considerably lower than background levels.
SOIL CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS
Contaminant
Ammonia
Calcium
Magnesium
Nitrates
Phosphorous
Potassium
Average Detected Level
(mg/kg)
5.47
337.1
53.5
5.43
283.4
65.0
Average Background Concentration
(mg/kg)
0.25
18,008
6,025
0.58
173
108
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Murco has been phasing out the current wastewater treatment system since August 1995. Ponds
1 through 4 are undergoing closure and are being replaced by a new 9.9 million gallon anaerobic pond
that has been constructed and is in use. As of May 1996, one aerobic pond remained in use. A new
treatment system is expected to be constructed by January 1997, operational by July 1997, and will
eliminate the land application of wastewater.
Page A-40
-------
Sources of Information
Remedial Investigation Report, STS Consultants Ltd. for Murco, Inc., May 6, 1996.
PageA-41
-------
WEXFORD SAND
MICHIGAN
Facility Name: Wexford Sand Company,
Yuma Site
Location: Slagle Township, Wexford
County, Michigan
Waste Stream: Wastewater from sand
washing operations
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Wexford Sand Company's Yuma site in
Slagle Township, Michigan is primarily a surface
sand mining and washing operation. The Yuma
site was once used as a waste disposal area for
spent core sand from Ford Motor Company's
Cleveland casting plant. The site is currently used
to dispose of the fine sands removed via the
beneficiation process.
The site is located in a sparsely populated
area with almost level topography. The land one-
quarter mile west (downgradient) of the site is part
of the Manistee National Forest. The Manistee
River is located approximately 3.5 miles northwest of the site and Slagle Creek is located 1.5 miles
southwest of the site.
The soil underlying the site consists of sorted and stratified sands and gravels. The aquifer at the
disposal site appears to be homogeneous and uncqnfined. The water table is estimated to be 30 to 40
feet below the ground surface. The nearest potable wells lie 0.25 miles northwest and north of the site.
Other wells lie 1.0 to 1.5 miles to the north in the town of Yuma. Groundwater migrates in a westerly
direction. The average groundwater gradient is about 0.3 to 0.5 percent in the vicinity of the disposal site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The site is considered an unlicensed type III landfill, which has never been properly capped and
closed. Approximately 800,000 tons of the spent foundry sand was dumped at the Yuma site between
1977 and 1982. The wastewater generated from the sand beneficiation process is treated to remove
conditioning reagents, namely Pamak-4 and Pine Oil. Pamak-4 consists of oil derived fatty acids and
small amounts (4-12%) of resin (rosin) acids. Many of the fatty acids found in this product are common
components of the human diet. Approximately 90% of the Pine Oil or terpineol consists of mixed terpene
alcohols.
The wastewater treatment system for the sand beneficiation process consists of three linked
ponds, representing an area of 1.86 million square feet or approximately 42.7 acres. Pond No. 1 is the
largest of the three ponds; it is used as a sedimentation/seepage lagoon. Outfall consisting of fine sand
waste material from the sand clarification process and from the sand purification process enter this pond
through a pipe and drainage ditch, respectively. Outfall from the drying operations enters this pond via a
pipe. The combined wastewater flow into the lagoon is 3.176 million gallons per day.
Pond No. 2 functions as a stabilization lagoon for wastewater from Pond No. 1. The wastewater
is allowed to further biodegrade prior to discharge to Pond No. 3.
Pond No. 3 serves as a holding pond for the treated wastewater. Approximately 24 percent of the
treated wastewater is recycled from Pond No. 3 to the processing plant. The calculated wastewater
removal rates by evaporation and infiltration are 0.129 million gallons per day and 2.32 million gallons per
day, respectively.
Groundwater monitoring wells are sampled quarterly.
Page A-42
-------
Extent of Contamination
A 1986 hydrogeological report for the years 1980 through 1986 showed levels of ammonia-N,
calcium, chloride, conductivity, iron, magnesium, nitrate-N, phenol, sodium, and sulfate present in the
groundwater above background levels. These elevated levels are attributable to the disposal of spent
core sand from Ford Motor Company's Cleveland casting plant. The levels of these parameters, except
that of iron, are all now within drinking water quality limits. Although levels of iron in groundwater are
elevated, they are lower than in the 1986 report because the company has ceased disposing of spent core
sand on the site.
Groundwater sampling results in 1990 indicate that current sand washing operations are
degrading groundwater quality beyond the sand mining property. Downgradient wells on Federal forest
land showed that PAMAK and elevated levels of manganese are present in the aquifer. The PAMAK is
not biodegrading as the company had thought it would. The sand washing operation has never held a
permit to discharge as is required under the Water Resources Commission Act.
An isochemical contour of Pamak-4 from the July 1988 analytical results indicates that
contamination is present in the groundwater. According to a May 1989 hydrogeological report by ASI,
these levels of Pamak-4 in the groundwater do not pose a significant impact to the environment based on
its low toxicity levels.
A September 28, 1994, memo from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources states that
sampling results on-site show levels of manganese and arsenic to be above permittable limits.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
MICHIGAN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia-N
Arsenic
Bicarbonate (mg CaCO,/!)
COD
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nitrate-N
Pamak-4
PH
Total alkalinity (mg CaCO,/!)
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.15
0.05
449
19
786
9.6
0.31
0.89
3.1
2.3
8.4
449
13
Ml Standard
(mg/l)
ID
0.05
--
~
~
ID
0.004
0.18
10
1.0*
-
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
~
10
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
0.3
0.3
0.05
~
6.5-8.5
.
*A May 1989 Hydrogeologic Investigation Report conducted by ASI states that the "anticipated allowable
level of Pamak-4 is 1 mg/l."
ID = Inadequate data to develop criterion.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
No corrective or regulatory actions have been taken.
Sources of Information
Hydrogeologic Investigation Report; May 1989, ASI.
Page A-43
-------
Sampling results from ANATECH Laboratories, November 7,1994.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Waste Management Division, memorandum to Wexford
Sand, October 22,1990.
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Hydrogeologic Review Unit, Waste Management Division,
memorandum to Wexford Sand, September 28,1994.
Page A-44
-------
BAKER COMMODITIES, INC.
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Baker Commodities, Inc. operates a
slaughterhouse in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The
depth to groundwater is approximately 10 feet.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Approximately 4,320 gallons per day of
wastewater was discharged to the unlined lagoon
until the plant closed in 1990.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Groundwater is monitored at four wells. Nitrate and total dissolved solids were found to be above New
Mexico or Federal standards.
Facility Name: Baker Commodities, Inc.
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Slaughterhouse wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Nitrate
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
46.9
57.6
10.4
3104
NM Standard
(mg/l)
~
10
1000
MCL
(mg/l)
--
.,
10
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
~
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
All operating wells are currently in compliance with state requirements. After the plant closed in
1990, the facility filled in their lagoons. The New Mexico Environment Department requires the plant to
monitor groundwater quarterly.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, Database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Page A-45
-------
BIAD CHILE PROCESSING PLANT - GARFIELD
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Biad Chile Processing Plant - Garfield is
located in Garfield, New Mexico, in Dona Ana
County. The facility washes red chiles, which are
then dehydrated and powdered on-site. The
wastestream produced from this process is chile
wastewater.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Biad Chile Processing Plant -
Garfield
Location: Garfield, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Food processing wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Up to 90,000 gallons per day of chile wastewater is screened for solids and discharged via
concrete irrigation ditches to a minimum of 16 acres of farmland. The discharge occurs during fall and
winter months, September through January.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Groundwater is monitored tri-annually at three wells. Nitrate/nitrite and total dissolved solids were found to
be above New Mexico or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Nitrate/nitrite as N
PH
Total dissolved solids
Total filterable residue
Water Kjeldahl nitrogen
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
29
7.19-8.01
2,400
2366
2.0
NM Standard
(mg/l)
10
6.5-8.5
1,000
--
MCL
(mg/l)
10
..
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
6.5-8.5
500
~
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
three times a year. The facility is planning to close its plant this year.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Page A-46
-------
BIAD CHILE PROCESSING PLANT - LEASBURG
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Biad Chile Processing Plant - Leasburg is
located in Leasburg, New Mexico, in Dona Ana
County. The depth to groundwater is
approximately 8 feet. The facility washes red
chiles, which are then dehydrated and powdered
on-site. The wastestream produced from this
process is chile wastewater.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Biad Chile Processing Plant -
Leasburg
Location: Leasburg, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Food processing wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Up to 90,000 gallons per day of chile wastewater is screened for solids and discharged via
concrete irrigation ditches to a minimum of 16 acres of farmland. The discharge occurs during fall and
winter months of September through January. No more than 200 pounds of total nitrogen per year per
acre are allowed to be land applied.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Groundwater is monitored tri-annually at three wells. Nitrate/nitrite and total dissolved solids were found to
be above New Mexico or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Nitrate/nitrite as N
PH
Total dissolved solids
Total filterable residue
Water Kjeldahl nitrogen
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
25
7.19-7.58
900
2366
2.0
NM Standard
(mg/l)
10
6.5-8.5
1,000
-
MCL
(mg/l)
10
~
-
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
6.5-8.5
500
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
three times a year.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Page A-47
-------
BIAD CHILE PROCESSING PLANT - MESILLA
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Biad Chile Processing Plant - Mesilla is
located in Mesilla, New Mexico. The facility
washes red chiles, which are then dehydrated and
powdered on-site. The wastestream produced
from this process is chile wastewater. The depth
to groundwater is approximately 20 feet.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Biad Chile Processing Plant -
Mesilla
Location: Mesilla, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Food processing wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Up to 90,000 gallons per day of chile
wastewater is screened for solids and discharged via concrete irrigation ditches to a minimum of 16 acres
of farmland. The discharge occurs during fall and winter months of September through January.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Groundwater is monitored tri-annually at three wells. Nitrate/nitrite was found to be above New Mexico or
Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Nitrate/nitrite as N
PH
Total filterable residue
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1.5
16
7.20-7.84
1059
NM Standard
(mg/l)
10
6.5-8.5
-
MCL
(mg/l)
10
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
6.5-8.5
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
three times a year.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Page A-48
-------
KOCH MATERIALS COMPANY
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Koch Materials Company is an asphalt
plant located in Eddy County, New Mexico. The
facility was operated by Eif management until April
1993 and has been under Koch management since
then. The approximate depth to groundwater at
the plant is 50 feet.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Koch Materials Company
Location: Eddy County, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Koch Materials Company produces water softener back wash, small amounts of boiler blowdown,
and laboratory water from asphalt emulsion. The company operates a synthetically-lined pond for
evaporation. The pond receives 1,000 gallons per day of wastewater. The facility's water management
permit permits flow up to 2,000 gallons/day. The flow is non-contact waste waters, except for very minor
quantities of laboratory waste water from asphalt emulsion road paving material testing.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Methylene chloride and total dissolved solids were found to be above New Mexico or Federal standards.
However, of note, the groundwater resource in question is brine and non-potable; and the State of New
Mexico has said that purgeable organics (e.g., methylene chloride, Method 8240) are within state
standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Chloromethane
Di-n-butylphthalate
Methylene chloride
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
47.9
1.4
19
4
1,248
NM Standard
(mg/l)
250
'
0.1
1,000
MCL
(mg/l)
--
-
--
0.005
(mg/l)
250
~
500
groundwater media in question is -3,200 mg/l.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
semi-annually. The facility has stopped using the lagoon and are only using evaporation. The facility will
continue to monitor for two years for closure.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-49
-------
LEPRINO FOODS CHEESE PLANT
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Leprino Foods Cheese Plant is located in
Roswell, New Mexico. The depth to ground water
is approximately 33 feet. The groundwater is
monitored quarterly at 15 monitoring wells located
in a sandstone formation which is connected to the
artesian groundwater aquifer.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Leprino Foods Cheese Plant
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Food processing wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Leprino Foods Cheese Plant produces an average of 750,000 gallons per day of food processing
wastewater. A maximum of 6,000 gallons of domestic wastewater is chlorinated, combined with process
wastewater, and directed to a flow equalization tank. Wastewater from the flow equilization tank is treated
in an extended-aeration activated sludge system consisting of two aeration basins and clarifiers. Treated
effluent is stored in a newly constructed 42 million gallon synthetically-lined lagoon and the two existing
synthetically lined lagoons. Treated effluent is used to irrigate 450 acres of cropland Sludge is processed
by aerobic digesters and stored in a 9 million gallon synthetically lined lagoon.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Nitrate and total dissolved solids were found to be above New Mexico or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia
Chemical oxygen demand
Conductivity
Nitrate
Total dissolved solids
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.5
20
5,640
30
4,320
1.0
NM Standard
(mg/l)
10
1,000
-
MCL
(mg/l)
~
..
10
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
500
--
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
quarterly.
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-50
-------
SANTA FE INGREDIENTS COMPANY, INC.
NEW MEXICO
Facility Overview
Santa Fe Ingredients Company, Inc. is
located in McCormack County, New Mexico. The
facility washes red chiles, which are then
dehydrated and powdered on-site. The
wastestream produced from this process is chile
wastewater. The depth to groundwater is
approximately 150 feet.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Santa Fe Ingredients
Company, Inc.
Location: Hidalgo County, New Mexico
Waste Stream: Food processing wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Up to 750,000 gallons per day of washwater is discharged to a tar-lined concrete sump, then
pumped through a solids separator screen and through a gated distribution pipe to a land application area
of approximately 120 acres. This area is bermed to prevent surface runoff. The facility is not allowed to
land apply more than 200 pounds of total nitrogen per acre per year.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Fluoride and nitrate/nitrite were found to be above New Mexico or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW MEXICO OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Alkalinity (as CaCO,)
Bicarbonate
Bicarbonate alkalinity
Calcium
Carbonate
Carbonate alkalinity
Chloride
Fluoride
Magnesium
Nitrate/nitrite as N
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Total filterable residue
Water Kjeldahl nitrogen
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
158.5
2.83
172.7
111.3
0.34
10.2
60
2.41
11.9
12.9
5.5
100.4
165.3
500
601
0.4
NM Standard
(mg/l)
~
250
1.6
10
-
600
1,000
--
MCL
(mg/l)
-
-
-
-
--
4
-
10
--
--
500
-
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
--
-
--
~
--
250
2
-
-
~
-
250
500
--
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New Mexico Environment Department requires the site to continue monitoring groundwater
semi-annually.
Page A-51
-------
Sources of Information
New Mexico Environment Department, Groundwater Section, database printout and corresponding files,
1995.
Page A-52
-------
GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Media Affected:
Facility Overview
Georgia-Pacific Corporation operates a
paper finishing plant in the town of Warwick,
Orange County, New York. An unnamed tributary
approximately 300 feet from Wawayanda Creek is
the nearest surface water body.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility discharges process wastewater
into their adjacent lagoon. Process wastewater
from the operation of Georgia Pacific Corp.'s paper
finishing plant is discharged into an adjacent clay-lined lagoon.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater - The table below identifies the constituents analyzed and detected in the 1992
groundwater sampling and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Arsenic,
chromium, lead, manganese, and zinc levels were found to be consistently above New York or Federal
standards.
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Warwick, New York
Process wastewater from
paper finishing
Groundwater and surface
water
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Chromium
Lead
Manganese
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.027
0.088
0.041
10.8
0.5
NY Standard
(mg/l)
0.025
0.05
0.025
0.3
0.3
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.1
0.015*
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05
5.0
*Action level
Surface water - The table below identifies the constituents analyzed and detected in the 1992
surface water sampling and the highest detected level of each constituent in downstream samples. Lead
levels were found to be above Federal standards.
SURFACE WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Alkalinity (as CaCO,)
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Copper
Fluoride
Hardness (as CaCO,)
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
74
0.00005
30.4
28.5
0.0023
0.09
105
NY Standard
(mg/l)
~
0.01
250
0.2
1.5
-
MCL
(mg/l)
~
0.005
~
~
1.0*
4.0
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
0.001
~
250
1.0
2.0
~
Page A-53
-------
SURFACE WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Lead
Magnesium
Nickel
Nitrogen, ammonia, as N
Nitrogen, Kjeldahl, as N
Nitrogen, nitrate (+NO,) as N
PH
Phosphate
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
TDS
Turbidity
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0010
7.0
0.0008
0.012
0.27
0.56
8.0
0.074
1.4
15.5
27.8
201
4.3 NTU
0.005
NY Standard
(mg/l)
0.025
35
~
10
6.5-8.5
20
250
500
5 NTU
0.3
MCL
(mg/l)
0.015*
~
0.1
10
500
-
--
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
--
~
--
--
--
6.5-8.5
-
~
--
250
500
-
5.0
'Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A 1992 Order on Consent requires Georgia-Pacific to conduct groundwater sampling of the
existing monitoring wells for all metals. The samples shall be both filtered and unfiltered. Georgia-Pacific
may, at their discretion, install new wells near the existing wells and sample the new wells in addition to
the existing wells. After an evaluation of the sample, the Department shall determine if Georgia-Pacific will
be required to submit and implement an Approved Investigative Report. A groundwater study addressing
the need to protect the water supply of the town of Warwick was required to be prepared and the
Department planned to review the soil sample results for the stream sediment, the clay liner of the
lagoons, the residual material that may still be in the lagoons, and/or tanks at the site. No information
was readily available on the implementation of this Order.
Sources of Information
Order on Consent, 1992.
Letter from Georgia-Pacific Corporation to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
March 19,1984.
Report on Preliminary Soil and Foundation Investigation, Proposed Paper Finishing Plant, 1992 surface
water sampling data.
Letter from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to Georgia-Pacific Corp., February
7,1992.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-54
-------
HOLLINGSWORTH AND VOSE COMPANY
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
Hollingsworth and Vose
Company
Easton, New York
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Hollingsworth and Vose Company is
headquartered in East Walpole, Massachusetts
and has two paper mills located in the towns of
Easton and Greenwich, New York. The mills
manufacture miscellaneous specialty papers,
specifically, papers for oil, water, and air filter
products. The Greenwich mill has been in
operation since 1880 and produces approximately
18 tons of paper per day. The Easton mill
produces approximately 44 tons of paper per day.
Hollingsworth and Vose has owned the mills for over 40 years. The landfill was constructed in 1974 and is
situated adjacent to the Batten Kill River.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Approximately 2,625 tons of paper sludge with 15-20% solids is disposed of per year. The sludge
is dewatered over time in drying beds. When the drying beds fill and dewatering has been maximized, the
sludge is excavated and hauled to the landfill. Leachate from the drying beds is collected in an underdrain
system and pumped to a clarifier. Under standard operating procedures, sludge disposal in the landfill
occurs once a year. The sludge disposal landfill is devoid of liners and leachate collection capabilities.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater sampling downgradient from the landfill was conducted monthly. Sampling has
detected phenol levels consistently above New York State standards. Phenols additionally are found to
meet or exceed the NYS drinking water standards in 75% of upgradient samples.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
PH
Phenol
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
6.87-8.09
0.022
NY Standard
(mg/l)
6.5-8.5
0.001
MCL
(mg/l)
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
6.5-8.5
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
No information was readily available on any remediation of the contaminated groundwater.
Sources of Information
Hollingsworth and Vose Company Multi-Media Inspection, June 16,1993.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Memorandum, "Program Summary for
Hollingsworth and Vose Inspection," August 17,1993.
Hollingsworth & Vose, Annual/Quarterly Report, 1995.
Page A-55
-------
Personal Communication, Al Majors, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division
of Solid Waste Management, August 28,1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-56
-------
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMELTING CORP.
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
International Environmelting
Corp.
Dunkirk, Chautauqua
County, New York
Spent casting sand and
construction wastes
Media Affected: Groundwater and soil
Facility Overview
The International Environmelting Corp.
facility is located in an industrial area where two
foundries operated for eighty or more years. The
two foundries, Skeleton Shovel Company and True
Temper Corporation, manufactured metal items,
such as steam radiators and shovels.
Manufacturing operations continued at the site
from at least 1915 to 1985. An environmental
investigation was conducted at the site, including
soil and groundwater sampling in 1989. A second
investigation including soil and groundwater
sampling was conducted in 1993 and submitted to the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC).
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Both of the foundries formerly located on the site used spent casting sand and construction
wastes to fill in the low lying areas near their plants. Excavations on site before 1975 provided a major
source of fill for the parking lot on the northern side of the facility. In addition, construction waste and truck
fleet maintenance waste was added to the fill material. This waste stream included copper pipe, solder,
galvanized ferrous metals, and brass filings. The fill area varies from grade to depths of eight feet. In
later years, parking lots and buildings were built on most of the property.
Extent of Contamination
The facility conducted an environmental investigation in 1993 and submitted the soil and
groundwater sampling results to the DEC. These results are presented in the following tables.
Groundwater - The table below presents the results of the groundwater analysis. Arsenic,
chromium, lead, and nickel were all detected above State or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
TPH
Tetrachoroethene
Xylenes
Highest Detected
Level fcig/l)
200
1.5
65.0
345
.5
278
1,180
3,600,000
1,450
40
NY Standard
(Ml/0
50
10
50
50
2
76.8
5,000
-
MCL
(ng/i)
50
10
50
50
2
,
10,000
SMCL
(ng/i)
..
,
..
5,000
__
.
Soil - The soil samples generally were taken from boring holes through the overlying concrete.
Some surface soil samples were taken from unpaved ground. Arsenic, benzene, copper, mercury, nickel,
Page A-57
-------
and zinc were all detected in soil boring samples at levels higher than those set by DEC. The table below
presents the results of the soil sampling.
SOIL CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO NEW YORK STATE STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Thallium
Zinc
Benzene
Toluene
TPH
Tetrachoroethene
Surface Soil Samples
Highest Detected
Level (mg/kg)
29.7
16.4
2930
..
3,600
1.45
0.04
Soil Boring Samples
Highest Detected
Level (mg/kg)
35.60
16.60
2250
1070
0.26
28.8
-
1770
0.03
0.027
170
-
--
Proposed DEC* Soil
Cleanup Objectives
For Inactive Hazardous
Waste Sites (mg/kg)
7.0
50
25
--
0.1
13
150
20
0.06
1.5
--
1.4
1.2
Telephone conversation with the Technology Section, DEC
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Most of the property is covered by asphalt paving or buildings. The facility plans to pave
additional areas to provide new parking. In addition, the groundwater underlying the property is perched
and is not used as a drinking water source. In view of this site's unique characteristics, DEC chose not to
list this site on the Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. DEC, however, recommended
that the facility "clean up those few areas that show elevated total metals" and provide a "letter report on
such action" to DEC.
Sources of Information
Letter from DEC addressed to International Environmelting Corporation.
DEC internal memorandum, dated April 13,1993.
Hazardous Substance Waste Disposal Nomination Form, May 3,1994.
Results of the Soil and Groundwater Sampling at the Prospective Enviromelting Facility in Dunkirk. NY.
Groundwater Technology for the DEC, April 2,1993.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-58
-------
INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, TICONDEROGA MILL
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
International Paper Company,
Ticonderoga Mill
Ticonderoga, New York
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
International Paper Company's (IPCo.)
Ticonderoga Mill facility has two paper making
machines which have the combined capacity to
produce 840 tons per day of fine alkaline printing
quality papers. Up to 700 tons of pulp per day is
also produced. IPCo. operates a paper sludge
landfill in the town of Ticonderoga, in Essex
County, New York. The landfill is underlain in
most areas by three distinct geologic units: a
varved clay zone, a silty sand zone, and a
bedrock formation. The silty sand zone is absent in localized areas on the western portion of the landfill.
Groundwater in the three geologic zones generally flows to the east-northeast. The shallow groundwater
also flows to the southeast in the southeast region of the landfill. The facility is located one-half mile west
of Lake Champlain.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
In 1982, IPCo. filed a permit application to expand its landfill into areas located immediately north
(33 acres) and south (27 acres) of the existing facility. A permit to construct both expansion areas was
issued in August 1983, and to operate the northern expansion in April 1984. The southern portion of the
expansion has not been constructed, although the facility has recently notified the State of their intent to
develop this section of the landfill. In March 1989, IPCo. submitted an application for renewal of their
existing permit. Processing of this permit was suspended pending resolution of issues relating to
groundwater contamination. IPCo. has continued to operate under the conditions of the 1984 permit in
accordance with Section 401.2 of the State Administrative Procedures Act. Presently, surface water
runoff and leachate are collected around the landfill perimeter and conveyed to a collection sump in the
northeast landfill corner. Leachate is then pumped to the treatment plant. Material permitted for disposal
in the landfill includes primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment sludge, as well as miscellaneous non-
hazardous waste associated with operation of the facility.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed for and detected in the December 1992
groundwater sampling of the landfill and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient
wells. Iron, magnesium, sodium, sulfate, and TDS levels were found to be above New York or Federal
standards.
GROUND WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Alkalinity
Chloride
Iron
Magnesium
PH
Sodium
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
746
47.7
20.4
1,495
6.7
282
5430
NY Class GA GW
Standards (mg/l)
250
0.3
35
6.5-8.5
20
250
MCL
(mg/l)
~
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
~
250
Page A-59
-------
GROUND WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
TDS
TOG
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
10,800
12.2
NY Class GA GW
Standards (mg/l)
500
-
MCL
(mg/l)
SMCL
(mg/l)
500
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In accordance with an Order on Consent with NYSDEC, a draft Remedial Action Plan has been
submitted by the facility and is currently under review.
Sources of Information
Summary prepared by New York Department of Environmental Conservation, July 1996.
Environmental Monitoring Plan, May 1996, Rust Environment and Infrastructure, Inc.
Hydrogeologic Assessment of the International Paper Ticonderoga Mill Landfill, January 1994, Eder
Associates.
New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Solid Waste Division files, July 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-60
-------
INTERNATIONAL PAPER, HUDSON RIVER
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
International Paper, Hudson
River
Corinth, New York
Facility Overview
The International Paper, Hudson River
facility is located in the town of Corinth, Saratoga
County, New York. The facility is a paper mill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
International Paper owns and operates a
solid waste landfill for the disposal of paper mill
sludge produced by their paper manufacturing
facility. Landfilling activities were initiated in the
summer of 1995. Approximately 6,728 tons of paper mill sludge is disposed of in the landfill per year.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells.
Aluminum, barium, iron, manganese, pH, and turbidity levels were found to be above New York or Federal
standards.
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Ammonia
Arsenic
Barium
Bromide
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Nitrate-nitrite
PH
Phenols
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Sulfate
Turbidity
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
445
3.3
0.09
0.002
0.034
1.74
0.0034
84.3
19.2
0.0039
0.0015
0.007
2.64
0.0141
25.2
20.7
0.0016
3.2
4.2-11.4
0.00012
2.8
0.0076
10.9
110
1050 NTU
NY Standard
(mg/l)
0.1
2.0
0.025
0.001
0.01
250
0.05
0.2
0.3
0.025
35
0.3
10
6.5-8.5
0.001
0.01
20
250
5 NTU
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
2.0
0.005
0.1
1.0*
0.015*
0.1
10
0.05
500
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05 to 0.2
..
..
250
__
1.0
0.3
..
0.05
__
6.5-8.5
250
-
Page A-61
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
TDS
Vanadium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
328
0.0049
0.109
NY Standard
(mg/l)
500
0.014
0.3
MCL
(mg/l)
--
-
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
500
5.0
Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Annual/Quarterly Report, 1995.
Sampling Data, 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-62
-------
RED HOOK PAPER, INC.
NEW YORK
Facility Name: Red Hook Paper, Inc.
Location: Red Hook, New York
Waste Stream: Paper slurry
Media Affected: Surface water, wildlife
Facility Overview
The Red Hook Paper, Inc., located in the
town of Red Hook, Dutchess County, New York is
engaged in the business of paper recycling.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Paper slurry, a byproduct of paper
recycling, is discharged into a wastewater
treatment plant comprised of seven lagoons in a
series, a small, and a large pond. The smaller pond has a flow of about 5 gallons per minute, escaping
through an earthen dam to a drainage ditch. This flow enters a swampy area adjacent to a small stream
exiting Spring Lakes. This treatment plant is required to monitor flow, BOD, suspended solids, settleable
solids, pH, temperature, toluene, acetone, and zinc. Under normal operations, 300 gallons of process and
cooling water are discharged per minute, 24 hours a day, producing a total daily flow of 432,000 gallons.
Extent of Contamination
On March 17, 1992, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
investigated a complaint at Red Hook Paper. The investigator noted that a dead swan and dead fish were
in the treatment lagoon. On April 15,1993, the Dutchess County Health Department conducted a site
visit. The investigator noted that "Many dead fish were observed... They appeared to have been dead for
a long time." The dead fish were located on the south side of the larger, propeller-shaped lake (indicated
as the large pond on the permit). Dead fish were also observed in the very small pond on the south side
of Spring Lake Road. In these areas about one to three dead fish per square foot were observed and
there appeared to be a mild, musty, paper waste odor around the ponds.
On March 30,1992, the DEC took a water sample from the treatment lagoon. The results
indicated a level of toluene of 0.02 mg/l. Since the lagoons are not lined, DEC has assumed that the
toluene has entered the groundwater. The State health standard for toluene in groundwater is 0.005 mg/l.
No groundwater sampling data were available.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The settling lagoons have been dredged. Regular maintenance of the settling lagoons will prevent
mats of sludge from collecting in the large pond. A hydrasieve was installed on March 9,1994. The
hydrasieve filters the wastewater thereby reducing the amount of waste paper fiber entering the lagoons.
Efforts have been made to reclaim and recycle paper sludge which has been stored on site in the past.
Plans to install groundwater monitoring wells are underway.
Sources of Information
Memorandum to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, "Case Report - Red Hook
Paper, Inc. Wastewater," June 16,1995.
Letter from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to Red Hook Paper Inc., June 22,
1993.
Letter from Red Hook Paper to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, May 11,
1993.
Page A-63
-------
Letter from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to Red Hook Paper Inc., July 29,
1992.
Letter from Red Hook Paper Inc. to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, March
19,1994.
Letter from Red Hook Paper Inc. to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, April 4,
1995.
State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Discharge Permit, April 1,1993.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Complaint Investigation Report, March 24,
1992.
Letter from New York Department of Environmental Conservation to Red Hook Paper Inc., May 7,1993.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Complaint Investigation Report, April 21,
1993.
Memorandum from Dutchess County Health Department to New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, April 22,1993.
Page A-64
-------
SHERWOOD MEDICAL COMPANY
NEW YORK
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Sherwood Medical Company
Argyle, New York
Cooling water discharge for
medical device manufacturing
facility
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Sherwood Medical Company owns and
operates a PVC medical catheters and devices
manufacturing facility located in the town of
Argyle, Washington County, New York. The
geology at the Sherwood Medical site consists
of a thin layer of unconsolidated sand, gravel,
silt, and weathered shale fragments which
overly the interbedded shale and sandstone
bedrock. Groundwater occurs within and its
flow is controlled by fractures and joints in the
shale/sandstone bedrock. Following an
evaluation of the shallow and deep flow aquifers at the site, groundwater divides were identified by
topographic ridges which separate surface water drainage basins. Shallow groundwater in the immediate
vicinity of the facility appears to be discharged to nearby Hook Brook which crosses the site from east to
west through the southwest corner of the property.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
From 1986 until July 1989, Sherwood Medical discharged cooling water to two septic tanks and
leach fields. The cooling water was used to solidify extruded catheters.
Extent of Contamination
Two new groundwater monitoring wells were installed in the downgradient direction from each
leachfield. Samples were collected from each of these wells and from the three in-service plant water
production wells. In addition, soil samples were collected at six locations and analyzed for the same
parameters as the groundwater samples in order to determine whether any residual soil contamination
may be affecting groundwater quality. Phenol levels in the groundwater were found to be consistently
above New York standards. Grease and oil contamination also was detected.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Grease and oil
Phenols
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
3
0.003
NY Standard
(mg/l)
0.001
MCL
(mg/l)
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation issued an Order on Consent
requesting that discharge of industrial wastewater be ceased for any outfall or point source at the site and
that a groundwater monitoring assessment be implemented to determine the impact, if any, on the local
groundwater. Groundwater sampling was required quarterly for one year to identify any observable trends
in groundwater quality. In addition to quarterly sampling, monthly water level readings were required in all
four plant production wells and the two monitoring wells for one year during periods of regular operation.
The daily volume of water also was required to be recorded to determine the effects of pumping on water
flow directions in the vicinity of the Sherwood plant. A risk assessment for phenolic compounds was
performed to study hypothetical groundwater use by area residents. The assessment concluded a low
Page A-65
-------
potential for adverse health effects due to phenolic compounds. No additional action was thus deemed
warranted at this time.
Sources of Information
Executive Summary, Sherwood Medical Company, undated.
1990 Groundwater Sample Analysis, Sherwood Medical Company.
New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Solid Waste Division files, July 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-66
-------
ALAMAC KNIT FABRICS, INC.
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Name: Alamac Knit Fabrics, Inc.
Location: Hamilton, North Carolina
Waste Stream: Processing sludge arid
wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Alamac Knit Fabrics, Inc. is an apparel
fabric manufacturing plant located in Hamilton,
North Carolina, in Martin County. The approximate
depth to groundwater is greater than 6 feet and the
predominant soil texture is sand.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Sludge is land applied to a 38 acre area by
spray irrigation. Management practices apply
solids at agronomic rates, or less, while maintaining a cover crop capable of uptaking all of the plant
available nitrogen (PAN), which includes nitrates. An annual report required by permit is prepared each
year and tracks closely the PAN and metals loading. In addition, an independent certified soil scientist
visits the site each year, collects soil samples, and provides his assessment of the operation. No waste is
discharged to surface water.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents detected in groundwater sampling and the highest
detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Groundwater is monitored tri-annually at 6 wells,
three upgradient and three downgradient. Nitrate and total organic carbon were found to be above North
Carolina or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Cadmium
Nitrate
TOG
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.01
27.4
5.44
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0.005
10
0
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
10
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
--
Alamac has not been able to identify the source of nitrates. Elevated cadmium and nitrate levels
are found in an upgradient well which monitors groundwater moving onto the site.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section, Permits and
Compliance Database Printout, August 18, 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-67
-------
BALL-FOSTER GLASS CONTAINER CO., L.L.C.
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Name:
Location:
Ball-Foster Glass Container
Co.
Henderson, North Carolina
Waste Stream: Process sludges
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Ball-Foster Glass Container Co. is located
in Henderson, North Carolina, in Vance County.
The nearest surface water body is Martin Creek
which is within 100 feet.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Ball-Foster Glass Container Co. operated
an industrial wastewater lagoon. According to the
facility, wastewater containing vegetable oils and
animal fats were discharged into the lagoon. North Carolina Department of Environmental Management
suspects that the lagoon also received "direct discharges of hydraulic oils, and other petroleum oils from
plant equipment maintenance operations" in the lagoon.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents detected in groundwater sampling and the highest
detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Groundwater is monitored semi-annually with a
monitoring well network which includes one upgradient and seven downgradient wells. Benzene, oil and
grease, and total petroleum hydrocarbons were found to be above North Carolina standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Benzene
Oil and grease
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0059
1,600
540
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0.001
0
10
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
SMCL
(mg/l)
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The industrial lagoon was closed in 1994. Sludge and soil from the lagoon were stabilized with
lime, excavated, and transported off-site to a sanitary landfill. The lagoon was back-filled with clean
material, compacted, and seeded. The lagoon wastewater was treated with a portable treatment system
and discharged to a publicly owned treatment works. Monitoring will continue, but removal of the waste
source is anticipated to enhance groundwater remediation. Remedial activities will continue during the fall
of 1996.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section, Permits and
Compliance Database Printout, August 18,1995.
Corrective Action Plan, Former Lagoon Area, O'Brien & Gere Engineers, Inc., June 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-68
-------
BORDEN CHEMICAL INC.
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Name: Borden Chemical Inc.
Location: Fayetteville, North Carolina
Waste Stream: Biomass from biological
treatment of thermoset resin
wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Borden Chemical Inc. is located in
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina.
The facility is situated on predominantly loamy
sands. There are no drinking water wells within
1/4 mile of the Borden plant site. There are,
however, drinking water wells adjacent to the land
application farm sites. For this reason, their permit
requires that biomass land application activities be
kept at least 400 feet from these homes and their
associated drinking water wells.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Borden Chemical operates a biological wastewater treatment facility which treats wastewater
generated during thermorest resin manufacture. Approximately 79 dry tons/yr. of biomass from
wastewater treatment is land applied on farmlands as a nutrient supplement. Biomass is land applied with
sufficient buffer zones established to prevent runoff to surface water.
Extent of Contamination
The sludge analysis indicates the presence of several compounds of concern: formaldehyde,
several halogenated organics, phenols, and toluene. The concentrations of these compounds do not
preclude land application, but the North Carolina Department of Environmental Management issued the
permit with contingencies requiring groundwater monitoring for related contaminants. Groundwater is
monitored tri-annually at 6 wells. The table below identifies the constituents detected in groundwater
sampling and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Ammonia-nitrogen,
arsenic, chromium, formaldehyde (methanol), lead, nitrate, and total organic carbon were found to be
above North Carolina or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia-nitrogen .
Arsenic
Chromium
Formaldehyde (Methanol)
Lead
Nitrate
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.05
0.012
0.11
0.25
0.27
10.4
9.9
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0
0
0.05
0
0.015
10
0
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.1
0.015*
10
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
-
*Action level
Arsenic, chromium, formaldehyde (methanol), lead, and TOC were determined to be inherent in
the soil and artificially elevated by the well purging and sampling procedure which captured high amounts
of sediment in the sample. After the sampling procedure was changed to allow the sediment to settle, the
contaminant values dropped below detectable limits. The ammonia-nitrogen value is a single result from a
single sampling event. All other samples were non detectable, suggesting a temporary aberration or
sample contamination. The nitrate value, however, is not inconsistent with subsequent sampling events.
Page A-69
-------
However, it must be noted that biomass is land applied on each field once every one to two years. Other
sources of nitrogen (and trace contaminants) are also land applied by the farmer. These include
commercial fertilizers and residuals from clean-out of turkey houses. It should also be noted that septic
tanks are contributing to the contaminate levels of the wells since coiiform bacteria are detected.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
None pending.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section, Permits and
Compliance Database Printout, August 18,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-70
-------
CAROLINA TURKEYS
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Overview
Carolina Turkeys, a turkey processing
facility, is located in Duplin County, North Carolina.
The nearest surface water body to our location for
monitoring procedures is an estuary which feeds
the Northeast Cape Fear River and is located
approximately 1500 - 2000 feet in distance away.
The surficial aquifer is predominantly sands with
medium to high infiltration capacities.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name:
Location:
Carolina Turkeys
Duplin Courity, North
Carolina
Waste Stream: Turkey processing and
rendering waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Carolina Turkeys has two waste water lagoons, one aerated 15 million gallon lagoon and one 41
million gallon holding lagoon. The water which is treated and aerated in the smaller lagoon feeds the
larger holding lagoon until ready to be applied to the permitted spray fields. Primary and secondary
screened effluent comes to a 1-million gallon flow equalization tank. Through dissolved air flotation units,
oil and grease is then removed. This treated wastewater is then sent to the 15 million gallon aerated
lagoon. The waste from these lagoons is then applied to approximately 560 (440 for water spray and 120
for sludge) acres of permitted spray irrigation disposal fields.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents detected in groundwater sampling and the highest
detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. There are currently 15 monitoring wells, 8 of
which are sampled on a quarterly basis. Nitrate and oil and grease were found to be above North
Carolina or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Copper
Nitrate
Nitrite
Oil and grease
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.230
14.2
<0.1
1.1
NC Standard
(mg/l)
1
10
1
0
MCL
(mg/l)
1.3*
10
1
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
1
~
-
*Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section, Permits and
Compliance Database Printout, August 18, 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-71
-------
FRIT CAR AND EQUIPMENT COMPANY
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Overview
Frit Car and Equipment Company is
located in Bridgeton, North Carolina in Craven
County.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Frit Car and Equipment Company has two
sludge drying beds, a 45,000 gallon aerated
storage tank, and a 1.5 acre sprayfield. No wastes
are discharged to surface water.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents detected in groundwater sampling and the highest
detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Groundwater is monitored tri-annually at four
wells. Ammonia, chromium, phenol, phosphorous, and total organic carbon were found to be above North
Carolina or Federal standards.
Facility Name: Frit Car and Equipment
Company
Location: Bridgeton, North Carolina
Waste Stream: Process washwater
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia-nitrogen
Chromium
Phenol
Phosphorous (total)
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.5
1.19
0.018
2.4
43.6
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0
0.05
0
0
0
MCL
(mg/l)
0.1
~
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
--
-
--
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section, Permits and
Compliance Database Printout, August 18, 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-72
-------
HOECHST CELANESE CORPORATION
NORTH CAROLINA
Facility Overview
Hoechst Celanese Corporation (HCC), a
chemical manufacturer, owns the closed
Needmore Road Landfill in Salisbury, North
Carolina, in Rowan County. The nearest surface
water body is the South Yadkin River and the
depth to groundwater ranges from 5 feet to 40 feet
below land surface.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Hoechst Celanese
Corporation
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina
Waste Stream: Chemical process waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Hoechst Celanese Corporation's Needmore Road Landfill received waste from 1966 until 1990
when the Corporation began to send its wastes off-site to a commercial facility.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed for and detected in groundwater sampling and
the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. The groundwater has been
monitored since 1980. There are 60 monitoring wells and 27 groundwater extraction wells on the site.
Many of the following contaminants listed below were found to exceed North Carolina or Federal
standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
,1-Biphenyl
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,1-Dichloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1 ,1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethene
1 ,4-Dioxane
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2-Butanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
4-Methylphenol
Acetone
Barium
Benzene
Benzoic acid
Benzyl alcohol
Biochemical oxygen demand
Biphenyl ether
Bis(2-ethylhexvl)phthalate
Cadmium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.2
0.54
0.296
0.056
0.001
0.002
0.046
45
0.731
1.57
0.15
0.056
0.434
10.6
2.55
0.006
11.3
1.204
13,400
10
2.608
0.0125
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0
0.7
0.007
0.2
0
0
0
0.007
0
0.17
0
0
0
0.7
1
0.001
0
0
0
0
0.003
0.005
MCL
(mg/l)
0.007
0.2
__
«
__
2
0.005
__
.__
0.005
SMCL
(mg/l)
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
-_
__
__
.-_
__
--
Page A-73
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NORTH CAROLINA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chemical oxygen demand
Chloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Chromium
Copper
Di-n-butvlphthalate
Diethylphthalate
Ethylene glycol
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manaanese
Methylene chloride
Nitrate
pH
Phenol
Specific conductance (umhos/cm)
Sulfate
Toluene
Total dissolved solids
TOC
TOX
Trichloroethene
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
15,500
118
0.042
0.023
0.062
0.772
1.16
0.388
3700
0.4
333
3.21
96.8
0.068
4.36
5.6
15.8
2,990
88
0.038
7,040
5,500
2.5
0.14
262
NC Standard
(mg/l)
0
250
0.05
0
0
1
0.7
5.0
7.0
2
0.3
0
0.05
0.005
10
6.5-8.5
0.3
-
250
1.0
1,000
0
0
0.0028
5
(mg/l)
--
0.1
1.3
--
4
--
0.015
0.005
10
--
500
1.0
--
0.005
"~
(mg/l)
--
250
--
1
--
--
2
0.3
--
0.05
--
--
6.5-8.5
~
250
500
~
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Hoechst Celanese Corporation has completed the Phase VI investigation to evaluate the nature
and extent of groundwater degradation, and is currently implementing corrective measures to contain and
treat affected groundwater. A UV/peroxide system is operating at the site to remove 1,4-dioxane from
extracted groundwater, and an additional biological treatment system will be installed to treat high-COD
effluent streams from source area wells. In addition, the facility completed the installation of a RCRA-type
composite cap over each of the fill areas during the first quarter of 1996.
Sources of Information
North Carolina Department of Environmental Management, Solid Waste Division, files, undated.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-74
-------
APPLETON PAPERS INC.
PENNSYLVANIA
Facility Overview
Appleton Papers inc. operates an
integrated fine paper mill at its Spring Mill in
Roaring Spring, Blair Co., Pennsylvania. They
manufacture coated paper for conversion into NCR
Paper brand of carbonless paper, utilizing the Kraft
pulping process. The nearest surface water body
is Halter Creek.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name:
Location:
Appleton Papers Inc.
Roaring Springs,
Pennsylvania
Waste Stream: Paper mill manufacturing
wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Waste products of bark and wood fines
from wood operations are burned in a power boiler. Wash-up water, overflows at the recausticizing plant,
bleach plant materials, and stock and coating preparations are processed through the waste treatment
plant. Power boilers burn coal and natural gas; some of these wastes are processed through the waste
treatment plant. The waste treatment plant treats all of the mill's liquid waste streams by primary
sedimentation and secondary activated sludge. Liquid waste streams include bleach plant filtrate and
washes, as well as washes from the boiler house machine room, and No. 2 paper machine coater. Solid
waste materials include green liquor dregs and slake grit which are impurities from chemical recovery.
These, as well as washed and dewatered lime sludge and dust, are disposed of in an on-site landfill.
Residual wastes generated at the mill are disposed of in a lined surface impoundment, the No. 1 Lagoon,
which has a State solid waste permit.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater has been contaminated at the site of the No. 1 Lagoon because the lagoon is
leaking. Monitoring was conducted with upgradient and downgradient wells. Results of the monitoring
show excess levels of chlorides and sulfates.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
TDS
Sulfate
Chloride
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1,933
595
630
MCL
(mg/l)
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
500
500-250
250
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In February 1987, the Department of Environmental Resources in Pennsylvania modified
Appleton's solid waste permit covering the No. 1 Lagoon. Condition 3 of the permit modification stated
that the company must submit a Phase II application for a new site due to groundwater contamination at
the existing site. In response to the permit modification, Appleton filed an appeal to the Environmental
Hearing Board (EHB Docket No. 87-085-W). The Department informed Appleton that continued use of the
No. 1 Lagoon was unacceptable, so the company filed another appeal (EHB Docket No. 88-074-W). The
appeals were solved in March 1990 when the Department removed the permit condition. No additional
information on the remediation of the contaminated groundwater was available.
Page A-75
-------
Sources of Information
Proposal to Appleton Papers, Inc. from the Harrisburg Regional Office of the Department of Environmental
Resources, October 1987.
Appleton Papers, Inc. PPC Plan, undated.
Consent Adjudication between the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental
Resources, and Appleton Papers, Inc. March 1990.
Page A-76
-------
ALLIED-SIGNAL, INC.
TENNESSEE
Facility Name: Allied-Signal, Inc.
Location:
Waste Stream:
Cleveland, Tennessee
Manufacturing scrap and
pelletized waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Since 1964, automotive brake friction
materials have been manufactured at Allied-Signal
Inc.'s Friction Materials Division in Cleveland,
Tennessee. This 285,000 square foot plant facility,
situated on 22 acres, employs approximately 550
personnel. The facility uses a permitted 24-acre
landfill near the plant operation for disposal of
process wastes from the facility. This landfill has
been operated by Allied-Signal and the former
Bendix Corporation since 1964. The landfill is
divided into four phases. Phase I, consisting of 1.3 acres, was constructed in 1964 and closed in 1981.
Phases II and III, consisting of 4.1 acres, were constructed in 1980 and closed in 1994. Phase IV,
consisting of 4 acres, was constructed in August, 1993 and is currently in use. As noted, the only portion
of this landfill currently in use is the Phase IV 4 acre portion. In August, 1992 the facility was permitted to
construct this final 4-acre phase of the active landfill according to the sub-title D requirements for a
leachate collection system and waste area liner system, which consists of three feet of recompacted clay
to meet the rule design specifications. In August of 1993, construction of the first section (IV-A) was
completed. In April of 1994 a variance from the rule requirements to upgrade class II landfills from clay
liners to composite fabric and clay liners was received for the unconstructed IV-B section due to the need
for design compatibility with the IV-A section. The construction of the final section, IV-B, is scheduled for
1997. The remaining life of this landfill is approximately 10 years at present fill rates. The landfill is
characterized by bedrock-controlled, northeast to southeast trending ridges and valleys.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Approximately 7,000 tons of manufacturing scrap and pelletized waste are disposed of annually at
the landfill. Solid waste includes friction materials, dust from process operations, floor sweepings, off-
specification batches, and reject products. Dust collected from process operations are pelletized with a
mixture of cement and water prior to disposal at the landfill. Generally, pelletized friction material wastes
and baghouse dust collector contents comprise 80% of the waste stream and reject materials and floor
sweepings make up the remaining 20%.
The landfill consists of a trench fill operation in which each trench is filled with individual cells of
waste that are covered with soil. Phases II and III are being filled in five foot lifts that consist of four feet of
waste and one foot of intermediate earthen cover. Both the waste and cover are compacted prior to-the
placement of additional waste. The waste is covered each day following filling activities to minimize
erosion and airborne transport of the waste. Grading of the waste is performed after placement to
enhance surface water runoff and to prevent ponding. The landfill was permitted in 1983, prior to the
promulgation of the Tennessee Solid Waste Processing and Disposal Amendments of 1990 and therefore,
the landfill is not equipped with a subterranean leachate collection system. The portions of the landfill that
were in use during the 1991-92 time period have been capped and closed. A new state-of-the-art landfill
has been installed that contains both a leachate collection system and waste area liner system which
complies with the federal standards for the management and siting of land-based units set forth at 40 CFR
Part 257. The leachate is collected and discharged to the local Cleveland POTW.
Extent of Contamination
Nine groundwater wells are monitored quarterly. Five piezometers characterize groundwaterflow.
High concentrations of BEHP, total dissolved solids, and total phenols have been detected in the
Page A-77
-------
groundwater samples. Health risk may be present when phenolic compound concentrations are above
21.0 mg/l for adults and 9.6 mg/l for children. The table below identifies the constituents analyzed and
detected in the 1990-1991 groundwater sampling (the only years for which data were readily available)
and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Barium
BEHP
Chloride
Hardness
Nitrogen, nitrate
pH
Phenols
Specific conduct-
ance (umhos/cm)
TDS
TOO
Turbidity
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.05
0.039
31
150
1.8
3.9-10.6
22.0
305
29,000
130
41.500NTU
TN Standard
(mg/l)
2.0
~
~
10
6.0-9.0
~
500
~
MCL
(mg/l)
2.0
--
-
10
~
~
--
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
~
250
6.5-8.5
--
'
500
~
U.S. EPA Health-
Based Criteria
(mg/l)
~
0.0042
-
«
21.0
~
--
~
~
Some of the reported data may be from a monitoring well suspected to be improperly installed.
However, the facility continues to sample thai well and monitoring data is provided to the State of
Tennessee.
Since September of 1993, solid waste from the plant facility has been disposed of in Phase IV-A
of the landfill. Since the new landfill was placed into use and Phases II and III were capped and closed,
levels of phenol and BEHP have continued to steadily decline
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Phases II and III were capped and closed in 1994. Phase IV-A, a new state-of-the-art landfill, with
a leachate collection and liner system has been in operation since September if 1993. The leachate from
this phase of the landfill is collected and discharged to the local Cleveland POTW. In 1994, three
additional monitoring wells were constructed due to the expansion of the active waste area into Phase IV-
A. Presently, twelve groundwater monitoring wells and four piezometer wells are located at the landfill.
These wells are currently sampled semi-annually in compliance with Tennessee Solid Waste regulations
and analyzed for selected volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds, and for applicable inorganics.
Analytical results are submitted to the State of Tennessee following each monitoring event.
Sources of Information
RMT Laboratories Report, Allied Signal, INC./ Bendix, April 1991.
RMT Laboratories Report, Allied Signal, INC./ Bendix, July 1991.
RMT Laboratories Report, Allied Signal, INC./ Bendix, June 1992.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-78
-------
CYTEC INDUSTRIES INC.
TENNESSEE
Facility Name:
Location:
Cytec Industries Inc.
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Waste Stream: Processed silica
Media Affected: Ground water
Facility Overview
Cytec Industries Inc. (Cytec) is a vertically
integrated, specialty chemicals company that
serves a wide range of industries. Cytec
manufactures liquid alum, which is an aqueous
solution of hydrated aluminum sulfate. It is used
primarily in paper making and as a precipitating
agent in sewage treatment and water purification.
The facility owner is Cytec Industries Inc. The
Tennessee River runs adjacent to the western
facility boundary. Although this area is termed
floodplain, it is at an elevation of 660 feet which is above the 100-year flood level of 653.7 feet. Local
groundwater moves towards the Tennessee River. There are no potable wells downgradient of the site
prior to the Tennessee River. The nearest potable well is reported to be over two miles from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Cytec Industries Inc. operates a 10 acre permitted class II disposal facility. Processed silica is the
byproduct of liquid alum manufacturing process. Processed silica slurry is pumped from the
manufacturing process to one of two permitted sand bed filters. While one sand bed is being filled, the
other sand bed provides final dewatering and drying so that the processed silica can be excavated from
the sand bed and transported to the landfill located on the same property. The processed silica is then
placed, spread, compacted, graded, covered and stabilized. Water, including rainwater, is reclaimed from
both sand bed filters continuously and is returned to the manufacturing process. Each sand bed has
4,000 cubic yards of capacity and is normally cleaned out once every six to eight months at the design
rate of 15,000 cubic yards per year. The landfill was constructed over a former processed silica impound
and is now characterized by 12 feet of processed silica underlain by silty, sandy clay.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1995 sampling and the highest detected
level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Aluminum, lead, pH, and sulfate all exceeded regulatory
groundwater standards. Groundwater sampling occurs quarterly.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Arsenic
Chromium
Lead
PH
Sulfate
TDS
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.75
0.012
0.039
0.043
4.1
4000
396
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
0.1
0.05
6.0-9.0
500
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.1
0.015*
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
~
~
~
6.5-8.5
250
500
*Action level
PageA-79
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
American Cyanamid Company Operation Manual, undated.
Final Hydrogeologic Evaluation, Tennessee Department of Public Health, Office of Solid Waste
Management, undated.
Application for State Operation Permit, Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water
Pollution Control. 1995.
Davies Engineering Company, Inc. Sampling Data. 1995.
Closure Plan for American Cyanamid Company, undated.
Public Notice of proposed alum mud disposal site, undated.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-80
-------
ASSOCIATED COMMODITIES CORPORATION
TENNESSEE
Facility Name: Associated Commodities
Corp.
Location:
Maury, Tennessee
Waste Stream: Aluminum slag and salt
compound
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Associated Commodities Corporation's
facility in Maury, Tennessee, processes aluminum
smelting drosses/residues. The regional
topography is typified by rolling hills which extend
down to the flood plain of the Duck River. The rate
of slope of the ground surface varies from virtually
flat-lying to 25% with the average slope estimated
to be 5%. The slope of the ground surface within
the development is generally flat with surface water
runoff flowing to the northwest and southeast. The
property is crossed by five principal and several
secondary eroded valleys.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 732 acre Associated Commodities landfill is situated along a ridge top, at an approximate
average elevation of 980 feet. Five active surface streams are present. The landfill accepted aluminum
slag and salt compound. The landfill stopped receiving waste in September of 1993. Landfill closure was
completed in 1994. Wastes are presently shipped off-site.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1995 groundwater sampling and the
highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Iron, nickel, and TDS
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Chloride
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Fluoride
Nitrogen
TDS
Turbidity
Ethylene dibromide
_pH
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.005
0.012
0.06
10
908
0.13
<0.1
595
47.3 NTLI
<0.0002
6.2
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.002
~
4.0
500
0.00005
6.0-9.0
MCL
(mg/l)
0.002
..
..
..
~
4.0
..
..
..
0.00005
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
5.0
250
2.0
500
..
6.5-8.5
Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Closure activities included placement of a compacted clay cap over the fill area, construction of
the cap of the former fill area, grading activities in the area downgradient of the fill area, seeding of grass
of the landfill, and quarterly groundwater sampling.
Sources of Information
Memorandum from Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, September 12,1994.
Letter from Resource Consultants Inc. to Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation,
August 19,1994.
Letter from Associated Commodities Corp. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation,
January 12,1994.
Subsurface Investigation for Proposed Recyclable Slag Storage Facility, Resource Consultants Inc.,
undated.
Corrective Action Activities, Resource Consultants, Inc., February 1993.
1995 Groundwater Sampling Data, Resource Consultants, Inc.
Personal communication with the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, August 1996.
Page A-82
-------
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
TENNESSEE
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Holston Army Ammunition
Plant
Kingsport, Tennessee
Mixture of ammunition
processing wastes
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Holston Army Ammunition Plant (HAAP)
was constructed in 1942 to manufacture the high
explosive RDX and formulations based on RDX.
Holston AAP currently manufactures RDX and
HMX (another high explosive) and formulations
based on these two explosives. Holston AAP is
located near Kingsport, in northeast Tennessee.
The facility is underlain by two major rock units, the
Mascot Dolomite and the Sevier Shale. The
Mascot formation is highly fractured and jointed,
and contains many solution channels. These
solution channels often develop vertically and form sinkholes. Groundwater is found in the abundant
fractures of the Sevier Shale. However, deeper fractures are usually sealed by calcium carbonate, and
significant quantities of groundwater are generally not found below 300 feet. The facility is bisected by the
Holston Rivr, which flows generally from northeast to southwest. Holston AAP operates an Active
Sanitary Landfill and a Tar Pit.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The wastes disposed of at HAAP consist of a mixture of materials from the manufacture of
explosives (ammunition) used by the Army. The Active Sanitary Landfill has seven associated sampling
wells. The Tar Pit has four associated sampling wells.
Extent of Contamination
Manganese was found to be above Federal standards in third quarter 1995 sampling results for
the active sanitary landfill. Groundwater sampling occurs quarterly.
Active Sanitary Landfill
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Manganese
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.160
TN Standard
(mg/l)
-
MCL
(mg/l)
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05
Manganese concentrations are naturally high in native soils in northeast Tennessee.
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed for in the third quarter 1995 sampling and the
highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells for the tar pit. The pH was found to be
above Tennessee or Federal standards. Groundwater sampling occurs quarterly.
Page A-83
-------
Tar Pit
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
COD
PH
Phenol
TDS
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
20
9.8
0.78
378
TN Standard
(mg/l)
--
6.0-9.0
500
MCL
(mg/l)
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
6.5-8.5
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The tar pit consists of two Solid Waste Management Units, SWMUs 14 and 15. A RCRA Facility
Investigation (RFI) has been performed on the two SWMUs. A removal action has been funded for
SWMU 15, and a Corrective Measure Study has been funded for SWMU 14. Both actions are expected to
be performed in 1997. The Sanitary Landfill will be closed in late 1996/early 1997.
Sources of Information
Groundwater Data and Summary, Third Quarter, 1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-84
-------
MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMPANY
TENNESSEE
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Monsanto Chemical
Company
Columbia, Tennessee
Variety of solid industrial
wastes
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Monsanto Chemical Company's
Columbia Tennessee plant processed phosphate
ore to extract elemental phosphorous for sale to
customers and for use in other Monsanto
operations external to the Columbia plant. The
manufacturing facility operated almost 50 years
prior to its shutdown in October 1986.
Subsequently, elemental phosphorous produced at
a sister plant was received in railroad tank cars,
unloaded and repackaged into 55-gallon drums for
sale. A local vendor crushed, sized, and shipped
previously stockpiled furnace slag for sale. No solid waste streams were generated from the phosphorous
repackaging or slag processing operations. In December 1995, the elemental phosphorous repackaging
operation was permanently shut down and the repackaging facility dismantled. Three additional plant
facilities remain operational. They were installed in 1986/87 in preparation for plant closure and include a
phosphorous recovery distillation still, a phosphorous contaminated water treatment plant, and an on-site
landfill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The plant presently operates a solid industrial waste landfill. The wastes currently being accepted
by the landfill are:
Phosphorus contaminated equipment components;
Office waste;
Building demolition waste;
Industrial demolition waste from process equipment operation and equipment repair;
including scrap metal, rubber, plastic, glass, paper, and cardboard that may contain trace
amounts of elemental phosphorus but are non-RCRA hazardous wastes;
Scrap metal, rubber, plastic, glass, paper, and cardboard from the on-site plant vehicle
repair shop; and
Scrap shipping materials including wooden pallets, cardboard, plastic, and metal
strapping.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies all of the constituents analyzed in the 1994-1995 groundwater sampling
of the landfill area and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Lead was
found to be above State standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Acetone
Acrylonitrile
Antimony
Arsenic
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.02
<0.02
<0.005
<0.05
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.006
0.05
MCL
(mg/l)
..
0.006
0.05
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
PageA-85
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Barium
Benzene
Beryllium
Bromochloromethane
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Carbon tetrachloride
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Fluoride
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.1
<0.005
<0.001
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
<0.01
<0.05
<0.01
0.36
0.014
<0.0002
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.017
0.07
TN Standard
(mg/l)
2.0
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.1
4.0
0.05
0.002
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.002
~
MCL :
(mg/l)
2.0
0.005
0.004
0.1
0.005
0.005
0.1
1.3*
4.0
0.015*
0.002
0.1
0.05
0.01
0.002
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
--
-
-
~
~
~
--
-
1.0
2.0
~
~
-
0.1
-
5
*Action levels
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Letter from Monsanto Chemical Company to Division of Solid Waste Management, Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation, September 20,1994.
Letter from Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation to Monsanto Chemical Company,
October 18,1994.
Groundwater Monitoring Analysis for Monsanto Chemical Company, 1994-1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-86
-------
OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION
TENNESSEE
Facility Name: Occidental Chemical Corp.
Location: Columbia, Tennessee
Waste Stream: Solid waste from phosphate
production
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Occidental Chemical Corporation is
presently using an area known as the Gaskill Farm
for the disposal of solid non-hazardous waste
generated at the Columbia facility. Phosphates are
produced at the facility.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The existing landfill covers approximately
19 acres in the northwest quadrant of the 724 acre
plant site. Of the 19 acres, 15 are currently inactive. The landfill is used for the disposal of industrial
waste. A current waste profile includes coke fines, scrap metal and wood, empty crushed drums, and
sludge from emission control scrubbers. No hazardous waste is disposed of in the landfill. The landfill
operates 5 days per week, 12 months a year. As scrubber sludge and coke fines compose the largest
portion of the waste, they are brought to the landfill three to four days per week. Sludge is deposited by
dump truck into the diked cell area. Nodule and slag fines are then used as cover as the cells are
completed during the weekly operation.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1994 groundwater sampling and the
highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Benzene was found to be above
Tennessee or Federal standards. Groundwater sampling occurs quarterly.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
2-Butanone
2-Hexanone
Acetone
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Cadmium
Carbon disulfide
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Ethylbenzene
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Nickel
Nitrate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.370
0.028
1.300
0.00018
0.000003
0.000091
0.009
0.0000012
0.023
0.200
0.00003
0.000086
0.002
0.0034
0.0256
0.000674
0.0011
0.00002
0.0023
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.006
0.05
2.0
0.005
0.005
0.1
0.7
4.0
0.05
~
0.1
10
MCL
(mg/l)
..
0.006
0.05
2.0
0.005
0.005
..
..
0.1
1.3*
0.7
4.0
0.015*
..
0.1
10
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
..
..
..
250
1.0
2.0
0.3
0.05
..
--
Page A-87
-------
GROUNDWATEiR CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Specific conductivity
(umhos/cm)
TOO
Toluene
Vanadium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
3.5(50
0.032
0.008
0.00001
0.00008
TN Standard
(ma/I)
1.0
--
0.001
MCL
(mg/l)
~~
-
1.0
--
--
(mg/l)
"
~
--
5.0
*Action levels
Some of the reported data may be from a monitoring well initially installed at the request of the
Tennessee Solid Waste division to be a downgradient test well, but was later determined to not be
downgradient of the landfill. Monitoring of this well did continue however.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Occidental Chemical Corp., 1994 Groundwater Sampling Results, undated.
Consulting Engineers, Inc., Description of Operation, undated.
Personal communication with the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, August 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-88
-------
SCEPTER, INC.
TENNESSEE
Facility Name: Scepter, Inc.
Location: New Johnsonville, Tennessee
Waste Stream: Slag
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Scepter, Inc. operates a commercial
industrial non-hazardous waste landfill near New
Johnsonville, Humphreys County, Tennessee.
Slag from an aluminum smelter is disposed of at
the landfill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The landfill covers approximately 134
acres, and varies in elevation from approximately
400 feet to 620 feet.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1992 sampling and the highest detected
level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Iron and pH were found to be above Tennessee or
Federal standards. Groundwater sampling occurs quarterly.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia (as N)
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
COD
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nitrate (as N)
PH
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Specific conductivity
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
TDS
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.1
0.002
<0.1
<0.0002
9.36
6.0
0.036
310
<0.01
15.7
0.026
3.98
<0.0002
3.40
4.4
2.9
<0.01
<0.01
5.9
85
12
304
6.0
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
2.0
0.005
~
0.1
~
0.05
~
0.002
10
6.0-9.0
~
0.05
0.01
500
MCL
(mg/l)
..
0.05
2.0
0.005
_.
0.1
0.2
..
0.015*
..
0.002
10
..
0.05
..
500
..
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
..
0.3
__
6.5-8.5
..
0.1
..
--
250
500
*Action level
PageA-89
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Scepter, Inc. 1992 Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Results.
Operating Manual, Industrial Landfill, Scepter, Inc., New Johnsonville, TN.
PageA-90
-------
TENNESSEE ALUMINUM PROCESSORS, INC.
TENNESSEE
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Tennessee Aluminum
Processors, Inc.
Mount Pleasant, Tennessee
Aluminum dross furnace
cake waste
Media Affected: Surface and groundwater
Facility Overview
Tennessee Aluminum Processors, Inc. is a
secondary smelter of aluminum scrap and dross.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Tennessee Aluminum Processors
stockpiles aluminum dross at its processing facility.
The material is soluble in water and as a result
has contaminated run-off from the property. This
contaminated run-off has percolated down to
underground waters and also has traveled
overland into surface waters, specifically Quality Creek, which runs adjacent to the site. The groundwater
at the site is classified for domestic and industrial water supply, livestock watering and wildlife, surface
water discharge, and irrigation uses. The waters of Quality Creek are classified for domestic and
industrial water supply, fish and aquatic life, recreation, irrigation and livestock watering, and wildlife uses.
Extent of Contamination
Surface water - The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1990-1993 surface water
sampling and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient samples. Aluminum,
chloride, and lead were found to be above Tennessee or Federal standards.
SURFACE WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Chloride
Lead
Manganese
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1.34
697
0.05
1.01
2,300
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
"-
MCL
(mg/l)
~
0.015*
..
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05 to 0.2
250
0.05
~
*Action level
Groundwater - The table below identifies the constituents analyzed in 1990-1993 groundwater
sampling and the highest detected level of each constituent in downgradient wells. Aluminum, chloride,
lead, and manganese were found to be above Tennessee or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Chloride
Lead
Manganese
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
108.0
37,200
0.16
8.03
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
~
MCL
(mg/l)
0.015*
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
250
..
0.05
PageA-91
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Specific conductance
(u mhos/cm)
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
67,500
TN Standard
(mg/l)
~~
MCL
(mg/l)
SMCL
(mg/l)
"
"Action level
The reported lead results may result in part from the natural presence of lead in the Bigby Cannon
limestone formation.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Crushing and screening processes have been added to aid in the reduction of the stockpile mass
and allow more confined storage of material. Additionally, the stockpile area has been reduced in size and
waste from the crusher has been stockpiled in a more contained, readily controlled area. Further,
concrete walls have been constructed to assist in containment and maintenance. Planning is underway
for the implementation of a total recovery process to recycle, sell, and/or permanently dispose of all
materials generated by Tennessee Aluminum Processors.
Sources of Information
Letter from Tennessee Department of Health and Environment to Tennessee Aluminum Processors, Inc.,
May 27,1987.
Letter from Caldwell and Associates to Tennessee Department of Health and Environment, June 29,
1988.
1990-1993 Sampling Data, Caldwell and Associates.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-92
-------
UCAR CARBON COMPANY INC.
TENNESSEE
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
UCAR Carbon Company
Inc.
Lawrenceburg, Tennessee
Process waste from carbon
brick manufacturing
Facility Overview
UCAR Carbon Company's facility in
Lawrenceburg, Tennessee manufacturers carbon
bricks.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
UCAR Carbon Company Inc., operates
one Class II industrial non-hazardous waste
disposal unit at the Lawrenceburg, Tennessee
facility to serve its carbon brick manufacturing
process. The industrial landfill is designed to
accept carbon and graphite, scrap metal, construction/demolition type material and other carbonaceous
wastes.
Extent of Contamination
The table below identifies the highest detected level of constituents from June 1994 in
downgradient wells. Cadmium, chromium, iron, lead, and nickel were found to be above Tennessee or
Federal standards.
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia nitrogen
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Carbon disulfide
Chloride
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Dissolved manganese
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Nitrate-N
PH
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
<0.1
0.02
0.451
<0.005
0.005
99.4
0.18
4.6
0.176
0.163
0.099
<0.01
1.11
72.8
0.091
29.2
0.00052
0.519
0.5
6.1
<0.005
<0.005
4.78
TN Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
2.0
0.004
0.005
~
~
0.1
0.05
0.002
0.1
10
6.0-9.0
0.05
0.01
-
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
2.0
0.004
0.005
"T
--
0.1
1.3*
0.2
~
0.015*
0.002
0.1
10
~
~
~
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
~
~
«
250
~
~
1.0
0.3
~
6.5-8.5
~
0.1
-
Page A-93
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
TENNESSEE OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Specific conductance
(umhos/cm)
Sulfate
Thallium
TOO
Vanadium
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mq/l)
578
175
<0.002
4.5
0.161
0.743
TN Standard
(mg/l)
500
0.002
~
-
MCL
(mg/l)
500
0.002
-
-
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
"
250
~
--
~
5.0
*Action level
The concentrations for chromium, lead, nickel, and pH were detected at high concentrations in the
facility background/upgradient well.
Measured sulfate, dissolved manganese and iron levels in the June 1994 sampling event
exceeded only the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCL). It is important to note that the
national secondary drinking water regulations (40 CFR 123) control contaminants in drinking water that
primarily affect the aesthetic qualities relating to public acceptance. Health implications may also exist at
considerably higher concentrations of these contaminants. These regulations are only guidelines for
States and are not federally enforceable.
It should be noted that during the analytical testing of the June 1994 event, antimony, beryllium,
and thallium were tested with a Limit of Quantification (LOQ) greater than the Maximum Contaminant
Level (MCL). These discrepancies were corrected in later sampling events.
No turbidity readings were taken during the June 1994 sampling event. Therefore no correlation
between sediment laden wells and relatively turbidity free wells within the groundwater monitoring network
at the Lawrenceburg, Tennessee facility can be made. Turbidity measurments have been implemented in
later sampling events.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
UCAR Carbon Company has adjusted sampling activities to address possible airborne
contamination. In addition, UCAR Carbon Company has initiated a correlation of the metals analysis in
response tot he sedimentation loading within the monitoring well network.
The Tennessee Division of Solid Waste Management, which regularly reviews the groundwater
quality data, has not presented regulatory concerns with the groundwater monitoring analytical results at
the Lawrenceburg, Tennessee facility.
Sources of Information
Regional Geohydrologic System, Law Engineering Testing Company, February 12,1982.
Registration Authorizing Solid Waste Disposal Activities in Tennessee, 1985.
Summary of Laboratory Analysis of Groundwater Samples, 1994.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-94
-------
ANZON AMERICA, INC.
TEXAS
Facility Name: Anzon America, Inc.
Location:
Laredo, Texas
Waste Stream: Antimony smelting slag
Media Affected: Groundwater and surface
water
Facility Overview
The Anzon America, Inc. facility in
Laredo, Texas is currently owned and operated by
Anzon Inc. and has been the site of metals
refining operations since the Texas Mining and
Smelting Company began operations in 1928.
The property was sold to the United States
government in 1947, who, in the same year sold it
to National Lead Industries. National Lead
operated the site until 1977, when it shut down for
approximately 18 months. Anzon Inc. acquired
the facility in 1978 and resumed operations. Las Manadas Creek is located approximately 100 to 200 feet
from the site. According to the site groundwater investigation report, the groundwater table ranges from
two to 18.5 feet below the surface, and the upper water-bearing zone is highly saline.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Anzon is a large quantity generator of hazardous waste according to the Waste Registration
Summary Report. The Phase II groundwater report indicates that the site used to store antimony ores on
concrete surface pads, and allow stormwater run-off on the ground. Since the blast furnaces were
removed from service in 1992, these outdoor storage practices have ceased. There are 17 water wells
within one mile of the Anzon property, either upgradient or cross-gradient. The Las Manadas Creek acts
as a shallow groundwater divide.
Extent of Contamination
The following information, regarding the extent of contamination at the site, was extracted from the
Phase II groundwater report. Groundwater monitoring wells sampled for the Phase II investigation in 1993
showed antimony levels from 0.004 mg/l to 0.8 mg/l in the upper water-bearing zone. In the lower water-
bearing zone, antimony levels ranged from 0.003 mg/l to 0.008 mg/l in downgradient wells. The highest
detected level of antimony (2.5 mg/l) in groundwater along the western plant boundary appears to be
related to the temporary historic storage of ores at a former blast furnace operation upgradient of the
impacted area. The site stopped accepting ores in 1991. Low levels of antimony were also detected in
upgradient wells. The facility's Phase II groundwater report to the Texas Water Commission (TWC) states
that it expects the concentrations of antimony to decrease with time. Due to naturally elevated levels of
total dissolved solids, the shallow, limited aquifer under the facility is not usable as a source of drinking
water. Additionally, deep aquifers underlying the facility have been investigated and have not been
impacted by antimony.
As shown in the table below, antimony exceeded Federal drinking water standards. However,
Anzon Inc. maintains that the insoluble forms of antimony found at the facility are approximately an order
of magnitude less soluble than the compound used to derive the federal drinking water standard, and thus
the bioavailability and toxicity of antimony found at the facility is significantly lower. Due to these
differences, Anzon feels that the risk to human health and the environment using the MCL as a basis of
comparison at the facility is significantly overstated.
Page A-95
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Antimony
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
0.006
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Anzon Inc. has been very active in investigating the facility and working with the TNRCC to ensure
protection of human health and the environment. Anzon has been performing environmental
investigations of all media at the site, beginning in 1991 and continuing into 1996. A Phase II groundwater
investigation was conducted at Anzon in May 1993. This investigation followed the Phase I investigation
conducted in October and November 1991, and was designed to define and characterize groundwater
quality at the Anzon facility. According to the Phase II groundwater report, ores or finished products are
no longer stored outdoors. Feedstock materials are currently shipped in supersaks and are stored and
processed indoors. There have been two additional rounds of well installation and groundwater sampling
following the Phase II Groundwater Investigation concluded in 1993. These continued groundwater
investigations have defined the horizontal and vertical extent of groundwater impact from historical
operations, and the impact is found to be limited to a very small area along the western boundary of the
facility.
Anzon has also conducted a human health and environment risk assessment in accordance with
the Risk Reduction Rules promulgated by the TNRCC. Pursuant to these assessments, it has been
determined that the antimony present in the environment at the Anzon facility does not pose an
unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. Anzon has received approval to close a
substantial portion of its property in accordance with the Risk Reduction Standards with the understanding
that no future action is necessary. While TNRCC has considered taking regulatory action at the facility,
Anzon has demonstrated that current management practices with regards to raw and other materials at
the site are protective of human health and the environment. These management practices include the
indoor storage of all raw materials with potential impact to the environment, control of stormwater runoff
from the manufacturing area of the facility, reduction of air emissions, control of fugitive emissions, along
with other best management practices and engineering controls which minimize the potential for release of
contaminants to the environment. Anzon believes that the site is taking adequate precautions under
existing regulatory programs to ensure that historical contamination from past practices is remedied and
that human health and the environment are being protected from current operations at the facility.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Phone conversation with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Enforcement Coordination
and Litigation Division. September 14,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. September 6,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18,1995.
Phase II Groundwater Investigation Report, Anzon Incorporated, Laredo, Texas. September 17,1993.
Page A-96
-------
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-97
-------
ELF ATOCHEM
TEXAS
Facility Name: Elf Atochem'
Location: Bryan, Texas
Waste Stream: Process wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater and surface
water
Facility Overview
Elf Atochem, a French chemical
company, bought this facility in 1989; the site has
manufactured pesticides and insecticides for 50
years. A municipal lake and several streams are
located near the site (exact distance unknown).
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility is a large quantity generator of
hazardous waste according to the Waste
Registration Summary Report. This report also indicates that in addition to the sprinkler water collection
lagoon, the facility had a waste pile of arsenic-contaminated soil used for temporary storage before
treatment. This waste pile was removed and closed in 1992. There are also two other surface
impoundments, one closed in 1994 and the other remains active, but plans to close as a landfill.
There are 46 monitoring wells across the facility. The facility monitors quarterly or annually
depending on the location of the wells.
Extent of Contamination
The following information regarding the extent of contamination at the site was extracted from the
Status Report on the Groundwater Extraction System. As shown in the table below, arsenic, benzene,
gamma-BHC, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, ethyl benzene, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide,
pentachlorophenol, and 1,1,2-trichloroethane exceeded Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Benzene
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
gamma-BHC
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Diazinon
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Ethyl parathion
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Methyl parathion
4-Nitrophenol
n-Nitrosodimethylamine
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.14
0.012
0.00114
0.00005
1.24
0.032
0.0312
0.426
0.000426
0.0316
0.0346
0.931
0.00018
0.0022
0.00096
0.000142
36.8
1.97
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.005
0.0002
0.006
0.1
~
0.6
0.075
0.7
0.0004
0.0002
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
..
..
~
._
~
..
..
..
--
Page A-98
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Pentachlorophenol
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1 ,1 ,2-Trichloroethane
0,0,0-Triethylphosphorthioate
Xylenes
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.063
0.0352
0.021
0.000125
4.78
MCL
(mg/l)
0.001
0.07
0.005
10
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
--
~
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Phone conversation with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Enforcement Coordination
and Litigation Division. September 14,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. Septembers, 1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18,1995.
Status Report on the Groundwater Extraction System, Elf Atochem North America, Inc., Bryan, Texas.
Supplement to the Semi-Annual Report for July, 1994. Volume 1. Prepared by Geraghty & Miller,
Inc.
Page A-99
-------
ROBROY INDUSTRIES - TEXAS, INC.
TEXAS
Facility Name: Robroy Industries - Texas, Inc.
Location: Gilmer, Texas
Waste Stream: Neutralized spent acid sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Robroy Industries site is a corrosion
resistant electrical conduit and fitting manufacturer
located near Gilmer, Texas. Prior to 1983, the
facility employed zinc plating and galvanizing in its
manufaturing process. Since 1983, the facility's
manufacturing process has been primarily a
coating operation, utilizing PVC and
polyurethanes.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility is a large quantity generator of hazardous waste according to the Waste Registration
Summary Report. The following information regarding the waste management practices at the facility was
extracted from the Phase III/IV progress report. The facility, constructed in 1962, operated two landfills to
dispose of neutralized spent acid sludge from former zinc plating and galvanizing operations. Both
landfills are now closed. Immediately adjacent to the main landfill (Site A) is a closed process water
holding pond. In the 1960s the site disposed of spent acid in an evaporation/holding pond along with its
rinse water and cooling water. In 1976 the site began neutralizing the acid then disposing of the resultant
sludge in the clay-lined landfill at Site B. In 1977, the acid holding pond was lined with clay and converted
to the Site A landfill. Electroplating operations ceased in 1978, and galvanizing operations ceased in
1983. Both landfills remained open for future use. In 1985, EPA sued Robroy for inadequate closure
plans and RCRA violations at the landfills. The suit was dropped when Robroy demonstrated that the
sludge in the Site A and Site B landfills is non-hazardous. A full groundwater investigation and closure
plan was initiated.
Extent of Contamination
Data presented in the table below, were extracted from a 1989 groundwater monitoring data
report. In addition to the parameters listed below, Site A has high specific conductance.
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, manganese, pH, and sulfate exceeded Federal
drinking water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
PH
Phenolics
Sodium
Sulfate
TOO
Total organic halogens
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1,907
4,400
22
3.0
26
2,400
19,800
120
1.18
MCL
(mg/l)
~
~
~
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
~
250
«
..
Page A-100
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
According to the Phase III/IV progress report, as part of the site's closure plan, eight new
monitoring wells have been installed in addition to the twelve existing wells. In addition, engineering
controls, primary waste stabilization, and impermeable caps were implemented at the closed landfills and
holding pond. The facility completed a two year post-closure monitoring period in December 1995. Based
on the results of the data collected, Robroy currently is requesting that the Site B landfill be closed under
the Texas Risk Reduction Rules. By agreement with the TNRCC, the facility started an additional two
year groundwater monitoring period to gather the data to finally close the Site A landfill. The additional
data will be submitted to the TNRCC to support the facility's desire for final closure under the Texas Risk
Reduction Rules.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. September 6,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18,1995.
Phase III/IV Progress Report Ground Water Investigation, Robroy Industries - Texas, Inc. Prepared by
ERM-Southwest, Inc. September 17,1992.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft verions of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-101
-------
SOUTHWESTERN BARGE FLEET SERVICE, INC.
TEXAS
Facility Name: Southwestern Barge Fleet
Service, Inc.
Location:
Highlands, Texas
Waste Stream: Washwaters, oil sludge, waste
paper, and debris
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Southwestern Barge Fleet Service
facility is a chemical and petroleum barge
cleaning and repair facility located in Highlands,
Texas. The San Jacinto River is located near the
site (exact distance unknown).
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The facility is a large quantity hazardous
waste generator according to the Waste
Registration Summary Report. The following
information regarding the waste management practices at the facility was extracted from the Site
Assessment Plan. A storage impoundment was used to hold washwaters, crude oil, and No. 6 fuel oil
recovered during the cleaning of barges. This unit was backfilled with waste paper and construction
debris from the site. In 1979 the impoundment was covered with one to two feet of cement kiln flue dust
and capped with two to four feet of clayey soil; then, the unit was covered with topsoil and vegetative
cover.
Extent of Contamination
The following information regarding the extent of contamination at the facility was extracted from
the Site Assessment Report. Subsequent to closure, oily liquids were found discharging at several
locations adjacent to the impoundment. The chromium exceedances may be indicative of naturally
occurring poor groundwater quality, and do not reflect contamination from the former impoundment.
As shown in the table below, aluminum, chromium, trans-1,2-dichloroethene, iron, manganese,
selenium, and vinyl chloride exceeded Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
1,1-Dichloroethane
trans-1 ,2-Dichloroethene
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
9.17
<0.01
<0.01
0.626
14.9
<0.005
<0.01
597
0.088
<0.05
<0.06
0.081
0.608
1.56
16.1
MCL
(mg/l)
~
0.006
0.05
2.0
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.1
--
1.3
0.2
0.005
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
~
~
...
~
~
~
1.0
--
~
~
~
Page A-J02
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Naphthalene
Nickel
Phenol
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Vinyl chloride
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
25.5
213
5.58
<0.0008
2.24
<0.06
5.5
49.7
0.051
<0.008
3,620
<0.002
<0.06
8.6
0.126
MCL
(mg/l)
0.002
0.1
0.05
0.002
~
0.002
.
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.3
~
0.05
0.1
--
-
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
According to the Site Assessment Plan, three oil/water recovery sumps were installed within the
limits of the former impoundment in order to prevent further discharges.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Phone conversation with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Enforcement Coordination
and Litigation Division. September 14,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. September 6,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18, 1995.
Site Assessment Plan, Southwestern Barge Fleet Service, Inc., Highlands, Texas. Prepared by
Southwestern Laboratories, Inc. October 19,1992.
Page A-103
-------
STAUFFER CHEMICAL
TEXAS
Facility Name: Stauffer Chemical
Location: Stauffer, Texas
Waste Stream: Wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Stauffer Chemical manufactured
pesticides at its Stauffer, Texas facility. Buffalo
Bayou is within one mile of the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The Stauffer Chemical plant is not a
hazardous waste generator according to the
Waste Registration Summary Report. The site
monitors groundwater semi-annually and submits a comprehensive annual report. The following
information regarding the waste management practices at the facility was extracted from the Barrier Well
System Performance Report. As part of a compliance directive issued by the State of Texas, Stauffer
initiated closure activities at the site in 1980. The impoundment was capped and a barrier well system
was installed to remove groundwater contaminants and prevent migration beyond the property
boundaries.
Extent of Contamination
The following information regarding the extent of contamination at the facility was extracted from
the Barrier Well Performance Report. As shown in the table, below, atrazine, benzene, gamma-BHC, iron,
manganese, and total dissolved solids exceeded Federal water standards. The data presented in the
table below were from sampling events in 1993 and 1994 from four barrier wells and one cleanup well
located within the property boundaries.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Atrazine
Benzene
alpha-BHC
gamma-BHC
Bicarbonate
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
PP'-DDT
EPTC
Fluoride
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Methyl parathion
Molinate
Nitrate
Potassium
Sodium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.024
0.038
0.087
0.077
528
149
464.3
92.5
0.005
0.096
0.43
0.67
24.45
0.39
0.18
0.36
4.27
1.32
56.2
MCL
(mg/l)
0.003
0.005
0.0002
~
4
~
--
--
--
~
10
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
--
~
~
~
250
~
2
0.3
--
0.05
--
--
--
~
Page A-104
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO FEDERAL DRINKING
WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Sulfate
TOC
Toluene
Total organic carbon
Total suspended solids
o-Xylene
m.p-Xylenes
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
42.4
540
0.19
5.7
213
3.8
6.7
MCL
(mg/l)
500*
1
10
10
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
500
..
..
--
* Sulfate MCL is under consideration by the Agency.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Phone conversation with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Enforcement Coordination
and Litigation Division. September 14,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. September 6,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18, 1995.
Barrier Well System Performance, August 1992 through June 1994, Stauffer Management Company
Hempstead Road Site, Harris County, Texas. Prepared by Geraghty & Miller, Inc. August 11,
1994.
PageA-105
-------
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, INC.
TEXAS
Facility Overview
Texas Instruments in Dallas, Texas is
currently a metal fabrication facility.
Manufacturing operations at the plant include
metal grinding, polishing, drilling, cutting, painting,
and plating. No known surface water body exists
on or near the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Texas Instruments, Inc.
Location: Dallas, Texas
Waste Stream: Wastewater
Media Affected: Groundwater
The facility is a large quantity generator of hazardous waste according to the Waste Registration
Summary Report. The following information regarding the waste management practices at the facility was
extracted from the Radio Tower Closure Plan. The machine shop adjacent to the Radio Tower Site at the
facility had collection trenches used to collect metal shavings and to reprocess the cutting oil. These
trenches were located along the perimeter of the building and are now filled with concrete. The facility
stopped using the trenches in the early 1980s. Now the plant has a cutting oil/fluid recycling system.
Extent of Contamination
The following information regarding the extent of contamination at the facility was extracted from
the Radio Tower Closure Plan. The Radio Tower Site at the Texas Instruments facility is the primary area
of contamination. Free floating petroleum product was found in some monitoring wells. The former
trenches are a primary source of groundwater contamination near the Radio Tower. The cutting oil
recycling system now being used is not believed to impact groundwater.
From the 1960s to the early 1970s the site used carbon tetrachloride in its semi-conductor
production and metals finishing processes.
The following contaminants were detected in groundwater sampling events: carbon tetrachloride,
chloroform, tetrachloroethene, trichloroethene. All of these contaminants were used in the metals
fabrication processes at some point in time. In addition, the following chemicals were also detected: 1,1-
dichloroethane, methylene chloride, toluene. Specific levels were not readily obtainable in the facility files.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Information was not readily available.
Sources of Information
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission Risk Reduction Rules, Chapter 335.
Phone conversation with Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Enforcement Coordination
and Litigation Division. September 14,1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Information Resources Division, Waste Registration
Summary Report, database query. Septembers, 1995.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Industrial and Hazardous Waste Division, facility files.
Retrieved September 18,1995.
Page A-106
-------
Tl Lemmon Ave. Radio Tower Site, Closure Plan Amendment Report, Texas Instruments Incorporated,
Dallas, Texas, April 1993. Prepared by Caldwell Engineering.
Texas Instruments Incorporated Lemmon Ave. Facility Radio Tower Site Closure Plan, Dallas, Texas,
December 1992. Prepared by Caldwell Engineering.
Page A-107
-------
CHESAPEAKE PAPER PRODUCT COMPANY
VIRGINIA
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Chesapeake Paper Product
Company
King William, Virginia
Industrial non-hazardous
solid waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Chesapeake Paper Products Company
(CPPC) owns and operates a captive industrial
solid waste facility located in rural King William
County, Virginia. The facility is located within a
275 acre site that is approximately 5 miles
northwest of the Town of West Point on the west
side of SR30. It is bounded by SR30 to the north,
the Norfolk Southern Railroad to the south, land
owned by the Pamunkey Game Club to the west,
and other lands of CPPC and private owners to the
east. The land between the Norfolk Southern
Railroad right-of-way and the Pamunkey River is also owned by CPPC. Adjacent lands are either forested
or used for agricultural purposes.
The facility consists of two permitted landfills identified as Mann #2 (permit #255) and Mann #3
(permit #543). Mann #2 is an active landfill that covers 11 acres and began operation on or about
September 25,1978. It reached its capacity in June 1993 and is currently in post-closure care. The
nearest surface body of water is the Pamunkey River which is 1400 feet to the south. Mann #3 is an
active three phase landfill with a design capacity of approximately 50 years. Phase 1 covers 21.3 acres
and began operation in May 1993 and is expected to reach its capacity in about 17 years. Phases 2 and 3
will cover 35.4 'acres when constructed. The nearest surface body of water is the Pamunkey River which
is 700 feet to the south.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
All waste received at the facility is non-hazardous industrial waste generated by CPPC. Waste
streams include ash from coal and wood-fired boilers, construction debris, secondary fiber and paper
waste, occasional dewatered sludge from wastewater treatment operations, and other non-hazardous
industrial wastes. Mann #2 groundwater is monitored by one upgradient and four downgradient wells.
Mann #3 is monitored by four upgradient and six downgradient wells.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater is monitored at one upgradient and three downgradient wells. The table below
identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells. Iron and zinc were found to
be above Virginia or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
VIRGINIA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium
Iron
Magnesium
Sulfates
TDS
TOC
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0063
0.046
1.6
0.6
16.9
190
1.7
VA Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
2
--
~
~
«
MCL (mg/l)
~
~
~
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
0.3
~
~
500
~
Page A-108
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
VIRGINIA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.057
VA Standard
(mg/l)
0.05
MCL (mg/l)
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Mann #2 entered Virginia's Phase 2 monitoring program on February 19,1993 and has continued
with an approved modified Phase 2 monitoring program to date as the result of one Phase 3 monitoring
event in September 1994.
Sources of Information
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for the Chesapeake Corp. Mann # 2 Industrial Waste Landfill, May 1992.
Chesapeake Paper Products Company, Phase 2 Background Data, Mann # 2 Landfill, June 1994.
Chesapeake Paper Products Company, Phase 2 Background Data, Mann # 2 Landfill, September, 1994.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 Monitoring
Program, August 22, 1995.
Drinking Water Regulations and Health Advisories, US EPA, Office of Water, February 1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills, June 17,1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 GW Monitoring,
June 17,1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-109
-------
GEORGIA-PACIFIC
VIRGINIA
Facility Name:
Location:
Waste Stream:
Georgia-Pacific
Bedford, Virginia
Industrial non-hazardous
solid waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Georgia-Pacific is located in Bedford,
Virginia.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Georgia-Pacific operates an unlined, on-
site, industrial waste landfill which began receiving
waste in approximately 1976, ceased receiving
waste by October 9,1993, and was closed
permanently by October 31,1994. Only non-
hazardous wastes (bark, fly ash, bottom ash, process wastewater sludge, papermill trash and garbage
and asbestos containing material) were landfilled at the facility.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater is monitored at one upgradient and three downgradient wells. The table below
identifies the highest level of each constituent detected in downgradient wells. Beryllium, iron, and lead
were found to be above Virginia or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
VIRGINIA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Selenium
Sodium
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.024
1.010
0.005
0.003
184
0.047
0.05
<0.02
37.1
0.19
0.006
40.2
0.5
VA Standard*
(mg/l)
0.05
2.0
0.004
0.005
0.1
1.3
0.2
0.015
0.05
4.7
MCL
(mg/l)
«
2
0.004
0.1
1.3**
0.2
--
0.015**
0.05
--
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
~
~
-
250
~
1.0
~
0.3
~
-
-
5
*These Groundwater Protection Standards (GWPS) were developed with the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality and will become effective upon issuance of the Post Closure Permit for the facility
in 1996 or 1997. The GWPS are based on background levels, Federal MCL's, or risk-based alternate
concentration limits. Since their establishment in 1995, no exceedances of these GWPS have occurred at
the site. Likewise, no exceedances of Federal Drinking Water Standards have occurred in that time
either.
"Action level
PageA-IW
-------
Many of the "high" data values were directly impacted by the relatively high level of turbidity in the
groundwater wells (one downgradient and one side gradient well). Additionally, the water samples were
unfiltered.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Georgia-Pacific installed a closure cap consisting of soil combined with a 30 mil. VLDPE synthetic
geomembrane to minimize stormwater infiltration into the waste and thereby minimize the potential for
leachate generation. The facility has completed Phase II groundwater monitoring program requirements in
1995. In April 1996 a request was made to the VA DEQ to modify the landfill permit for the post closure
period. A Phase III groundwater monitoring plan, as required by the VSWMR, has been proposed in the
permit modification.
Sources of Information
Georgia-Pacific Groundwater Sampling, June 24,1992.
Georgia-Pacific Groundwater Sampling, October 28,1992.
Phase 2 Monitoring, January 17, 1994.
Georgia-Pacific Corp. Industrial Waste Disposal Facility, Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report, February
28,1994.
Georgia-Pacific Groundwater Sampling, September 28,1994.
Georgia-Pacific Groundwater Sampling, January 23,1995.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 Monitoring
Program, August 22,1995.
Georgia-Pacific Groundwater Sampling, February 1996.
Drinking Water Regulations and Health Advisories, US EPA, Office of Water, February 1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills, June 17,1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 GW Monitoring,
June 17, 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-111
-------
HERCULES INCORPORATED
VIRGINIA
Facility Name: Hercules Inc.
Location: Allegheny, Virginia
Waste Stream: Waste propylene and latex
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Hercules Inc. is located in Allegheny,
Virginia. The soils at the site are alluvial sediments
consisting primarily of silts and fine sands which
coarsen downwards into silty and clayey gravel
and silty sand with gravel at the base above
bedrock. The bedrock below these alluvial soils is
a black shale of the Millboro Formation of the
Devonian age. The shale is encountered at depths
of 8.5 to 20 feet below grade.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Hercules Inc. has an on-site industrial landfill which began operating in 1965 and has been
inactive since 1993. The facility was permitted in 1973 as a sanitary landfill, but was later designated as
an industrial waste landfill in 1993. The landfill contains waste polypropylene and latex. The facility
contains three distinct waste disposal areas: the mound, trench, and pit areas. The mound area received
baled saran-coated polypropylene film; the trench area received saran latex solids; and the pit area
received baled, saran-coated polypropylene film.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater is monitored at 4 wells. The table below identifies the highest level of each
constituent detected in downgradient wells. Cadmium, iron, lead, and zinc were found to be above Virginia
or Federal standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
VIRGINIA OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Cadmium
Chloride
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Selenium
Sodium
TOC
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0099
77
0.014
788
0.376
0.002
11.8
1.8
0.385
VA Standard
(mg/l)
0.050
0.05
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
..
0.015*
0.05
..
..
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
250
..
0.3
.-
..
..
5
'Action level.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The facility entered into Virginia's Phase 2 rrtonitoring program on July 16,1992. Additional
information was not readily available.
PageA-112
-------
Sources of Information
Annual Summary Report on Phase I Groundwater Monitoring at the Hercules Forster Plant Landfill,
February 1992.
Hercules Incorporated Industrial Waste Landfill, Covington, Virginia, 1993 Groundwater Annual Report,
February 28, 1994.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 Monitoring
Program, August 22,1995.
Hercules Incorporated, Statistics Report, Comparison of Indicator Parameters Detected in Groundwater
During Phase I Monitoring, September 27,1995.
Drinking Water Regulations and Health Advisories, US EPA, Office of Water, February 1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills, June 17,1996.
Virginia Solid Waste Management Facilities List - Industrial Waste Landfills in Phase 2 GW Monitoring,
June 17, 1996.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-113
-------
APPLETON PAPERS LOCK MILLS
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Appleton Papers Lock Mills
Location: Combined Locks, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Appleton Papers Lock Mills is a paper mill
located in Combined Locks, Wisconsin. The Fox
River is located 400 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 11-acre unlined landfill closed in
1992. The site was previously an old gravel pit,
and in the 1970s the mill began disposing of its
sludge in the pit. The site placed a cover on the landfill in the late 1980s. Groundwater is monitored
quarterly. There are residential areas near the facility.
Extent of Contamination
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is unsure of the source of contamination.
The Fox River is raised and lowered often, which affects sampling. There is no apparent trend to the
exceedances.
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, pH, sulfate, and total dissolved solids exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Boron
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
Magnesium
PH
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
2.8
810
3,228
446
0.68
325
5.4
382
274
1,685
1,120
Wl Standard (mg/l)
~
125
0.15
6.5-8.5
125
675 I
MCL
(mg/l)
..
..
_-
__
..
__
500
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
_
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
..
250
500
-
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In 1993, the site placed another cover on the landfill. There are no further remedial actions
planned.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 15, 1995.
PageA-114
-------
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Page/4-775
-------
BADGER PAPER MILL
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
Badger Paper Mill is located in Peshtigo,
Wisconsin. The Peshtigo River is located 300 feet
from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 5-acre landfill is unlined and disposes
of 9,000 tons/year of waste. Groundwater is
monitored quarterly. The nearest drinking water
well is located 3,000 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, and manganese exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water
standards.
Facility Name: Badger Paper Mill
Location: Peshtigo, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
PH
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
220
759
130
44
1.75
6.4
84
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.15
0.025
125
MCL
(mg/l)
_
..
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
There is no groundwater remedial action being taken. The Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) has requested that the site propose a remedial plan.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database query, August 21,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Page A-J16
-------
CONSOLIDATED PAPERS KRAFT DIVISION
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Consolidated Papers Kraft
Division
Location:
Wisconsin Rapids,
Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Pulp mill wastes
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Consolidated Papers Kraft Division is a
paper mill located in Wisconsin Rapids,
Wisconsin. The Wisconsin River is 50 feet from
the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 37-acre landfill is unlined, with
several phases closed and capped. The open
cells are receiving waste at a slow rate. The site
is near closure according to the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The landfill receives related waste such as boiler ash, wood
wastes, knots, lime dregs, asbestos, sand, clean fill, and rubble.
Groundwater is monitored quarterly but is expected to switch to semiannually. The nearest
drinking water well is located 2,000 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
Most monitoring wells indicate exceedances of some Wisconsin standard. As shown in the table
below, chloride, iron, and pH exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
Magnesium
PH
Phenols
Sodium
Sulfate
Total suspended solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.08
568
1860
1200
710
20
4.3
0.047
12060
17
1135
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.15
6.5-8.5
~
125
-
MCL
(mg/l)
~
-
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
-
~
250
0.3
-
6.5-8.5
-
-
250
~
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The site installed a groundwater collection trench; no further action is anticipated.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
PageA-117
-------
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database query, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-118
-------
CONSOLIDATED PAPERS WATER RENEWAL
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Consolidated Papers Water
Renewal
Location:
Linwood, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Consolidated Papers Water Renewal is a
paper mill located in Linwood, Wisconsin. The
Wisconsin River is 300 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The nine-acre landfill began receiving
waste in 1971. Area 1 is unlined, and now closed
and capped. Areas 2 and 3 still receive waste
and both have liners and leachate collection
systems. Groundwater is monitored semi-annually. The nearest drinking water well is located two miles
from the site.
Extent of Contamination
It appears that the impact to groundwater is from waste disposed in the older, unlined portion of
the landfill (Area 1). Most of the wells with impacted groundwater are installed through waste in Area 1.
As shown in the table below, chloride, chloroform, dichloromethane, iron, manganese,
nitrate/nitrite, pH, phenol, sulfate, toluene, total dissolved solids, trichloroethylene, and zinc exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Boron
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Chloroform
Dichloromethane
Ethylbenzene
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nitrate/nitrite as N
pH
Phenol
Phosphorous
Silica
Sodium
Sulfate
Toluene
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids
Trichloroethylene
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
44
780
3,600
580
0.01
0.018
0.0013
860
350
37
64
4.4
60
14
170
11
2,200
1.3
2,880
4,100
0.0085
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
~
125
0.0006
0.015
0.14
0.15
0.025
2
6.5-8.5
1.2
125
0.069
0.0005
MCL
(mg/l)
--
0.1
0.005
0.7
--
10
~
~
500
1
~
0.005
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
250
~
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
500
--
~
PageA-119
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
* Contaminant
Xylene
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.002
110
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
~
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
10
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
There is a groundwater gradient control system in place for all four landfill areas. Groundwater
from Area 1 wells is extracted and treated at a wastewater treatment plant adjacent to the landfill. A clay
cutoff was installed around Area 1.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-J20
-------
CONSOLIDATED PAPERS WATER QUALITY CENTER
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Consolidated Papers Water
Quality Center
Location:
Wisconsin Rapids,
Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Consolidated Papers Water Quality
Center (WQC) is a paper mill located in Wisconsin
Rapids, Wisconsin. Cranberry Creek runs
adjacent to the site, and the Wisconsin River is
2,600 feet away.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 32-acre landfill began receiving
waste in 1975. Area 1, the oldest portion, is
unlined. Areas 2 through 5 have three-foot clay
liners and leachate collection systems. Groundwater is monitored semi-annually. The nearest drinking
water well is located 1,200 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
Groundwater is impacted from waste disposed in Area 1. In the early 1980's, the facility installed
a clay cut-off wall down to the bedrock and a sand and dewatering trench upgradient of the cut-off wall.
The bedrock fractured and contaminants went under the cut-off wall.
As shown in the table below, barium (dissolved), benzene, chloride, chromium (hexavalent),
dichloromethane, iron (total), lead, mercury, nitrate as N, pH, sulfate, toluene, and total dissolved solids
exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia as N
Barium (dissolved)
Benzene
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Chromium (hexavalent)
Copper
Dichloromethane
Ethylbenzene
Iron (total)
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nitrate
PH
Phenols
Silica
Sodium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
200
2.6
0.0032
540
1,880
1,360
23
0.064
0.012
0.022
230
0.12
150
0.002
13.36
4.4
1.2
27
390
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.4
0.0005
125
0.010
0.13
0.015
0.14
0.15
0.0015
0.0002
6.5-8.5
~
MCL
(mg/l)
2
0.005
~
0.1
1.3*
0.005
0.7
0.015*
0.002
10
..
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
~
250
1
_.
0.3
..
..
6.5-8.5
..
~
PageA-121
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Sulfate
Toluene
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
490
0.92
4,500
6,100
0.1
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.0686
--
~
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
500
1
~
--
(mg/l)
250
500
5
* Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The site has installed extraction wells downgradient, which seem to be effective in reversing the
groundwater flow. The groundwater is removed to a wastewater treatment plant adjacent to the site.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-J22
-------
DEROSSO LANDFILL
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
Derosso Landfill is a foundry sand mining
landfill located in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Across
the street from the landfill is a pond which was
created when clay was removed pursuant to a
DNR closure order for use as capping on the
closed landfill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Derosso Landfill
Location: Oak Creek, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Foundry sand
Media Affected: Groundwater
The 45-acre landfill began receiving foundry sand in 1972 and was closed under the terms and
conditions of a DNR closure plan and order in 1989. The landfill is lined with naturally occurring clay, and
does not have a leachate collection system. Groundwater is currently monitored quarterly. The nearest
drinking water well is located two miles from the site.
Extent of Contamination
This landfill has only received foundry sand during the life of its operation. During 1982 or 1983,
the landfill entered into a contract with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation to remove some
foundry sand for use as road base material. During the process of removing some of this road base
material two to three empty open topped barrels were discovered at the landfill. There is no evidence that
drummed waste was ever disposed of at this landfill. Regardless of this fact, the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) believes that some of the volatile organics exceedances a result from waste other than
foundry sand waste. The phenol exceedances are most likely resulting from the foundry sand waste.
As shown in the table below, arsenic, benzene, cadmium, chloride, chromium, cyanide,
ethylbenzene, fluoride, iron, lead, manganese, pH, phenol, sulfate, toluene, and xylenes have at times
exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards. There is no evidence of any off-site impact caused by
these exceedances. Some of the constituents listed below, including calcium carbonate, potassium and
sodium have no State or Federal standards, and in many cases the highest detected level does not
exceed either the State or Federal standard.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Benzene
Cadmium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Ethylbenzene
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.018
0.82
0.025
1,400
570
0.5
0.02
0.4
0.66
10
9
0.4
0.41
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.005
0.0005
0.005
--
125
0.01
0.13
0.04
0.14
0.44*
0.15
0.005
0.025
MCL
(mg/l)
0.05
0.005
0.005
0.1
1.3*
0.2
0.7
4
0.015*
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
-
-
250
--
1
2
0.3
-
0.05
Page A-123
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Nickel
Nitrate/nitrite
PH
Phenol
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Toluene
Total suspended solids
Xylenes
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.02
0.3
10.2
1.7
26
960
11,000
1.7
380
3
0.09
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
2.0
6.5-8.5
1.2
124
0.068
0.124
0.25
MCL
(mg/l)
0.1
10
--
~
500
1
--
10
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
~
6.5-8.5
~
250
2
~
5
* Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
EPA considered listing the site as a Superfund site, but determined the damage did not merit a
listing. The landfill is now capped as part of the closure requirements. No further remedial action is
planned.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Phone conversation with Wisconsin DNR engineer, September 10,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-124
-------
FALK FOUNDRY
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
Falk Foundry is an industrial sand mining
landfill located in Franklin, Wisconsin. Root River
is 200 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 17-acre unlined
landfill. Groundwater is monitored quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
Facility Name:
Location:
Falk Foundry
Franklin, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Foundry sand, wastewater
from foundry
Media Affected: Groundwater, potentially
surface water
The discharge region is downgradient of a large industrial area. Thus, the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) believes that the source of the contamination may extend beyond the landfill.
As shown in the table below, aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chloride, chromium, fluoride,
iron, lead, manganese, mercury, pH, and sulfate exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
PH
Phenols
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
2.2
0.28
0.086
0.001
170
280
1,700
0.04
0.03
26
1,300
0.06
72
0.86
0.0044
0.02
10.4
0.01
3.7
0.002
640
1,350
0.08
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
~
0.005
0
0.0005
125
0.01
0.13
0.44*
0.15
0.005
0.025
0.0002
~
6
0.010
125
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
~
0.05
2
0.005
--
0.1
1.3*
4
0.015*
--
0.002
0.1
--
'
0.05
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
--
~
250
--
1.0
2
0.3
~
0.05
--
6.5-8.5
--
-
~
250
5
* Action level
Page A-125
-------
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
There is no remediation currently being taken. The DNR recently asked Falk Foundry to analyze
leachate to gain more meaningful data.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-126
-------
FLAMBEAU PAPER CORPORATION
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Flambeau Paper Corporation
Location: Eisenstein, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
Flambeau Paper Corporation is a paper
mill located in Eisenstein, Wisconsin. Flambeau
River is 1,200 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is an 18-acre landfill that
is currently closed. Groundwater is monitored
quarterly. The nearest drinking water well is
located 1,400 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
The facility is in a highly contaminated area. Adjacent areas formerly contained sulfide liquor
lagoons, which are thought to be the source of sulfate contamination.
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, pH, and sulfate exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water
standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
PH
Sodium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
8,500
610
642
4.4
29
2,800
37,507
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.15
~
125
-
MCL
(mg/l)
--
--
-
-
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
-
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
-
250
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
There is no remediation at the landfill; however, the sulfide liquor lagoons are under remediation.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management,
Solid Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22, 1995.
Page A-I27
-------
GEORGIA-PACIFIC - TOMAHAWK MILL
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Georgia-Pacific - Tomahawk
Mill
Location: Tomahawk, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Mixed Paper Mill Waste
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Tomahawk Mill is a paper mill located
in Tomahawk, Wisconsin. Located on a
peninsula, the site is 500 feet from the Wisconsin
River and 1600 feet from the Spirit River flowage.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 30-acre unlinecl
landfill, which is now closed. Portions of the
landfill are covered with silty clay, bentonite
amended soil, or geomembrane. There is also a lined landfill adjacent to the unlined disposal site, which
is not believed to be causing contamination. Groundwater is monitored quarterly. The nearest drinking
water well is about 700 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, cadmium, chloride, iron, manganese, nitrite as N, pH, sulfate, and
zinc exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia as N
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Fluoride
Iron
Manganese
Nitrite as N
PH
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
410
31.2
0.001
540
3,625
0.17
320
1.18
2.32
5.6
670
359
5,000
100
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.0005
~
125
0.8
0.15
0.025
1
~
125
2500
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
4
10
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
..
250
2
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
There is no further corrective action required. The cover is in place and the site no longer
receives waste. The facility is preparing a groundwater investigation report.
PageA-128
-------
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management,
Solid Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22, 1995.
PageA-129
-------
GEORGIA-PACIFIC - SARATOGA
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
The Georgia Pacific facility in Saratoga,
Wisconsin is a paper mill. The Wisconsin River is
300 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 20-acre three-phase
landfill. Phase I is an un-engineered landfill.
Phase II is an engineered and lined landfill.
Phase III is a lined landfill. Groundwater is
monitored quarterly. The nearest drinking water
well is 1,000 feet from the site.
Extent of Contamination
Phase I of the landfill is the source of the groundwater contamination.
As shown in the table below, barium, chloride, chromium, copper, iron, manganese, mercury, pH,
and sulfate exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
Facility Name: Georgia-Pacific Waste Water
Treatment Site/Landfill
Numbers
Location: Saratoga, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Barium
Chloride
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Mercury
PH
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
3.3
669
0.042
0.9
493
72
0.007
4.4
680
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.2
125
0.01
0.13
0.15
0.025
0.0002
125
MCL
(mg/l)
2
0.1
1.3*
..
0.002
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
1
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
' Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A cut-off wall and collection system were installed in the mid 1980s. This system has been very
effective in reducing contaminant concentrations in the groundwater and is still active.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management,
Solid Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Page A-130
-------
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
PageA-131
-------
KOHLER CO.
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Kohler Co.
Location:
Facility Overview
The Kohler Company site is an industrial
waste landfill. The Sheboygan River is 150 feet
from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 53-acre landfill, located on a 82-acre
parcel is unlined. Groundwater is monitored
quarterly. The nearest drinking water well is
located one-half mile from the site. From the
1950's through 1975, the site received solvents,
oil, and plating wastes.
Extent,of Contamination
Pre-RCRA, dike failures occurred and the Sheboygan River was contaminated. The extent of
contamination of the Sheboygan River is difficult to measure. The impact to groundwater is a result of
releases from the landfill waste mass. Liquids disposed in the landfill and leachate from the site have
entered the groundwater system. The impact to groundwater results from a phenolic resin used as a
binder for foundry sand molds, as well as other industrial waste received at the landfill.
As shown in the table below, aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chloride, chromium (total),
iron, lead, manganese, nickel, phenol, sulfate, and total dissolved solids exceeded Wisconsin or Federal
water standards.
Sheboygan County,
Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Waste foundry sand cores,
pottery cull and molds and
other non-hazardous
industrial wastes.
Media Affected: Groundwater and surface
water
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium (total)
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1.36
0.32
0.008
10.7
0.010
82
0.07
386
148
0.048
0.12
0.39
0.006
127
0.37
0.0002
0.0006
0.31
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
--
0.005
0.2
0.0005
125
0.01
0.13
0.15
0.0015
0.025
0.0002
~
MCL
(mg/l)
--
~
0.05
2
0.004
0.005
--
~
0.1 ,
1.3
~
0.015
~
0.002
0.1
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
-
-
-
-
~
.
-
250
--
1
0.3
-
~
0.05
-
--
PageA-132
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
pH
Phenol
Phosphorous
Potassium
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfate
Tin
Titanium
Total dissolved solids
Vanadium
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
7.7
6
0.41
16
0.0091
546
6.5
778
0.03
0.03
2,700
0.442
0.15
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
6.5-8.5
1.2
-
-
0.1
~
125
~
~
, -
~
2.5
(mg/l)
-
--
.
--
. -
--
500
-
--
--
--
(mg/l)
6.5-8.5
--
0.1
~
250
~
~
500
5
* Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and USEPA have issued both a Source
Control and Groundwater Record of Decision (March 1992 and April 1996, respectively). The selected
remedy specifies closure, placement of a clay cap, installation of a groundwater interceptor drain and
groundwater monitoring. Remedial action is scheduled to begin in 1997.
Sources of Information
Data from table 5-1 "Constituents of Concern" Environmental Contamination Assessment and
Groundwater Remedial Action Alternatives Report Addendum, Kohler Co. Landfill, November
1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21, 1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-133
-------
MOSINEE PAPER
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Mosinee Paper
Location: Mosinee, Wisconsin
Waste Stream:
Paper mill sludge primarily,
but also ash and bark
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Mosinee Paper Mill is located in
Mosinee, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin River is 550
feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 10.7-acre landfill has been licensed
by the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), since 1978. Of this 10.7 acres,
3.8 acres were closed during 1995 using
approved cover procedures. Originally the site was a wastewater lagoon that was converted to an unlined
landfill. Groundwater is monitored quarterly. The nearest drinking water well is located 1,300 feet from
the site and has not been impacted.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, chromium, iron, manganese, mercury, pH, and sulfate exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards. Background levels of iron are also high in background wells.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Chromium
Iron
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrate as N
PH
Phosphorous
Sodium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
51
0.05
988
38.6
0.002
0.65
5.4
1.03
420
174
1,268
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.01
0.15
0.025
0.0002
6.5-8.5
..
125
-
MCL
(mg/l)
0.1
0.002
10
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
--
0.3
0.05
»
__
6.5-8.5
250
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A downgradient groundwater collection trench was installed by Mosinee in 1987 in response to a
negotiated remediation plan with the Wisconsin DNR, but no cut-off walls were required or installed. The
groundwater collection trench collects downgradient groundwater and returns it for treatment through a
WPDES wastewater facility along with leachate collected from the site. There is no further remedial action
planned.
Page A-134
-------
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22, 1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-135
-------
NEENAH PARKSIDE - BERGSTROM
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
The Neenah Parkside-Bergstrom site is a
paper mill located in Neenah, Wisconsin. Lake
Butte is 25 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 23-acre unlined
landfill. The facility is located within the floodplain
of Lake Butte. Sludge is used to fill this area of
the floodplain. Groundwater is monitored
quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, pH, and sulfate exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water
standards.
Facility Name: Neenah Parkside -
Bergstrom
Location: Neenah, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
PH
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
1,880
854
80
5.7
764
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.15
--
125
MCL
(mg/l)
~
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
250
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A partial non-engineered cap exists on the landfill. There are no further plans to upgrade the
design of the disposal site.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management,
Solid Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-136
-------
NEKOOSA PAPERS INC.
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Nekoosa Papers Inc.
Location: Nekoosa, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Ash and bark
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Nekoosa Paper Mill is located in Port
Edwards, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin River is
1,500 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site, licensed in 1976, is a
35-acre unlined landfill. A clay cut-off wall and
gradient system were installed in 1980. The cut-
off wall was constructed on three sides of the original landfill and an expansion site, on the west, north,
and east side of the combined sites. The cut-off wall was keyed into the decomposed rock to a depth of
approximately 16 to 24 feet below grade, the cut-off wall was designed to take advantage of the
groundwater mound configuration at the site and the fact that there is no tendency for water to flow to the
south from the landfill area. To ensure that positive gradients are maintained towards the landfill and that
contaminants leached from the sludge do not migrate to the south, a groundwater gradient control system
was incorporated into the design. Groundwater is monitored quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, chloride, iron, pH, sulfate, and total dissolved solids exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards. In the case of iron, the area groundwater is known to have high
iron content. The data in the table does not reflect present conditions. Most data are prior to additional
remediation efforts taken in 1983.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
PH
Sodium
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
244
981
150
382
5.2
623
1,800
2,170
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
0.15
..
125
-
MCL
(mg/l)
..
500
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
..
250
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The site was modified in 1977 to include a clay cut-off wall keyed into the weathered bedrock
zone, where it existed, and rested on solid bedrock over the remainder of the perimeter. The cut-off wall
was constructed around the full perimeter of the landfill. An interior leachate collection system and french
drain system were installed and operated in late 1977. These efforts were undertaken under the direction
of the State of Wisconsin and were completed with the cooperation and participation between the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Nekoosa Papers Inc. Gradual groundwater degradation
in wells 19 and 20 was noticed beginning in 1981 after showing improvement after the modification. An
additional french drain was installed on the south side and partially on the east and west sides in late
1982. A new, higher capacity leachate pump was started up in 1983, which lowered the water level within
Page A-J37
-------
the cut-off wall under the landfill and assured an in-gradient flow of groundwater from outside the
periphery. The groundwater quality in the vicinity of the landfill has improved since reconstruction of the
landfill.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-138
-------
NIAGARA OF WISCONSIN PAPER CORP.
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
The Niagara Paper Mill is located in
Marinette County, Wisconsin. Monitoring wells
are located within 50 feet of the Menominee River.
The facility is located along the side of the river.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The landfill is closed, with no other
industry in the immediate vicinity. The landfill was
completely capped in the last two years.
Groundwater is monitored quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table beiow, boron, cadmium, iron, pH, selenium, and sulfate exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
Facility Name: Niagara of Wisconsin Paper
Corp.
Location: Marinette County, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium carbonate
Iron
pH
Potassium
Selenium
Sulfate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
80.3
3
2,820
0.5
6.2
495
26.6
4,404
0.1
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
2.9
0.0005
0.15
0.01
125
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
0.05
500
-
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
0.3
6.5-8.5
250
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) received an Environmental Contamination
Assessment (EGA) report from the site in August 1995. An upgraded cap and additional wells were
installed. The agency has not recommended further action.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22, 1995.
Phone conversation with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, September 14,1995.
Page A-139
-------
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-140
-------
POPE & TALBOT WISCONSIN INC. LANDFILL
WISCONSIN
Facility Name:
Location:
Pope & Talbot Wisconsin
Inc. Landfill
Eau Claire County,
Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludges
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Pope & Talbot landfill is located in
Eau Claire County, Wisconsin. Six Mile Creek is
200 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 19-acre landfill began receiving
waste in 1978. Currently, the site has a three-foot
clay liner and leachate collection system (Phase 3
area). Previously, the site dewatered the sludge,
compacted it, and used it as a liner (Phases 1 and
2 areas). The sludge liner is suspected to have developed fractures and leachate permeated the
compacted waste liner.
Groundwater is monitored quarterly. The nearest drinking water well is located 1,350 feet from
the site.
Extent of Contamination
A breach in the compacted sludge liner in Phases 1 and 2 and leachate handling practices
resulted in an impact to groundwater. The paper mill manufactures recycled paper, and therefore, must
use solvents to de-ink the recycled paper. Many of the contaminants found in the groundwater are
process solvents used in the de-inking phase. Private drinking water wells, located approximately 1,000
feet from the facility, were contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and iron. There is no
evidence that organisms in the surface water have been impacted.
As shown in the table below, benzene, cadmium, chloride, chromium, 1,1-dichlorethylene, trans-
1,2-dichloroethylene, iron (dissolved), manganese, naphthalene, nitrate/nitrite as N, pH, sodium, toluene,
trichloroethylene, and vinyl chloride exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Ammonia as N
Benzene
Bromodichloromethane
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
Cadmium
Calcium
Calcium carbonate
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloride
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
19
0.0015
0.0001
0.00078
0.00042
0.001
32
5,300
0.0001
210
0.0017
0.003
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.0005
0.036
..
0.0005
~
0.0005
125
0.08
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
0.1
0.005
~
0.005
~
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
..
..
250
..
~
Page A-141
-------
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloroform
Chloromethane
o-Chlorotoluene
p-Chlorotoluene
Chromium
Dibromochloromethane
m-Dichlorobenzene
o-Dichlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,1-DichIorethylene
cis-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
trans-1 ,2-Dichioroethyiene
Dichloromethane
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
trans-1 ,3-Dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Freon
Iron (dissolved)
Isopropylbenzene
Isopropyl toluene
Manganese
Naphthalene
Nickel
Nitrate/nitrite as N
PH
n-Propylbenzene
Sodium
Sulfate
Toluene
Tribromomethane
Trichloroethylene
1 ,1 ,1 -Trichloroethylene
1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1 ,3,5-Trimethyibenzene
Vinyl chloride
Xylene
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0001
0.00033
0.016
0.00027
0.082
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.016
0.005
0.0016
0.052
0.004
0.0001
0.0001
0.0012
0.0025
230
0.0024
0.00058
1.34
0.019
0.057
11
4.8
0.0051
64
10
0.79
0.0001
0.006
0.0001
0.028
0.0098
0.016
0.0045
0.285
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.0006
--
~
~
0.01
0.043
0.125
0.06
0.015
0.085
0.0007
0.01
0.02
0.015
. 0.0005
-
0.14
0.698
0.15
0.025
0.008
2
6.5-8.5
~
15
125
0.069
--
0.0005
0.04
-
--
0.00002
0.124
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
0.1
--
-
-
0.1
--
0.6
0.6
0.075
--
0.007
0.07
0.1
0.005
0.005
-
0.7
--
--
--
-
--
-
0.1
10
~
--
-
500
1.0
-
0.005
0.005
--
~
0.002
10
~
SMCL
(mg/l)
--
~
--
--
~
--
--
--
~
--
-
-
-
--
-
~
~
.--
0.3
~
0.05
--
-
--
6.5-8.5
~
~
250
~
-
--
--
~
-
~
"
5
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The facility altered its de-inking process. The site placed a composite cap over Phase 1 and 2
areas of the landfill. The site attempted to install leachate extraction wells through the sludge, but the
wells have had limited success in removing leachate. The site was required to replace impacted private
wells with a sidegradient shared well.
Page A-142
-------
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout. August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21, 1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-I43
-------
RICHLAND CENTER FOUNDRY
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Richland Center Foundry
Location: Richland Center, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Foundry sand
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Richland Center Foundry is an
industrial spent sand landfill in Richland Center,
Wisconsin. The Pine River is an average of 350
feet away from the mouth foot of the landfill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The 3.7 acre landfill received foundry
sand waste from 1975 until its closure in 1990.
Phases I, II, and III of the landfill are unlined but are clay capped according to applicable regulations;
phase IV is both lined and capped. Eleven groundwater monitoring wells are tested biannually and two
leachate wells are checked monthly to verify their dry condition. There are no drinking wells near the site.
Extent of Contamination
The groundwater has exceedances of Wisconsin groundwater standards for iron and chloride, as
well as high conductivity and chemical oxygen demand. No specific data were available. It is possible
that the high iron levels are due to natural causes and that the high chloride levels are due to the practice
of "salting" Highway 14 during the winter months.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
As part of its closure plan, the site installed a multi-layered cap of clay and cover soils. No further
action is anticipated.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database query, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 21,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-144
-------
TOMAHAWK TISSUE CORPORATION
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Tomahawk Tissue
Corporation
Location:
Tomahawk, Wisconsin
Facility Overview
The Tomahawk Paper Mill is located in
Tomahawk, Wisconsin. Wetlands exist 1,360 feet
from the site. The facility is currently bankrupt.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal facility is a 20-acre unlined
landfill. Groundwater was monitored quarterly
from 1976 to 1989. The nearest drinking water
well is two miles from the site.
Extent of Contamination
As shown in the table below, iron, manganese, and pH exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water
standards.
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium
Chloride
Chlorobenzene
p-Dichlorobenzene
Iron
Maqnesium
Manganese
pH
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Total suspended solids
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
88
28.4
0.0067
0.0029
40.5
26.4
4.8
5.9
23
370
37,860
0.0042
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
125
~
0.015
0.15
--
0.025
125
--
, ~
0.124
MCL
(mg/l)
--
-
-
0.075
--
~
500
-
10
(mg/l)
250
~
~
0.3
0.05
6.5-8.5
250
500
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
In 1991 the facility's license was revoked. No other information about the facility was readily
available.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System .
database printout, August 22, 1995.
Page A-145
-------
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-146
-------
TORK ALUM LANDFILL
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Tork Alum Landfill
Location: Wisconsin Rapids,
Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Alum sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Tork Alum Landfill is located in
Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin. Cranberry Creek
is located 300 feet from the landfill.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 10-acre unlined
landfill. The landfill is licensed by the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources and was owned
and operated between the mid 1950's and 1983
by Tork Landfill Corporation. While in operation, the landfill accepted low-pH waste clay residue
generated during the production of aluminum sulfate (alum) by the former Allied Chemical Corporation
(now Allied Signal Inc.) at a facility in Wisconsin Rapids, Wl. Groundwater and surface water monitoring
at the site has continued on a routine basis since the site closed, with the analytical results submitted to
the WDNR on a quarterly basis.
Extent of Contamination
The site has been closed for many years; however, it is still impacting groundwater. Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources also believes that surface water may be affected, but does not have
surface water data.
As shown in the table below, cadmium, chloride, chromium, iron, lead, pH, and sulfate exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Aluminum
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
PH
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
99
0.7
103
1,065
58
600
28
475
3.2
26,000
1730
1.19
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
~
0.0005
125
0.01
0.15
0.0015
~
~
125
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
.. -
0.005
--
0.1
0.015*
500
--
--
SMCL
(mg/l)
0.05-0.2
-
~
250
~
0.3
~
6.5-8.5
250
500
5
* Action level
The highest concentrations detected for cadmium, chromium, and lead are not from the routine
monitoring program and represent a one-time monitoring event in August of 1979. It is doubtful the
sampling techniques utilized at the time met current standards. It is also unlikely the samples were field
filtered. The 1992 DNR SSI and 1996 ACE sampling results do not support the data collected in 1979. It
Page A-147
-------
should also be noted that the reported highest concentrations are above the levels reported in the pore
water of the alum residue.
The highest chloride level noted in the draft table is from February 1978 in well AC-6B. This is
one of the two questionable chloride results that exceeded 1,000 mg/L during that time period. Also, the
alum residue pore water had a very low chloride concentration, 17 mg/L.
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
A soil cap was placed over the site upon closure and construction documentation of the closure
was approved by the State on March 15,1984. The State completed a Potential Hazardous Waste Site-
Preliminary Assessment of the landfill in June 1984 and ranked the landfill as a low priority. As part of a
cooperative agreement between the USEPA and the State, a Site Screening Inspection (SSI) was
conducted at the landfill by the State on April 2,1991. In December, 1995, the State issued a Plan
Modification Approval to address exceedances of state standards for sulfates in groundwater at the site.
The Plan Modification required an Environmental Contamination Assessment be prepared and conducted
at the site, which is currently underway.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-148
-------
WARD PAPER
WISCONSIN
Facility Overview
The Ward Paper Mill is located in Merrill,
Wisconsin. The facility ceased operations in late
1994 and the landfill ceased receiving paper mill
sludge at that time. No known surface water
bodies exist on or near the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
Facility Name: Ward Paper
Location: Merrill, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
The 9-acre site began receiving waste in
1983. The landfill is divided into five cells. Cells NV are unlined. Cell V has a liner composed of
recompacted native soil (silty sand) overlain by a geomembrane. The final cover is soil and
geomembrane. Groundwater is monitored quarterly.
Extent of Contamination
The site is fairly isolated. Wisconsin's hydrogeologists believe that the landfill waste is the sole
source of the groundwater contamination.
As shown in the table below, cadmium, iron, lead, mercury, nitrate/nitrite, and pH exceeded
Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Arsenic
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nitrate/nitrite as N
PH
Selenium
Sodium
Sulfate
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
0.0039
2.1
0.02
317
80
0.0014
17.6
0.008
75
0.004
3.8
6
0.0045
4
52.3
0.1
Wl Standard
(mg/l)
0.005
0.0005
-
125
0.010
0.15
0.005
0.0002
2
0.01
125
2.5
MCL
(mg/l)
0.005
--
-
-
0.015*
0.002
10
--
0.05
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
~
-
~
-
250
-
0.3
--
-
-
-
6.5-8.5
~
250
5
* Action level
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
The facility performed an Environmental Contamination Assessment and determined that a
composite liner should be installed in Cell V if the facility is to remain active. The landfill has been closed
PageA-149
-------
and the final closure documentation is being developed. Under the new Wisconsin solid waste regulations
promulgated in July 1996, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is considering relaxing the
monitoring requirements from quarterly to semi-annually.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15,1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 21,1995.
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
Page A-150
-------
WAUSAU PAPER MILLS
WISCONSIN
Facility Name: Wausau Paper Mills
Location: Brokaw, Wisconsin
Waste Stream: Paper mill sludge
Media Affected: Groundwater
Facility Overview
The Wausau Paper Mill is located in
Brokaw, Wisconsin. The Wisconsin River is
1,000 feet from the site.
Wastes and Waste Management Practices
The disposal site is a 6-acre landfill. The
landfill is divided into three cells. Cell I is unlined
and has no leachate collection system. Cell II is
lined and has a leachate collection system. Ceil III has a five-foot clay liner and a leachate collection
system. Groundwater is currently monitored quarterly but may be changed in part to semi-annually. The
nearest drinking water well is 2,650 feet side gradient from the site.
Extent of Contamination
The contamination is thought to be caused by Cell I of the landfill. According to the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) hydrogeologist, there are exceedances of Wisconsin
groundwater quality standards for the following parameters: alkalinity, chemical oxygen demand, iron,
manganese, and hardness.
As shown in the table below, chloride and iron exceeded Wisconsin or Federal water standards.
The standard for iron has also been exceeded at several upgradient (background) wells.
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS COMPARED TO
WISCONSIN OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Calcium carbonate
Chloride
Iron
PH
Sulfate
Highest Detected
Level (mg/l)
5,160
310
11.1
6.06
20.5
Wl Standard
(mg/I)
125
0.15
125
MCL
(mg/l)
~
500
SMCL
(mg/l)
250
0.3
6.5-8.5
250
Corrective Actions/Regulatory Actions
Cell I and Cell II are currently closed. The Wisconsin DNR has required Cell I to be recapped with
a composite cap of clay, bentonite mat, and geomembrane, which was subsequently completed by July
1996. If the problem continues, the other cells will be considered for additional corrective action.
Sources of Information
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Groundwater and Environmental Monitoring System database
printout, August 15, 1995.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid
Waste Management Section, Solid and Hazardous Waste Inventory Management System
database printout, August 22, 1995.
Page A-151
-------
Meeting with Wisconsin DNR hydrogeologist, August 22,1995.
Written correspondence submitted by facility and/or State on draft version of release descriptions, October
1996.
PageA-152
-------
SECTION A.2:
CONSTRUCTION AND
DEMOLITION LANDFILL
RELEASE DESCRIPTIONS
Page A-153
-------
GAROFALO C&D SITE
ISLIP, NEW YORK
Media Affected:
Groundwater
Overview of Site/Site History
The Garofalo C&D landfill was operated illegally by the Garofalo Carting Company (the Company)
on land owned by Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center (PSPC) in Islip, New York. In 1978, the Company was
confronted by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) concerning
illegal dumping and excavating on land owned by the PSPC. The Company has been fined and
repeatedly ordered to clean up the site, but has not complied with the sanctions.
The Garofalo site is located in a densely populated section of Long Island. Approximately 10,000
people reside within three miles of the landfill, including 1,200 people at the PSPC located immediately
south of the site. Several schools are located within one mile of the site.
Facility Operations
The Garofalo C&D landfill was cited for violations under the New York State Environmental
Conservation Law, Article 27, in 1986. Testing found the landfill material to be comprised of 10 to 60
percent sandy soil with lesser amounts of silt, and mechanically crushed wood, metal, plastic, bricks,
concrete, whole trees and brush, large timbers, pilings, railroad ties, chain link fencing, rugs, plastic, and
fiberglass sheeting. In 1989, approximately 100 syringes with needles and some intravenous tubing were
found on PSPC property, near the landfill site.
Facility Design
Five test pits excavated at the site revealed no engineered cover material. We assume that there
is no liner or leachate collection system, but the Preliminary Site Assessment (PSA) did not specifically
discuss these features.
Site Environment and Hydrogeology
The landfill is located in the Upper Glacial geologic unit, which extends to at least 90 feet below
the land surface. The unit is comprised of coarse to fine sand and medium to fine gravel, with less than
five percent silt. The soils are highly permeable, with hydraulic conductivities ranging from 1.46 x 10"1to
6.55 x 10"' centimeters per second (cm/sec). Average annual precipitation for the region is 43.4 inches per
year, 21 inches of which is available for infiltration.
The landfill is located in a primary recharge area to the Upper Glacial aquifer, which is
hydraulically connected to two other aquifers (the Magothy Formation and the Lloyd sand of the Raritan
Formation). Both the Upper Glacial and the Magothy aquifers are pumped for domestic and industrial
uses in the vicinity of the site. Two municipal well fields are located about 1.25 miles and 3 miles from the
site. The aquifer system has been designated a "Sole Source Aquifer" by the U.S. EPA under the
provisions of the Federal State Drinking Water Act.
Although wetlands are located near the site, they are isolated from the landfill by road systems. It
is not likely that surface water run-off will reach any rivers or creeks due to topographic and human-built
borders.
Page A-154
-------
Summary of Environmental Damages
Groundwater monitoring at the perimeter of the landfill detected seven inorganic contaminants at
elevations that exceed the New York State Class GA standards for groundwater. The levels of these
contaminants, as well as the level of total dissolved solids (IDS) are compared to Class GA standards
and EPA drinking water standards (MCLs and SMCLs) in Table 1.
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
NEW YORK AND/OR FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant .
Chromium
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Sodium
TDS
Zinc
Highest Detected
Level (|ig/l)
134
130,000
90
94,900
33,200
178,000
1,630,000
391
Class GA
Standard (ug/l)
50
300
25
35,000
300
20,000
500,000
300
MCL
(WJ/I)
100
15*
--
-
SMCL
(H9/I)
--
300
--
--
50
~
500,000
5000
*Value is action level for lead at the tap
Discussion
Ground water at the perimeter of the landfill was found to contain several contaminants at levels
above their drinking water standards.
Municipal well fields are located about 1.25 to 3 miles from the site. Off-site groundwater
monitoring was not conducted as part of this study. According to the investigators, data from this one
round of sampling do not conclusively determine whether or not the C&D landfill is affecting groundwater
quality near the site.
No disposal of hazardous waste (as defined in 6NYCRR Part 371) was documented during the
PSA. The PSA recommended closing the Garofalo C&D site, and capping it to reduce infiltration and
provide surface water control.
Source
Final Preliminary Site Assessment: Garofalo C&D Site; New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC); November 1991.
PageA-155
-------
COX'S DARBYTOWN ROAD LANDFILL HENRICO COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Media Affected: Groundwater
Overview of Site/Site History
The 100-acre site is located in Henrico County, Virginia, adjacent to a road and two miles from the
Richmond International Airport runway. According to an engineering company working for the landfill, the
shallow aquifer in the area of the landfill receives only limited use. Although the exact opening date of the
landfill is unknown, the landfill received a permit on June 20,1989 for its third parcel (a 34-acre area) to
accept wastes; the other two parcels had already been receiving demolition wastes. According to the
source documents, the landfill has accepted only construction, demolition, and debris wastes.
Facility Operations
The site is permitted to accept only construction, demolition, and debris wastes, including
construction debris, demolition debris, broken brick, block, concrete rubble, brush, tree trimmings, stumps,
and leaves. Excluded are municipal solid waste (any putrescible waste), industrial waste, liquid waste,
and hazardous waste. According to the 1989 site investigation, the site apparently also accepted tires.
Facility Design
The design of the landfill required a one-foot liner of on-site soil with a permeability of less than 1 x
10"* centimeters/second, a leachate collection system of PVC pipe for each cell, a collection manhole for
each cell, and a pump and haul process to a treatment facility. A 1988 memo from the Wiley and Wilson
engineering firm noted that where existing sand pits were located, the pits would be filled with non-organic
waste material consisting of broken concrete, bricks, broken pavement, and soil up to an elevation of one
foot below the bottom of the landfill and then covered with a one-foot liner layer. The design included a
100-foot wide buffer strip around the perimeter of the entire landfill with a 50-foot buffer strip on the inside
boundaries of the adjoining sections of the landfill. Groundwater monitoring is conducted at one
upgradient and three downgradient wells.
Site Environment and Hydrogeology
The shallow aquifer lies 1 to 14 feet below the ground surface in the area of the landfill, but the
landfill! design required at least 3 feet between the seasonal high groundwater elevation and the bottom of
the landfill, including a one-foot liner. It is unclear whether the landfill design is in violation of this
requirement. A nearly impermeable marl layer serves as a confining layer to the deeper aquifer. The site
apparently has gently sloping topography.
In the shallow aquifer, the dominant groundwater flow direction at the site is northward. The
groundwater velocity ranges from 5.6 x 10"6 cm/sec at the eastern portion of the site to 8.8 x 10'6 cm/sec at
the western portion of the site. The hydraulic gradient ranges from 0.012-0.019 ft/ft at the site. Little is
known about the deeper aquifer except that it is virtually confined by an overlaying marl.
Summary of Environmental Damages
A 1989 site inspection revealed waste slopes exposed due to lack of sufficient cover, a breach of
the 50-foot buffer zone between wastes and the edge of the property, and leachate seeps that did not
leave the site.
Page A-156
-------
1993 monitoring results indicated statistically significant increases in specific conductance and
total organic carbon (TOC) in downgradient on-site wells when compared to an upgradient well. In
addition, pH was found to be unusually low during the 1991 monitoring.
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER PARAMETERS EXCEEDING BACKGROUND
LEVELS AND FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Parameter
TOC (jig/I)
Conductance (umhps/cm)
Parameter
PH
Highest
Detected Level
57,000
2,758
Lowest
5.98
Background
Level
21,200
170
Background
6.6
MCL
--
-
MCL
.
SMCL
-
~
SMCL
6.5-8.5
Discussion
According to the 1993 Annual Report, data gathered from groundwater monitoring indicate that
contamination may be occurring in the groundwater at Cox's Darbytown Road Landfill. The facility was
moved into the Phase II monitoring program because specific conductance and TOC were significantly
higher in downgradient wells than in the upgradient/background well. The source documents do not
address whether or not the contamination extends off-site.
Sources
1993 Annual Report, Cox's Darbytown Road Landfill, Inc. Prepared by Joyce Engineering, Inc., June
1994.
1st Quarter Phase I Sampling Event Results, Cox's Darbytown Road Landfill, Inc. Prepared by Joyce
Engineering, Inc., May 1994.
2nd Quarter Water Monitoring Analyses, Cox's Darbytown Road Landfill, Inc. Prepared by Joyce
Engineering, Inc., July 1990.
Chemical Analytical Report, Central Virginia Laboratories and Consultants, May 1994.
Commonwealth of Virginia, Solid Waste Disposal Site Inspection Report of Darbytown Landfill, September
5,1989.
Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Health Permit to M&M Wrecking Company, Inc., for a Sanitary
Landfill, July 3, 1975.
Memorandum from Linda K. Lightfoot to Berry F. Wright, Virginia Department of Waste Management,
November 20,1987.
Memorandum from Wiley & Wilson to Berry F. Wright, Jr., Virginia Department of Waste Management,
January 13, 1988.
Memorandum from Wiley & Wilson to Berry F. Wright, Jr., Virginia Department of Waste Management,
January 20, 1988.
Memorandum from John F. Deal to Dr. W. Gulevich, Virginia Department of Waste Management, August
19, 1987.
Page A-157
-------
Memorandum from S.B. Cox, Inc. to Hassan Vakili, Virginia Department of Waste Management, January
8,1993.
Memorandum from Edward Hollos, Joyce Engineering, Inc. to Howard Freeland, Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, June 30,1994.
Memorandum from Harry Gregori, Virginia Department of Waste Management to S.B. Cox, Inc., June 21,
1991.
Solid Waste Facility Permit, June 20,1989.
Solid Waste Facility Permit, July 26,1988.
Page A-158
-------
QUALLA ROAD LANDFILL
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Media Affected:
Groundwater, Surface Water
Overview of Site/Site History
The Qualla Road Landfill is an active 33-acre C&D landfill located in a mainly agricultural area in
Chesterfield County, Virginia. The landfill opened in 1983 with an 11-acre area, and 22 acres were added
in 1988. To date, 16 of those 22 acres have received waste. The facility is owned by a private farmer and
leased to Sanifill, Inc. The landfill capacity is estimated to be 1.523 million cubic yards over a design life of
12 years.
Two fires have been reported at the landfill, one in 1990 and one in 1993. Both were quickly
extinguished.
Facility Operations
The Qualla Road Landfill accepts C&D waste, brick, concrete rubble, brush, tree trimmings, and
stumps. Approximately 40 percent of the waste at the site is land-clearing debris, which is currently -
disposed on approximately ten unlined acres. The remaining 60 percent is building material and
demolition waste and is disposed on approximately six lined acres. Prohibited wastes include hazardous
waste, liquids, garbage, refuse, agricultural waste, industrial waste, paper products, asbestos, fly ash,
bottom ash, sludge, tires, white goods, leaves, and metal scrap. According to the permit, six inches of
daily cover must be applied.
Facility Design
The Qualla Road Landfill has been permitted jn sections, and the facility design varies depending
on when a section was permitted. The original 11 acres probably were unlined. As of 1987, at least five
feet between the cell bottoms and the seasonal high groundwater table were required. Of the 22 acres
added in 1988,10 acres are unlined, 6 acres are equipped with a compacted soil bottom liner
(permeability of 1 x 10"6 cm/sec) and a leachate collection system, and the remaining 6 acres have not yet
been put to use. As of 1994, leachate must be discharged to an underground storage tank to be
ultimately pumped and hauled to a waste treatment plant. Run-on and run-off controls, and a groundwater
interceptor were also described for portions of the landfill in the 1994 design.
Site Environment and Hydrogeology
Soils under the landfill consist of a 2- to 4-foot upper layer of lean to fat clays and elastic silt,
underlain by silty sand and sandy silt soils to depths of 20 to 50 feet. Groundwater in the area is found 10
to 38 feet below the ground surface. The general movement of groundwater is to the west (toward Reedy
Branch), with a gradient of 0.03 to 0.08 feet/feet. Lateral flow is about 3.5 x 10'5 to 3.8 x 10'4 centimeters
per second (cm/sec) and vertical flow is about 9.7 x 10'5 cm/sec. Rainfall is estimated at 42 inches a year.
The landfill drains into Swift Creek (to the north) and Reedy Branch (to the west), a tributary to
Swift Creek. The original 11 acres were located within the 100-year flood plain of Swift Creek. A flowing
stream, possibly fed by discharge through the groundwater from a pond at the southern edge of the site,
was located on the site prior to the 1987 proposed expansion.
Summary of Environmental Damages
In 1987, debris was protruding from the original landfill adjacent to Swift Creek, and the relief was
too steep to retain soil covering. The source documents attested that the presence of a stream within the
Page A-159
-------
boundaries of the proposed landfill expansion was "unacceptable" and could present "erosion and
sediment control problems." A 1987 Request Analysis and Recommendation also noted that "unless
actions are taken to stabilize the existing fill area, siltation of Swift Creek itself may occur" and that "due to
the significant topographic relief of the proposed landfill area, the potential for siltation of the adjacent
property and streams, including Swift Creek, appears to be even greater than that of the existing landfill."
A 1993 inspection found leachate emanating from the landfill that "had the potential for discharging off-
site." The leachate break was immediately repaired.
Surface water samples have been taken from two sampling sites, but it is unclear whether the
sampling was conducted on or off site. Surface water monitoring found iron, lead, and acidity levels
exceeding freshwater chronic AWQC protective of aquatic life (Table 1).
TABLE 1
SURFACE WATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING FEDERAL AWQC
Contaminant/Parameter
Iron
Lead
Parameter
Highest Detected Level
(Wl/l)
252,000
113
Lowest
pH I 5.6
Fresh Chronic AWQC
(WJ/0
1,000
7*
AWQC
6.5-9
*EPA calculated the AWQC value using a reported measured hardness value of 196 ppm.
Groundwater monitoring has been conducted on-site at one upgradient and three downgradient
wells. For each well, samples are compared to background data for that well (i.e., based on samples
taken earlier). In addition, samples from downgradient wells are compared to the background data from
the upgradient well. In 1992, groundwater monitoring found elevated levels of lead, manganese, and total
organic carbon (TOC) in a downgradient well compared to the upgradient background level. In addition,
the lead, manganese, total dissolved solids (TDS), and specific conductance exceeded the background
mean for that downgradient well.
Groundwater monitoring has also shown iron and manganese levels to exceed Federal drinking
water standards (secondary MCLs) (Table 2).
TABLE 2
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING VIRGINIA PROTECTION
LEVELS AND FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Iron
Manganese
Highest Detected
Level (u,g/l)
103,000
4,600
MCL
(ng/i)
~
~
SMCL
-------
Sources
General Testing Corporation, Laboratory Reports, dated November 25,1992, February 12, 1993, April 13,
1993, July 21, 1993, and March 17, 1994.
Letter from Kenton Chestnut, Jr., Division of Regulation, Department of Waste Management,
Commonwealth of Virginia, to Lane Ramsey, County Administrator, Chesterfield County, Virginia,
February 5, 1990.
Letter from William Gilley, Division of Regulation, Department of Waste Management, Commonwealth of
Virginia, to Paul Robins, Qualla Road Landfill, January 12, 1990.
Letter from Carl Benson, Schnabel Environmental Services, to Jim Leiper, Sanifill, Octobers, 1993.
Letter from Schnabel Environmental Services to Chuck Hurt, J.K. Timmons & Associates, February 27,
1992.
Letter from Schnabel Environmental Services to Jim Leiper, Sanifill, April 8,1992.
Letter from Stephen Werner, Hatcher-Sayer, Inc. to Paul Robins, Qualla Road Landfill, December 11,
1990.
Letter from A.M. Tope, Hydrogeologist, State Water Control Board, Commonwealth of Virginia, to Berry
Wright, Department of Waste Management, Commonwealth of Virginia, May 15,1987.
Letter from Scott Bullock, Department of Environmental Quality, Commonwealth of Virginia to Gregory
Cekander, Sanifill, February 2, 1994.
Memorandum from Scott Bullock, Department of Environmental Quality, Commonwealth of Virginia, to
Timothy Torrez, Qualla Road Landfill, January 12,1994.
Memorandum from Charles Plott, Landfill Manager, Qualla Road Landfill, to Robert Timmons, Department
of Environmental Quality, Commonwealth of Virginia, April 28,1993.
Memorandum to the file from Berry Wright, Department of Waste Management, Commonwealth of
Virginia, August 25,1987.
Memorandum from Charles Plott, Landfill Manager, Qualla Road Landfill, to Robert Timmons, Department
of Environmental Quality, Commonwealth of Virginia, May 10, 1993.
Memorandum from J.A. Adams to Berry Wright, Department of Waste Management, Commonwealth of
Virginia, July 23, 1987.
Qualla Road Landfill Design Report, March 31, 1994.
Request Analysis and Recommendation, Linwood Belcher, Matoaca Magisterial District, January 20,
1987.
Sanifill, Groundwater Monitoring Data, for Robert Timmons, Department of Waste Management,
Commonwealth of Virginia, November 11,1993.
Solid Waste Facility Permit, Permit Amendment Number 516, February 1,1988.
Page A-161
-------
Solid Waste Management Permit, Department of Waste Management, Commonwealth of Virginia, January
14,1988.
Page A-162
-------
SCHUYLKILL DEBRIS LANDFILL PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Media Affected: Groundwater
Overview of Site/Site History
The Schuylkill Debris Landfill comprises approximately seven acres near the western edge of the
Appomattox River in Prince George County. The landfill received its permit to accept C&D wastes in
November 1984 and closed in 1988. It was owned and operated by the U.S. Army Quartermaster Center
and Fort Lee. A few leachate seeps were discovered in 1992, but they led to no obvious visual signs of
contamination.
Facility Operations
The landfill is a permitted debris facility. An October 1989 questionnaire revealed that the facility
has accepted wood, stumps, brick, concrete, and other inert construction and demolition debris material.
Facility Design
The source document provides no information on facility design.
Site Environment and Hydrogeoiogy
The source document provides no information on site environment or hydrogeology.
Summary of Environmental Damages
A Response Record from August 6,1992 indicated that the local water supply smelled and tasted
badly. However, during the same investigation, the almost adjacent Appomattox River showed no signs of
contamination from the landfill.
Various groundwater monitoring records over 1991 and 1992 indicate levels of beryllium, iron,
lead, sulfate, and total dissolved solids (TDS) above Federal drinking water standards (primary or
secondary MCLs) at least several times over the course of the monitoring (Table 1). Also, pH was
consistently low in the series of groundwater results, often below 5. The location of the monitoring wells
(i.e., whether they are on-site or off-site) was not reported in the available source documents. Monitoring
wells at Virginia landfills that reported the well locations generally were located within the landfill owner's
property boundaries.
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant/
Parameter
Beryllium
Iron
Lead
Sulfate
TDS
Parameter
PH
Highest Detected
Level (ng/l)
6
33,500
56
465,000
670,000
Lowest
4.22
MCL
(Mfl/0
4
15*
~
~
MCL
-
SMCL
(WJ/I)
~
300
250,000
500,000
SMCL
6.5-8.5
*MCL is action level for lead at the tap
PageA-163
-------
Discussion
Groundwater contamination has occurred at the landfill, but the source documents do not
specifically state whether the landfill is the cause of the contamination. Because no information is readily
available on site geology or facility design and location, it is not possible to further evaluate the cause of
damages at the Schuylkill Debris Landfill. It is also unknown whether off-site contamination has been
documented, because the location of the monitoring wells was not presented in the source document.
Sources
Laboratory Report, Schuylkill, Montgomery Laboratories, December 16,1992.
Memorandum from Thomas L. Kowalski, Environmental Inspector, to Department of Waste Management
File, December 8,1992.
Memorandum from Jonathan P. Adams, Lieutenant, U.S. Army, to Richard Burton, Department of
Environmental Quality, April 7,1994.
Memorandum from William M. Munson, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, to Linda Lightfoot, Department of
Waste Management, October 11,1989.
Solid Waste Management Permit, Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Health, December 11,1984.
1st Quarter Groundwater Analysis, Environmental Laboratories, Inc., April 30,1992.
2nd Quarter Groundwater Analysis, Environmental Laboratories, Inc., July 23,1992.
Page A-164
-------
JANESVILLE DEMOLITION WASTE LANDFILL
JANESVILLE, WISCONSIN
Media Affected:
Groundwater
Overview of Site/Site History
The Janesville Demolition Landfill is a six-acre site located in Janesville, Wisconsin, just east of
the Rock River. The site was never licensed and began to accept demolition waste in 1981 until its
closure in 1992. The site was~open to the residents of Janesville and Rock County.
Facility Operations
The landfill received demolition waste from 1981 to 1992. A sign at the site identified concrete,
broken pavement, untreated/unpainted wood, and brush as acceptable materials, but a wide variety of
waste may have been accepted. An attendant inspected all incoming loads to the landfill.
Facility Design
After the site was closed, two feet of compacted clay was placed on the site to mitigate infiltration
of surface water and precipitation. Groundwater monitoring is conducted using one upgradient and four
downgradient wells. The source document does not mention any other engineering controls, such as
liners, leachate collection systems, or run-on/run-off controls.
Site Environment and Hydrogeology
The landfill is located in the drainage basin of the Rock River, which flows south. The landfill lies
in a large sand and gravel quarry, which is still partly active. Logs from monitoring well installation indicate
that the soils are comprised mostly of sand and gravel, with some clay and rock fragments as well.
Samples from the bottom of the deepest well were predominantly silt.
The underlying bedrock is St. Peter Sandstone, which is underlain by other sandstone layers.
These sandstones make up the principal aquifer in this area and provide residents with potable water.
The groundwater flow is generally from the northeast to the southwest with a strong westward component
due to the influence of the Rock River, which is about 1,200 feet west of the site. The depth to
groundwater in the wells varies from 37 to 75 feet. The large component of sand and gravel in the area
suggests that groundwater could be moving rapidly.
The total annual precipitation is about 32 inches.
Summary of Environmental Damages
Groundwater samples were taken periodically over a two-year period at one upgradient, one
sidegradient, and two downgradient wells. The source document is unclear as to whether the wells are
inside or outside of the property line, but both downgradient wells appear to be within the property line.
Several parameters were significantly higher in the two downgradient wells compared to the upgradient
well. Constituents that were found in downgradient wells at levels higher than their Federal drinking water
standard (primary or secondary MCL) are shown in Table 1. According to the source document, levels of
sulfate, chloride, and manganese were above the Wisconsin Public Welfare Standards. The high sulfate
levels were attributed to gypsum, a common component of wallboard. Phenolic, a common constituent of
tree and vegetative decay products, was detected once in one of the downgradient wells slightly above
reporting limits.
Page A-J65
-------
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Manganese
Sulfate
Total dissolved solids (TDS)
Highest Detected
Level (|ig/l)
430,000
710
1,900,000
3,780,000
MCL
(ng/0
..
--
SMCL
(ng/0
250,000
50
250,000
500,000
Discussion
Adverse on-site groundwater quality impacts from demolition waste disposal were documented at
this landfill. Off-site groundwater monitoring was not conducted.
Source
Investigation of Groundwater Impacts at Demolition Waste Landfills, Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, June 1994.
Page A-166
-------
TERRA ENGINEERING DEMOLITION WASTE
LANDFILL
DANE COUNTY,
WISCONSIN
Media Affected:
Groundwater
Overview of Site/Site History
The Terra Engineering Demolition Landfill is about 4.1 acres in size. It is located in a drained
marshy area in Dane County near the city of Madison, Wisconsin. This site was licensed in 1971 for
demolition waste only, and one owner has operated the site since 1972. The company expects to be able
to fill at the present rate for at least 10 more years.
Facility Operations
Since 1972, the site has been filled only with waste materials from the company's construction
and demolition projects. The main fill materials have been reinforced and unreinforced concrete, wood,
masonry, brick, asphalt pavement, glass, steel and metal pieces, and brush. Some asphalt and scrap
metal has been sorted out for the company to sell or reuse.
Facility Design
No information is presented in the source document about the design of the landfill.
Site Environment and Hydrogeology
The landfill is in a drained marshy area bounded on the north and east by drainage ditches.
Surface water is routed around the fill on the southern end of the site. The land slopes towards the
southeast.
The glacial material underlying the site is undifferentiated glacial deposits consisting of ground
moraine. The unconsolidated material below the surface includes layers of brown sand, silt, and clay
along with some sand seams and sand and gravel lenses. About 100 feet below these unconsolidated
deposits lies Trempealeau and Franconia sandstone bedrock, which is underlain by Cambrian sandstone
down to Precambrian crystalline bedrock. The Cambrian sandstone acts as the principal aquifer for most
Dane County residents.
Groundwater is close to the surface at the site; the measured depth to ground water is between
2.5 and 10 feet. Regional movement of groundwater deep in the sandstone aquifer is southwest towards
the Yahara River, which is three miles away. Locally, there is a definite eastward gradient. The
groundwater flow is very complex due to the heterogeneous nature of the glacial deposits.
Summary of Environmental Damages
Five groundwater monitoring wells were installed at the site, one within the demolition debris and
the others sidegradient to the fill. All wells were sampled periodically for two years. One of the
sidegradient wells had elevated levels of manganese, sulfate, and total dissolved solids (TDS); the other
three sidegradient wells were generally unaffected. The well installed within the demolition debris had
elevated levels of many inorganics; five were detected at levels above Federal drinking water standards
(primary or secondary MCLs). These are shown in Table 1.
Page A-167
-------
TABLE 1
GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS EXCEEDING
FEDERAL DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
Contaminant
Chloride
Iron
Manganese
Sulfate
TDS
Highest Detected
Level (jig/I)
380,000
6,400
1,400
600,000
3,340,000
MCL
(ug/i)
.
~
~
~
-
SMCL
(ng/0
250,000
300
50
250,000
500,00
Discussion
Adverse on-site groundwater quality impacts from demolition waste disposal were documented at
this landfill. Off-site groundwater monitoring was not conducted.
Source
Investigation of Groundwater Impacts at Demolition Waste Landfills; Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, June 1994.
Page A-J68
-------
SECTION A.3:
CALIFORNIA SOLID
WASTE ASSESSMENT TEST
RELEASE DESCRIPTIONS
Page A-169
-------
Facility ID
CA2 071 042002
CAS 270300008
CA3 270303001
CA4B1 90309001
CA5A1 70300001
CA5B050302001
CA5D1 5030301 4
CA5D1 62008001
CA6B1 5030301 7
CA6B360304013
CA6B360304025
CA7A360304121
CA7B330305021
CA1B900110NSO
CA1B900020NSO
CA2 071 059002
CA2218049N01
CA2 438262N01
CA2 438332N01
CA3420000N13
CA5D543001N01
CA5D100326N01
CA5D100325N01
CA5A340301N01
CA5A340300N01
CA7A330008NUR
CA5C220300001
CAS 362039002
CAS 362277001
Facility Name
WDR-SHELL LAND DISPOSAL
JOLON ROAD SOLID WASTE SITE
MARINA DISPOSAL SITE
STOUGH PK, VERDUGO
EASTLAKE LANDFILL
RED HILLS SWDS
SHAFTER-WASCO SANITARY LANDFILL
KETTLEMAN HILLS FACILITY
TEHACHAPI CLASS III LANDFILL
LENWOOD/HINKLEY-LANDFILL
VICTOR VILLE CLASS III LANDFILL
LANDERS CLASS III WMF 91-028
BLYTHE CLASS III WMF 91-005
SCPW AIRPORT ROAD BURN DUMP
SO CO ROBLAR SWDS
WDR-USS-POSCO
TIMBER COVE MOBILE HOME CO
SAN JOSE CITY-STORY ROAD LANDFILL
ROBERTS ROAD LANDFILL
TRANSFER STATION
BIXBY RANCH DISPOSAL SITE
KEPCO-PINEDALE LANDFILL
FOWLER CITY LANDFILL (OLD)
WHITE ROCK ROAD LANDFILL-NORTH
WHITE ROCK ROAD LANDFILL-SOUTH
CATHEDRAL CITY #19 LANDFILL
MARIPOSA CO LANDFILL FACILITY
SEPTAGE DISPOSAL
LANDFILL, WATERMAN
SIC Code
2911
4952
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
3462
4953
4953V
4953
4952
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4953
4959
4953
Management Unit Type
Surface Impoundment
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Surface Impoundment
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Waste Pile
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill
Surface Impoundment
Landfill
Media
Groundwater
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Surface Water
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Vadose Zone
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
PageA-170
-------
APPENDIX B
METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING
RELEASES USING ADDITIONAL DATA
SOURCES
-------
-------
APPENDIX B: METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING
RELEASES USING ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
This appendix presents the methodology, results, and limitations of the Agency's efforts to
identify contamination resulting from the management of non-hazardous industrial wastes for the four
data sources that were not discussed in Chapter 2 of the Scoping Study. The Agency prepared a draft
report entitled "Hazardous Waste Characteristics Scoping Study: Environmental Release Descriptions"
which was released for public comment on September 25, 1996 (see 61 Federal Register 50295)
which also summarized the methodology presented below.
The four major data sources reviewed by the Agency to identify potential environmental
releases that did not result in any case studies meeting the Agency's strict selection criteria are:
Federal RCRA corrective action program;
Other federal and state data sources;
Newspapers; and
Other literature searches.
The remainder of this appendix discusses the methodology used to investigate each of these four data
sources. See Chapter 2 of the Scoping Study for information on the data sources that identified the
environmental release descriptions presented in Appendix A.
B.I RCRA Corrective Action
In the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), Congress directed EPA to require corrective action for all releases of
hazardous waste and hazardous constituents from solid waste management units (SWMUs) at facilities
seeking RCRA hazardous waste management permits. On July 27, 1990 (55 Federal Register 30798),
EPA proposed detailed regulations to govern the RCRA corrective action program addressing both
technical and procedural elements of the corrective action program. Because RCRA corrective action
addresses entire facilities, releases from non-hazardous industrial waste management units at these
hazardous waste facilities that posed a potential threat to human health or the environment may be
identified in RCRA corrective action documents. The Agency reviewed two RCRA corrective action
data sources, RCRA facility assessments (RFAs) and RCRA facility investigations (RFIs) to identify
potential corrective action case studies. The methodology used to review these data sources and the
results of the reviews are described below.
RCRA Facility Assessments
The RFA is the first stage in the RCRA corrective action process and is performed by the
Agency. It typically includes a desk-top review of available information on the site and a visual site
inspection to confirm available information on specific solid waste management units and to note any
visual evidence of releases. Because the RFA is performed on the entire facility, the non-hazardous
industrial waste management units with apparent releases may be identified.
The Agency reviewed over 50 RFAs that were collected as part of the RCRA corrective action
regulatory impact analysis. In its review, the Agency identified numerous non-hazardous industrial
Page B-l
-------
waste management units that were described as possibly posing a potential threat to human health and
the environment. The limited data collected as part of the RFA, however, were not sufficient to
document actual damages. RFA data do not include documented evidence (e.g., sampling results) that
a release has occurred, one of the Agency's selection criterion described in Chapter 2 of the Scoping
Study. Therefore, the Agency decided to terminate its review of RFAs and begin a review of RFIs.
RCRA Facility Investigations
The RFI is the second stage in the RCRA corrective action process. The RFI is undertaken by
the facility owner or operator when a potentially significant release has been identified in the RFA.
The purpose of the RFI is to characterize the nature and extent of contamination at the facility. RFIs
typically contain detailed sampling data that may meet the Agency's criteria for test of proof that a
release from a non-hazardous industrial waste management unit has occurred.
Number of Completed RFIs by Top
Three Regions
Region II = 104
Region IV = 77
Region DC = 68
Over 500 RFIs have been performed to date
and are housed in EPA's Regional offices. To cost-
effectively review RFIs, the Agency targeted the
Regions that had identified the largest number of
completed RFIs. Using April 1996 RCRIS information,
the Agency identified the three EPA Regional offices
that have completed the largest number of RFIs
(Regions 2, 4, and 9). The Agency contacted these
offices to schedule a time to review their RFIs. Region 4 was the only office that could provide
immediate assistance, and so the Agency visited Region 4's office to review its RFIs.
After reviewing over half of Region 4's RFIs, the Agency recognized that non-hazardous
industrial waste management units appeared rarely in the RFIs. After discussions with Region 4
personnel most familiar with the RCRA corrective action program, the Agency determined that the
RFIs completed to date focus on the worst SWMUs, which tend to manage hazardous waste, and that
the Regions may delay the investigations associated with non-hazardous industrial waste management
units or allow the facilities to address these units without requiring detailed investigations. The
Agency then contacted five other Regional corrective action programs to verify the applicability of this
finding. All five Regional offices agreed that the RFIs typically do not address non-hazardous
industrial waste management units and further stated that they could not identify specific non-
hazardous industrial waste management units at corrective action facilities that meet the Agency's
selection criteria.
The Agency reviewed a total of 39 RFIs and identified 3 potential case studies. Further
review of the data, however, did not confirm that the non-hazardous industrial waste management units
were responsible for releases discovered at the facility. Therefore, none of the releases met the
Agency's selection criteria for the source of contamination and the Agency did not identify any case
studies from RCRA corrective action data.
B.2. Other Federal and State Data Sources
The Agency conducted a brief review of several other federal and state data sources that
included information on contaminant releases. The data sources included various accidental release
and emergency response databases and EPA's Office of Water Databases. The methodology used to
review each data source and the results of the reviews are described below.
Page B-2
-------
Accidental Release and Emergency Response Databases
The Agency reviewed the following federal and state hazardous material accidental release
databases in its efforts to identify potential damage cases:
Incident Reporting Information System (IRIS);
Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS);
Accidental Release Information Program (ARIP);
Hazardous Materials Incident Reporting System (HMIRS);
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Accident Database (HLPAD);
Integrated Management Information System (IMIS);
Hazardous Substances Emergency Events Surveillance (HSEES);
State hazardous material incident reporting systems (HMIRS); and
Acute Hazardous Events (AHE) database.
The databases generally include information on the time and date of the event, location and
address of the release, description of the quantity and concentration of the substance involved in the
release, primary cause of the release, damages (e.g., deaths, injuries, property damage, and
environmental damage) from the release, and actions taken to cleanup the release. The databases
frequently use standardized responses and do not include a field or other identifier to distinguish
incidents that involved releases of wastes or non-hazardous wastes. The vast majority of releases
reported in the databases are releases of products rather than wastes and, therefore, do not meet the
Agency's selection criteria.
First, the Agency reviewed the federal and state databases for all descriptive text fields that
may be searched for incidents involving wastes rather than products. The databases were filtered
using the word "waste" as a general key. A few potential damage cases were identified from the
ERNS and ARIP databases. After additional review, however, the cases were found to involve
releases of hazardous wastes or PCBs, which are already regulated under TSCA.
Next, the Agency cross-referenced incidents involving the release of wastes, as reported in the
Major Hazard Incident Data Service (MHIDAS) database, with corresponding reports in the federal
and state databases. MHIDAS, a database of worldwide releases compiled by the United Kingdom
Health Safety Executive, contains a search field that identifies incidents involving wastes rather than
products and, by cross-reference, provides another way to select potential damage cases from the
federal and state databases. The MHIDAS database was filtered for incidents involving releases of
wastes that occurred in the United States. Among 156 cases that met this initial selection criteria, 142
involved releases of wastes that are already regulated as hazardous waste under RCRA.
Additional information was collected on the remaining 14 potential damage cases by cross-
referencing the date and location of an incident identified in MHIDAS with corresponding data
reported in the ERNS and ARIP databases. The ERNS database captures a broad range of release
notifications to the National Response Center or the 10 EPA Regional Offices over the last decade and
was selected for its wide scope. The ARIP database captures the fewer more serious or significant
incidents over the last eight years and is considerably smaller than the ERNS database; however, the
ARIP data are subject to assurance and quality control that the ERNS data are not and was selected for
its high data quality. A literature search of secondary sources (57 newspapers) also was conducted for
additional information on the 14 potential damage cases.
Page B-3
-------
After reviewing the additional data, however, EPA determined that none of the potential
damage cases met the Agency's criterion that the source of contamination was only non-hazardous
industrial waste. Therefore, the Agency did not identify any appropriate releases using federal and
state accidental release databases.
EPA Office of Water Databases
The Agency reviewed three EPA Office of Water databases:
The National Listing of Fish Consumption Advisories;
The Storage and Retrieval of U.S. Waterways Parametric Data (STORET); and
The Fish Kill database.
The Agency also reviewed non-point source release fact-sheets and the 1994 Report to Congress
entitled "National Water Quality Inventory" to identify incidents where environmental damages were
caused by non-hazardous industrial wastes. In general, these databases lack detailed information on
the source of contamination, such as the responsible industries, facilities, or releases. Most of them
were developed to track incidents of damage, and not the causes of the damage. Therefore, the
Agency did not identify any case studies using these databases. A brief description of each of the data
sources and their applicability to this analysis is provided below.
National Listing of Fish Consumption Advisories
This database provides information on state-issued fish consumption advisories. Fish
consumption advisories are issued by state agencies to reduce health risks associated with exposure to
chemical contaminants in freshwater noncommercial fish and shellfish. The states tailor individual
advisories to minimize health risks based on contaminant data collected in their fish tissue sampling
programs. The database includes information on the species of fish and the chemicals included in
advisories, populations affected, and advisory locations. Mercury is the most common contaminant
found in fish. Other common contaminants include PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, and DDT. The damage
cases discussed in the database, however, cannot readily be linked to specific industries, facilities, or
waste management practices.
Storage and Retrieval of U.S. Waterways Parametric Data (STORET)
STORET is. an EPA database of parametric data pertaining to the quality of the waterways in
the United States. The data contained in STORET are collected, stored, and used by a variety of
federal, state, interstate, and local government agencies to monitor the quality of waterways and to
evaluate the effectiveness of pollution prevention and abatement programs. According to the data
provided by states, siltation and nutrients are the leading causes of river and stream impairment. Other
leading causes of impairment include indicators of pathogens, pesticides, and organic enrichment and
resultant low levels of dissolved oxygen. The information discussed in the database, however, cannot
readily be linked to specific industries, facilities, or waste management practices.
Fish Kill Database
Before being discontinued in the late 1980s, the fish kill database provided information on
contaminants detected in fish. The database, however, did not include information linking
Page B-4
-------
contamination to specific industries, facilities, or waste management practices. This database is no
longer available.
Non-point Source Releases Fact-Sheets
The fact-sheets discuss the major sources of non-point source releases. The most common
non-point source contaminants identified are sediment and nutrients, while leading sources of non-
point source pollution include agriculture, forestry, and septic systems. The fact-sheets, however, do
not link non-point source contamination to specific industries, facilities, or wastestreams.
National Water Inventory - Report to Congress, 1994
The Report to Congress discusses sources of non-point contamination and the affected rivers,
streams, and lakes. Once again, the report does not link non-point source contamination to specific
industries, facilities, or releases. The major sources of non-point contamination include agriculture,
forestry, and septic systems, with sediments and nutrients being the most common pollutants.
B.3 Newspapers
Newspapers contain a vast array of information on a number of topics, including damages to
human health or the environment. State and local newspapers often contain articles on local industries
and any problems associated with these industries. The Agency believed that these articles may be
able to identify incidents of releases from industries that manage non-hazardous industrial waste.
Initially, the Agency performed an electronic search of industrial waste issues on newspapers
available on-line. The search strategy used to review these newspapers consisted of key words and
phrases that deal with industrial waste and environmental damages or releases of constituents from
non-hazardous industrial waste management. A total of 55 newspapers from across the country were
reviewed electronically. Most of the newspapers were available electronically for at least six years,
and EPA reviewed all years. Over 30 potential articles of interest were identified and the articles were
reviewed. After reviewing the complete articles, however, the Agency did not identify any potential
case studies that clearly met the Agency's selection criteria.
Second, the Agency conducted an article search at the Library of Congress, which consisted of
a CD-ROM search and a manual review of newspaper indices and articles. The Library of Congress
has a CD-ROM-based search engine for over 25 newspapers in its collection that were not included in
the on-line electronic search discussed above. The database includes article titles, abstracts, newspaper
titles, and dates. Again, the Agency used key word searches to identify articles on non-hazardous
industrial waste. Several articles of potential concern were identified and complete articles were
obtained and reviewed. After reviewing the complete articles, however, the Agency did not identify
any potential case studies or leads that could have been investigated further by looking at
supplementary sources.
Finally, the Agency conducted a manual review of newspapers that publish annual indices and
that were not available on-line or in the Library of Congress' CD-ROM database. The Agency
reviewed nine newspaper indices for the last seven years looking for articles dealing with
environmental damages and/or non-hazardous industrial waste. Again several articles of potential
concern were identified. Upon review of the complete article, however, the Agency did not identify
any potential case studies or possible leads.
Page B-5
-------
Overall, EPA reviewed nearly 90 newspapers. The majority of the newspaper articles that
appeared to be of some concern focused on the environmental damages associated with animal wastes
and gun firing ranges. Numerous articles were identified that discussed the detrimental impacts
associated with waste spills from hog and cattle farms. Damages from the hog wastes included fish
kills in nearby streams and creeks due to high concentrations of ammonia and lack of oxygen and high
concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in indoor swine facilities. Damages from the cattle waste included
leakage of silage and slurry into water supplies, resulting in fish kills due to a depleted oxygen supply
in the water. Articles on gun firing ranges identified high concentrations of lead in the soils and water
bodies located near the ranges. At this time, the Agency has not pursued documenting further these
sources of environmental damages.
B.4 Other Literature Searches
Due to the vast amount of information available electronically, the Agency conducted literature
searches on non-hazardous industrial waste and associated environmental damages using the Internet
and on-line sources such as DIALOG and LEXIS. The Agency also contacted representatives of the
insurance industry to determine whether they had available literature or other data on damages from
non-hazardous industrial waste management.
The Agency performed a literature search on the environmental damages associated with non-
hazardous waste using key words and titles. Over 20 different sources of information were accessed
including NTIS publications, Enviroline, trade and industry databases, Conference Papers Index, and
various journals and publications. Nearly 300 "hits" were identified and reviewed by the Agency.
From the 300 or so articles that contained the key words, approximately 50 appeared to discuss topics
of concern. The Agency obtained abstracts of these articles of potential concern and narrowed down
the list to approximately 10. The Agency then obtained and reviewed copies of the 10 relevant
articles. Although a number of the articles discussed environmental damages and non-hazardous
industrial waste, none of them identified specific incidents that could be used as the basis for release
descriptions meeting the Agency's selection criteria.
The Agency also reviewed published judicial opinions and legal reference sources to identify
court cases containing relevant release descriptions. The Agency searched LEXIS on-line databases of
federal and state court cases dating back to 1980, before the RCRA hazardous waste regulatory
program was adopted. The pre-1980 cases were not examined because it would be difficult to
properly screen out the large number of cases where damages were caused by releases of wastes that
now would be hazardous under the current RCRA Subtitle C regulations. The initial on-line search,
which provided the text surrounding the use of key words in each case, identified about 125 cases of
potential relevance. The Agency reviewed these excerpts and the full text of selected court opinions.
This search yielded no releases meeting the criteria. This search strategy was not successful for
several reasons:
Appellate courts issue most published opinions and appellate cases focus on
narrow legal issues and seldom consider the detailed facts of cases, which are
addressed by the trial courts. Thus, few of the cases containing the relevant
key words included adequate facts sufficient to determine whether there was a
release satisfying the Agency's criteria. For example, many state court cases
focused on disputes concerning the coverage of insurance contracts where the
nature of the wastes or the harm were not facts in dispute.
Page B-6
-------
Many cases addressed sites where the contamination resulted or may have
resulted, at least partly, from municipal solid wastes or hazardous wastes,
rather than solely from non-hazardous industrial wastes.
Many court cases in the 1980s and 1990s address situations occurring before
1980 and therefore it was difficult to determine whether the wastes would be
hazardous under current RCRA Subtitle C regulations.
Many cases did not address releases from waste management units, but instead
addressed releases of products or from facilities regulated under the Clean
Water Act.
EPA also examined several legal references, including books addressing environmental liability,
environmental risks in real property transactions, hazardous waste liability, tort damages in tort actions
generally, and environmental law. No relevant releases were identified by examining these books.
EPA also contacted representatives of the insurance industry to determine whether literature,
databases, or other sources of data on insurance claims might be helpful in developing release
descriptions. Based on conversations with representatives at several insurance companies offering
environmental liability coverage, the Agency determined that such information was not readily
available from the insurance industry. The insurance industry is reluctant to release such information,
although one contact suggested that if the Agency wished to pursue the matter further it could request
the information in writing from the company's claims counsel. Also, obtaining any potentially useful
claims information would require individual file searches because the industry generally does not
maintain databases with the relevant types of information. In addition, the data in insurance claims
files may often be inadequately detailed for purposes of developing release descriptions.
Page B-7
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
COMPARISON OF ICR CHARACTERISTICS
DEFINITIONS TO RELATED DEFINITIONS
-------
-------
APPENDIX C. COMPARISON OF ICR
CHARACTERISTICS DEFINITIONS
TO RELATED DEFINITIONS
Table 1 Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus DOT Hazardous
Materials Definitions
Table 2 Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus OSHA Health
Hazard Definitions
Table 3 Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus Selected State
Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Table 4 Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus Basel Convention
Hazardous Characteristics
Page C-l
-------
Table 1
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
DOT Hazardous Materials Definitions
RCRA Definition
DOT Definition
Comparison
Ignitable
liquid
(40 CFR 261.21)
flash point less than 60°C (140°F)
excludes aqueous solutions
containing less than 24 percent
alcohol by volume
test method = Pensky-Martens
Closed Cup Tester, ASTM Standard
D-93-79 or D-93-80; or Setaflash
Closed Cup Tester, ASTM standard
D-3278-78
(49 CFR 173.120 and 173.150)
flammable liquid = flash point not more than
60.5°C (141 °F), or any material in liquid phase
with a flash point at or above 37.8°C (100°F) that
is intentionally heated and offered for
transportation or transported at or above its flash
point in a bulk packaging
several exclusions listed, including one for liquids
that do" not sustain combustion (method of testing
for sustained combustion provided in Appendix H
to Part 173); DOT also includes a partial exclusion
for aqueous solutions containing 24 percent or less
alcohol by volume
combustible liquid = flash point above 60.5°C
(141°F) and below 93°C (200°F)
test method = ASTM D-93 (or 56 for certain
liquids) and ASTM D-3278
RCRA ignitable liquids definition
includes DOT flammable liquids but
does not include DOT combustible
liquids.
Page C-2
-------
Table 1 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
DOT Hazardous Materials Definitions
DOT, Definition
Comparison
Ignitable
solid
(40CFR261.21)
capable, under standard temperature
and pressure, of causing fire through
friction, absorption of moisture or
spontaneous chemical changes and,
when ignited, burns so vigorously
and persistently that it creates a
hazard
(49 CFR 173.124)
flammable solid = certain specified wetted
explosives
self-reactive materials; i.e., materials that are
thermally unstable and that can undergo a strongly
exothermic decomposition even without
participation of oxygen (several exclusions listed)
readily combustible solids; i.e., solids which may
cause fire through friction, materials that show a
burning rate faster than 2.2mm per second, and
certain metal powders
RCRA definition is descriptive and
broad. DOT definition names specific
materials (e.g., wetted explosives) and
includes specific criteria (e.g., materials
with burning rate faster than 2 mm/sec).
EPA has proposed Method 1030 in SW-
846 Update III, which is essentially the
same as DOT's burn rate test.
The RCRA ignitable solid characteristic
is limited to conditions of standard
temperature and pressure, whereas the
DOT definition is not.
Ignitable
compressed
gas
as defined in 49 CFR 173.300 (DOT
regulations)
(49 CFR 173.115)
Flammable gas = any material which is a gas at
20°C (68°F) or less and 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi) of
pressure (a material which has a boiling point of
20°C (68°F) or less at 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi)) which
(1) is ignitable at 101.3 kPa (14.7 psi) when in a
mixture of 13 percent or less by volume with air;
or
(2) has a flammable range at 101.3 kPa (14.7
psi) with air of at least 12 percent regardless of the
lower limit.
EPA adopted DOT definition. RCRA
regulations now reference outdated DOT
regulations.
Oxidizer
(40 CFR 261.21)
as defined in 49 CFR 173.151 (DOT
regulations)
(49 CFR 173.127)
oxidizer = a material that may, generally by
yielding oxygen, cause or enhance the combustion
of other materials
EPA adopted DOT definition. Current
DOT definition of oxidizer is found at 49
CFR 173.27 (not 173.151 as stated in
RCRA regulations).
Page C-3
-------
Table 1 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
DOT Hazardous Materials Definitions
RCRA Definition
DOT Definition
Comparison
Corrosive
liquid
(40CFR261.22)
aqueous and pH less than or equal
to 2 or greater than or equal to 12.5
(test method = pH meter using
Method 9040 in SW-846)
corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate
greater than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch)
per year at a test temperature of
55°C (130°F) (test method specified
in NACE (National Association of
Corrosion Engineers) Standard TM-
01-69 as standardized in SW-846
(49 CFR 173.136)
corrosive material = liquid or solid that
causes full thickness destruction of human skin at
the site of contact within a specified period of time
(packing groups I through III are assigned based on
period of time, e.g. packing group I = observation
up to 60 minutes after exposure starting after
exposure time of three minutes or less)
a liquid that has a corrosion rate on steel or
aluminum surfaces exceeding 6.25mm (0.25 inch) a
year at a test temperature of 55°C (130°F) (DOT
references test method ASTM G-31)
DOT defines corrosivity using criteria
related to destruction of human skin, as
opposed to EPA definition which uses
pH as an indicator.
DOT and RCRA choice of steel
corrosion rate is the same, but DOT
definition also includes aluminum
surfaces.
EPA has proposed (in SW-846 Update
HI) Method 1120 for dermal corrosion,
which is essentially the same as the DOT
method.
Corrosive
nonliquid
none
(40 CFR 173.136)
causes full thickness destruction of human skin at
the site of contact within a specified period of time
DOT includes corrosive solid (whereas
RCRA corrosivity characteristic does
not) by using destruction of human skin
criteria.
EPA has proposed (in SW-846 Update
III) Method 1120 for dermal corrosion,
which is essentially the same as the DOT
method.
Page C-4
-------
Table 1 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
DOT Hazardous Materials Definitions
Reactive
(40 CFR 261.23)
normally unstable and readily
undergoes violent change without
detonating
reacts violently with water
forms potentially explosive mixtures
with water
when mixed with water, generates
toxic gases, vapor or fumes in a
quantity sufficient to present a
danger to human health and the
environment
cyanide or sulfide bearing wastes
which, when exposed to pH
conditions between 2 and 12.5 can
generate toxic gases, vapors or
fumes in a quantity sufficient to
present a danger to human health or
the environment
capable of detonation or explosive
reaction if subjected to a strong
initiating source or if heated under
confinement
readily capable of detonation or
explosive decomposition or reaction
(49 173.124)
spontaneously combustible material = a pyrophoric
material (a liquid or solid that, even in small
quantities and without an external ignition source,
can ignite within five minutes after coming in
contact with air)
a self-heating material (a material that, when in
contact with air and without an energy supply, is
liable to self-heat)
dangerous when wet material = a material that, by
contact with water, is liable to become
spontaneously flammable or to give off flammable
or toxic gas at a rate greater than 1 liter per
kilogram of the material, per hour
(49 CFR 173.50)
DOT defines several divisions of explosives,
ranging from very insensitive explosives (Division
1.5) to explosives that have a mass explosion
hazard (Division 1.1).
Forbidden explosives are listed at 49 CFR 173.54.
DOT includes more specific definitions.
RCRA regulations reference outdated
DOT regulations regarding explosives.
RCRA and DOT definitions differ, but
there is likely significant overlap of
coverage.
Page C-5
-------
Table I (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
DOT Hazardous Materials Definitions
RCRA Definition
DOT Definition
Comparison
Other
(49 CFR 173.21)
DOT lists several forbidden materials, including
materials likely to decompose with a self-
accelerated decomposition temperature of 50°C
(122°F) or less, or polymerize at a temperature of
54°C (130°F) or less with an evolution of a
dangerous quantity of heat or gas when
decomposing or polymerizing.
(40 CFR 173.173.115)
non-flammable, nonpoisonous compressed gas =
any material (or mixture) which exerts in the
packaging an absolute pressure of 280 kPa (41
psia) or greater at 20°C (68°F)
DOT also defines non-liquified compressed gas,
compressed gas in solution, and cryogenic liquid.
(49 CFR 173.128)
organic peroxide = any organic compound
containing oxygen (O) in the bivalent -O-O-
structure and which may be considered a derivative
of hydrogen peroxide, where one or more of the
hydrogen atoms have been replaced by organic
radicals (with certain exceptions)
DOT hazardous materials definitions
include several materials that are not
directly covered by RCRA
characteristics.
Organic peroxide is not specifically
included in any RCRA characteristic, but
organic peroxides are likely to be
covered as oxidizers under the RCRA
ignitability characteristic.
Page C-6
-------
Table 2
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
OSHA Health Hazard Definitions
RCRA Definition
OSHA Definition
Comparison
Ignitable
liquid
(40 CFR 261.21)
flash point less than 60°C (140°F)
excludes aqueous solutions containing less
than 24 percent alcohol by volume
test method = Pensky-Martens Closed Cup
Tester, ASTM Standard D-93-79 or D-93-
80; or Setaflash Closed Cup Tester, ASTM
standard D-3278-78
combustible liquid = flash point at or above
37.8°C (100°F) but below 93°C (200°F)
flammable liquid = flashpoint below 100°F
RCRA ignitable liquids definition does
not include OSHA combustible liquids
with flash points at or above 60°C
(140°F).
Ignitable
solid
(40 CFR 261.21)
capable, under standard temperature and
pressure, of causing fire through friction,
absorption of moisture or spontaneous
chemical changes and, when ignited, burns
so vigorously and persistently that it creates
a hazard
flammable solid = a solid, other than a
blasting agent or explosive, that is liable to
cause fire through friction, absorption of
moisture, spontaneous chemical change, or
retained heat from manufacturing or
processing, or which can be ignited readily
and when ignited burns so vigorously and
persistently as to create a serious hazard
OSHA refers to a test method at 16 CFR
1500.44.
Definitions are very similar except for
the following:
The OSHA definition includes solids
liable to cause fire through retained
heat from manufacturing or processing;
the RCRA ignitability characteristic
does not.
The RCRA ignitable solid characteristic
is limited to conditions of standard
temperature and pressure, whereas the
OSHA definition is not.
OSHA specifies a test method.
Page C-7
-------
Table 2 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
OSHA Health Hazard Definitions
RCRA Definition
OSHA Definition
Comparison
Ignitable
compressed
gas
as defined in 49 CFR 173.300 (DOT
regulations)
compressed gas = absolute pressure
exceeding 40 psi at 70°F (21.1°C);
absolute pressure exceeding 104 psi at 130°F
(54.4°C) regardless of pressure at 70°F
(21.1°C); or
liquid having a vapor pressure exceeding 40
psi at 100°F (37.8°C) as determined by
ASTM D-323-72
flammable gas = gas that, at ambient
temperature and pressure, forms a flammable
mixture with air at a concentration of 13
percent by volume or less; or
gas that, at ambient temperature and
pressure, forms a range of flammable
mixtures with air wider than 12 percent by
volume
OSHA and RCRA definitions are
similar.
Oxidizer
oxidizer = a material that may, generally by
yielding oxygen, cause or enhance the
combustion of other materials
oxidizer = a chemical other than a blasting
agent or explosive that ignites or promotes
combustion in other materials, thereby
causing fire either of itself or through
release of oxygen or other gases
OSHA and EPA definitions are similar.
Page C-8
-------
Table 2 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
OSHA Health Hazard Definitions
Corrosive ,
liquid
Corrosive
nonliquid
! »
RCRA Definition
(40 CFR 261.22)
aqueous and pH less than or equal to 2 or
greater than or equal to 12.5
(test method = pH meter using Method 9040
inSW-846)
corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate greater
than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch) per year at a test
temperature of 55°C (130°F) (test method
specified in NACE (National Association of
Corrosion Engineers) Standard TM-01-69 as
standardized in SW-846
none
OSHA Definition
corrosive = causes visible destruction of, or
irreversible alterations in, living tissue by
chemical action at the site of contact. For
example a chemical is considered to be
corrosive if, when tested on the intact skin
of albino rabbits by the method described by
the U.S. Department of Transportation in
Appendix A to 49 CFR part 173, it destroys
or changes irreversibly the structure of the
tissue at the site of contact following an
exposure period of four hours.
see above
Comparison
OSHA definition is based on tissue
damage and references DOT regulations
regarding test method. EPA definition
is based on pH and metal corrosion.
OSHA definition includes nonliquids.
Page C-9
-------
Table 2 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
OSHA Health Hazard Definitions
RCRA Definition
OSHA Definition
Comparison
Reactive
(40 CFR 261.23)
normally unstable and readily undergoes
violent change without detonating
reacts violently with water
forms potentially explosive mixtures with
water
when mixed with water, generates toxic
gases, vapor or fumes in a quantity sufficient
to present a danger to human health and the
environment
cyanide or sulfide bearing wastes which,
when exposed to pH conditions between 2
and 12.5 can generate toxic gases, vapors or
fumes in a quantity sufficient to present a
danger to human health or the environment
capable of detonation or explosive reaction if
subjected to a strong initiating source or if
heated under confinement
readily capable of detonation or explosive
decomposition or reaction at standard
temperature and pressure
forbidden explosives as defined in 49 CFR
173.51, or a Class A explosive as defined in
pyrophoric = a chemical that will ignite
spontaneously in air at a temperature of
130°F (54.4°C) or below
unstable reactive = a chemical which in the
pure state, or as produced or transported,
will vigorously polymerize, decompose,
condense, or will become self-reactive under
conditions of shocks, pressure or
temperature
water reactive = a chemical that reacts with
water to release a gas that is either
flammable or presents a health hazard
OSHA definitions of pyrophoric and
unstable reactive identify specific
hazards that the RCRA characteristics
do not list specifically. These
substances are likely to be covered by
the RCRA ignitability and/or reactivity
characteristics.
Page C-10
-------
Table 2 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
OSHA Health Hazard Definitions
Definition
.OSHA Definition
Comparison
Other
organic peroxide = an organic compound
that contains the bivalent 0-0 structure and
which may be considered a structural
derivative of hydrogen peroxide where one
or both of the hydrogen atoms has been
replaced by an organic radical
irritant = not corrosive, but which causes a
reversible inflammatory effect on living
tissue by chemical action at the site of
contact. A chemical is a skin irritant if,
when tested on the intact skin of albino
rabbits by the methods of 16 CFR 1500.41
for four hours exposure or by other
appropriate techniques, it results in an
empirical score of five or more. A chemical
is an eye irritant if so determined under the
procedure listed in 16 CFR 1500.42 or other
appropriate techniques.
sensitizer - causes a substantial proportion
of exposed people or animals to develop an
allergic reaction in normal tissue after
repeated exposure to the chemical
Like DOT, OSHA specifies and defines
organic peroxides as posing hazards.
RCRA characteristics do not directly
identify organic peroxides, but they are
likely covered by the RCRA inclusion
of oxidizer in the ignitability
characteristic.
RCRA characteristics do not include
irritants or sensitizers. OSHA includes
definitions for irritants and sensitizers,
including specifying a test method for
irritants.
Page &11
-------
r
Table 3
Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Selected State Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Ignitable
liquid
Ignitable
solid
Ignitable
compressed
gas
Oxidizer
Federal
flash point < 60°C
(140°F)
capable, under standard
temperature and
pressure, of causing fire
through friction,
absorption of moisture or
spontaneous chemical
changes and, when
ignited, burns so
vigorously and
persistently that it creates
a hazard
as defined in DOT
regulations
as defined in DOT
regulations
California
same
same
same
same
New Hampshire
same
same
same
same
ma- -i-miiimwin-.-. ., , i-ii...iinn - , .-."iwiiin-, ,.-..
Rhode Island
includes liquids having
a flash point up to
200°F
includes solids and
semi-solids which
readily give off
flammable vapors
below 100°F
same
same
Washington
same
same
same
same
Page,C-J2
-------
Table 3 (continued)
Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Selected State Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Corrosive
liquid
Federal
aqueous and has pH less
than or equal to 2 or
greater than or equal to
12.5
(test method = pH meter
using Method 9040 in
SW-846)
corrodes steel (SAE
1020) at a rate greater
than 6.35 mm (0.250
inch) per year at a test
temperature of 55°C
(130°F)
California
same
New Hampshire
same
Rhode Island
same
Washington
same
Page C-13
-------
f
Table 3 (continued)
Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Selected State Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Corrosive
noniiquid
.
Corrosive
Gas
Federal
none
none
California
not aqueous and, when
mixed with an equivalent
weight of water,
produces a solution
having a pH less than or
equal to 2 or greater
than or equal to 12.5
(same .test method)
not a liquid and, when
mixed with an equivalent
weight of water,
produces a liquid that
corrodes steel (SAE
1020) at a rate greater
than 6.35 mm (0.250
inch) per year (same test
method)
same
New Hampshire
non-aqueous waste
which when mixed 50%
by weight with distilled
water, yields a pH less
than or equal to 2 or
greater than or equal to
12.5 (same test method)
gaseous material which
when mixed with
distilled water to form a
2 molar solution, yields
a pH less than or equal
to 2 or greater than or
equal to 12.5 (same test
method)
Rhode Island
non-aqueous waste,
when mixed 50% by
weight with distilled
water yields a pH less
than or equal to 2.0 or
greater than 12.5
gaseous material such
that a 2 molar aqueous
solution yields a pH
less than or equal to
2.0 or greater than 12.5
Washington
solid or semi-solid, and
when mixed with an
equal weight of water
results in a solution, the
liquid portion of which
has a pH less than or
equal to 2 or greater
than or equal to 12.5
same
Page C-14
-------
Table 3 (continued)
Comparison: Federal Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Selected State Hazardous Waste Characteristics
Reactive
Federal
8 conditions listed at 40
CFR 261.23, including:
reacts violently with
water
California
same
New Hampshire
reacts violently with
water or air
(remainder of reactivity
characteristic is the
same)
Rhode Island
same
Washington
same
Page C-15
-------
Table 4
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Basel Convention Hazardous Characteristics
RCRA Definition
Basel Convention Characteristic
Comparison
Ignitable
liquid
(40 CFR 261.21)
flash point less than 6t)°C (140°F)
test method = Pensky-Martens Closed Cup
Tester, ASTM Standard D-93-79 or D-93-
80; or Setaflash Closed Cup Tester, ASTM
standard D-3278-78
(H3) flammable liquids = liquids which give
off a flammable vapor at temperature of not
more than 60.5°C, closed-cup test, or not
more than 65.6°C, open-cup test
basically same
Ignitable
solid
(40 CFR 261.21)
capable, under standard temperature and
pressure, of causing fire through friction,
absorption of moisture or spontaneous
chemical changes and, when ignited, burns
so vigorously and persistently that it creates
a hazard
(H4.1) flammable solids = solids which
under conditions encountered in transport are
readily combustible, or may cause or
contribute to fire through friction
Basel Convention characteristic does
not (like RCRA) contain the condition
that the substance burn so vigorously
and persistently that it creates a hazard.
Ignitable
compressed
gas
as defined in 49 CFR 173.300 (DOT
regulations)
none
Basel Convention characteristics do not
cover ignitable compressed gases.
Oxidizer
(40 CFR 261.21)
as defined in 49 CFR 173.151 (DOT
regulations)
(H5.1) oxidizing = substances or wastes
which, while in themselves not necessarily
combustible, may, generally by yielding
oxygen cause, or contribute to, the
combustion of other materials
basically same
Page C-16
-------
Table 4 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Basel Convention Hazardous Characteristics
RCRA Definition
Basel Convention Characteristic
Comparison
Corrosive
liquid
lor
(40CFR261.22)
aqueous and pH less than or equal to 2
greater than or equal to 12.5
(test method = pH meter using Method 9040
inSW-846)
corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate greater
than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch) per year at a test
temperature of 55°C (130°F) (test method
specified in NACE (National Association of
Corrosion Engineers) Standard TM-01-69 as
standardized in SW-846
(H8) corrosives = substances or wastes
which, by chemical action, will cause severe
damage when in contact with living tissue
or, in the case of leakage, will materially
damage, or even destroy, other goods or the
means of transport; they may also cause
other hazards
Basel Convention characteristic uses
general definition linked to ability to
cause severe tissue damage; does not
use pH criteria or metals corrosion rate.
Corrosive
nonliquid
(H8) corrosives = substances or wastes
which, by chemical action, will cause severe
damage when in contact with living tissue
or, in the case of leakage, will materially
damage, or even destroy, other goods or the
means of transport; they may also cause
other hazards
Basel Convention characteristic is not
limited to liquids.
Page C-17
-------
Table 4 (continued)
Comparison: RCRA Hazardous Waste ICR Characteristics versus
Basel Convention Hazardous Characteristics
RCRA Definition
Basel Convention Characteristic
Comparison
Reactive
(40CFR261.23)
normally unstable and readily undergoes
violent change without detonating
reacts violently with water
forms potentially explosive mixtures with
water
when mixed with water, generates toxic
gases, vapor or fumes in a quantity sufficient
to present a danger to human health and the
environment
cyanide or sulfide bearing wastes which,
when exposed to pH conditions between 2
and 12.5 can generate toxic gases, vapors or
fumes in a quantity sufficient to present a
danger to human health or the environment
capable of detonation or explosive reaction if
subjected to a strong initiating source or if
heated under confinement
readily capable of detonation or explosive
decomposition or reaction at standard
temperature and pressure
forbidden explosives as defined in 49 CFR
173.51, or a Class A explosive as defined in
(HI) explosive = solid or liquid capable by
chemical reaction of producing gas at such a
temperature and pressure and at such speed
as to cause damage to the surroundings
(H4.2) substances or wastes liable to
spontaneous combustion = are liable to
spontaneous heating under normal conditions
encountered in transport,'or to heating upon
contact with air, and being then liable to
catch on fire
(H4.3) substances or wastes which, in
contact with water emit flammable gases =
by interaction with water, are liable to
become spontaneously flammable or to give
off flammable gases in dangerous quantities
(H10) liberation of toxic gases in contact
with air or water = by interaction with air or
water, are liable to give off toxic gases in
dangerous quantities
(H5.2) organic peroxides: organic substances
or wastes which contain the bivalent O-O
structure are thermally unstable substances
which may undergo exothermic self-
accelerating decomposition
The wastes that are covered under
Basel Convention definitions would
likely be covered by RCRA reactivity
(and/or flammability) characteristics.
Page C-18
-------
-------
vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
(5305W)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |