EPA/540/4-90/024
September 1990
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Minnesota
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
If you wish to purchase copies of any additional State volumes or the National
Overview volume, Superfund: Focusing on the Nation at Large, contact:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 487-4600
-------
PAGE
INTRODUCTION:
A Brief Overview...
.111
SUPERFUND:
How Does the Program Work to Clean Up Sites
How To:
Using the State Volume
.Vll
.xvn
NPL SITES:
A State Overview.
.xxi
THE NPL PROGRESS REPORT, xxiii
NPL: Site Fact Sheets
GLOSSARY:
Terms Used in the Fact Sheets
.G-l
-------
-------
WHY THE SUPERFUND
PROGRAM?
s the 1970s came to a
close, a series of head-
tine stories gave
Americans a look at the
dangers of dumping indus-
trial and urban wastes on the
land. First there was New
York's Love Canal. Hazard-
ous waste buried there over a
25-year period contaminated
streams and soil, and endan-
gered the health of nearby
residents. The result: evacu-
ation of several hundred
people. Then the leaking
barrels at the Valley of the °
Drums in Kentucky attracted
public attention, as did the
dioxin tainted land and water
in Times Beach, Missouri.
In all these cases, human
health and the environment
were threatened, lives were
disrupted, property values
depreciated. It became in-
creasingly clear that there
were large numbers of serious
hazardous waste problems
that were falling through the
cracks of existing environ-
mental kws. The magnitude
of these emerging problems
moved Congress to enact the
Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act in 1980.
CERCLA commonly
known as the Superfund
was the first Federal law
established to deal with the
dangers posed by the
Nation's hazardous waste
sites.
After Discovery, the Problem
Intensified
Few realized the size of the
problem until EPA began the
process of site discovery and
site evaluation. Not hun-
dreds, but thousands of
potential hazardous waste
sites existed, and they pre-
sented the Nation with some
of the most complex pollution
problems it had ever faced.
In the 10 years since the
Superfund program began,
hazardous waste has surfaced
as a major environmental
concern in every part of the
United States. It wasn't just
the land that was contami-
nated by past disposal prac-
tices. Chemicals in the soil
were spreading into the
groundwater (a source of
drinking water for many) and
into streams, lakes, bays, and
wetlands/ Toxic vapors
contaminated the air at some
sites, while at others improp-
erly disposed or stored
wastes threatened the health
of the surrounding commu-
nity and the environment.
EPA Identified More than
1,200 Serious Sites
EPA has identified 1,236
hazardous waste sites as the
most serious in the Nation.
These sites comprise the
"National Priorities List":
sites targeted for cleanup
under the Superfund. But site
discoveries continue, and
EPA estimates that, while
some will be deleted after
lengthy cleanups/this list,
commonly called the NPL,
will continue to grow by ap-
proximately 100 sites p'er
year, reaching 2,100 sites by
the year 2000.
THE NATIONAL
CLEANUP EFFORT IS
MUCH MORE THAN
THE NPL
From the beginning of the
program, Congress recog-
nized that the Federal govern-
ment could not and should
not address all environmental
problems stemming from past
disposal practices. Therefore,
the EPA was directed to set
priorities and establish a list
of sites to target. Sites on the
NPL (1,236) are thus a rela-
111
-------
INTRODUCTION
lively small subset of a larger
inventory of potential hazard-
ous waste sites, but they do
comprise the most complex
and environmentally compel-
ling cases. EPA has logged
more than 32,000 sites on its
National hazardous waste
inventory/ and assesses each
site within one year of being
logged. In fact, over 90 per-
cent of the sites on the inven-
tory have been assessed. Of
the assessed sites, 55 percent
have been found to require no
further Federal action because
they did not pose significant
human health or environ-
mental risks. The remaining
sites are undergoing further
assessment to determine if
long-term Federal cleanup
activities are appropriate.
EPA IS MAKING
PROGRESS ON SITE
CLEANUP
The goal of the Superfund
program is to tackle immedi-
ate dangers first, and then
move through the progressive
steps necessary to eliminate
any long-term risks to public
health and the environment.
The Superfund responds
immediately to sites posing
imminent threats to human
health and the environment
at both NPL sites and sites
notontheNPL. The purpose
is to stabilize, prevent, or
temper the effects of a haz-
ardous release, or the threat
of one. These might include
tire fires or transportation
accidents involving the spill
of hazardous chemicals.
Because they reduce the
threat a site poses to human
health and the environment,
immediate cleanup actions
are an integral part of the
Superfund program.
Immediate response to immi-
nent threats is one of the
Superfund's most noted
achievements. Where immi-
nent threats to the public or
environment were evident,
EPA has completed or moni-
tored emergency actions that
attacked the most serious
threats to toxic exposure in
more than 1,800 cases.
The ultimate goal for a haz-
ardous waste site on the NPL
is a permanent solution to an
environmental problem that
presents a serious (but not an
imminent) threat to the public
or environment. This often
requires a long-term effort. In
the last four years, EPA has
aggressively accelerated its
efforts to perform these long-
term cleanups of NPL sites.
More cleanups were started
in 1987, when the Superfund
law was amended, than in
any previous year. And in
1989 more sites than ever
reached the construction
stage of the Superfund
cleanup process. Indeed
construction starts increased
by over 200 percent between
late 1986 and 1989! Of the
sites currently on the NPL,
more than 500 nearly half
have had construction
cleanup activity. In addition,
over 500 more sites are pres-
ently in the investigation
stage to determine the extent
of site contamination, and to
identify appropriate cleanup
remedies. Many other sites
with cleanup remedies se-
lected are poised for the start
of cleanup construction activ-
ity. Measuring success by
"progress through the
cleanup pipeline," EPA is
clearly gaining momentum.
EPA MAKES SURE
CLEANUP WORKS
EPA has gained enough
experience in cleanup con-
struction to understand that
environmental protection
does not end when the rem-
edy is in place. Many com-
plex technologies like
those designed to clean up
groundwater must operate
for many years in order to
accomplish their objectives.
EPA's hazardous waste site
managers are committed to
proper operation and mainte-
nance of every remedy con-
structed. No matter who has
been delegated responsibility
for monitoring the cleanup
work, the EPA will assure
that the remedy is carefully
followed and that it continues
to do its job.
Likewise, EPA does not
abandon a site even after the
cleanup work is done. Every
IV
-------
-Is
five years the Agency reviews
each site where residues from
hazardous waste cleanup still
remain to ensure that public
and environmental health are
still being safeguarded. EPA
will correct any deficiencies
discovered and report to the
public annually on all five-
year reviews conducted that
year. .
CITIZENS HELP SHAPE
DECISIONS
Superfund activities also
depend upon local citizen
participation. EPA's job is to
analyze the hazards and
deploy the experts, but the
Agency needs citizen input as
it makes choices for affected
communities.
Because the people in a
community with a Superfund
site will be those most di-
rectly affected by hazardous
waste problems and cleanup
processes, EPA encourages
citizens to get involved in
cleanup decisions. Public in-
volvement and comment does
influence EPA cleanup plans
by providing valuable infor-
mation about site conditions,
community concerns and
preferences.
This State volume and the
companion National Over-
view volume provide general
Superfund background
information and descriptions
of activities at each State NPL
site. These volumes are
intended to clearly describe
what the problems are, what
EPA and others participating
in site cleanups are doing,
and how we as a Nation can
move ahead in solving these
serious problems.
USING THE STATE AND
NATIONAL VOLUMES
IN TANDEM
To understand the big picture
on hazardous waste cleanup,
citizens need to hear about
both environmental progress
across the country and the
cleanup accomplishments
closer to home. The public
should understand the chal-
lenges involved in hazardous
waste cleanup and the deci-
sions we must make as a
Nation in finding the best
solutions.
The National Overview
volume Superfund: Focus-
,ing on the Nation at Large
accompanies this State vol-
ume. The National Overview
contains important informa-
tion to help you understand
the magnitude and challenges
facing the Superfund pro-
gram as well as an overview
of the National cleanup effort.
The sections describe the
nature of the hazardous
waste problem nationwide,
threats and contaminants at
NPL sites and their potential
effects on human health and
the environment, the Super-
fund program's successes in
cleaning up the Nation's
serious hazardous waste sites,
and the vital roles of the
various participants in the
cleanup process.
This State volume compiles
site summary fact sheets on
each State site being cleaned
up under the Superfund
program. These sites repre-
sent the most serious hazard-
ous waste problems in the
Nation, and require the most
complicated and costly site
solutions yet encountered.
Each State book gives a
"snapshot" of the conditions
and cleanup progress that has
been made at each NPL site in
the State through the first half
of 1990. Conditions change as
our cleanup efforts continue,
so these site summaries will
be updated periodically to
include new information on
progress being made.
To help you understand the
cleanup accomplishments
made at these sites, this State
volume includes a description
of the process for site discov-
ery, threat evaluation and
long-term cleanup of Super-
fund sites. This description
How Does the Program
Work to Clean Up Sites?
will serve as a good reference
point from which to review
the cleanup status at specific
sites. A glossary also is
included at the back of the
book that defines key terms
used in the site fact sheets as
they apply to hazardous
waste management.
-------
vi
-------
X he diverse problems posed by the Nation's hazardous
waste sites have provided EPA with the challenge to
establish a consistent approach for evaluating and
cleaning up the Nation's most serious sites. To do this, EPA
had to step beyond its traditional role as a regulatory agency
to develop processes and guidelines for each step in these
technically complex site cleanups. EPA has established proce-
dures to coordinate the efforts of its Washington, D.C. Head-
quarters program offices and its front-line staff in 10 Regional
Offices with the State governments, contractors, and private
parties who are participating in site cleanup. An important
part of the process is that any time during cleanup, work can
be led by EPA or the State or, under their monitoring, by
private parties who are potentially responsible for site con-
tamination.
The process for discovery of the site, evaluation of threat, and
long-term cleanup of Superfund sites is summarized in the
following pages. The phases of each of these steps are high-
lighted within the description. The flow diagram below pro-
vides a summary of this three step process.
STEP1
Discover site
and determine
whether an
emergency
exists*
STEP 2
Evaluate whether
a site is a serious
threat to public
health or
environment
STEPS
Perform long-term
cleanup actions on
the most serious
hazardous waste
sites in the Nation
* Emergency actions are performed whenever needed in this three-step process
FIGURE 1
Although this State book provides a current "snapshot" of site progress made only by emer-
gency actions and long-term cleanup actions at Superfund sites, it is important to understand
the discovery and evaluation process that leads up to identifying and cleaning up these most
serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in the Nation. This discovery and
evaluation process is the starting point for this summary description.
vu
-------
v.v^. rt-
How does 1PA l
abcmt potential
sites?
waste
« t " ^ , \XS\-,
VW>gJ^ . s^ vj
\ f
STEP1: SITE DISCOVERY AND EMERGENCY
EVALUATION
Site discovery occurs in a number of ways. Information
comes from concerned citizens people may notice an odd
taste or foul odor in their drinking water, or see half-buried
leaking barrels; a hunter may come across a field where waste
was dumped illegally. Or there may be an explosion or fire
which alerts the State or local authorities to a problem. Rou-
tine investigations by State and local governments, and re-
quired reporting and inspection of facilities that generate,
treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste also help keep EPA
informed about either actual or potential threats of hazardous
substance releases. All reported sites or spills are recorded in
the Superfund inventory (CERCLIS) for further investigation
to determine whether they will require cleanup.
; What happens II
- there is an
^danger?
ff-><^'-.\
?
I
I
, If t!ter$ Isn't
tir i ,T T, |
tmmment
»f ^W^% ^--^
~~ ""% ?
Determine what,
, clea««j>
be taken?.
As soon as a potential hazardous waste site is reported, EPA
determines whether there is an emergency requiring an imme-
diate cleanup action. If there is, they act as quickly as possible
to remove or stabilize the imminent threat. These short-term
emergency actions range from building a fence around the
contaminated area to keep people away or temporarily relo-
cating residents until the danger is addressed, to providing
bottled water to residents while their local drinking water
supply is being cleaned up, or physically removing wastes for
safe disposal.
However, emergency actions can happen at any time an imminent
threat or emergency warrants them for example, if leaking
barrels are found when cleanup crews start digging in the
ground or if samples of contaminated soils or air show that
there may be a threat of fire or explosion, an immediate action
is taken.
STEP 2: SITE THREAT EVALUATION
Even after any imminent dangers are taken care of, in most
cases contamination may remain at the site. For example,
residents may have been supplied with bottled water to take
care of their immediate problem of contaminated well water.
But now if s time to figure out what is contaminating the
drinking water supply and the best way to clean it up. Or
vui
-------
EPA may determine that there is no imminent danger from a
site, so now any long-term threats need to be evaluated. In
either case, a more comprehensive investigation is needed to
determine if a site poses a serious but not imminent danger,
and requires a long-term cleanup action.
Once a site is discovered and any needed emergency actions
are taken, EPA or the State collects all available background
information not only from their own files, but also from local
records and U.S. Geological Survey maps. This information is
used to identify the site and to perform a preliminary assess-
ment of its potential hazards. This is a quick review of readily
available information to answer the questions:
Are hazardous substances likely to be present?
How are they contained?
How might contaminants spread?
How dose is the nearest well, home, or natural resource
area like a wetland or animal sanctuary?
What may be harmed the land, water, air, people,
plants, or animals?
Some sites do not require further action because the prelimi-
nary assessment shows that they don't threaten public health
or the environment. But even in these cases, the sites remain
listed in the Superfund inventory for record keeping purposes
and future reference. Currently, there are more than 32,000
sites maintained in this inventory.
Inspectors' go to the site to collect additional information to
evaluate its hazard potential. During this site inspection, they
look for evidence of hazardous waste, such as leaking drums
and dead or discolored vegetation. They may take some
samples of soil, well water, river water, and air. Inspectors
analyze the ways hazardous materials could be polluting the
environment such as runoff into nearby streams. They also
check to see if people (especially children) have access to the
site.
Information collected during the site inspection is used to
identify the sites posing the most serious threats to human
health and the environment. This way EPA can meet the
r--«sc. JV, -f-- '---'-w---,^ /' - ;
^- S^-^^^-^^^^^x^^
V^C&-*x±*'^'''* *
*»~ "" % *4% ,'<. v. .., , "" -O '
««,::?'' c% ,-?l" X,*x" -x-
~4>s.'*'^ ,-"-'{; ^""^'-. \,^ ^,,
" \ v*"/*- % ^ A 'V *' - s--'
% v' . '/ % ^ "" "<'< v !
Cx^v,;fe - 0 ' """'V, -- , * '^ !
% . % ., , ,% ^ v ^^ !
'"*
IX
-------
SUPERFUND
plow 4q people
oul whether W
^
;Superfund moneyt
" ' -- "
requirement that Congress gave them to use Superfund mo-
nies only on the worst hazardous waste sites in the Nation.
To identify the most serious sites, EPA developed the Hazard
Ranking System (HRS). The HRS is the scoring system EPA
uses to assess the relative threat from a release or a potential
release of hazardous substances from a site to surrounding
groundwater, surface water, air, and soil. A site score is based
on the likelihood a hazardous substance will be released from
the site, the toxicity and amount of hazardous substances at
the site, and the people and sensitive environments potentially
affected by contamination at the site.
Only sites with high enough health and environmental risk
scores are proposed to be added to EPA's National Priorities
List (NPL). Thafs why there are 1,236 sites are on the NPL,
but there are more than 32,000 sites in the Superfund inven-
tory. Only NPL sites can have a long-term cleanup paid for
from the national hazardous waste trust fund the Super-
fund. But the Superfund can and does pay for emergency
actions performed at any site, whether or not it's on the NPL.
The public can find out whether a site that concerns them is
on the NPL by calling their Regional EPA office at the number
listed in this book
The proposed NPL identifies sites that have been evaluated
through the scoring process as the most serious problems
among uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in
the U.S. In addition, a site will be added to the NPL if the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry issues a
health advisory recommending that people be moved away
from the site. Updated at least once a year, it's only after
public comments are considered that these proposed worst
sites are officially added to the NPL.
Listing on the NPL does not set the order in which sites will be
cleaned up. The order is influenced by the relative priority of
the site's health and environmental threats compared to other
sites, and such factors as State priorities, engineering capabili-
ties, and available technologies. Many States also have their
own list of sites that require cleanup; these often contain sites
not on the NPL that are scheduled to be cleaned up with State
money. And it should be said again that any emergency action
needed at a site can be performed by the Superfund whether
or not a site is on the NPL.
-------
STEP 3: LONG-TERM CLEANUP ACTIONS
The ultimate goal for a hazardous waste site on the NPL is a
permanent, long-term cleanup. Since every site presents a
unique set of challenges, there is no single all-purpose solu-
tion. So a five-phase "remedial response" process is used to
develop consistent and workable solutions to hazardous waste
problems across the Nation:
1. Investigate in detail the extent of the site contamination:
remedial investigation,
2. Study the range of possible cleanup remedies: feasibility
study,
3. Decide which remedy to use: Record of Decision or ROD,
4. Plan the remedy: remedial design, and
5. Carry out the remedy: remedial action.
This remedial response process is a long-term effort to provide
a permanent solution to an environmental problem that
presents a serious, but not an imminent threat to the public or
environment.
The first two phases of a long-term cleanup are a combined
remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/ES) that
determine the nature and extent of contamination at the site,
and identify and evaluate cleanup alternatives. These studies
may be conducted by EPA or the State or, under their monitor-
ing, by private parties.
Like the initial site inspection described earlier, a remedial
investigation involves an examination of site data in order to
better define the problem. But the remedial investigation is
much more detailed and comprehensive than the initial site
inspection.
A remedial investigation can best be described as a carefully
designed field study. It includes extensive sampling and
laboratory analyses to generate more precise data on the types
and quantities of wastes present at the site, the type of soil and
water drainage patterns, and specific human health and
environmental risks. The result is information that allows
EPA to select the cleanup strategy that is best suited to a
particular site or to determine that no cleanup is needed.
: |p tfte NIPIv wfcat aye"*
rj&estep&lp
t
^f
o- *
\
XI
-------
^alternatives
-identified and vx
Placing a site on the NPL does not necessarily mean that
cleanup is needed. It is possible for a site to receive an HRS
score high enough to be added to the NPL, but not ultimately
require cleanup actions. Keep in mind that the purpose of the
scoring process is to provide a preliminary and conservative
assessment of potential risk. During subsequent site investiga-
tions, the EPA may find either that there is no real threat or
that the site does not pose significant human health or envi-
ronmental risks.
i HOW ate Cteamip ' *"x 1 EPA or the State or, under their monitoring, private parties
f w * v v* identify and analyze specific site cleanup needs based on the
extensive information collected during the remedial investiga-
tion. This analysis of cleanup alternatives is called a feasibility
study.
Since cleanup actions must be tailored exactly to the needs of
each individual site, more than one possible cleanup alterna-
tive is always considered. After making sure that all potential
cleanup remedies fully protect human health and the environ-
ment and comply with Federal and State laws, the advantages
and disadvantages of each cleanup alternative are carefully
compared. These comparisons are made to determine their
effectiveness in the short- and long-term, their use of perma-
nent treatment solutions, and their technical feasibility and
cost.
To the maximum extent practicable, the remedy must be a
permanent solution and use treatment technologies to destroy
principal site contaminants. But remedies such as containing
the waste on site or removing the source of the problem (like
leaking barrels) are often considered effective. Often special
pilot studies are conducted to determine the effectiveness and
feasibility of using a particular technology to clean up a site.
Therefore, the combined remedial investigation and feasibility
study can take between 10 and 30 months to complete, de-
pending on the size and complexity of the problem.
jt * I r
} ' 1* ' * 4
I
fw? k*\ t * j;W^«|
EDoes the public have \
la &y "in me final
Me^nup decision? ,,_
Yes. The Superfund law requires that the public be given the
opportunity to comment on the proposed cleanup plan. Their
concerns are carefully considered before a final decision is
made.
xii
-------
" . &. % w N v. . , sw '.*.
v v v -. x^C,. i. XflAX % w>X i. vjt:^-. <<*$&*£ -, v-v**-
wwAweO-e!'''' "**^£'M*v*M.^v'-'>-'-'vh. -Sv^x*. <. &? WWM. -M-. v. '::<
The results of the remedial investigation and feasibility study,
which also point out the recommended cleanup choice, are
published in a report for public review and comment. EPA or
the State encourages the public to review the information and
take an active role in the final cleanup decision. Fact sheets
and announcements in local papers let the community know
where they can get copies of the study and other reference
documents concerning the site.
The public has a minimum of 30 days to comment on the
proposed cleanup plan after it is published. These comments
can either be written or given verbally at public meetings that
EPA or the State are required to hold. Neither EPA nor the
State can select the final cleanup remedy without evaluating
and providing written answers to specific community com-
ments and concerns. This "responsiveness summary" is part
of EPA's write-up of the final remedy decision, called the
Record of Decision or ROD.
The ROD is a public document that explains the cleanup
remedy chosen and the reason it was selected. Since sites
frequently are large and must be cleaned up in stages, a ROD
may be necessary for each contaminated resource or area of
the site. This may be necessary when contaminants have
spread into the soil, water and air, and affect such sensitive
areas as wetlands, or when the site is large and cleaned up in
stages. This often means that a number of remedies using
different cleanup technologies are needed to clean up a single
site.
Yes. Before a specific cleanup action is carried out, it must be
designed in detail to meet specific site needs. This stage of the
cleanup is called the remedial design. The design phase
provides the details on how the selected remedy will be
engineered and constructed.
Projects to clean up a hazardous waste site may appear to be
like any other major construction project but, in fact, the likely
presence of combinations of dangerous chemicals demands
special construction planning and procedures. Therefore, the
design of the remedy can take anywhere from 6 months to 2
years to complete. This blueprint for site cleanup includes not
only the details on every aspect of the construction work, but a
description of the types of hazardous wastes expecced at the
"v-x*"-X -.s " %s vVM- -. - W.-X -. " v%« s*
o y&; ^^-:^* ;;c *> r- -5
% -.% % Vv?v.<"v4 ss x <\ -. - -.w.% % -.\\\XlV.\.. "" C" ^
x v^~->.-<* v.* ^-.^ 5 y$- ^.-^ *'.' v *
,xs^« "',.;" %' « * ^*«!>*" «s % - v S
%x!,s ,, sv^x. vs ^< v, 5vw,,-<>, 5
HfVv;> - X%SKS-V <"v - :
^-H *\: ---^-^^^-^ *^,, -j
:< \'.f' :\-. f £ -. '' ''- : "^ * ^ \\ s '<. "- - i
, ^-4. -WJ^ X Vtt ->^ -V ^. ^
jS^X fjy ""-"" v. ' -vs f ' ; f % % v 5
"^"'^ '"'**' '"'. " '"'^ i'^^'x'1' '' "^^
f"^^>"Vf -^ -t?v P -^ ^ *|
^fV°* '"5 ^- -^""» - v."!""-^-"i"iv &5
^--j>----^^%s--!,v" V-:- -"<
^<:^Zr',fv s ^>^ ^
X^SSx ^. ,; 4,»V^, rXX^C f^-;
iv- -^xs, :^<*^--v r^t * ^T" " \%;
"< r * ^ *^-^ v * * »
, temeay need iot.be % ^
-^taiioredloot \.'°i. "-;
^>.-- %% . .. .5> . "Vv. ..iy^v Ss , «'' . -4
X-\ sX*. x-.^S: »ftw5«S v "\TO. 'x^\ % * "
v% -.^J. %< S^NV^ * X %" ,5
V>*X^-NC v^^-.>-x^nw, -1
%1-Vl.Vl.l.l. V.V.VS A% . *.*. -.V14V1.V %,, % V, %1.<1.C<. v
ff . f , > V<- % i^?A vSw.**.-!. X *>. v ^ v ,, ^
^ A -5-W. -A. % X% f V.f ^ f J
Xlll
-------
m1v? oJ-%?Sl?
S Kft ff^, '
|lt \l V
i
«L
r Once tlie design is J
^complete, how loS|
: does it take to ^v
actually dean ttp we
$ite>nd|towmi^L::;j
Once the cleaimp
action Is complete/ 'U
Ihc site a«totnaltcaHy
'' fcom Ihe
(l l»l MM
4V,
site, special plans for environmental protection, worker safety,
regulatory compliance, and equipment decontamination.
The time and cost for performing the site cleanup called the
remedial action are as varied as the remedies themselves.
In a few cases, the only action needed may be to remove
drums of hazardous waste and decontaminate them an
action that takes limited time and money. In most cases,
however, a remedial action may involve different and expen-
sive measures that can take a long time.
For example, cleaning polluted groundwater or dredging
contaminated river bottoms can take several years of complex
engineering work before contamination is reduced to safe
levels. Sometimes the selected cleanup remedy described in
the ROD may need to be modified because of new contami-
nant information discovered or difficulties that were faced
during the early cleanup activities. Taking into account these
differences, a remedial cleanup action takes an average of 18
months to complete and costs an average of $26 million per
site.
No. The deletion of a site from the NPL is anything but auto-
matic. For example, cleanup of contaminated groundwater
may take up to 20 years or longer. Also, in some cases the
long-term monitoring of the remedy is required to ensure that
it is effective. After construction of certain remedies, opera-
tion and maintenance (e.g., maintenance of ground cover,
groundwater monitoring, etc.) or continued pumping and
treating of groundwater, may be required to ensure that the
remedy continues to prevent future health hazards or environ-
mental damage, and ultimately meets the cleanup goals
specified in the ROD. Sites in this final monitoring or opera-
tional stage of the cleanup process are designated as "con-
struction completed".
If s not until a site cleanup meets all the goals and monitoring
requirements of the selected remedy that EPA can officially
propose the site for "deletion" from the NPL. And if s not
until public comments are taken into consideration that a site
can actually be deleted from the NPL. Deletions that have
occurred are included in the "Construction Complete" cate-
gory in the progress report found later in this book.
xiv
-------
Yes. Based on the belief that "the polluters should pay," after a
site is placed on the NFL, the EPA makes a thorough effort to
identify and find those responsible for causing contamination
problems at a site. Although EPA is willing to negotiate with
these private parties and encourages voluntary cleanup, it has
the authority under the Superfund law to legally force those
potentially responsible for site hazards to take specific cleanup
actions. All work performed by these parties is closely guided
and monitored by EPA, and must meet the same standards
required for actions financed through the Superfund.
Because these enforcement actions can be lengthy, EPA may
decide to use Superfund monies to make sure a site is cleaned
up without unnecessary delay. For example, if a site presents
an imminent threat to public health and the environment, or if
conditions at a site may worsen, it could be necessary to start
the cleanup right away. Those responsible for causing site
contamination are liable under the law for repaying the money
EPA spends in cleaning up the site.
Whenever possible, EPA and the Department of Justice use
their legal enforcement authorities to require responsible
parties to pay for site cleanups, thereby preserving the Super-
fund for emergency actions and sites where no responsible
parties can be identified.
," ou.|^pinatio|i^pax?^
-------
TAX
-------
HOW TO:
.- * he Site Fact Sheets
presented in this book
/ are comprehensive
summaries that cover a broad
range of information. The
fact sheets describe hazard-
ous waste sites on the Na-
tional Priorities List (NPL)
and their locations, as well as
the conditions leading to their
listing ("Site Description").
They list the types of con-
taminants that have been dis-
covered and related threats to
public and ecological health
("Threats and Contami-
nants"). "Cleanup Ap-
proach" presents an overview
of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or
planned. The fact sheets
conclude with a brief synop-
sis of how much progress has
been made on protecting
public health and the envi-
ronment. The summaries also
pinpoint other actions, such
as legal efforts to involve pol-
luters responsible for site
contamination and commu-
nity concerns.
The following two pages
show a generic fact sheet and
briefly describes the informa-
tion under each section. The
square "icons" or symbols ac-
companying the text allow
the reader to see at a glance
which environmental re-
sources are affected and the
status of cleanup activities.
Icons in the Threats
and Contaminants
Section ,
Contaminated
Ground water re-
sources in the vicinity
or Underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used
as a drinking water source.)
Contaminated Sur-
face Water and
Sediments on or near
the site. (These include lakes,
ponds, streams, and rivers.)
Contaminated Air in
the vicinity of the
site. (Pollution is
usually periodic and involves
contaminated dust particles
or hazardous gas emissions.)
Contaminated Soil
and Sludges on or
near the site.
Threatened or
contaminated Envi-
ronmentally Sensi-
tive Areas in the vicinity of
the site. (Examples include
wetlands and coastal areas,
critical habitats.)
Icons in the Response
Action Status Section
nitial Actions
have been taken or
are underway to
eliminate immediate threats
at the site.
Site Studies at the
site are planned or
underway.
Remedy Selected
indicates that site
investigations have
been concluded
and EPA has se-
lected a final cleanup remedy
for the site or part of the site.
Remedy Design
means that engi-
neers are prepar-
ing specifications
and drawings for the selected
cleanup technologies.
Cleanup Ongoing
indicates that the
selected cleanup
remedies for the
contaminated site or part
of the site are currently
underway.
Cleanup Complete
shows that all
cleanup goals have
been achieved for
the contaminated site or part
of the site.
xvii
-------
Site Responsibility
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties that are taking
responsibility for cleanup
actions at the site.
NPL Listing
History
Dates when the site
was Proposed,
made Final, and
Deleted from the
NPL
EPA REGION
CONGRESSIONAL DIST
County Name
Location
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID# ABCOOOOOOOO
Site Description
Site RtsponstbtUtu:
Threats and Contaminants
Cleanup Approach
Rcoponsc Action Statue
Sits Facts:
Environmental Progress
Environmental Progress
A summary of the actions to reduce the threats to nearby residents and
the surrounding environment; progress towards cleaning up the site
and goals of the cleanup plan are given here.
'}, &&?*?* 4*
f <^*S-S %&&»
xviii
-------
WHAT THE FACT SHEETS CONTAIN
Jff7^ A V,
Site Description
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes
descriptions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have
contributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
Throughout the site description and other sections of the site summary, technical
or unfamiliar terms that are italicized are presented in the glossary at the end of
the book. Please refer to the glossary for more detailed explanation or definition
of the terms.
Threats and Contaminants
The major chemical categories of site contamination are noted as well as
which environmental resources are affected. Icons representing each of the
affected resources (may include air, groundwater, surface water, soil and
contamination to environmentally sensitive areas) are included in the margins
of this section. Potential threats to residents and the surrounding
environments arising from the site contamination are also described. Specific
contaminants and contaminant groupings are italicized and explained in more
detail in the glossary.
Cleanup Approach
This section contains a brief overview of how the site is being cleaned up.
Response Action Status
Specific actions that have been accomplished or will be undertaken to clean up
the site are described here. Cleanup activities at NPL sites are divided into
separate phases depending on the complexity and required actions at the site.
Two major types of cleanup activities are often described: initial, immediate or
emergency actions to quickly remove or reduce imminent threats to the
community and surrounding areas; and long-term remedial phases directed at
final cleanup at the site. Each stage of the cleanup strategy is presented in this
section of the summary. Icons representing the stage of the cleanup process
(initial actions, site investigations, EPA selection .of the cleanup remedy,
engineering design phase, cleanup activities underway and completed cleanup)
are located in the margin next to each activity description.
Site Facts
Additional information on activities and events at the site are included in this
section. Often details on legal or administrative actions taken by EPA to achieve
site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with the site
cleanup process are reported here.
,ffjfS
XIX
-------
The fact sheets are arranged
in alphabetical order by site
name. Because site cleanup is
a dynamic and gradual
process, all site information is
accurate as of the date shown
on the bottom of each page.
Progress is always being
made at NPL sites, and EPA
will periodically update the
Site Fact Sheets to reflect
recent actions and publish
updated State volumes.
HOW CAN YOU USE
THIS STATE BOOK?
You can use this book to keep
informed about the sites that
concern you, particularly
ones close to home. EPA is
committed to involving the
public in the decisionmaking
process associated with
hazardous waste cleanup.
The Agency solicits input
from area residents in com-
munities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely
to be affected not only by
hazardous site conditions, but
also by the remedies that
combat them. Site cleanups
take many forms and can
affect communities in differ-
ent ways. Local traffic may
be rerouted, residents may be
relocated, temporary water
supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a
site can help citizens sift
through alternatives and
'make decisions. To make
good choices, you must know
what the threats are and how
EPA intends to clean up the
site. You must understand
the cleanup alternatives being
proposed for site cleanup and
how residents may be af-
fected by each one. You also
need to have some idea of
how your community intends
to use the site in the future
and to know what the com-
munity can realistically
expect once the cleanup is
complete.
EPA wants to develop
cleanup methods that meet
community needs, but the
Agency can only take local
concerns into account if it
understands what they are.
Information must travel both
ways in order for cleanups to
be effective and satisfactory.
Please take this opportunity
to learn more, become in-
volved, and assure that
hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your
community's concerns.
xx
-------
NPL Sites in
State of Minnes
The State of Minnesota is bordered by Canada to the north, North and South Dakota to
the west, Wisconsin and Lake Superior to the east, and Iowa to the south. Minnesota
covers 84,402 square mile and consists of central hilly and lake regions, rocky ridges
and deep lakes in the northeast, flat plains in the northwest, with rolling plains and deep
river valleys in the south. The State experienced a 5.7 percent increase in population
during the 1980s and currently has approximately 4,307,000 residents, ranking 21st in
U.S. populations. Principal State industries include agricultural business, forest prod-
ucts, mining, manufacturing, and tourism. Minnesota manufactures in food processing,
non-electrical equipment, printing and publishing, instruments, and fabricated metal
products. -
How Many Minnesota Sites
Are on the NPL?
Proposed
Final
Deleted
2
40
J.
43
Where Are the NPL Sites Located?
Cong. District 04
Cong. District 02, 08
Cong. District 01, 05
Cong. District 06
Cong. District 03, 07
2 sites
3 sites
5 sites
7 sites
9 sites
50-r
How are Sites Contaminated and What are the Principal* Chemicals ?
Groundwater: Volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), heavy metals
(inorganics), and creosotes (organics).
Soil and Solid Waste: Volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), heavy
metals (inorganics), creosotes
(organics), polychlorinated biphenyls
(RGBs), dioxins, and petrochemicals.
Surface Water and Sediments:
Creosotes (organics), heavy metals
(inorganics), and volatile organic
compounds {VOCs).
Air: Heavy metals (inorganics).
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
and gases.
GW Soil SW
Contamination Area
Solid
Waste
(Sludge)
*Appear at 10% or more sites
State Overview
xxi
continued
-------
Where are the Sites in the Superfund Cleanup Process*?
Site
Studies
Remedy
Selected
Remedy
Design
Cleanup
Ongoing
Construction
Complete
«*
4
Initial actions have been taken at 20 sites as interim cleanup measures.
Who Do I Call with Questions?
The following pages describe each NPL site in Minnestota,. providing specific
information on threats and contaminants, cleanup activities, and environmental
progress. Should you have questions, please call one of the offices listed below:
Minnestota Superfund Office
EPA Region V Superfund Office
EPA Public Information Office
EPA Superfund Hotline
EPA Region V Superfund Public
Relations Office
(612)296-7290
(312)886-7456
(202) 477-7751
(800) 424-9346
(312)353-2072
'Cleanup status reflects phase of site activities rather than administrative accomplishments.
State Overview xxii
-------
The NPL Progress Report
The following Progress Report lists the State sites currently on or deleted from the NPL,
and, briefly summarizes the status of activities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup process are arrayed across the top of the
chart, and each site's progress through these steps is represented by an arrow {*) which
indicates the current stage of cleanup at the site.
Large and complex sites are often organized into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and surface water pollution, or to clean up
different areas of a large site. In such cases, the chart portrays cleanup progress at the
site's most advanced stage, reflecting the status of site activities rather than administrative
accomplishments.
*- An arrow in the "Initial Response" category indicates that an emergency cleanup or
initial action has been completed or is currently underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to provide immediete relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize a site to prevent further contamination.
*- An arrow in the "Site Studies" category indicates that an investigation to determine the
nature and extent of the contamination at the site is currently ongoing or planned to
begin in 1991.
«* An arrow in the "Remedy Selection" category means that the EPA has selected the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site contamination, or that any remaining
contamination will be naturally dispersed without further cleanup activities, a "No
Action" remedy is selected. In these cases, the arrows in the Progress Report are
discontinued at the "Remedy Selection" step and resume in the final "Construction
Complete" category.
*- An arrow at the "Remedial Design" stage indicates that engineers are currently
designing -the technical specifications for the selected cleanup remedies and
technologies.
*- An arrow marking the "Cleanup Ongoing" category means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and are currently underway.
«*- A arrow in the "Construction Complete" category is used only when all phases of the
site cleanup plan have been performed and the EPA has determined that no additional
construction actions are required at the site. Some sites in this category may currently
be undergoing long-term pumping and treating of groundwater, operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure that the completed cleanup actions continue to
protect human health and the environment.
The sites are listed in alphabetical order. Further information on the activities and progress
at each site is given in the site "Fact Sheets" published in this volume.
xxiii
-------
A *Wj
Page
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
5*«*i9i9 AWWCUU VXA^CUJLUI/ O.L.
Site Name
ADRIAN MUNICIPAL WELL FIELD
AGATE LAKE SCRAP YARD
ARROWHEAD REFINING CO.
BOISE CASCADE, ONAN, MEDTRONICS
BURLINGTON NORTHERN
DAKHUE SANITARY LANDFILL
EAST BETHEL DEMOLITION LANDFILL
FMC CORP.
FREEWAY SANITARY LANDFILL
JL1JL JL/ V7A1»^£9
County
NOBLES
CASS
ST. LOUIS
ANOKA
CROW WING
DAKOTA
ANOKA
HENNEPIN
DAKOTA
GENERAL MILLS/HENKEL CORPORATION HENNEPIN
JOSLYN MFG & SUPPLY CO.
KOCH REFINING COMPANY
KOPPERS COKE
KUMMER SANITARY LANDFILL
KURT MANUFACTURING CO.
LAGRAND SANITARY LANDFILL -
LEHILLIER MANKATO
LONG PRAIRIE GROUNDWATER
MACGILLIS & GIBBS CO./BELL LUMBER
HENNEPIN
DAKOTA
RAMSEY
BELTRAMI
ANOKA
DOUGLAS
BLUE EARTH
TODD
RAMSEY
1 JUUL fcU
NPL
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Prop
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
,\j V7bO.l\; VM. J.fJUUUUUM&aWl.a.
Initial She Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
06/10/86 *- *-
06/10/86 * *
09/21/84 "* *" *- *-
09/21/84 * * «* *
09/08/83 "^ "^ «^ ^
10y26/89 *- <*"
06/10/86 «*
09/08/83 ****- B^ ^
06/10/86 «^'
09/21/84 *'*"
09/21/84 >*- "^ "^ *- «^
06/10/86 " "*
09/08^3 "* «*
10/15/86 *- «K * ^>-
06/10/86 * ^ «*- "^ . *
07^1/87 "^ .
09/08/83 * * "K "^ "^
06/10/86 * "K ^
09/21/84 Mh * ' . . :. !^; ...
XXIV
-------
Page Site Name
County
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
NPL Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
39
41
43
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
63
65
68
70
73
75
77
79
MORRIS ARSENIC DUMP
NAVAL INDUSTRIAL RESERVE ORDNA
NEW BRIGHTON /ARDEN HILLS
NL IND TARACORP GOLDEN AUTO
NUTTING TRUCK & CASTER CO.
OAK GROVE SANITARY LANDFILL
OAKDALE DUMP
OLMSTED COUNTY SANITARY LDFL
PERHAM ARSENIC
PINE BEND SANITARY LANDFILL
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL CORP.
RITARI POST & POLE
SOUTH ANDOVER SITES
ST. AUGUSTA LDFL/ ENGEN DUMP
ST. LOUIS RIVER SITE
ST. REGIS PAPER CO.
TWIN CITIES AIR FORCE RESERVE BASE
UNION SCRAP IRON & METAL CO.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
STEVENS
ANOKA
RAMSEY
HENNEPIN
RICE
ANOKA
WASHINGTON
OLMSTED
OTTER TAIL
DAKOTA
HENNEPIN
WADENA
ANOKA
STEARNS
ST. LOUIS
CASS
HENNEPIN
HENNEPIN
DAKOTA
Delete
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
03/07/86 ' "* ** "K
11/24/89 .**
09/08/83 * * * ** *
09/08/83 * * * *«*
09/21/84 +* -
06/10/86 * * *
09/08/83 *- * * ' * *
06/10/86 '"*
09/21/84 * ' *
06/10/86 *-
09/08/83 "^ "^ ^ *" "K
07/21/87 *-
09/08/83 *~ st* s*~ s*-
07/01/87 * -
09/21/84 ' "*" "*- "*-.-:
09/21/84 **-. ^- ^
07/21^7 "^ *-.,.
09/21/84 *- ' "* ' "^ ... ' -
06/10/86 «*- ."K . «K
XXV
-------
Page Site Name
County
NPL Date
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
81
83
85
87
89
WAITE PARK WELLS STEARNS
WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL WASHINGTON
WASTE DISPOSAL ENGINEERING, INC. ANOKA
WHITTAKER CORPORATION
WINDOM MUNICIPAL DUMP
Final 06/10/86
Final 09/21/84
Final 09/08/83
HENNEPIN Final 09/08/83
GOTTONWOOD' Final 06/10/86
XXVI
-------
-------
-------
ADRIAN M
WELL FIELD
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980904023
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Nobles County
Adrian
Site Description
The Adrian Municipal Well Field site, located within the Adrian city limits, is
contaminated with volatile halogenatedand npn-halogenated organic chemicals,
according to tests conducted by the State. The State has closed the two most highly
contaminated city wells because of the health risk. The City is now using two
uncontaminated wells previously slated to be abandoned due to age and low capacity.
Since contaminants found in Adrian wells are typical of gasoline contamination, source
investigations have focused on a number of underground storage tanks used to store
gasoline and fuel oil. There are nine separate underground storage tank locations in the
vicinity of the Adrian Municipal Well Field. The source of the contamination appears to
be a service station that has had visibly leaking underground storage tanks removed in
the past, and possibly a local glass company. The underground storage tanks from all
but three of the locations have been removed. The estimated 1987 population of
Adrian was 1,305 residents. All households, with one exception, are connected to a
municipal water supply. The nearest residence is approximately 2 blocks south of the
contaminated area. Several recreational facilities are located between the areas of
contamination and the upper arm of Kanaranzi Creek, including a swimming pool, two
ballfields, and a campground.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is polluted with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including benzene, toluene, and chloroform. Accidental ingestion,
inhalation of airborne contaminants, and direct contact with contaminated
groundwater may be potential health threats.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
1
continued
-------
ADRIAN MUNICIPAL WELL FIELD
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: After installation of activated carbon filtration units, the closed
wells (wells 3 and 4) were temporarily brought back on line from July
through November 1984. During this interim period, two new wells were
installed outside the area of contamination. Well 5 went into production in
November 1984, and Well 6 went into production later in 1985.
Responsibility for the remaining site cleanup actions has been transferred to the EPA's
Underground Storage Tank (LIST) program, which is administered by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), for removal and area cleanup.
Site Facts: The UST program was established in 1986 to clean up contamination
resulting from leaking petroleum storage tanks.
Environmental Progress
The installation of two new wells outside of the area of contamination at the Adrian
Municipal Well Field site has virtually eliminated the potential for exposure to
contaminated drinking water for users of the municipal water system. Final cleanup
will be conducted under the EPA UST program.
-------
AGATE
SCRAP YAK
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980898068
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
Cass County
Western shore of Agate Lake,
Fairview Township
The Agate Lake Scrap Yard covers about 2 acres on the eastern shore of Agate Lake in
a rural area of Fairview Township. The area is used mostly for recreation and residential
purposes. About 480 acres of public forest and adjacent wetland near the
northwestern side of the site are used for hunting. Approximately 33 homes, a small
resort, and a golf course are located across the lake from the site. The Agate Lake
Scrap Yard was operated from 1952 to 1982 as an industrial waste treatment facility.
Two homemade furnaces were used to smelt aluminum, copper, and lead for an
unknown time period until the site closed. Transformer oils and halogenatedsolvents
were used to fuel the furnace. Transformer liquids were sometimes spilled or drained
onto the ground, mainly near the furnaces. A large ash pile from the furnaces was
found in the main transformer storage area. This pile was fenced during some cleanup
of the site in the early 1980s. The fencing has been partially removed since that time,
which allows access to the ash pile. Two smaller ash piles that are thought to contain
asbestos were found on the northeastern side of the site. An on-site open dump area
along the west side of the entrance road, just north of a gully, contains bottles, cans,
and other trash. The gully area slopes down toward a wetland area about 10 feet north.
Junked automobiles are found in various parts of the site, about 100 feet from Agate
Lake. Lead batteries were observed in several places. Approximately 1,100 people
reside within 3 miles of the site. These people depend on groundwater as a source of
drinking water.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
l\
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including trichloroethylene (TCE), benzene, toluene, and methylene
chloride. The soil is contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
dioxins, furans, and lead. Exposure to contaminants from soils is most
likely through accidental ingestion, especially by children playing in the
area, or by way of inhaling contaminated soil or ash particles. Swimmers
and people fishing may be exposed to PCBs if they use Agate Lake or the
nearby wetlands for recreation. People consuming fish from the lake may
be exposed to health risks.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
3
continued
-------
AGATE LAKE SCRAP YARD
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial
phase directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: Transformers, 5 drums of transformer oils, and 51
drums of waste solvents and liquids were removed from the site in two
operations in 1983. Two furnaces were also dismantled. In fall of 1983,
approximately 300 cubic yards of contaminated soil were excavated from the main
transformer storage area and were deposited in an on-site gully located west of the site
entrance road. The contaminated soil was mixed with clean soil and revegetated with
grass seed.
Entire Site: Investigations into the nature and extent of contamination
have been completed by the party potentially responsible for site
contamination under State monitoring. The final decision on the remedy
that will be used to clean up the site is expected to be completed in late
1990, with remedy design scheduled to begin in 1991.
Site Facts: The State of Minnesota issued a Unilateral Administrative Order compelling
the potentially responsible party to perform an investigation of site contamination and
to identify alternative methods for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
Much of the contaminated materials and soils have been removed from the Agate Lake
Scrap Yard site, thereby reducing the potential for exposure to hazardous materials
while the final remedy selection is being made.
-------
ARROWHEAD
REFINING
COMPANY
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980823975
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
St. Louis County
Hermantown
Alias:
Arrowhead Ref. Sludge Dspl.
The Arrowhead Refining Company site, which is located in Hermantown near Duluth,
consists of 10 acres of relatively flat land with peaty wetlands scattered across the
area. During the 1940s, the site was used for retinning milk cans. In 1951, however,
Arrowhead began recycling waste oil, which produced a highly acidic, metal-laden
sludge. It is estimated that the operation generated approximately 7,000 cubic yards of
waste by-products, which were discharged into a 2-acre lagoon and a wastewater ditch
in a wetland area. The Arrowhead Refinery Company incorporated in 1961 and
continued refining and recycling operations until 1977, when the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) ordered work to be stopped. On-site investigations conducted
by the EPA in 1979 revealed that on-site surface water was transporting contaminants
to nearby wetlands areas and navigable waters. Nearly 754 residences within a 3-mile
radius of the site use groundwater that could be affected by the contaminants in the
sludge.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date': 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
EPA studies found that the groundwater, surface water, soils, and
sediments are contaminated with volatile organic compounds, (VOCs)
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals such as lead.
The sludge lagoon, covering roughly an acre, consists of liquid sludge
approximately 1 1/2 feet deep and up to 7 feet of solid sludge and peat
saturated with oil to a depth of at least 4 inches. The contaminated
sludge may pose health risks to individuals or wildlife coming in direct
contact with it. Groundwater beneath the site is contaminated, but the
contamination has not yet affected the private water wells near the site.
The area is fenced to prevent public access to the site.
March 1990
NP.L HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
-------
ARROWHEAD REFINING COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: an immediate action and a long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Action: A surface water diversion ditch was constructed to
prevent further contaminant migration in 1980 by the Coast Guard and the
EPA, and a fence was installed.
Entire Site: In 1986, the EPA selected the following remedies'to address
the site contamination: (1) excavation and on-site incineration of 4,600
cubic yards of sludge and 39,400 cubic yards of contaminated soils and
___ sediments; (2) groundwater pumping and treating designed to restore the
aquifer and control contaminant migration over a 25-to 50-year period; (3) extension of
a nearby municipal water supply system to replace those private water supplies most
likely to be affected by groundwater,contamination; and (4) proper abandonment of
individual wells formerly used as drinking water supplies in accordance with State well
codes. The EPA and the State are investigating alternative technologies to incineration
of the contaminated soil. Under EPA monitoring, the potentially responsible parties are
designing the technical specifications for the construction of the Hermantown water
main extension. Construction is scheduled to be completed by late 1990. Construction
of the extraction and treatment system is scheduled for 1991. Sludge and soil cleanup
are slated to begin in 1992. A solvent extraction treatability study was conducted in
1989. A bioremediation treatability study is under way.
Site Facts: In March 1990, the EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to several
potentially responsible parties directing them to implement the groundwater cleanup
actions. In May 1990, the EPA issued special notice letters to several parties informing
them of their liability for the waste sludge and to commence the process of negotiating
a three-party Consent Decree with EPA and the State for cleanup of the sludge.
Environmental Progress
By constructing the surface water diversion ditch and installing the fence the potential
for contact with contaminated materials has been greatly reduced. Further remedy
design activities leading to final cleanup actions are taking place.
-------
BOISE CAS
ONAN CORP
MEDTRONI
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND053417515
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Anoka County
Fridley
Alias:
National Pole Treating Company
The Boise Cascade/Onan Site covers 183 acres in Fridley. The National Pole and
Treating Company (later the Minnesota and Ontario Paper Company) treated wood from
1921 until 1961 at this location. Operations at the site first used creosofeto treat wood
for railroad cross ties and for utility poles. In 1958, the company began using
pentachlorophenol (PCP) to treat their wood products until 1961, when all operations
stopped. In 1964, the Minnesota and Ontario Paper Company and the National Pole
Treating Company were purchased and merged into the Boise Cascade Company. The
Onan Corporation acquired 133 acres of the Boise Cascade property, and Medtronic
Corporation purchased the remaining 50 acres. Both of these new owners built
commercial and manufacturing facilities on the site. In 1979, Onan and Medtronic
uncovered large quantities of creosote from past treatment operations. Approximately
3,000 people live within 4,000 feet of the site. Several residences are located within ,
500 feet of the site. Two elementary schools and several small urban parks are located
within 1 mile of the site. Groundwater contamination from this site is-a major concern,
because the towns of Fridley and Moundsview use water drawn from municipal wells
that are near the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The EPA detected high levels ofp organics including creosote and phenols-
in on-site groundwater monitoring wells. Sediments and soils throughout
the site also contained these same contaminants. Sampling of all
contaminated areas indicate that the contaminants have either been
removed from the site or confined within a containment vault built at the
site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
7
continued
-------
BOISE CASCADE/ONAN CORP./MEDTRONICS, INC.
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in a single long-term remedial phase, which was focused on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Work was completed in 1986 on both properties on the site
to address the contamination problems. The work included: (1) excavating
and disposing of contaminated soil; (2) filling in the excavated areas with
clean soil; (3) removing and treating contaminated groundwater at the site; (4)
constructing a fence around the site; and (5) monitoring the air and surface water within
the site vicinity. Long-term monitoring of the vault constructed on the site to contain
contaminated materials is planned.
Site Facts: In 1984, Medtronic entered into a Consent Decree with the State to help
pay the cost of addressing contamination of its part of the site. Onan Corporation,
Boise Cascade, and two railroad companies went to court to decide their individual
responsibility and an acceptable solution to contamination of the property.
Environmentalrj*rpgr
-------
BURLINGTON
NORTHERN
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND000686196
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
Crow Wing County
Brainerd
The Burlington Northern site is a 70-acre facility that preserves railroad ties with
creosote and is located in the Baxter/Brainerd area. Since 1907, Burlington Northern
has owned and operated the railroad tie treatment plant. During the 1950s, Burlington
Northern began mixing creosote, a preserver, with number 5 fuel oil. At some
undetermined time, the mixture was changed to creosote and coal tar. Wastewater
generated from the wood treating process was sent to two shallow, unlined surface
impoundments for disposal. The discharge of wastewater to the disposal ponds
generated a sludge thai contaminated both the underlying soils and groundwater. The
original pond was abandoned in the 1930s and was covered. The second pond was
used until the fall of 1982, when a wastewater pre-treatment plant became operational.
The effluent from the pre-treatment plant is discharged to the local municipal sewage
collection system. The Mississippi River flows about 3,000 feet east of the plant, and
residential areas are located to the northeast and southeast, less than 1,000 feet from
the site. Six private water supply wells are within a 1/2-mile radius of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/16/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater downgradientof the site is contaminated with carcinogenic
and non-carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Heavy
metal contamination also has been detected in groundwater samples.
PAHs have migrated Into the surrounding soils from the contaminated
wastewater and sludge. Access to the railroad tie treatment plant is
restricted; therefore it is not likely that the general public would wander
onto the installation. Prior to the initiation of the cleanup activities,
workers at the site could have been exposed to the contaminants through
direct contact with contaminated soil, sludge, or groundwater or by
inhaling dust when contaminated soil or sludge was disturbed. The
Mississippi River will be sampled periodically for contamination from the
site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
9
continued
-------
BURLINGTON NORTHERN
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1985, the EPA selected the following cleanup remedies for
a the site: (1) preparation of a lined staging area for temporary storage of the
sludge and contaminated soil; (2) removal of all standing water in the
impoundment; (3) excavation and segregation of the sludges for
subsequent free oil recovery; and (4) excavation of visibly contaminated soil from both
impoundments and subsequent storage in the staging area. The excavated areas will
be backfilled and covered. A sump for collection of the stormwater and leachate will be
installed, and bioremediation of soil and the installation of an irrigation system will also
be carried out. After the treatment process has been completed, a cover will be
installed over the site. The EPA is currently conducting soil and groundwater cleanup
activities on the site. The groundwater is being treated through a gradient control
system that has been installed on site. Any water discharged to the river will be
regulated by Federal and State permits. The soil bioremediation is taking place. The
final goal of treatment by bioremediation is the transformation and immobilization of
waste constituents in soil into non-toxic materials.
Site Facts: A Consent Agreement was signed in April 1985 between the EPA and
Burlington Northern. Burlington Northern is carrying out the site cleanup at its own
expense. In addition, the company will reimburse the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and the EPA for expenses incurred in connection with past and future
investigations.
Environmental Progress
The potential for exposure to hazardous wastes continues to diminish as cleanup
activities at the Burlington Northern site continue. The EPA has determined that the
site does not pose an imminent threat to the surrounding population or the
environment while the groundwater gradient control treatment system is in operation
and the other cleanup activites are under way.
-------
DAKHUES
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND981191570
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Dakota County
3 miles north of Cannon Falls
Site Description
The Dakhue Sanitary Landfill, covering approximately 80 acres, is a privately owned and
State-permitted sanitary /andf/7/that has operated since 1971 in Cannon Falls. Prior to
1971, the land within the site boundary was undeveloped. Since opening, the landfill
has been utilized for the disposal of mixed municipal and commercial waste and small
amounts of industrial waste. The landfill was opened on a part-time basis until 1973,
when the landfill extended its operations to 6 days a week. The exact quantity and
disposal area of hazardous substances is unknown. The area surrounding the site
consists mainly of single family dwellings or farms. Residential drinking water supply
wells, municipal water supply wells, and irrigation wells draw groundwater from a
shallow aquifer and from the hydraulically connected aquifers beneath it.
Approximately 650 people use the aquifer as the primary source of drinking water
within a 3-mile radius of the site, and about 6,600 acres of major cropland are irrigated
with water from the aquifer. Pine Creek, 3/4 mile south of the site, and the Cannon
River, 2 3/4 miles south of the site, are used for recreational purposes.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/26/89
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), chloroform, and heavy metals including cadmium and lead.
People could be exposed to potential health threats by drinking the
contaminated groundwater or by eating food crops that have been
irrigated with the contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
11
continued
-------
DAKHUE SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: interim actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: Interim erosion control measures were completed in
June 1990. Areas where garbage was exposed were filled in, and a trench
was dug around the site to direct surface water into catch basins.
Source Control: Under the supervision of the State of Minnesota, a study
to determine the source of the contamination and to identify cleanup
actions to control the source began in spring 1990. This study is slated for
n 1992.
Entire Site: An investigation into the nature and extent of the
groundwater contamination began in spring 1990. This investigation is
slated for completion in 1992. Upon completion, the EPA will select and
implement the cleanup actions needed to address the groundwater contamination.
Site Facts: The State amended the landfill permit in 1983, and in 1984, it issued a
notice to the facility for violation of the amended permit. In 1984, the State and the
party potentially responsible for the site contamination, under EPA supervision, entered
into a Consent Order requiring the party potentially responsible to conduct the
investigation into the nature and extent of contamination at the site and to recommend
alternatives for final cleanup.
completion in 1992.
Environmental Progress
Interim measures to control the movement of contamination from the Dakhue Sanitary
Landfill site have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials on and
around the site. An investigation leading to the selection of a final remedy to address
groundwater contamination is currently taking place.
12
-------
EAST BETH
DEMOLITIO
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND981088180
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
East Bethel Township
Alias:
East Bethel Sanitary Landfill
The East Bethel Demolition Landfill is a 60-acre landfill located in East Bethel Township,
1 mile east of Highway 65. The site was operated as an unpermitted solid waste
disposal site from 1969 to 1971. In fall 1971, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
{MPCA) issued a solid waste disposal facility permit for the site, which was amended in
1985. The site currently accepts only demolition waste and a small amount of
municipal waste. According to information provided by representatives of the landfill,
most hazardous wastes were accepted between 1969 and 1976. MPCA files indicate
that the equivalent of approximately 4,400 drums of hazardous industrial wastes and.
contaminated soils were buried in the landfill in 1974. Hazardous industrial wastes
reported to have been disposed of at the site include cleaning solvents, waste inks,
caustics and acids, paint, waste oils, thinner, dry cleaning solvents, liquids with a strong
chemical odor, small transformers, and 8-ounce cans of ether. The landfill is located on
the Anoka Sand Plain, a shallow sand aquifer that provides drinking water to a few
residents in the area. The aquifer is contaminated; however, the majority of residents
use a deeper aquifer for drinking water. Approximately 3,400 people live within a 3-
mile radius of the site, with about 300 living within 1 mile that use private wells. The
two closest residences are about 1,500 feet southwest of the landfill. A growing
subdivision begins about 2,000 feet southwest of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been identified in groundwater
from the shallow aquifer. Two wells on the western and southern
borders of the landfill area are the most heavily contaminated with VOCs.
Several other compounds have been detected in the two most
contaminated wells, .including the heavy metals arsenic, barium,
cadmium, mercury, and lead. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
were also detected in these wells. On-site soils have been found to be
contaminated with VOCs including toluene and vinyl chloride. Potential
health risks may exist for those accidentally ingesting, touching, or
inhaling volatilized contaminants from the contaminated groundwater or
soil. The areas to the west and southeast are marshy wetlands, and
Ned's Lake lies 1,000 feet to the south; both the wetlands and Ned's
Lake may be threatened from site contaminants.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
13
continued
-------
EAST BETHEL DEMOLITION LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase directed at cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The State is conducting an investigation to determine the
nature and extent of contamination at the site. Once the investigation is
completed/the most appropriate cleanup alternatives for the site will be
recommended.
Environmental Progress
After listing the East Bethel Demolition Landfill on the NPL, the EPA performed a
preliminary investigation and determined that there are no immediate threats to the
surrounding community or the environment while the investigations leading to the final
remedy selection are taking place.
14
-------
FMC
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND006481&43
REGION 5
ONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Hennepin County
Fridley, about 1,000 feet east of the Mississippi
River
Site Description
The 18-acre FMC site combines two areas in Fridley, referred to as the FMC lands and
the Burlington Northern Railroad Company lands, 13 acres and 5 acres in size,
respectively. Both areas are located immediately south of the FMC Ordnance Plant.
From 1941 until 1964, the site operated as a naval ordnance manufacturing complex.
From about 1945 to 1969, a tract of land south of the manufacturing complex was used
for the burning and disposal of wastes, including plating'wastes, paint, paint sludges,
oils, bottom ash, and chlorinated and non-chlorinated solvents. An 11-acre unlined
landfill on the site was used for the disposal of hazardous wastes. Records indicate
that solvents and sludges were dumped directly into unlined pits and burned or buried.
Disposal at the site was discontinued in 1969. There are approximately 70,000 people
living within 3 miles of the site. This population receives drinking water from wells
extended into the bedrock aquifer. The City of Minneapolis has a drinking water supply
intake on the river 1/2 mile downstream of the site. The drinking water plant supplies
about 500,000 people.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/16/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soils were contaminated with volatile organic
compounds {VOCs) including trichloroethylene (TCE) and benzene. TCE
was detected in high,concentrations near the Mississippi River and
probably contributed to the detection of VOCs in the Minneapolis drinking
water supply intake. The main health risk of concern to people was from
drinking contaminated groundwater. There are no private drinking water
wells in the area and the industrial wells are not contaminated. Therefore,
area residents were not directly exposed to groundwater contamination
from the site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
15
continued
-------
FMC CORP.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the party potentially responsible for the site
contamination, under EPA and State supervision, excavated approximately
38,600 cubic yards of contaminated soil and placed it in a secure
containment and treatment facility constructed on site. Drummed waste that was
found in isolated areas on the site was excavated, overpacked, sampled, and disposed
of at an off-site approved landfill. A gas extraction and treatment system was
constructed to gradually reduce the levels of contamination in the soil in the
containment and treatment facility. Excavated areas were restored and revegetated. In
a separate action, and during the same year, the party excavated additional
contaminated soil and placed the soil in the on-site containment facility.
Entire Site: The cleanup methods selected to address groundwater
contamination included: (1) groundwater pump and treatment with
discharge to a sanitary sewer system; (2) groundwater monitoring to
assure effectiveness of the pump and treatment, and (3) implementation of land use
restrictions to stop the use of contaminated groundwater between the site and the
Mississippi River. The potentially responsible party constructed the groundwater
treatment system, which has been in operation since 1987. A secure cover was placed
on the landfill as an interim measure to stop ongoing groundwater contamination, and
the site disposal areas are enclosed by an 8-foot high chain link fence.
Site Facts: In 1983, the party potentially responsible, the State, and the EPA entered
an agreement that required that the party potentially responsible construct a large clay-
lined vault on an uncontaminated portion of the site for placement of about 58,000
cubic yards of contaminated soils excavated from the site. The party also agreed to
conduct the study to determine the nature and extent of groundwater contamination at
the site and to recommend alternatives for final groundwater cleanup.
Environmejital Progress
Cleanup goals for groundwater and surface water have been met due to the excavation
and treatment of contaminated soils, the removal of the drummed wastes, the
installation of the groundwater treatment system, and other noted actions. The EPA
has determined that the site is now safe to nearby residents and the environment and
will continue to monitor the site to assure the effectiveness of the cleanup remedies.
16
-------
FREEWAY 3
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND038384004
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Dakota County
Burnsville
The Freeway Sanitary Landfill site covers 126 acres in Burnsville. Since 1971, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency licensed the landfill'to accept 1,962 acre-feet of
household, commercial, demolition, and non-hazardous industrial wastes. The State
permit prohibited the disposal of liquids and hazardous wastes. However, heavy
metals, acids, and bases were accepted by the landfill from local industries. The landfill
also accepted 200 cubic yards of battery casings and 448 tons of aluminum sweat
furnace slag. In 1984, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals were
detected in the groundwater. The owner has installed a cover over the landfill.
Burnsville's municipal wells are located about 4,000 feet south of the landfill. These
wells serve approximately 36,000 people. Two quarries are located nearby. Surface
water runoff drains from the site into the Minnesota River, about 400 feet from the
landfill.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains VOCs such as benzene, ethyl benzene, and xylene
and heavy metals including arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, and
manganese. Exposure to contaminated groundwater is possible if the
pollutants migrate to the Burnsville municipal well field. Water beneath
the landfill discharges into the Minnesota River. Wildlife in and around the
river may be harmed by the contaminants.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
17
continued
-------
FREEWAY SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire site: Under State supervision, the parties potentially responsible
for the site contamination are studying the type and extent of the
contamination. Once the study is completed in 1992, the final'cleanup
remedy for the site will be selected.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Freeway Sanitary Landfill site to the NPL, the EPA performed
preliminary evaluations and determined that the site does not pose an immediate threat
to the surrounding population or the environment while the studies leading to the
selection of final site cleanup actions are taking place.
18
-------
GENERAL
HENKEL
MINNESOTA
EPAID# MND051441731
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Hennepln County
Minneapolis
Aliases:
Tech Center Research Lab
Henkel Tech Center
Site Description
The General Mills/Henkel Corporation site is located in an industrial section of
Minneapolis. General Mills operated a technical center and research laboratories at the
site from 1930 through 1977. Food research was conducted until 1947, when chemical
research began. From 1947 to 1962, solvents were disposed of in a soil adsorption pit
and are believed to be contained in 3 buried perforated 55-gallon drums, stacked one
on top of another, with the deepest drum 10 to 12 feet below the ground surface.
Approximately 1,000 gallons of solvents per year were disposed of in this manner. The
soil and the -aquifers are contaminated. Although the site is in an industrial section of
Minneapolis, approximately 4,900 people live within 1 mile of the,property. Access to
the site is restricted. All residences and businesses in the area are connected to the
municipal water system. This water is obtained from the Mississippi River north of the
city.
Site Responsibility :
Tnjs sjte js being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soils are contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including benzene, chloroform, toluene, and xylenes. People who
touch or accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater or soil may be at
risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
19
continued
-------
GENERAL MILLS/HENKEL CORPORATION
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial
phase directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: General Mills installed wells to pump the water out of
the contaminated aquifers and treat it by air stripping in 1985. Air is forced
_ through the water and blows the contaminants out. The air is then treated
before being released into the atmosphere. The treated water is discharged into the
municipal sewer system. The groundwater is being monitored to ensure the
effectiveness of the treatment.
Entire site: The State recently completed an investigation to determine
the extent of the groundwater and soil contamination. The results of the
study are being reviewed to determine if there is any remaining
contamination at the site. Once reviewed, the EPA will select the appropriate cleanup
methods to completely clean up the site. :
Environmental Progress
By pumping and treating the contaminated groundwater, the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials at the General Mills/Henkel site has been greatly reduced while
selection of final site cleanup remedies are taking place.
20
-------
JOSLYN
MANUFA
& SUPPL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND044799856
Site Description -
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Hennepln County
Brooklyn Center
Alias:
Joslyn Wood Products Plant
The Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company site covers 30 acres in Brooklyn
Center. From the 1920s until 1980, a wood treating facility was operated at the site
where processes involved using creosote, pentachlorophenol (PCP), and a copper-
arsenic solution. In 1944, this facility discharged its wastewater into a marshy area
connected to Twin Lakes. Later, an unlined lagoon adjacent to the marsh was used.
1976, 216,000 gallons of oil were discharged into the lagoon. Waste sludge was also
buried on site. Approximately 800 people live within 1/2 mile of the site. The
surrounding area is both light industrial and residential. Surface water runoff from the
site drains into Shingle Creek, which empties into the Mississippi River. Twin Lakes is
used for swimming, boating, and fishing.
In
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soils are contaminated with PCPs, creosote, polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and oil. Because groundwater flow in the
area is to the east, away from Twin Lakes, the lakes are not affected by
the site, and sampling of the lakes confirmed this. Area drinking water is
also not affected since residences are connected to the city water
system.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
21
continued
-------
JOSLYN MANUFACTURING & SUPPLY COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in,two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial
phase directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
I***1' Interim Actions: Joslyn removed about 30,000 gallons of wood treating
solutions in 1981 and 65,000 gallons of sludge in 1982 to a federally
approved facility. In 1986, Joslyn fenced the entire site area, and the
company connected six properties to the city water supply.
Entire site: In 1989, the State selected a remedy for site cleanup, now
being conducted by Joslyn, which includes pumping the groundwater and
discharging it to the sanitary sewer system where it is treated.. Before the
water is discharged to the sewer system, water and oil mixtures are first
sent through an on-site treatment system to remove the oil. It is estimated the
groundwater pumping will continue for 30 years. In addition, Joslyn is cleaning the soil
through a method called landfarming. This involves thinly spreading contaminated soil
over a specially engineered area on the site, adding water and nutrients, periodically
tilling the area, and allowing the soil bacteria, with help from the applied water and
nutrients, to break down the contaminants into non-hazardous constituents. This
process was begun in 1989 and will take approximately 4 to 6 years to complete.
Site Facts: In 1985, the State and Joslyn signed a Consent Order whereby the
company agreed to clean up the site.
Environmental Progress
The removal of the most highly contaminated soils and the groundwater pump and
treat system have significantly reduced the possibility of exposure to hazardous
materials on the site while the final cleanup activities are taking place at the Joslyn
Manufacturing site.
22
-------
KOCHREFI
COMPANY
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND000686071
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Dakota County
Rosemount
The Koch Refining Company site covers 1,200 acres in the Pine Ben industrial district of
Rosemount. The site includes the refinery and adjacent properties owned by Koch.
The Great Northern Refining Company began refining oil on this site in 1955. In 1969,
the refinery was sold to Koch, which has expanded refining capacity from 25,000
barrels to 160,000 barrels per day. The refinery receives crude oil by pipeline and
barge, which is then refined into gasolines, jet fuels, heating oil, kerosene, diesel fuel,
boiler fuel, asphalt, petroleum coke, sulfur, carbon dioxide, butane, and propane.
Product spills have been recorded in the storage tank area on the site since the early
1970s. The State sampled water from six private wells near the refinery and found
them contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A section of gasoline
pipeline running from the tank farms to the barge dock on the Mississippi River had
corroded but was replaced. This pipeline is believed to be the source of groundwater
and soil contamination at the site. Approximately 60 people live within 1 mile of the
refinery. About 1,600 people, as well as a school with 2,600 students, use wells within
3 miles of the site for drinking water. Four miles north of the site is Inver Grove
Heights, with a population of about 16,100. There is a population of about 6,800 people
to the south of the site. Four people living in two homes east of the refinery are being
supplied with bottled water due to well contamination.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contaminants include VOCs, polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), phenols, and lead. Soil also is contaminated with
VOCs including benzene, toluene, and xylenes as well as PAHs. Drinking
water for the employees on the site is obtained from deep bedrock
production wells that are not contaminated. People who touch or
accidentally ingest contaminated soils may be at risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
23
continued
-------
KOCH REFINING COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire site: Koch, under State supervision, is conducting an investigation
to determine the type and extent of contamination at the site. Once the
investigation is completed, planned for 1990, alternatives will be
recommended for site cleanup.
Site Facts: In 1985, the State entered into a Consent Agreement with Koch Refining
Company, whereby the company agreed to clean up the site.
Environmental Progress
After listing the Koch Refining site on the NPL, the EPA conducted preliminary
evaluations of the site conditions and determined that no immediate threat is posed to
the surrounding communities or the environment while the investigations leading to the
selection of the final cleanup remedies are taking place.
JK JB
KV
24
-------
KOPPERS
COKE
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND000819359
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Ramsey County
St. Paul
Aliases:
Minnesota Coke Plant
Hoppers Company, Inc.
The Koppers Coke site covers 45 acres in the Midway area of St. Paul. The facility
operated from 1911 until 1978, producing coke, coal tars, and coal tar distillates from
the coking of coal. Coke plant wastes were disposed of in unlined earthen pits. In
addition, contamination of soils from coal tar distillates, naphtha and benzene wash
have occurred. Numerous tanks and valves leaked over the years, causing additional
coal tar distillate to migrate to the shallow groundwater table. The company
demolished all standing structures and removed storage tanks in 1981. The site was
acquired in 1981 by the Port Authority for the St. Paul Energy Park. Office and light
industrial buildings now occupy the site. Approximately 15,400 residents live within 1
mile of the site. The nearest residence is 100 feet away, and Como Park, a
recreational facility, is 3/4 mile from the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/22/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and phenols.
Because all local residences are connected to the municipal water supply,
the private wells are not used for drinking water. However, these wells
are occasionally used for lawn and garden watering. There is a potential
for people to be exposed to contaminants by eating vegetables that may
have been watered with the contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
25
continued
-------
HOPPERS COKE
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: In the fall of 1982, about 240,000 gallons of residue in
20 tanks were disposed of by Koppers in a federally approved facility.
Approximately 21,600 cubic yards of contaminated soils were excavated
and disposed of. The entire site was covered with clean fill. Soils found in pits too
deep to be totally excavated were partially excavated and backfilled with clean soil.
They were then covered with clay, additional clean fill, and a second layer of clay was
installed.
Entire site: Koppers began an investigation to determine^the types and
extent of contamination at the site in 1989. Upon completion of the
investigation, the EPA will review the recommended cleanup alternatives
and select the final remedial actions. The EPA expects to reach a decision on final
cleanup remedies in late 1990.
Site Facts: In 1978, the State and Koppers signed a Stipulation Agreement that
required the plant to shut down and Koppers to conduct an investigation of soil and
groundwater contamination.
Environmental Progress
Most, if not all, of the contaminated residue and soils have been excavated and
disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Through these actions and the installation
of the cover over the site, the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the
Koppers Coke facility has been greatly reduced. Further studies are currently under
way that will result in the selection of the final cleanup remedies for the site.
26
-------
KUMMER
SANITARY
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980804049
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Beltrami County
Northern Township
The Kummer Sanitary Landfill site in Northern Township covers 35 acres on a 40-acre
parcel of land, which includes the Kummer residence. The site was a privately owned
and operated solid waste landfill from 1971 until 1984, accepting mixed municipal
wastes. Landfill operations consisted of excavating trenches, filling them with waste
materials, and covering the fill with on-site sand and gravel deposits. The trenches may
have been excavated to the water table and the wastes placed in direct contact with
the groundwater. Beginning in 1974, demolition debris consisting of fly ash and
sawdust was disposed of on site. There is a history of violations such as improper
covering of the debris, garbage blowing from the site, and improper grading. In 1982
and 1983, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) sampled groundwater from
on-site monitoring wells and found the water to be contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). Residential wells downgradientirom the site were found to be
contaminated the following year, and subsequently, in 1985, the landfill was closed.
Northern Township has a population of about 4,100 people. A trailer.park is about
1,500 feet away from the landfill, and a residential area is about 1,000 feet away, with
both areas housing approximately 1,000 people. An estimated 14,700 people use wells
that draw on two aquifers within 3 miles of the site. The City uses groundwater for its
municipal water supply, and those wells are within 1/4 mile upgradient from the landfill.
There are numerous wetlands and lakes within the area of the site, including Lake
Bemidji, which is 1 mile away.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/84
Final Date: 10/15/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater underlying the site contains VOCs including vinyl chloride,
xylenes, carbon tetrachloride, and naphthalene. People who use or come
into contact with contaminated groundwater may be at risk. There is the
potential for contaminants from the landfill to leach into Lake Bemidji or
the wetlands area. Wildlife in and around the lake and wetlands may be
harmed by pollutants.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
27
continued
-------
KUMMER SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three long-term remedial phases directed at supplying an
alternate water source, controlling the source of contamination, and cleanup of the
groundwater. " '
Response Action Status
Alternate Water Supply: In 1985, the EPA selected a remedy to provide
alternate water for affected residents by constructing a connecting well
tapping into the deep uncontaminated aquifer, connecting into the City of
Bemidji's main water line, and installing a water distribution system. All
work for the well installation and distribution system is expected to be completed by
the end of 1990. The State is in the process of connecting the affected residences to
the municipal water supply. However, some residences have refused connection.
Source Control: In 1988, the EPA selected a.remedy to control the
source of the contamination by: (1) grading the site and consolidating the
soil and other waste material; (2) placing a sloping foundation layer of
natural soil fill; (3) covering the landfill with clay or synthetic material and a
drainage layer with a soil and vegetative cover; (4) deed restrictions limiting the future
use of the site; (5) fencing the site; and (6) monitoring the groundwater and landfill gas
to ensure the effectiveness of the cleanup. The State is designing the technical
specifications for the cleanup actions. Once the design phase is completed, the
cleanup activities will begin.
Groundwater: The State is conducting an investigation to determine the
extent of the on-site migration of contaminants into the groundwater.
Once the investigation is completed in 1990, effective measures'to clean
up the groundwater and prevent the further movement of contaminants will be
determined. The State began an additional investigation in 1990,to determine the
extent to which the contaminants have migrated off site in the groundwater. Once this
investigation is completed, the most appropriate alternatives will be recommended for
off-site groundwater cleanup.
Site Facts: In 1985, the EPA and the State signed a Cooperative Agreement whereby
the State will investigate and clean up the site. In addition, the agreement provided for
the funding of an alternate water supply for residents with contaminated wells.
Environmental Progress
By providing a safe alternate drinking water source to affected residences, the potential
for exposure to contaminated groundwater is being eliminated. Further investigations
which will lead to the selection of the most appropriate permanent cleanup solutions
are currently under way.
28
-------
KURT
MANUFACTIJ
COMPANY
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND059680165
Site Description -
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
Fridley
The Kurt Manufacturing Company site covers 10 acres in Fridley. The company has
been operating since 1960, producing precision computer components. Solvent-coated
metal shavings from the machining area were placed in a storage bin located near the
loading dock. In 1982, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) found two
company production wells to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs);
later that year, monitoring wells were installed at the site. Results of groundwater
sampling showed the shallow groundwater near the loading dock was contaminated.
The State determined the metal shavings bin sump was the source of the
contamination. The site is in an industrial, commercial, and residential area1. Over
163,000 people live within 3 miles of the site. The company is located 1 mile from the
Mississippi River.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86'
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soils are contaminated with VOCs including
tetrachloroethylene, and trichloroethane (TCA). People who touch or
accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater or soil may be at risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
29
continued
-------
KURT MANUFACTURING COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: In 1984, the shaving bin sump was excavated and
capped to prevent further seepage.
Entire Site: In 1986, the State approved actions to clean up the site that
consisted of: (1) long-term operation and maintenance of a groundwater
pump-out system to prevent the migration of contaminated groundwater;
(2) covering the sump area with clay to prevent rainwater from coming into
contact with contaminants; (3) abandoning a shallow production well to minimize
migration of contaminated groundwater; and (4) long-term monitoring to ensure the
cleanup is effective. In 1986, Kurt started to pump and treat the groundwater, but the
pumps were found to be inadequate. In 1987, the sump area was excavated and then
covered with the clay. The response action plan is being re-evaluated.
Site Facts: In 1984, the State issued a Request for Response Action to Kurt
Manufacturing. Under this action, the company was required to investigate the site and
develop and implement a cleanup plan.
Environmental Progress
By excavating and covering the areas of greatest contamination, the potential for
exposure to hazardous materials at the Kurt Manufacturing site has been significantly
reduced. The cleanup plan chosen for the site is currently under re-evalulation. Once
this phase is completed, final cleanup activities will begin.
30
-------
LAGRAND S
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND981090483
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Douglas County
LaGrand Township
The LaGrand Sanitary Landfill site covers 80 acres in LaGrand Township, 5 miles west
of Alexandria. The landfill, which occupies 5 1/2 acres, began operations in 1974 and
was licensed by the State to accept mixed municipal and non-hazardous industrial
refuse. In 1977, the original owner transferred the permit and title to Valley Disposal,
Inc. Approximately 140 cubic yards of soil containing 900 gallons of diesel fuel were
stored, and consequently disposed of, on the site in 1980. The landfill had been in an
almost constant state of noncompliance with solid waste regulations and was closed in
1985, covered, and seeded. There are five abandoned buildings on the site, a pile of
several hundred tires, abandoned machinery, and junk. Approximately 1,100 people
live within 3 miles of the landfill and depend on public and private wells for drinking
water. The nearest private well is 1/3 mile away from the site. A wetland Is less than 1
mile downstream of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 07/21/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
chloroethane and methylene chloride. People who drink contaminated
groundwater may suffer adverse health effects. If contaminants leach
from the landfill into the nearby wetland, wildlife in or around the wetland
may be harmed.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
31
continued
-------
LAGRAND SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site. *
Response Action Status
Entire site: In 1987, the State began an investigation to determine the
type and extent of contamination at the site. Once the investigation is
completed in 1992, the final cleanup remedy will be selected.
Environmental Progress
After listing the LaGrand Sanitary Landfill site on the NPL, the EPA performed
preliminary evaluations and determined that the site does not pose an immediate threat
to the surrounding communities or the environment while the investigations leading to
the selection of a final cleanup remedy are taking place.
32
-------
LEHILLIER
MANKATO
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980792469
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Blue Earth County
Mankato
Alias:
LeHillier/Mankato Groundwater
The LeHillier/Mankato site, located just west of Mankato, covers 6,400 acres. Between
1925 and 1950, numerous natural and manmade depressions, resulting from changes
in the channels of the Minnesota and Blue Earth Rivers and from sand and gravel
excavations, were filled with miscellaneous rubbish. In 1981, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency received anonymous information alleging that hazardous wastes had
been disposed of in several areas. Studies confirmed contamination of the shallow
sand and gravel aquifer, the primary source of drinking water for the LeHillier and
Mankato area. Although this area draws its drinking water from the contaminated
aquifer, the wells presently do not show contamination. Approximately 500 people
reside in LeHillier. Mankato's primary water supply well is located approximately 1/4
mile north of the contaminated area. About 29,000 people are served by Mankato's
municipal water supply. The Minnesota and the Blue Earth Rivers are used for
recreational activities.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/16/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE)'and other
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Soil contains petroleum products and
VOCs. LeHillier residents have been provided with an alternate water
supply; however, individuals may be exposed to contaminants through
accidental ingestion or direct contact with contaminated groundwater and
soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
33
-------
LEHILLIER/MANKATO
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and single long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA and the State supplied LeHillier residents
with bottled water for drinking and cooking in 1984 and 1985. A new
LeHillier community well and a distribution system were constructed
through a Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grant and have been operational
since late 1985.
Entire Site: Based on the results of an investigation completed in 1985,
the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the site-by extracting the
contaminated groundwater and treating it by using an air stripping
technique that removes contaminants by exposure to air. The cleanup plan
includes using eight existing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers groundwater and flood
control wells and constructing two new extraction wells; extending the LeHillier
community water system to affected residents and businesses not currently serviced;
and properly closing individual wells formerly used for drinking water supplies. The
cleanup actions currently under way are expected to be completed in late 1991.
Environmental Progress
The immediate action of providing LeHillier residents with an alternate water supply
have significantly reduced the threat of exposure from contaminated drinking water.
The cleanup actions are currently under way and will continue to reduce contamination
and establish safety levels.
34
-------
LONG PRAIRIE
GROUNDWAT
CONTAMINAT
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980904072
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Todd County
Long Prairie
The Long Prairie site, as defined by the extent of the plume of contaminated
groundwater, covers an area 2,100 feet by 1,000 feet in Long Prairie. Various municipal
and private wells are contaminated with solvents thought to be from a barrel of
contaminated material used by a dry cleaning operation. The barrel of material was
partially buried in the parking lot behind the building. The area of highest groundwater
contamination is directly below this parking lot. On two separate occasions in 1983,
routine municipal well monitoring by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)
indicated contamination in two of five municipal wells. The MDH ordered the two wells
shut down in 1983 and issued an advisory to provide bottled water for area residents.
About 50 of the area's 300 private wells were affected by the groundwater
contamination. Since the advisory was issued, the majority of homes using
contaminated groundwater have been connected to the municipal drinking water
system. Land use in the surrounding area is primarily.residential. Businesses surround
the parking lot over the contaminated area, and at the northern edges of the plume
there are city garages and an athletic field. Long Prairie, a residential and business
area, has a population of approximately 2,900 residents. Approximately 2/3 of the
population receive water from municipal water supplies; the remaining 1/3 use private
wells. Seven wells are still in use in the advisory area; four of these wells contain
levels of chemicals above the EPA drinking water health advisories.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
II
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and soils are contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including vinyl chloride and trichloroethylene (TCE).
Persons using the contaminated groundwater have been exposed to
chlorinated ethylenes by drinking it or inhaling evaporated contaminant
particles from the water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
-------
LONG PRAIRIE GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Based on the results of the site investigation, the EPA has
selected the following methods for cleanup of the groundwater and soil:
(1) install groundwater extraction wells in the contamination plume; (2)
treat contaminated groundwater with an air stripper, (3) discharge treated
groundwater from the air stripper to the Long Prairie River; and (4) treat contaminated
soil with an active soil venting system. The technical design of the remedy is expected
to be completed in late 1990, with cleanup expected to begin in late 1991.
Environmental Progress
After listing the site on the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary evaluations and
determined that the Long Prairie site does not pose an immediate threat to the
surrounding communities or the environment while final cleanup actions are being
designed.
36
-------
MACGILLIS &
COMPANY/B
LUMBER
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND006192694
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Ramsey County
New Brighton
Alias:
Bell Lumber & Pole Company
The MacGillis & Gibbs Company and the Bell Lumber & Pole Company are adjoining
properties listed as one site on the National Priorities List. The site covers 68 acres in
New Brighton. Both companies are wood treatment plants arid have been in operation
since the early 1920s. Both plants used creosote as a preservative until the mid-1950s.
At that time, the companies began using light and heavy oils containing
pentachlorophenoKPCP). MacGillis & Gibbs has been using chromated copper
arsenate since 1970, some of which has been spilled in the process areas of the plants.
Both companies used PCP sludge for weed control in the 1960s. A pond in a low-lying
area between the properties was used for the disposal of PCP-contaminated sludge,
treated and untreated wood scrap, and steel drums. Studies conducted by the
companies indicate the groundwater is contaminated with wood preserving chemicals.
There are more than 10,000 people living within 1 mile of the site. The closest
residence is within several hundred feet.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
L\
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, sediments, and soils are contaminated with polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); PCP; and heavy metals such as copper,
chromium, and arsenic. Barrels on the site contain PAHs, PCP, dioxins,
and furans. These barrels have been moved to a secure storage area on
site.. Although no private or municipal wells are contaminated, there is a
potential for future contaminant plume migration, which may reach the
drinking water wells. Children playing in sediments or water at the county
ditch may be exposed to chemicals. Wetlands areas surrounding the site'
within a 2,000-foot radius may be subject to contamination from site
runoff.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
37
continued
-------
MACGILLIS & GIBBS COMPANY/BELL LUMBER
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term
remedial phases directed at cleanup of disposal area soils and the process and storage
areas.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Open and leaking barrels containing PAHs, PCP,
dioxins, and furans were overpackedand removed to a secure storage area
on the MacGillis & Gibbs property. The part of the disposal area owned by
Bell Pole has been excavated and filled with sand and gravel and covered with a clay
cap.
Disposal Area Soils: In 1987, the State began an investigation to
determine the type and extent of soil contamination. Once this
investigation is completed in 1991, final cleanup remedies will be selected.
Process and Lumber Yard Storage Areas: In 1990, the State began an
investigation to determine the extent of the contamination in the process
and the lumberyard storage areas. Once the investigation is completed in
1991, final cleanup alternatives for these areas will be selected.
Site Facts: In 1985, Bell Lumber signed a Consent Order with the State and began
planning for the site cleanup on their portion of the site.
Environmental Progress
By removing the drums of contaminated materials and storing them in a safe location
and excavating contaminated soil from part of the site, the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials on the site has been significantly reduced. Investigations at both
locations are currently under way and will lead to the final selection of remedies for the
MacGillis & Gibbs/Bell Lumber & Pole Company areas of the site.
38
-------
MORRIS ARS
DUMP
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980792287
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Stevens County
Northeast of Morris
The Morris Arsenic Dump site is located approximatefy 1 mile northeast of the town of
Morris. In the early 1940s, approximately 1,500 pounds of arsenic-laced grasshopper
bait was reportedly buried in a gravel pit near the intersection of Highways 28 and 59.
The subsequent construction of the Highway 59 bypass through the general location of
the burial site made the discovery of the exact location of the materials difficult. It has
been presumed that the arsenic was mechanically dispersed during highway
construction since topsoil cleared from the site for roadbed preparation was later
spread along the side slopes.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Deletion Date: 03/07/86
Threats and Contaminants
Arsenic was detected in the groundwater. The site poses no imminent
health hazards to the public due to the direction of groundwater
movement from the site and the minimal population concentration within
the site area. In addition, levels of arsenic found in the soils at the site are
within the range of natural levels.
March 1990
NPLHAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
39
-------
MORRIS ARSENIC DUMP SITE
Cleanup Approach
The site was addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site. .
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The EPA conducted a thorough investigation of the site in
1985 to determine the type and extent of contamination at the site. The
results of the investigation indicated that the site poses no imminent
health hazards to the public. Therefore, no further cleanup actions were deemed to be
necessary. The site was deleted from the NPL in 1986. '.
Environmental Progress
The investigation of the Morris Arsenic Dump led to the determination that the site
poses no danger to the surrounding population or the environment, and it has been
deleted from the National Priorities List.
40
-------
NAVAL INDU
RESERVE O
PLANT
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MN3170022914
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
Fridley
Alias:
Naval Sea Systems Command
The Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) occupies 83 acres in an industrial,
commercial, and residential area of Fridley. NIROP has produced advanced weapons
systems since it was constructed in 1940. Paints, solvents, lubricants, oil, and plating
waste were and still are generated at the site. Analyses conducted by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) found that soil and groundwater on the site are
contaminated with solvents. In 1981, three bedrock wells supplying drinking water to
NIROP were taken out of service because of trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination.
The plant discontinued the use of TCE in 1987. FMC Corporation, NIROP's operating
contractor, owns a 50-acre site bordering on the south of the site that was placed on
the National Priorities List in 1983. Over 200,000 people live within 3 miles of the site.
The Mississippi River is about 1/4 mile to the west. The water supply intake for
Minneapolis is located approximately 1 mile downstream of the site. An estimated
29,000 people obtain drinking water from public wells within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/24/89
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater and soils are contaminated with solvents, including
trichloroethylene {TCE) and methylene chloride. Highly permeable sands,
conducive to the downward migration of contaminants, lie below the
facility. The aquifers beneath these sands may be threatened from site
contaminants. Potential health risks may exist for individuals who
accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater or soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
41
continued
-------
NAVAL INDUSTRIAL RESERVE ORDNANCE PLANT
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial
phase directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
x" Initial Actions: From 1983 to 1984, the Army Corps of Engineers
excavated a trench and borrow pit consisting of 1,200 cubic yards of soil
and approximately 43 barrels containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)
wastes, flammable solids, and base solids. The excavated materials were removed to
an EPA-regulated hazardous waste landfill.
Entire Site: In 1984, MPCA requested that the Navy and FMC determine
the extent of surface water and groundwater contamination, locate any
additional disposal areas, and take cleanup action. In response, a network
of monitoring wells were installed to gather information on patterns of groundwater
flow and contaminant concentrations. The study was completed in 1988, and an
investigation into groundwater pumping and treatment has been completed. The EPA
is evaluating the results and is drafting an outline of the selected remedy. The EPA also
is planning to investigate the soil contamination.
Site Facts: The site is being cleaned up as part of the Installation Restoration Program
(IRP). Under this program, established in 1978, the Department of Defense (DOD)
seeks to identify and evaluate its hazardous waste and control the migration of
hazardous contaminants from these sites.
Environmental Progress
The EPA is reviewing results of studies performed by the Navy and FMC to determine
the most appropriate cleanup technologies for the Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance
Plant. While these activities are ongoing, the site does not pose an imminent threat to
the surrounding population or the environment.
42
-------
NEW BRIGHTO
ARDEN HIL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MN7213820908
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Ramsey County
Arden Hills
Aliases:
US Army Twin Cities Ammo. Plant
St. Anthony Site
The New Brighton/Arden Hills site is located in Arden Hills, approximately 2 miles north
of the twin cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul. The site consists of over 18 square miles of
groundwater contaminated with volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). The Twin Cities
Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP), located north of St. Paul and Minneapolis, comprises
the northeast corner of the New Brighton/Arden Hills/St. Anthony (NBAHSA) site.
According to the U.S. Army, VOC contaminants are migrating off TCAAP into the
groundwater and the Prairie Du Chien/Jordan Aquifer. In 1981, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Health detected VOC
contamination in the system used for municipal drinking water in New Brighton. Prior
to these findings, the City of New Brighton had constructed and operated a total of nine
municipal wells. From 1982 to 1984, the city shut down six wells, deepened two
municipal wells to the Mt. Simon/Hinckley Aquifer and constructed three new wells.
The City of St. Anthony, located directly north of Minneapolis, is one of several
communities that obtain their municipal water supply from the Prairie Du Chien/Jordan
Aquifer system. Following the detection of contaminants in the New Brighton wells,
the City of St. Anthony also detected contamination in their three Prairie Du Chien/
Jordan Aquifer wells, one of which was shut down in early 1984. Since contaminants
were first discovered, the levels have increased in the remaining undeepened municipal
wells. The site includes parts of the municipalities of Shoreview, Arden Hills,
Moundsview, New Brighton, and St. Anthony.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal and State
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/16/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), chromium, arsenic, and VOC
contaminants, including trichloroethylene (TCE), benzene, toluene, and
xylene have been detected in the groundwater. Potential health risks may
exist for individuals drinking or coming into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUSWASTE SITES
43
continued
-------
NEW BRIGHTON/ARDEN HILLS
Cleanup Approach
*
The site is being addressed in nine stages: immediate actions and eight long-term
remedial phases directed at: the sewer line; groundwater; off-base contamination;
groundwater plume; New Brighton well #7; contamination source control; soil; and
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Between 1983 and 1984, the EPA supplied bottled
water to many residences and businesses, extended the existing water
supply system to the New Brighton and Arden Hills private well users
whose wells were found to be contaminated, installed granular activated carbon filters
on two wells to meet the peak summertime demand, and treated the New Brighton/
Arden Hills wells #5 and #6 with activated carbon. All the nearby affected residents are
now using either uncontaminated water or treated water.
Sewer Line: The State conducted an investigation in 1987 to determine
the type and extent of contamination around a sewer line/force main that
was used forTCAAP waste transportation to the metropolitan waste
district. The results of the study will be used to determine the appropriate actions
needed to clean up the sewer line area contamination.
Groundwater: In March 1990, the EPA selected the remedy to address
St. Anthony wells #3, #4, and #5, which consisted of the construction of
granular activated carbon (GAG) water treatment facilities to remove VOCs
from the wells. The treated water will be discharged into the municipal
water treatment plant and distribution system. A pipeline will be constructed to
connect St. Anthony well #5 to the GAC treatment facility. The EPA completed design
of the technologies and the State agreed to take responsibility for the construction.
Off-Base Contamination: In 1983, the State began an investigation to
determine the type and extent of contamination off the Army base. The
first study was completed in 1987. The second study is expected to be
completed in 1990. The U.S. Army will then identify the alternative technologies for the
cleanup.
Groundwater Plume: In 1988, the U.S. Army initiated an investigation of
the nature and extent of the contaminated groundwater plume and
recommended a recovery system. The State and the EPA have not
accepted this option because there is no useful way to dispose of the water: The EPA
is investigating a program for groundwater plume extraction and injection of the water
into the Mississippi River or treatment of the water for use as potable water.
New Brighton Well #7: In 1986, the EPA selected a remedy to address
potential future contamination of New Brighton well #7, which involves the
construction of a new well into the Mt. Simon-Hinckley Aquifer system.
However, in the fall of 1989, the EPA signed an amendment to this
remedy, because the Army agreed to provide the City over 4 million gallons per day of
drinking water. In 1987, the Army also agreed to provide results of monitoring the
water quality of Well # 7 and to construct a barrier system to prevent future
contamination.
continued
44
-------
NEW BRIGHTON/ARDEN HILLS
Soil: In 1989, following the investigation of on-site soil contamination,
the Army and the EPA selected incineration of the PCB-contaminated dirt
in a mobile incinerator as the soil cleanup remedy. The incineration was
completed within a month in 1989. The final disposal of drummed waste and the
cleanup of incidentals, such as concrete pads for the incinerator, is expected to be
finished in 1990.
Source Control: In 1987, to address the source of the groundwater
contamination, the EPA, the MPCA, and the Army initiated the operation
of a 6-well system to extract groundwater migrating from the
southwestern corner of TCAAP and treated it with air stripping. Approximately 300,000
gallons per day are utilized in the plant, with the remainder being disposed of by
reinjectipn/infiltration through the arsenal sand and gravel pit. Operating data and
monitoring results are evaluated and additional measures will be taken, if necessary, to
ensure that any contaminated groundwater migrating from the site is captured.
Currently, there is a 14-well extraction system in operation; all water is air stripped, and
some is carbon filtered for the military base's drinking water supply.
Entire Site: The U.S. Army initiated an investigation in 1987 to study
technologies to be used in cleaning up the entire site. All contamination
source areas found on the base during the investigation will be evaluated
for the need and type of cleanup.
Site Facts: The U.S. Army Twin Cities Ammunition Plant is participating in the
Installation Restoration Program (IRP), a specially funded program developed in 1978 by
the Department of Defense (DOD) to identify, control, and investigate hazardous
wastes on military or other DOD installations.
Environmental Progress
By supplying the affected residents with a safe drinking water supply, incinerating the
PCB-contaminated soils, and constructing the water treatment system, the potential for
contact with hazardous materials from the the New Brighton/Arden Hills site has been
greatly reduced. Further investigations into the other areas needing attention are
currently taking place and will lead to the selection of final remedies for the entire site.
45
-------
NL INDUST
TARACORPfGOL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND097891634
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Hennepln County
St. Louis Park
Aliases:
Northwestern Metal Works
Taracorp Ind.
The NL Industries/Taracorp/Golden Auto site is located in St. Louis Park, just west of
Minneapolis. The site consists of two neighboring properties, one formerly owned by
Taracorp, Inc., and the other currently owned by Morris and Harry Golden. Metal
refining, fabricating, and associated activities were conducted at the site until 1903,
when the secondary lead smelting operation was started. The secondary smelting
operations produced a number of products, including sheet lead solder, shotgun lead
pellets, lead wool, lead pipe, powdered lead, and secondary lead ingots. Historically,
solid waste generated by the manufacturing facilities was stored on site in a slag
storage area. Liquid wastes were discharged through process sewers, which ran under
the site, to the municipal sewer system. NL Industries, Inc., formerly the National Lead
Company, bought the site in 1928. NL Industries operated a lead smelting plant on the
site from 1940 until 1979. Plant operations included recovering lead from lead plates,
battery fragments, and lead containers. Lead smelting operations and disposal
practices resulted in elevated levels of lead in the air and on-site soils. In 1962, NL sold
a 4 1/2-acre portion of the property to Republic Enterprises, which, in turn, sold the
property to Morris and Harry Golden, who used the land for an auto wrecking and used
auto parts business from 1964 until 1983. Currently, that land is leased by Quality Auto
Body, also a used auto parts and wrecking company. NL sold the lead smelting
operation and the remaining property to Taracorp, Inc. in 1979. The smelterremained
in operation until its closure in 1981. There are residential areas within 1/4 mile of the
site. Aquifers beneath the site serve as a primary source of drinking water in the area,
supplying 90% of all groundwater used in the region. Marshy areas exist approximately
1,000 feet from the site, and there is a pond about 500 feet to the northwest.
Minnehaha Creek is about 1 mile away, and the Mississippi River is approximately 3
miles northwest of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/22/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater in the vicinity of the site was found to be contaminated with
elevated levels of sulfates, dissolved solids, lead, and lower pH levels.
Off-site soils have shown elevated levels of lead, although levels are
generally well below the safety levels for lead in soil established by the
State. On-site soils were found to contain highly elevated levels of lead.
Also present on the site were battery fragments, lead-bearing debris, and
slag. Potential health risks may have existed for individuals who
accidentally ingested or came into direct contact with the contaminated
soils or groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
46
continued
-------
NLINDUSTRIES/TARACORP/GOLDEN AUTO
Cleanup Approach
The site has been addressed in two long-term remedial phases focus ing on cleanup of
the groundwater and on-site soils and cleanup of the off-site soils.
Response Action Status
Groundwater and On-Site Soils: Under a Consent Order, NL Industries
conducted on-site investigations and cleanup activities between 1985 and
. 1988. These activities included: (1) restricting access to the site; (2)
removing contaminated on-site soils to a federally approved facility and replacing the
excavated area with clean soils; (3) revegetating the excavated area; (4) paving areas
with asphalt to minimize exposure to contaminated soil; (5) cleaning and demolishing
several on-site buildings; and (6) long-term monitoring of groundwater. The
groundwater will continue to be monitored for 30 years. If contaminant levels exceed
standards, further'cleanup actions will be taken.
Off-Site Soils: A risk assessment conducted by NL Industries in 1987, and
a similar study conducted by the EPA both concluded that the lead in soils
near the NL Industries site do not presently pose a risk to public health and
the environment. Based on these results and the recommendations of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the Minnesota Department of Health, and the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the EPA recommended
that no further action was necessary with regard to off-site soils near the site.
i Environmental Progress
Cleanup goals for the site have been fully achieved. Based on a consensus of
recommendations from the various agencies involved in the investigations of the site
conditions, it was agreed that the site requires no further cleanup actions. The EPA will
continue to monitor the groundwater to ensure that the contaminant levels do not to
exceed standards. The site will not be deleted from the NPL until the EPA is absolutely
certain the site poses no threats to the public.
47
-------
NUTTING
CASTER
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND006154017
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Rice County
Falrbault
Site Description
The 11-acre Nutting Truck and Caster Company site was used for the production of
various manufacturing tools beginning in 1891. Sludge from various manufacturing
wastes were disposed of in an unlined pit from 1959 to 1979. In 1979, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) issued a notice of non-compliance to the company. In
response to this notice, Nutting excavated the pit, backfilled it with clean fill, and paved
over the area. MPCA required that the company investigate the soil and groundwater
in the area. Monitoring wells were installed and trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination
was discovered in on-site monitoring wells that were screened in the upper aquifer. In
1984, the manufacturing operations were moved to another location. The property is
presently unused. The population of the City of Fairbault is approximately 16,500. The
city is served by a municipal water system.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and'potentially
responsible parties'actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with various volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). Cadmium was also detected in the groundwater
directly under the disposal pit. Potential health threats include drinking or
touching contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
48
continued
-------
NUTTING TRUCK & CASTER COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The company completed the investigation of groundwater
contamination in 1986. Two pump-out wells were placed in the aquifer,
and the contaminated water is being treated by a passive aeration system
before being discharged to a nearby creek. As part of site investigations, a
groundwater monitoring system was also put in place. Monitoring of TCE levels are
continuing on the site. The selection of the final cleanup technology will be made using
the results of this investigation.
Site Facts: A Consent Order was signed in 1984 by the MPCA and Nutting requiring
Nutting to conduct an investigation of the extent of groundwater contamination
originating from its property.
Environmental Progress
The treatment and monitoring systems installed at the Nutting Truck and Caster
Company site have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to contaminated
groundwater while further monitoring and cleanup activities are taking place.
49
-------
OAK GROVE
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MMD980904056
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
Oak Grove Township
The 104-acre Oak Grove Sanitary Landfill site was operated as an open dump until
1971, when the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) issued a permit to the
owner for a sanitary landfill. In 1976, operations were taken over by Northwest
Disposal Inc. until closure in 1984. Approximately 2 1/2 millipn cubic yards of wastes
including garbage, various sludges and acids, pesticide manufacturing waste, cutting
oils, cleaning solvents, and inks were disposed of at the landfill. The Minnesota
Department of Health sampled nine nearby residential wells in 1984. The wells are
screened in a sand aquifer, which is the primary water supply source in the area.
Samples from three wells indicated the presence of several volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). Subsequent resampling did not detect these compounds. In 1985, lime
sludge was received and used as a cover for part of the landfill. Approximately 330
people live within 1 mile of the site, and 9,800 live within 4 miles. The majority of
these residents depend on water from wells. A creek flows through the site and is
adjacent to a wetland, discharging to Rum River 2 miles from the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
I
Threats and Contaminants
Methane and VOCs were detected beneath the lime sludge cover
material. VOCs, phenols, phthalates, and heavy metals were detected in
the aquifer. Leachate samples indicated the presence of VOCs, phenols,
and heavy metals. Several VOCs, phenols, and heavy metals were found
in sediment samples and surface water at the site. Leachate discharges
to a nearby wetland, thereby potentially threatening the wetland and the
connected Cedar Creek. Potential human health risks may exist from
accidental ingestion or touching of the contaminated soil, sediments, or
leachate. Drinking contaminated groundwater may also pose potential
health risks.
Morchl990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
50
continued
-------
OAK GROVE SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on source
control and cleanup of the groundwater.
Response Action Status
Source Control: In 1988, the MPCA and the EPA selected the following
cleanup actions for the site: (1) installation of a security fence; (2) capping
with a multi-layer cover system; (3) installation of a topsoil cover and
vegetation; (4) enforcement of deed restrictions; (5) consideration of
treatment options for air emissions from gas vents after construction of the final cover;
and (6) air and groundwater monitoring. The State began designing the cleanup
technologies in 1988; completion is scheduled for 1990.
Groundwater: An investigation was initiated in 1985 to determine the
nature and extent of groundwater contamination. The selection of final
cleanup actions is scheduled to be made in 1990.
I Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Oak Grove Sanitary Landfill
site while further studies are being completed and cleanup activities are being planned.
51
-------
OAKDALE
DUMP
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980609515
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Washington County
Oakdale
Alias:
Abresch Barrel & Drum Company
The 40-acre Oakdale Dump site consists of three disposal areas: two of the areas were
burial areas, and one was a burning area. The burial areas were owned and operated
by the Abresch Drum and Barrel Company from the mid-1940s to 1961. Aerial photos
reveal that the greatest activity at the burial operations occurred in the late 1950s,
when large trenches were dug with heavy equipment, and drums containing chemical
wastes were disposed of in the trenches. In 1961, the disposal of wastes at the site
had ceased and the property was later sold to several parties. The site was left vacant,
covered with rusted drums, pails, and a variety of industrial wastes. Groundwater
pollution was detected, forcing the closing of two community wells and a number of
private wells within the City of Oakdale. Approximately 600 private wells are within 1
mile of the site; approximately 540 people live within 1 mile of the site. More than
44,000 people live within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/22/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater was contaminated with various volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). Since the cleanup activities were conducted by the Minnesota
Mining and Manufacturing Corporation (3M), one of the potentially
responsible parties, the potential health risks have been eliminated. The
site is currently being considered for deletion from the NPL.
' March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
52
continued
-------
OAKDALE DUMP SITES
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in a single/ong-term remedial phase that focused on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Sit
Entire Site: Under an agreement reached in 1983 between 3M, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the EPA, 3M handled the
necessary arrangements and payments for the reconstruction of multi-
aquifer wells in 1984; removal of concentrated waste deposits in 1984;
r _ _ i ii i. '. ., . '
installation of a shallow groundwater pump-out system in 1985; and the establishment
of a monitoring well network in 1985. Cleanup actions have been completed.
Environmental Progress
Cleanup for contaminated groundwater have been fully achieved at the Oakdale Dump
site. Through the cleanup efforts of 3M to address the groundwater contamination and
the removal of its source, health risks to nearby residents have been eliminated, and
the environment has been protected. The site is currently being considered for
deletion from the NPL
53
-------
OLMSTED C
SANITARY
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND000874354
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Olmsted County
Oronoco
Aliases:
Rochester Landfill
Oronoco Sanitary Landfill
The 50-acre Olmsted County Sanitary Landfill was owned and operated by the City of
Rochester and was licensed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The
first ce//of the landfill was constructed without a liner or a system for collecting
leachate. The liner for the second cell was poorly constructed, but the third and fourth
cells were properly built. The landfill has operated since 1972 and has accepted various
industrial wastes including electroplating sludge, asbestos, transformers, paint, and
solvents. A large amount of flood-soaked material was put into the landfill in 1977. By
1984, groundwater under the landfill was heavily contaminated with leachate from the
waste pile. There were extensive leachate seeps on the site. Also, an intermittent
stream, which runs through the site to the Zumbro River, could carry contaminants
during heavy rains. In 1984, the County of Olmsted assumed ownership and operation
of the landfill. Approximately 200 people live within 1 mile of the site. Approximately
1,200 private wells are located near the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is. being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties'actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with various volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and heavy metals including chromium, cadmium, and lead.
People who use contaminated groundwater supplies or inhale vapors
from it, may be exposed to hazardous chemicals from the site.
Groundwater under the landfill is likely to discharge into the nearby
Zumbro River, potentially contaminating area surface waters and
sediments.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
54
continued
-------
OLMSTED COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The County of Olmsted is scheduled to start a study of
contamination at the site in 1991, which will include an analysis of the
groundwater, surface water, and sediments to define the problem and
assess possible cleanup alternatives. The County is conducting a dye tracing study to
identify the flow pattern of groundwater in and around the site.
Site Facts: In 1989, the MPCA signed a Consent Order with Olmsted County to carry
out a study of the nature and extent of contamination at the site and to carry out final
cleanup activities.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Olmsted County Sanitary
Landfill site while further studies are taking place and cleanup activities are being
planned.
55
-------
PERHAM AR
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980609572
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Otter Tall County
Perham
Alias:
Perham Fairgrounds
The State of Minnesota set up the 1/4-acre Perham Arsenic site to mix pesticides in the
1930s and 1940s. This was part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
program to control an outbreak of grasshoppers that threatened crops throughout the
Midwest The USDA provided all midwestern states at that time with pesticides to
control the infestation, and it helped them set up numerous stations to mix the
chemicals used in the program. Approximately 200 to 2,500 pounds of pesticides
were buried between what is now the cattle shed of the county fairgrounds and a
building of the Hammers Construction Company. The EPA believes the pesticides
were buried around 1947, after the USDA ended its program against the infestation. In
1971, the Hammers Construction Company purchased property next to the fairgrounds
from the City of Perham to build offices and a warehouse. In 1972, the company
installed a shallow well to provide water to the facility. Eleven employees were
poisoned with arsenic when they drank water from the well. The well was capped, and
the City of Perham extended its municipal water supply to the facility. Approximately
2,000 people live in the City of Perham.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soil on the site is contaminated with arsenic. Potential
health threats include accidentally ingesting or touching contaminated
groundwater or soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
56
continued
-------
PERHAM ARSENIC
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two phases: initial actions and a single long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1982, the City of Perham capped the site with a plastic
film and clay soil to reduce the amount of arsenic that can leach through
the soil as a result of rain and snow. In 1985, the State excavated
approximately 200 cubic yards of arsenic wastes in the burial pit and disposed of the
wastes in a hazardous waste landfill. The State filled the pit with clean soil, placed an
impermeable membrane and clay cap over the pit, and set up a program to monitor the
groundwater. The city extended its municipal water supply to the affected workers at
the Hammers Construction Company.
Entire Site: In 1989, the State of Minnesota began a study into the nature
and extent of contamination at the site and is considering alternatives for
cleaning up contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
Excavation of contaminated soil and other initial actions taken at the Perham Arsenic
site has significantly reduced exposure to contaminated soil and groundwater while
further investigations are taking place and cleanup activities are being planned.
57
-------
PINE BEND
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND000245795
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Dakota County
Inver Grove Heights
Alias:
American Crosby Demolition Landfill
Site Description
The 252-acre Pine Bend Sanitary Landfill site is an active facility that accepts various
wastes into two adjacent landfills. Browning Ferris Industries owns the landfill and has
allowed Phoenix, Inc., a subsidiary, to operate it since 1972. During these years, the
landfill has produced leachate containing arsenic, halogenated and non-halogenated
organic compounds, and various chlorides. The EPA and the State analyzed the
groundwater and soils on site and discovered contamination from leachate. i The EPA
found volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
In wells that monitor groundwater in the shallow aquifer and in residential and
commercial wells that draw water from that same source. Approximately 50 people
live within a 1-mile radius of the site. Approximately 16,000 people live in the town of
Inver Grove Heights, 3 miles north of the landfill. Various wells of private residences
are contaminated with heavy metals, VOCs, and PAHs. Eight private residences now
use bottled water that is provided by the site owners. The site is approximately 3/4 of a
mile west of the Mississippi River and is bordered by farms, food processing plants,
chemical manufacturers, an oil refinery, a pumping station for natural gas, an asphalt
plant, an installation for electrical utilities, and residences. The site is fenced, and there
is a check-in station at the gates of both landfills to enforce security restrictions.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties'actions.
1MPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Leachate from the landfills and surface water contains arsenic,
halogenated and non-halogenated organic compounds, and various
chlorides. Groundwater is contaminated with VOCs and PAHs. People
could potentially be exposed to contaminants from the site through
drinking or touching contaminated groundwater, or by eating crops grown
in private gardens watered with contaminated well water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
58
continued
-------
PINE BEND SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The State of Minnesota has begun a study of the site to
determine the nature and extent of contamination of the groundwater
surface water, soils, and sediment in and near the site and to identify '
cleanup alternatives. The study is scheduled for completion in late 1990 Once the
study is completed, the EPA will review the results and determine what cleanup
actions are needed to address the contamination.
Site Facts: In 1985, the State entered into an agreement with Pine Bend Sanitary
Landfill and the adjacent Crosby American Demolition Landfill to conduct the
investigation.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Pine Bend Sanitary Landfill
site while further investigations are taking place leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies. ^
59
-------
REILLY T.
CHEMIC
CORPORA!
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980609804
REGION 5
"CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Hennepln County
St. Louis Park Plant
Aliases:
Reilly Tar & Chemical Republic Creosoting
Company
Site Description
The 80-acre Reilly Tar & Chemical St. Louis Park site is an inactive facility that was used
for coal tar distillation and wood preserving from 1917 to 1972. The site was sold and
converted into recreational and residential areas in 1972. Highway and storm sewer
improvements were also constructed on the site in 1972. Wastes from site operations
were disposed of on the site and in a network of ditches that discharged to an adjacent
wetland. The wastes contained many compounds, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). Soil and groundwater below the wetland and the southern
portion of the site are heavily contaminated. The site is located in St. Louis Park, a
western suburb of Minneapolis, with a population of approximately 43,000 people.
Portions of the northern end of the site have been developed as a residential complex.
Seven municipal wells have been closed due to PAH contamination. The nearest
residence is located approximately 1/4 mile from the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties'actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date::,10/22/81
Final Date: 0^/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with petrochemicals and various volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Sludges and soils are contaminated with
petrochemicals and creosotes from wood preserving activities. The
wetland adjacent to the site is threatened by the contaminants that have
been discharged from the site. The potential health risks to people
include drinking or touching groundwater, inhaling contaminated vapors,
or coming into direct contact or accidentally ingesting contaminated soils
and sludge.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
60
continued
-------
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term
remedial phases focusing on water treatment and contamination source control,
groundwater aquifer control, cleanup of the Drift Platteville Aquifer, and cleanup of the
St. Peter Aquifer.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1982 and 1983, the State cleaned out two deep
wells on the site and conducted a complete off-site well survey. The State
also performed a water treatability study on the closed municipal wells.
The State plugged additional multi-aquifer wells, and tested the proposed
gradient system to control migration of contamination to existing wells.
Water Treatment and Contamination Source Control: The cleanup
option selected to address water treatment and contamination source
control includes the construction and operation of a granular activated
carbon water treatment system at two existing contaminated municipal
wells. The parties potentially responsible for site contamination constructed this water
treatment system, which has been fully operational since 1985.
Groundwater Aquifer Control: The cleanup methods selected to
address groundwater and aquifer contamination include: (1) monitoring,
pumping, and treating the various aquifers to maintain drinking water
quality; (2) capping and filling exposed hazardous wastes in the vicinity of
the peat bog and discharging those hazardous materials into a sanitary sewer; (3)
investigating subsurfaces to implement deed restrictions for current and future land
use; and (4) completing further investigations into the nature and extent of
contamination in the northern area of the.Drift Platteville and St. Peter Aquifers. In
1986, the City of St. Louis Park proceeded with the filling of exposed hazardous wastes
in the vicinity of the peat bog. Five areas of the wetland were filled in to prevent
further spread of contamination into the food chain. The filling activity was completed
in 1986. The potentially responsible parties, under EPA guidance, began monitoring
and pumping water from contaminated plumes to prevent further migration of
contaminants. Work is ongoing for deed restrictions of future commercial and
residential construction on the site. An existing municipal well in the Prairie du Ghien
Aquifer is to be used as a gradient control well to prevent the spread of contamination.
St. Peter and Drift Platteville Aquifiers: The potentially responsible
parties, under EPA monitoring, are conducting an investigation of the
aquifers to determine if a higher capacity well pump should be installed in
an existing well or whether a new gradient control well should be
constructed. The investigations will define the extent of contamination in the aquifer
and recommend a process to prevent the spread of the contamination. The
investigation is scheduled for completion in late 1990 and 1991, respectively, for each
aquifier.
continued
61
-------
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
Site Facts: In 1984, the EPA issued an order to Reilly, a potentially responsible party,
requiring the company to construct and install a granulated activated carbon drinking
water system. In 1986, Reilly Tar and Chemical signed a Consent Decree requiring
them to finance cleanup activities at the site. The Decree also required the: company to
conduct investigations into the nature and extent of contamination in the Drift Platteville
and St. Peter Aquifers.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions described above began treating the contaminated groundwater
and removing the sources of contamination. These actions have greatly reduced the
potential for exposure to contaminated groundwater at the Reilly Tar and Chemical St.
Louis Park site while further investigations into additional measures required to clean
up the aquifer are taking place.
62
-------
RITARI POST
& POLE
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980904064
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Wadena County
3 miles northwest of Sebeka
The 212-acre Ritari Post & Pole site is an active wood preserving facility that has been
in operation since 1959. Creosote was used as a preservative up to 1966. The wood
preserving operation now uses pentachlorophenol {PCP) as the preservative. From
1966 to 1973, the site used a process that allowed approximately 27,000 gallons of
PCP to drip from treated wood directly onto the ground. In addition, approximately
3,200 gallons^of PCP-contaminated sludge were applied directly to the ground. The site
is partially fenced. There are approximately 350 people living within 3 miles of the site.
Several on-site monitoring wells and a private well less than 500 feet away from the
site are contaminated with PCP. The private well has been replaced by a new well into
a deeper uncontaminated aquifer. The site is 3/4 miles from a wef/andarea draining
into the Cat River. The river is used for recreation.
site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: ,01/22/87
Final Date: 07/21/87
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater is contaminated with PCP and phenols. Potential
health threats include using contaminated groundwater for household
purposes and crop irrigation. Also, contamination of the food chain is
possible if contaminants move into the adjacent wetlands and the small
creek that drains into the Cat River.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
63
-------
RITARI POST & POLE
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The State currently is conducting an investigation into the
nature and extent of contamination at the site, which will result in the
selection of final cleanup remedies. The investigation is schedule to to be
completed in 1991.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Ritari Post and Pole site
while further studies are taking place and cleanup activities are being planned-
A
64
-------
SOUTH AN
SITES
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980609614
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
Andover, 16 miles northeast of Minneapolis
Aliases:
Heidelberger Cecil Musket Ranch
Pumpkin City Investments
Musket Ranch
Site Description
The South Andover Sites are composed of several parcels of land totaling
approximately 50 acres. The individual parcels of land are located adjacent to one
another and are independently owned and used. Several small businesses involved
with used auto part sales, auto salvage operations, and auto body repair are situated
adjacent to the site. From 1954 until 1981, the majority of these properties were
involved with waste disposal and salvage operations. The Cecil Heidelberger property
stored drums containing inks and solvents. Approximately 75% of the Heidelberger
property was later covered with an estimated 3 million tires. Thousands of barrels of
solvents and inks were reportedly burned in open pits on the Batson property. A
wetland on the property was used as a disposal area prior to filling. The Charles
Mistelske property was used to store approximately 8,300 gallons of paints, adhesives,
and greases in 1-, 2- and 55-gallon containers. Jhe Meyer property was used to store
approximately 200 drums of chemical waste. Spillage of chemical waste is known to
have occurred at this location. Drummed waste and transformers were stored on the
Klar property. Transformers, salvaged electrical equipment, empty drums, and
miscellaneous debris are evident on the site. Waste processing stopped in 1977, and
waste was not accepted after 1978, when the property was sold to Parmack, Inc. In
1980, the State issued notices of violation for improper storage and disposal of
chemical wastes. The site is located 3,000 feet from the Waste Disposal Landfill,
another National Priorities List (NPL) site. The City of Andover has a population of
13,000. The area 1/4 mile north of the site is a residential neighborhood with about 170
homes. Five residences are located on site. Further development is planned to the
west and south of the site. Several commercial ventures, including auto part and
salvage operations, currently operate on site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date:" 10/22/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
continued
65
-------
SOUTH ANDOVER SITES
Threats and Contaminants
L\
Groundwater in three shallow drinking wells is contaminated with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene, xylenes, and vinyl chloride
and the heavy metals lead and chromium. The shallow aquifer underlying
the site is heavily contaminated at one location. No other contamination
of drinking water wells has been detected. Subsurface soil is
contaminated with trace amounts of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
and surface soil is contaminated with lead and chromium. Trade amounts
of several semi-volatiles have been detected in soil samples. The
potential health threats of greatest concern to people are drinking,
inhaling, or making direct contact with contaminated soil, grouhdwater,
and contaminated vapors. Residents who live on site and use the shallow
groundwater may be subject to health threats and have been advised by
the State to use bottled water, pending provision of an alternate water
supply.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term
remedial phases directed at cleanup of the groundwater and the soil, surface water,
and sediments. ,
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1981, approximately 700 drums were disposed of
by mixing the contents with waste oil and using the mixture as fuel. An
estimated 600 drums were removed from the site by the potentially
responsible parties in 1986 and were disposed of in a federally approved facility. In
1989, the EPA constructed a fence around the unfenced area of the site and posted
warning signs in an effort to limit site access. Also in 1989, the EPA, in conjunction
with the State, completed shredding and removing the tires from the site.
Groundwater: The selected groundwater cleanup technologies to control
the migration of contaminants present in the surficial aquifer include:
extraction of groundwater from the surficial aquifer; provision of municipal
water to private well users on or near the site; monitoring of groundwater
movement at the site; and placement of restrictions on new wells on or near the site.
The State and the EPA are preparing the technical specifications and design for the
groundwater cleanup technologies. Groundwater discharge and treatment options, as
well as the exact number and location of extraction wells, will be determined during the
design phase of the cleanup. Groundwater discharge options include on-site treatment,
discharge of groundwater to a municipal sewage treatment plant, and discharge to a
surface stream. Groundwater cleanup activities will begin once the design phase is
completed in 1991. :
continued
66
-------
SOUTH ANDOVER SITES
Soils, Surface Water, and Sediment: The EPA currently is conducting
an investigation into the nature and extent of soil, surface water, and
sediment contamination at the site. Additionally, any contamination in the
lower sand aquifer will be assessed. The investigation will define the contaminants of
concern and will recommend alternatives for the cleanup of these resources and
control of the sources of contamination at the site.
Site Facts: In 1976, the State issued a Citation of Violation to Cecil and Marian
Heidelbergerfor unregulated chemical waste storage. In 1982, the EPA notified 16
potentially responsible parties that they may be liable for cleanup at the site. An early
investigation of the site was initiated by the State in 1973, after a citizen lodged a
complaint of suspected contamination in a residential well.
Environmental Progress
By removing contaminated drums, fencing the area of contamination, and removing
numerous tires from the site, the potential for direct exposure to hazardous materials at
the South Andover Sites facility has been greatly reduced. Further studies leading to
the selection of a permanent cleanup strategy are currently being conducted, and the
design specifications for groundwater cleanup are being prepared.
67
-------
ST. AUGU
DUMP
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND981002256
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Steams County
1 mile from St. Augusta
Alias:
St. Cloud Dump
Site Description
The 75-acre St. Augusta Landfill/Engen Dump site operated as a dump and landfill. The
10-acre Engen Dump portion of the site operated from 1966 to 1971. The 40-acre St.
Augusta Landfill was operated as a sanitary landfill, licensed by the State, from 1971
until 1982. Paint wastes, solvents, sludges, and ash from hazardous waste incineration
were buried at the site. Records indicate that open burning occurred at the Engen
Dump portion of the site. There was also evidence of illegal dumping of wastes in the
early 1980s. Also, erosion has at times exposed filled waste at the St. Augusta site,
and a leachate seep has been noticed on the north side of the landfill. In 1983, the
landfill and dump ceased operations and were covered with a cap. Fencing around the
site is inadequate, and there is evidence of site use by recreational vehicles and
hunters. St. Augusta has an approximate population of 2,500. The Mississippi River
borders the old Engen Dump area of the site. Johnson Creek runs to the south of the
site. One nearby residence has a private well which is regularly monitored., Since
groundwater flow is toward the Mississippi River, site contaminants may be reaching
the river which is used as a major drinking water resource.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed
through Federal, State, and
potentially reponsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic,
barium, and lead; volatile organic compounds (VOCs); atrazine; and
phthalates. Potential health threats to people include touching and
accidental ingestion of contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
68
continued
-------
ST. AUGUSTA LANDFILL/ENGEN DUMP
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: A steering committee representing potentially responsible
parties has installed monitoring wells, taken yearly samples, and had a
hydrogeological study conducted. An investigation to determine the nature
and extent of contamination is expected to begin in 1991 and is scheduled
for completion in 1992.
Site Facts: Approximately 40 parties potentially responsible for wastes associated with
the site have formed a steering committee to address contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the St. Augusta Landfill site
while further investigations and cleanup activities are being planned.
A
69
-------
ST. LOUIS
MINNESOTA
EPA H># MND039045430
ITE
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
St. Louis County
5 miles southwest of Duluth's central
business district
Aliases:
U.S. Steel Corp. Duluth Workshop
Interlake/Duluth Tar
The 640-acre St. Louis River site contains two different areas: the St. Louis; River/
Interlake (Duluth Tar Area) and the U.S. Steel or USX area. These areas are separated
by 4 miles of river. The USX Corporation began, operation of an integrated steel mill on
this site in 1915. Operations included coke and iron production, open hearth steel
production, rolling, and wire milling. The USS Duluth Works closed in 1979; however,
the wire mill building was used by a lessee until 1987. There is extensive i
contamination of sediments, soil, surface water, and groundwater with coke and tar
products, which contain high concentrations of polycycllc aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs). Demolition of most site buildings has already occurred, and some pipes and,
tanks used for storage in the past have been cleaned and dismantled. The St. Louis
River and associated wetlands run along the east and south sides of the site. Eight
miles downstream of the site, the river empties into Lake Superior. The Duluth Tar
area is located about 3 miles from downtown Duluth. It occupies 230 acres of land and
a marina area. The site consists of the 54th Avenue Peninsula, a boat slip, the Hallett
Peninsula, and Stryker Embayment. The Hallett Peninsula has a long history of
industrial use for pig iron manufacturing, coking operations, and related industries from
the late 1800s to about 1960. Zenith Furnace Company manufactured pig iron on site
from the late 1800s until the 1920s. The Zenith facilities were dismantled and partially
removed during the 1920s, and the Interlake Iron Company plant was built., Between
1920 and 1927, Duluth Tar and Chemical Company produced tar paper from waste tar
obtained from Interlake. During the 1930s, Dominion, and then American Tar and
Chemical Companies, produced roofing paper and shingles also using tar from
Interlake. Most buildings from these businesses have been removed. Presently,
Hallett Dock Company, an auto junkyard, and other small businesses operate on the
site. The St. Louis River is located south of this area. The river empties int6 Lake
Superior 4 miles downstream of the site. Approximately 800 people live within 1 mile
of the site. Contaminated groundwater is not a drinking water source. Drinking water
is supplied from an intake several miles from the mouth of Lake Superior. ,
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: \ 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
70
continued
-------
ST. LOUIS RIVER SITE
Threats and Contaminants
Air at the site contains contaminated dust and VOCs when the surface
soil is disturbed. The groundwater at both site areas is contaminated with
PAHs. Sediments and soils at the U.S. Steel area contain PAHs.
Sediments and soils at the Duluth Tar Area contain PAHs and tars. The
surface water at the U.S. Steel area is contaminated with PAHs. The
tanks and pipes are contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
If the contaminated soil, sediments, surface water and groundwater is
accidentally swallowed or touched, it could lead to health hazards. The
site could also contaminate the adjacent wetlands and the St. Louis River.
There is a fish advisory in effect, "No swimming" signs are posted, and
there are some restrictions on access to the site.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three phases: initial actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of the Duluth Tar area and cleanup of the U.S. Steel area.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Several initial actions have been completed to remove
contaminated materials at the site. Most buildings at the site have been
demolished, and tanks and pipes have been cleaned and dismantled.
Duluth Tar Area: The State is investigating the nature and extent of
contamination on the Interlake portion of the site. The study, which is
scheduled to be completed in late 1990, will lead to the selection of final
cleanup activities at the site.
U. S. Steel Area: The State has selected the following remedy to
cleanup the U.S. Steel portion of the site: (1) excavating and removing
the tar-contaminated soil and using it as fuel; (2) discharging the
contaminated water to the publicly owned water treatment facility; (3)
incinerating PCB liquids; (4} constructing a slurry wall; (5) landfarming of
some materials; (6) surface water and groundwater monitoring; and (7) disposing of
wastes in an approved landfill. The EPA is currently evaluating the remedy selection to
determine if the technologies and cleanup methods will adequately address site
contamination.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
71
continued
-------
ST. LOUIS RIVER SITE
Environmental Progress
The demolition of contaminated buildings and cleanup and dismantling of contaminated
tanks and pipes have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the
St. Louis River site while further studies and remedy selection are taking place.
72
-------
ST. REGIS P
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND057597940
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Cass County
Chippewa National Forest
Alias;
Wheelers Division
Site Description
The St. Regis Paper Company site occupies 125 acres in the Chippewa National
Forest between Pike Bay and Cass Lake. Wood treatment activities began at the site
in the 1950s while the land was leased from Great Northern Railroad. In 1957,
pressure treatment of lumber with creosote was being used for the wood treatment
process, and wastewater from this process was discharged into a disposal pond. In
1960, pentachlorophenol (PCP) was being used to pressure-treat wood products.
Wastewater from this process was discharged into three disposal ponds. In mid-1971,
the three ponds were replaced by a new pond. Since mid-1980, the plant's
wastewater was evaporated, and the residue was placed in barrels for transport to a
hazardous waste disposal facility. Prior to this action, sludge was reportedly hauled to
the southwestern corner of the property before it was transported to an off-site
disposal facility. Also, the pond was dredged on one occasion and the contents were
placed around the sides of the pond. Drinking water in the area comes from private
and municipal wells. The Chippewa National Forest, Pike Bay, and Cass Lake have a
potential of being contaminated by the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and phenolic compounds, low levels of metals, and dioxins. The
soil is contaminated with PAHs, PCPs, dioxin and arsenic, while the
surface water is contaminated with PAH and phenolic compounds. The
contaminated soil and groundwater could have adverse health effects if
accidentally touched or swallowed. Seepage from the site most likely
flows into the nearby wetlands and could be harmful to its plant and
animal life.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
73
continued
-------
ST. REGIS PAPER CO.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site. :
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1986, the State decided to excavate the contaminated soil
and store it in an on-site vault. The contaminated soil has been excavated
and stored, and the groundwater is being treated by the carbon absorption
method before being discharged to the surface water. This treatment
system has been operative for the last two years.
Site Facts: Two Consent Orders signed between the State of Minnesota and
Champion International in 1985 gave Champion the responsibility to conduct the
investigation to determine the nature and extent of site contamination and to develop a
plan for cleanup. !
Environmental Progress
The ongoing groundwater treatment program and soil excavation at the St. .Regis site
has significantly reduced the potential for exposure to soils contaminants while cleanup
activities are being completed. ;
74
-------
TWIN CITI
FORCE
BASE
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MN8570024275
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Hennepln County
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
Complex
Aliases:
US Air Force Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport
Small Arms Range Landfill
Since 1944, the 280-acre Twin Cities Air Force Reserve Base site was used, for
operations that resulted in the storage and disposal of hazardous substances. The
Small Arms Range Landfill was the main base landfill from 1963 to 1972. The site is
along the Minnesota River and covers approximately 3 acres. In addition to general
base refuse, quantities of paint sludge, paint filters, and leaded-fuel sludge were also
disposed of at the landfill. The site is within the 100-year floodplain of the Minnesota
River and is periodically flooded, resulting in the release of chromium, lead, and zinc to
the river. Approximately 64,700 people living in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan
area depend on public and private wells for drinking water within a 3-mile area of the
landfill. The northern boundary of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge lies
500 feet from the landfill.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/21/87
Threats and Contaminants
Monitoring wells have shown contamination with low levels of mercury,
chromium, lead, and zinc in the groundwater. Soil and sludge is
contaminated with paint by-products and petrochemicals. People who
accidentally ingest or touch contaminated groundwater, contaminated soil
or sludge may potentially suffer adverse health effects.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
7S
continued
-------
TWIN CITIES AIR FORCE RESERVE BASE
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site. ;
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In the spring of 1987, the EPA secured the site,
posted warning signs, transferred liquids to on-site storage tanks, shipped
69 drums of organic sludges for incineration, and transported 35 cubic
yards of contaminated soil for off-site disposal.
Entire Site: The Air Force is currently conducting an investigation of the
site to determine the extent of contamination. The study is scheduled to
be completed in 1991 and will lead to the selection of final cleanup
remedies.
Site Facts: The Twin Cities Air Force Reserve Base is participating in the Installation
Restoration Program (IRP), the specially funded program established by the
Department of Defense to identify, evaluate, and mitigate previous hazardous waste
sites on military installations. '.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions, especially the removal of liquid and solid wastes and
contaminated soil, have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous
substances at the Twin Cities Reserve Base site while further investigations are taking
place and cleanup activities are being planned.
76
-------
UNION SC
METALC
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND022949192
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Hennepin County
North Minneapolis
Union Scrap Iron & Metal Company sorted and crushed lead battery fragments on this
1/4-acre site from 1973 to 1980. Lead was separated and sold for recycling. The
plastic and rubber fragments remaining, which also contained lead, accumulated in
piles. Approximately 30,000 tons of these fragments are on the site. According to the
State, airborne lead levels adjacent to the site are significantly high. There is also
potential for groundwater and surface water contamination. Approximately 3,700
people live within a 1/2-mile radius of the site and 17,100 live within 1 mile. There are
three schools within 1 mile of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The air is contaminated with lead. The soil and sludge are contaminated
with heavy metals including lead, arsenic, cadmium, nickel and copper, as
well as polychlorinated biphenyls (RGBs). The site is located in a
predominantly commercial area, but the potential for exposure to airborne
particulates exists for people traveling and working near the area.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
77
continued
-------
UNION SCRAP IRON & METAL COMPANY
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: emergency actions and a long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site. ;
Response Action Status
. X" Emergency Actions: In 1985, the EPA covered the contaminated piles
with tarpaulins and weighted them with tires to prevent erosion and air
pollution. A fence was also installed. In 1987, the EPA removed the
battery debris, casings, and contaminated soil from the property and
refilled the area with clean fill. Contaminated materials were removed from sewer
lines. Existing buildings were decontaminated and demolished. In 1989, ajcement pad
and the waste beneath it were removed. !
Entire Site: The EPA conducted an investigation of the site to determine
the nature and the extent of the contamination. The results of the
investigation indicated that no significant contamination remained on the
site after the completion of the emergency actions. ;
Environmental Progress
The emergency actions described above have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to contaminated materials at the Union Scrap Iron & Metal Company site.
Because of these actions, all cleanup goals for surface contamination have been met
and no significant contamination remains on the site, making the surroundings safe for
nearby residents and the environment. The EPA will continue to monitor the site to
assure the effectiveness of the cleanup remedies.
78
-------
UNIVERSITY
MINNESOTA
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980613780
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Dakota County
Rosemount
Alias:
Rosemount Research Center
The University of Minnesota formerly operated this 4-acre disposal site which includes
the following six areas: (1) a burn pit, constructed in 1968, received about 7,000
gallons of waster per year. A second pit existed in the early 1960s and received about
100 gallons of waste per year; (2) a used equipment area that may have been used for
storing electrical equipment and for disposal of polychlorinated' biphenyl (PCB)-
contaminated oil. Two incinerators were also operated in this area and may have been
fueled by transformer oil; (3) a transformer area where a PCB spill occurred in the
1970s; (4) an oxidation pond and a Research Center Sewer System area which now
receives sanitary sewer discharges; (5) a dump area where construction, demolition,
and municipal wastes have been placed; and (6) a former Process Water Lagoon area,
which operated for 4 months in 1945 and received sulfuric acid, nitric acid/ammonia,
and ether. Between 1960 and 1973, the University buried and incinerated gaseous,
liquid, and chemical laboratory wastes on the site. The University detected volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals in monitoring wells and soil on site in
1972. New monitoring data collected by the State in 1984 indicate that the
contamination is spreading. Approximately 9,600 people use wells within 3 miles of
the site as a source of drinking water. The closest well downslope of the burn pit is
9,500 feet away. Employee and tenant work areas are within 1,000 feet away from the
used equipment area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals including lead,
copper, and zinc; VOCs; and nitrates. The soil is contaminated with
VOCs; heavy metals including lead, chromium, copper, and zinc;
pesticides including lindane and chlordane; dioxins; and PCBs. The
contaminated soil and groundwater could pose health problems to
individuals if accidentally touched or swallowed.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
79
continued
-------
UNIVERSITY OP MINNESOTA
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on groundwater
cleanup and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Groundwater: The University has taken the responsibility to monitor the
groundwater. Also, the State is supplying bottled water to 28 families in
Rosemount A groundwater pump-out system has been constructed and
is operational. Construction of a permanent water supply system began
in 1988 and is scheduled for completion in late 1990. '
Entire Site: The EPA and the State have completed an investigation into
the soil contamination at the site. Lead-contaminated soil will be disposed
of off site In a federally approved landfill. Soil heavily contaminated with
PCBs will be treated on site using a thermal desorption/fume incineration
process. The cleanup actions are scheduled to begin in 1991.
Site Facts: In 1986, under a State Order, the University of Minnesota conducted an
investigation of the site. The Order also called for the removal of contaminated soil and
monitoring of the contaminated groundwater.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternative water supply to affected families and the ongoing
cleanup activities described above have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to
hazardous substances in the drinking water, while final cleanup activities are being
completed.
80
-------
*"u"'- ?:- "^r!"sxccs::v,>
WAITE PARIL-ME
( - , > v; /xcvB!!^ v- si
MINNESOTA I
EPAID# MND981002249
REGION 5
'CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Stearns County
St. Cloud
Site Description
The Waite Park Wells site contains four municipal water wells. Wells 1 and 3 are
located on Burlington Northern Car Shop property and were found to be contaminated
with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in 1984. Burlington Northern has constructed
and repaired railroad cars on the site since 1894. The activities generated wastes that
included oils and greases, sandblast sand, calcium hydroxide, solvents, paints, and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Burlington Northern ceased operations at this facility
around 1980 and has donated much of the land to the City of Waite Park. The other
two contaminated wells are located on the Electric Machinery plant property, which has
manufactured electric generators since 1969. The plant had four major waste streams:
waste oils and lubricants, resins from the thermoplastics operation, coolant from the
machine shop, and solvents and paints from a paint booth. There were several disposal
and storage areas on the property. Approximately 4,000 people reside in Waite Park,
and 3,500 people are served by the municipal water system. The adjacent Sauk River
joins the Mississippi River 2 miles from the site. The nearest houses' are approximately
50 feet from the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/15/85
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and soil are contaminated with VOCs. Sandblast sand
and soils are contaminated with heavy metals, VOCs, and PCBs. People
may be at a health risk if they swallow contaminated water or touch
contaminated soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
81
continued
-------
WATTE PARK WELLS
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the Electric Machinery property and cleanup of the Burlington
Northern property. '
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The contaminated wells were taken out of service
immediately with an emergency hookup to the St. Cloud water:supply
established in 1985. Since 1988, an air stripper has been operated by the
municipality to treat the groundwater from these two municipal wells.
Electric Machinery Property: The remedy selected for cleanup of the
Electric Machinery property includes: (1) installing groundwater extraction
wells in the contaminated plume; (2) pumping and treating contaminated
groundwater through a water treatment system and discharging the
treated water to the Sauk River; and (3) restricting access to the site by installing a
fence and security system around the site. Groundwater pumping and treatment are
still taking place. All other cleanup activities have been completed.
Burlington Northern Property: The State is conducting an additional
investigation to further define the areas of contamination at this site and to
determine if additional cleanup actions will be required. :
Environmental Progress
The emergency hookup to the municipal water system, installation and operation of the
air stripper water treatment system, and securing of the site have greatly reduced the
potential for exposure to contaminated soil and groundwater while further investigation
and cleanup activities are taking place.
82
-------
WASHINGTO
LANDFILL
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980704738
Site Description
REGIONS
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Washington County
Lake Elmo
From 1969 to 1975, Washington and Ramsey Counties operated a sanitary landfill at
the 40-acre Washington County Landfill site. After operations were discontinued in
1975, a clean soil cap was placed on the landfill. In 1981, groundwater monitoring
indicated the presence of elevated concentrations of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and some heavy metals in on-site monitoring wells and off-site residential wells.
In 1983 and 1984, alternate drinking water supplies were provided to affected
residences. In 1983, Ramsey and Washington Counties installed a pump and treat
system to reduce any potential groundwater contamination from the landfill. The site is
located in a sparse residential development, with some farmland in the area.
site Responsibility: jhis site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with VOCs and lead. People may be at a
health risk from swallowing or touching contaminated groundwater.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
83
continued
-------
WASHINGTON COUNTY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: an immediate action and a long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site; I
Response Action Status
Immediate Action: In 1983 and 1984, alternate drinking water supplies
were provided to affected residences, and Ramsey and Washington
Counties installed a pump and treat system. ;
Entire Site: Cleanup remedies selected by the EPA include: (;!}
installation and operation of a groundwater gradient control operation at
the site; (2) providing safe drinking water supplies for affected residences;
(3) monitoring of the landfill and the effectiveness of the groundwater
gradient control system; (4) appropriate landfill security and safety procedures; and (5)
implementing a closure plan. The groundwater gradient control system is in operation
and monitoring of the groundwater will continue until the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) determines that the groundwater has been cleaned. Landfill closure
has been completed.
Site Facts: In 1984, a Consent Order was signed between the Counties and the
MPCA for the Counties to perform cleanup activities.
Environmental Progress
The immediate action to supply alternative water to affected residences has eliminated
the potential of exposure to hazardous substances in the drinking water at the
Washington County Landfill site while additional cleanup activities are ongoing.
84
-------
WASTE DISP
ENGINEERIN
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980609119
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Anoka County
Andover
The 114-acre Waste Disposal Engineering, Inc. site operated as a dump and landfillfor
approximately 20 years, closing in early 1983. Hazardous wastes were disposed of
throughout the landfill during site operation. From 1972 until 1974, paint sludges,
solvents, oils, caustics, and acids were disposed of in an asphalt-lined pit on the site.
Poor operating practices and spills contributed to the site contamination. In 1982, lime
sludge generated by the Minneapolis Drinking Water Treatment Plant was deposited at
the site. The landfill covers 73 acres of refuse area and contains approximately
2,500,000 cubic yards of waste. Groundwater directly under the site is contaminated
primarily with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Area residents rely on groundwater
for their potable water source. The area surrounding the site is residential, agricultural,
and commercial. The site is bordered by Coon Creek.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/16/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, soil gas, and Coon Creek contain VOCs from wastes
deposited in the landfill. Individuals may be exposed to contaminants
through accidental ingestion, inhalation, or direct contact with
groundwater, soil gas, or surface water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
85
continued
-------
WASTE DISPOSAL ENGINEERING, INC.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site. :
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1987, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the site by
pumping and treating the groundwater using carbon adsorption and
discharging the treated water to Coon Creek; installing a soil cap to
completely cover the landfill; installing a clay groundwater cut-off wall;
restricting well use; filling in a wetland and constructing an alternate wetland to replace
the lost habitat; and monitoring the site. Once the technical specifications for the
remedy are designed, the final site cleanup will begin. j
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation by the EPA of the Waste Disposal Engineering, Inc. site determined
that no immediate actions are necessary to protect the public or the environment from
immediate threats while waiting for the final cleanup to begin.
86
-------
WHITTAKE
CORPORATION
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND006252233
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Hennepln County
Minneapolis
Alias:
Minneapolis Coatings & Chemical Division
The .1-acre Whittaker Corporation site is located within a 10-acre site. During World
War II, Triploil Holding Company operated on the site and repackaged war materials,
including antifreeze and oil, for the military. In the 1950s, Triploil expanded its
operations by acquiring Midwestern Copper Works, which manufactures industrial
coatings. Resins and industrial coatings were produced on the property. Raw materials
were stored in underground storage tanks, in diked aboveground storage tanks, in
drums, or inside the plant. Waste products were used in the manufacturing process,
condensed into steam, incinerated on site, or disposed in a low, swampy area on the
site. Hazardous materials were found during a 1978 excavation for a parking lot. The
site is located within an industrial area of Minneapolis. The Mississippi River is
approximately 1,200 feet to the west of the site. There are four industrial and four
residential wells in the nearby area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soil were found to be contaminated with heavy metals
including cadmium and lead, as well as volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). Accidental ingestion or touching contaminated groundwater or
soil could pose adverse health threats.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
87
continued
-------
WfflTTAKER CORPORATION
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site. :
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1985, the following actions were initiated: (1) excavation of
buried drums; (2) removal of contaminated soils from the disposal area; (3)
shipment of all hazardous wastes to permitted disposal facilities; and (4)
pumping and treating of recovered groundwater. The groundwater is
being treated by two air strippers, then discharged to a storm sewer. The State will
continue to conduct the groundwater treatment system.
Environmental Progress
The removal and treatment actions described above have greatly reduced the potential
for exposure to contaminated materials at the Whittaker Corporation site while further
cleanup and monitoring activities are continuing. \
A
yy
88
-------
WINDOM Ml
DUMP
MINNESOTA
EPA ID# MND980034516
Site Description
REGION 5
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Cottonwood County
Windom
Prior to the 1930s, the 11-acre Windom Municipal Dump site was quarried for sand and
gravel, almost to the level of the water table. The site was used for the burning of
municipal and industrial wastes from the 1930s until 1971. From 1971 to 1974,
municipal wastes and some industrial wastes were placed in a fill area along the pit.
However, burning of paint sludges continued during this time. The site was closed in
1974, although the City of Windom has continued to place demolition asphalt and
concrete over the fill area. The population of Windom is approximately 4,500. Land
near the site is comprised of residences and is used for farming and industrial activities.
An elementary school is two blocks to the west of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties'actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with various volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, and chromium.
VOCs were also detected in the soil. The contaminated groundwater and
soil could pose a health hazard to individuals if accidentally touched or
swallowed. Possible contamination of private wells and the city drinking
water supply with VOCs is a major concern.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
89
continued
-------
WINDOM MUNICIPAL DUMP
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Under EPA monitoring, the potentially responsible parties
conducted an investigation at the site to determine the nature and the
extent of the contamination. As part of the investigation, a fence was
constructed around the borders of the site and six monitoring wells were
installed by the City. In 1985, the Minnesota Department of Health samplecl the city's
municipal and residential wells. In 1987, an additional 12 monitoring wells v^ere
installed. The parties potentially responsible for site contamination performed the
following activities to clean up the site: (1) grading the site to control erosion; (2)
covering the site with compacted clay and other materials which are imperrneable to
water; (3) providing a drainage layer; and (4) installing a cover to prevent water and wind
erosion. Intervention limits for the contaminants of concern were also established.
These intervention limits were exceeded in 1989, so a pump and treatment system is
currently being installed. i
Environmental Progress
The numerous cleanup activities described above have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to hazardous substances at the Windom Municipal Dump site while further
cleanup activities are taking place. :
90
-------
his glossary defines the italicized terms used in the site
fact sheets for the State of Minnesota. The terms and
abbreviations contained in this glossary are often
defined in the context of hazardous waste management as de-
scribed in the site fact sheets, and apply specifically to work per-
formed under the Superfund program. Therefore, these terms
may have other meanings when used in a different context.
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH (less than
7.0) that are used in chemical manufacturing. Acids in
high concentration can be very corrosive and react with
many inorganic and organic substances. These reactions
may possibly create toxic compounds or release heavy
metal contaminants that remain in the environment long
after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A legally binding document issued by EPA direct-
ing the parties potentially responsible to perform site cleanups or studies (generally,
EPA does not issue unilateral orders for site studies).
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown of contaminants in soil or water by
exposing them to air.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air through it in a pressurized vessel. The
contaminants are evaporated into the air stream. The air may be further treated before
it is released into the atmosphere.
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand, or gravel capable of storing water within
cracks and pore spaces, or between grains. When water contained within an aquifer is
of sufficient quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used for drinking or other pur-
poses. The water contained in the aquifer is called ground water.
Backfill: To refill an excavated area with removed earth; or the material itself that is
used to refill an excavated area. .
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH (greater than 7.0), which tend to be corro-
sive in chemical reactions. When bases are mixed with acids, they neutralize each other,
forming salts.
G-l
-------
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants naturally and break them down into iionhaz-
ardous components.
Borrow Pit: An excavated area where soil, sand, or gravel has been dug up for use
elsewhere. : '
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated materials. The surface of the cap is
generally mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in which contaminants are removed from
groundwater and surface water by forcing water through tanks containing activated
carbon, a specially treated material that attracts and holds or retains contaminants.
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of holes in a landfill where waste is
dumped, compacted, and covered with layers of dirt. :~ *
Cltromated Copper Arsenate: An insecticide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This salt is used extensively as a wood pre-
servative in pressure-treating operations. It is highly toxic and water soluble) making it
a relatively mobile contaminant in the environment. j
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops accepting wastes and is shut 4own
under Federal guidelines that ensure the public and the environment is protected.
Consent Decree: A legal document, approved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between EPA and the parties potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the potentially responsible parties are re-
quired to perform and/or the costs incurred by the government that the parties will '
reimburse, as well as the roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options that the gov-
ernment may exercise in the event of non-compliance by potentially responsible parties.
If a settlement between EPA and a potentially responsible party includes cleanup ac-
tions, it must be in the form of a consent decree. A consent decree is subject to a public
comment period. ,
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order on Consent]. ;
Containment: The process of enclosing or containing hazardous substances in a struc-
ture, typically in ponds and lagoons, to prevent the migration of contaminants into the
environment. :
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood preserving operations and produced by; distillation
of tar, including polycydic aromatic hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic hydrocar-
G-2 :
-------
bons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Contaminating sediments, soils, and surface water, creo-
sotes may cause skin alterations and cancer with prolonged exposure.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic slope that causes groundwater to move
toward lower elevations. Therefore, wells dawngradient of a contaminated groundwater
source are prone to receiving pollutants.
Downslope: [see Downgradient].
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated, that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer,
or industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes discharged into surface waters.
Fly ash: Non-combustible residue that results from the combustion of flue gases. It can
include nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides, as well as many
other chemical pollutants.
Halogens: Reactive non-metals, such as chlorine and bromine. Halogens are very good
oxidizing agents and, therefore, have many industrial uses. They are rarely found by
themselves; however, many chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), some
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and dioxin are reactive because of the presence of
halogens.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater, with particular emphasis on the chemis-
try and movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Installation Restoration Program: The specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its hazard-
ous waste sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from those
sites.
Intake: The source where a water supply is drawn from, such as from a river or water-
bed.
Lagoon: A shallow pond where sunlight, bacterial action, and oxygen work to purify
wastewater. Lagoons are typically used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges, liquid
wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfarm: To apply waste to land and/or incorporate waste into the surface soil, such
as fertilizer or soil conditioner. This practice is commonly used for disposal of com-
posted wastes.
G-3
-------
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is placed in or on land.
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through or drains from waste, carrying soluble
components from the waste. Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by which soluble
chemical components are dissolved and carried through soil by water or some other
percolating liquid. ;
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct, often incremental, steps that are takento solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into a number of these phases. ;
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, contaminants, water, or other liquids through
porous and permeable rock.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day
formal period of negotiation during which EPA is not allowed to start work at a site or
initiate enforcement actions against potentially responsible parties, although ;EPA may
undertake certain investigatory and planning activities. The 60-day period may be
extended if EPA receives a good faith offer [see Good Faith Offer] within that period.
Overpacking: Process used for isolating large volumes of waste by jacketing or encap-
sulating waste to prevent further spread or leakage Decontaminating materials. Leakr
ing drums may be contained within oversized barrels as an interim measure prior to
removal and final disposal. ;
Pentachlorophenol (PCP): A synthetic, modified petrochemical that is usedjas a wood
preservative because of its toxicity to termites and fungi. It is a common component of
creosotes and can cause cancer. i
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances produced from petroleum in refinery operations
and as fuel oil residues. These include fluoranthene, chrysene, mineral spirits, and
refined oils. Petrochemicals are the bases from which volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), plastics, and many pesticides are made. These chemical substances are often
toxic to humans and the environment.
Phenols: Organic compounds that are used in plastics manufacturing and are by-
products of petroleum refining, tanning, textile, dye, and resin manufacturing. Phenols
are highly poisonous and can make water taste and smell bad.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater flowing from a specific source. The
movement of the groundwater is influenced by such factors as local groundwater flow
patterns, the character of the aquifer in which groundwater is contained, and the den-
G-4
-------
sity of contaminants.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and biphen-
yls, are a group of highly reactive organic compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications, carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope emersion oils, and caulking compounds. PCBs are also produced in
certain combustion processes. PCBs are extremely persistent in the environment be-
cause they are very stable, non-reactive, and highly heat resistant. Burning them pro-
duces even more toxins. Chronic exposure to PCBs is believed to cause liver damage. It
is also known to bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. PCB use and sale was banned in 1979
with the passage of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs): Parties, including owners, who may have
contributed to the contamination at a Superfund site and may be liable for costs of
response actions. Parties are considered PRPs until they admit liability or a court makes
a determination of liability. This means that PRPs may sign a consent decree or admin-
istrative order on consent [see Administrative Order on Consent] to participate in site
cleanup activity without admitting liability.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land into receiving waters.
S,ediment: The layer of soil, sand and minerals at the bottom of surface waters, such as
streams, lakes, and rivers that absorb contaminants.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in the ground used for storage of liquids, usually
in the form of leachate, from waste disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves the pit
by moving through the surrounding soil.
- *.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Slurry Wall: Barriers used to contain the flow of contaminated groundwater or subsur-
face liquids. Slurry walls are constructed by digging a trench around a contaminated
area and filling the trench with an impermeable material that prevents water from
passing through it. The groundwater or contaminated liquids trapped within the area
surrounded by the slurry wall can be extracted and treated.
/ ,
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid runoff for drainage or disposal.
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY!
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, colorless liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as a solvent and as a metal degreasing
agent. TCE may be toxic to people when inhaled, ingested, or through skin contact and
can damage vital organs, especially the liver [see also Volatile Organic Compounds].
Unilateral [Administrative] Order: [see Administrative Order.on Consent];
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): VOCs are made as secondary petrochemicals.
They include light alcohols, acetone, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, dichloroeth-
ylene, benzene, vinyl chloride, toluene, and methylene chloride. These potentially toxic
chemicals are used as solvents, degreasers, paints, thinners, and fuels. Because of their
volatile nature, they readily evaporate into the air, increasing the potential exposure to
humans. Due to their low water solubility, environmental persistence, and widespread
industrial use, they are commonly found in soil and groundwater. |
Wetland: An area that is regularly saturated by surface or groundwater and, under
normal circumstances, capable of supporting vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. Wetlands are critical to sustaining many species cjf fish and
wildlife. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, and bogs. Wetlands may be
either coastal or inland. Coastal wetlands have salt or brackish (a mixture of salt and
fresh) water, and most have tides, while inland wetlands are non-tidal and freshwater.
Coastal wetlands are an integral component of estuaries. ',
G-6
------- |