United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(OS-240)
EPA/540/8-91/025
September 1991
PB92-963250
vvEPA National
Priorities
List Sites:
FLORIDA
1991
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Publication #9200.5-710A
September 1991
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Florida
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (P; -' """'
77 West Jackccn <•' ' :, ^2»i; Floor
Chicago, IL 6060-,- J.,, j
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, DC 20460
-------
If you wish to purchase copies of any additional State volumes contact:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 487-4650
The National Overview volume, Superfund: Focusing on the Nation at Large (1991),
may be ordered as PB92-963253.
The complete set of the overview documents, plus the 49 state reports may be ordered
as PB92-963253.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction:
A Brief Overview 1
Super fund:
How Does the Program Work to Clean Up Sites? 5
The Volume:
How to Use the State Book 13
NPL Sites:
In the State of Florida 17
The NPL Report:
Progress to Date 19
The NPL Fact Sheets:
Summary of Site Activities 23
Appendix A: Glossary:
Terms Used in the Fact Sheets 133
Appendix B: Repositories of
Site Information us
-------
INTRODUCTION
WHY THE SUPERFUND
PROGRAM?
As the 1970s came to a close, a series of
headline 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. Hazardous
waste buried there over a 25-year period
contaminated streams and soil, and endangered
the health of nearby residents. The result:
evacuation 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 envi-
ronment were threatened, lives were disrupted,
and property values were reduced. It became
increasingly clear that there were large num-
bers of serious hazardous waste problems that
were falling through the cracks of existing
environmental laws. The magnitude of these
emerging problems moved Congress to enact
the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act in 1980.
CERCLA — commonly known as Superfund
— was the first Federal law established to deal
with the dangers posed by the Nation's hazard-
ous waste sites.
After Discovery, the Problem
Intensified
Few realized the size of the problem until the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
began the process of site discovery and site
evaluation. Not hundreds, but thousands of
potential hazardous waste sites existed, and
they presented the Nation with some of the
most complex pollution problems it had ever
faced.
Since the Superfund program began, hazard-
A
Brief
Overview
ous waste has surfaced as a major environ-
mental concern in every part of the United
States. It wasn't just the land that was con-
taminated by past disposal practices. Chemi-
cals in the soil were spreading into the ground-
water (a source of drinking water for many)
and into streams, lakes, bays, and wetlands.
Toxic vapors contaminated the air at some
sites, while improperly disposed or stored
wastes threatened the health of the surrounding
community and the environment at others.
The EPA Identified More than 1,200
Serious Sites
The EPA has identified 1,245 hazardous waste
sites as the most serious in the Nation. These
sites comprise the National Priorities List; sites
targeted for cleanup under Super-fund. But
site discoveries continue, and the EPA esti-
mates that, while some will be deleted after
lengthy cleanups, this list, commonly called
the NPL, will continue to grow by approxi-
mately 50 to 100 sites per year, potentially
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
recognized that the Federal government could
-------
INTRODUCTION
not and should not address all environmental
problems stemming from past disposal prac-
tices. Therefore, the EPA was directed to set
priorities and establish a list of sites to target.
Sites on the NPL (1,245) thus are a relatively
small subset of a larger inventory of potential
hazardous waste sites, but they do comprise
the most complex and compelling cases. The
EPA has logged more than 35,000 sites on its
national inventory of potentially hazardous
waste sites and assesses each site within one
year of being logged.
THE EPA IS MAKING PROGRESS
ON SITE CLEANUP
The goal of the Superfund program is to tackle
immediate dangers first and then move through
the progressive steps necessary to eliminate
any long-term risks to public health and the
environment.
Superfund responds immediately to sites
posing imminent threats to human health and
the environment at both NPL sites and sites not
on the NPL. The purpose is to stabilize,
prevent, or temper the effects of a release of
hazardous substances, or the threat of one, into
the environment. 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 imminent threats is one
of Superfund's most noted achievements.
Where imminent threats to the public or
environment were evident, the EPA has initi-
ated or completed emergency actions that
attacked the most serious threats of toxic
exposure in more than 2,700 cases.
The ultimate goal for a hazardous waste site on
the NPL is a permanent solution to an environ-
mental problem that presents a serious threat
to the public or the environment. This often
requires a long-term effort. The 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. By 1991, construction had
started at more than four times as many sites as
in 1986! Of the sites currently on the NPL,
more than 500 — nearly half— have had
construction cleanup activity. In addition,
more than 400 more sites presently are in the
investigation stage to determine the extent of
site contamination and to identify appropriate
cleanup remedies. Many other sites with
cleanup remedies selected are poised for the
start of cleanup construction activity. In
measuring success by "progress through the
cleanup pipeline," the EPA clearly is gaining
momentum.
THE EPA MAKES SURE
CLEANUP WORKS
The EPA has gained enough experience in
cleanup construction to understand that envi-
ronmental protection does not end when the
remedy is in place. Many complex technolo-
gies — like those designed to clean up ground-
water — must operate for many years in order
to accomplish their objectives.
The EPA's hazardous waste site managers are
committed to proper operation and mainte-
nance of every remedy constructed. 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, the EPA does not abandon a site
even after the cleanup work is done. Every
five years, the Agency reviews each site where
residues from hazardous waste cleanup still
remain to ensure that public and environmental
-------
INTRODUCTION
health are being safeguarded. The EPA will
correct any deficiencies discovered and will
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. The EPA's job is to
analyze the hazards and to deploy the experts,
but the Agency needs citizen input as it makes
choices for affected communities.
Because the people in a community where a
Superfund site is located will be those most
directly affected by hazardous waste problems
and cleanup processes, the EPA encourages
citizens to get involved in cleanup decisions.
Public involvement and comment does influ-
ence EPA cleanup plans by providing valuable
information about site conditions, community
concerns, and preferences.
The State and U.S. Territories volumes and the
companion National overview volume provide
general Superfund background information
and descriptions of activities at each NPL site.
These volumes clearly describe what the
problems are, what the EPA and others partici-
pating 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 TOGETHER
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.
Citizens also should understand the challenges
involved in hazardous waste cleanup and the
decisions we must make, as a Nation, in
finding the best solutions.
The National overview, Superfund: Focusing
on the Nation at Large (1991), contains impor-
tant information to help you understand the
magnitude and challenges facing the
Superfund program, 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, vital roles
of the various participants in the cleanup
process, the Superfund program's successes in
cleaning up the Nation's serious hazardous
waste sites, and the current status of the NPL.
If you did not receive this overview volume,
ordering information is provided in the front of
this book.
This volume compiles site summary fact sheets
on each State or Territorial site being cleaned
up under the Superfund program. These sites
represent the most serious hazardous waste
problems in the Nation and require the most
complicated and costly site solutions yet
encountered. Each book gives a "snapshot" of
the conditions and cleanup progress that has
been made at each NPL site. Information
presented for each site is current as of April
1991. Conditions change as our cleanup
efforts continue, so these site summaries will
be updated annually to include information on
new progress being made.
To help you understand the cleanup accom-
plishments made at these sites, this volume
includes a description of the process for site
discovery, threat evaluation, and long-term
cleanup of Superfund sites. This description,
How Does the Program Work to Clean Up
Sites?, will serve as a reference point from
which to review the cleanup status at specific
sites. A glossary defining key terms as they
apply to hazardous waste management and site
cleanup is included as Appendix A in the back
of this book.
-------
SUPERFUND
The diverse problems posed by hazard-
ous waste sites have provided the EPA
with the challenge to establish a consis-
tent approach for evaluating and cleaning up
the Nation's most serious sites. To do this, the
EPA has had to step beyond its traditional role
as a regulatory agency to develop processes
and guidelines for each step in these techni-
cally complex site cleanups. The EPA has
established procedures to coordinate the
efforts of its Washington, D.C. Headquarters
program offices and its front-line staff in ten
Regional Offices, with the State and local
governments, contractors, and private parties
who are participating in site cleanup. An
important part of the process is that any time
How Does the
Program Work
to Clean Up
Sites?
THREE-STEP SUPERFUND 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.
during cleanup, work can be led by the EPA
or the State or, under their monitoring, by
private parties who are potentially responsible
for site contamination.
The process for discovery of the site, evalu-
ation of threat, and the long-term cleanup of
Superfund sites is summarized in the follow-
ing pages. The phases of each of these steps
are highlighted within the description. The
flow diagram above provides a summary of the
three-step process.
Although this book provides a current "snap-
shot" of site progress made only by emergency
actions and long-term cleanup actions at
Superfund sites, it is important to understand
the discovery and evaluation process that leads
to identifying and cleaning up these most
serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous
-------
SUPERFUND.
waste sites in the Nation. The discovery and
evaluation process is the starting point for this
summary description of Superfund involve-
ment at hazardous waste sites.
STEP 1: SITE DISCOVERY AND
EMERGENCY EVALUATION
How does the EPA learn about
potential hazardous waste sites?
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. There may
be an explosion or fire, which alerts the State
or local authorities to a problem. Routine
investigations by State and local governments
and required reporting and inspection of
facilities that generate, treat, store, or dispose
of hazardous waste also help keep the EPA
informed about 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 if there is an imminent
danger?
As soon as a potential hazardous waste site is
reported, the EPA determines whether there is
an emergency requiring an immediate 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 con-
taminated area to keep people away, or tempo-
rarily relocating residents until the danger is
addressed, to providing bottled water to resi-
dents 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
If there isn't an imminent danger, how
does the EPA determine what, If any,
cleanup actions should be taken?
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 contami-
nated well water, but now it's time to deter-
mine what is contaminating the drinking water
supply and the best way to clean it up. The
EPA may determine that there is no imminent
danger from a site, so 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 whether it requires a
long-term cleanup action.
Once a site is discovered and any needed
emergency actions are taken, the EPA or the
State collects all available background infor-
mation 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 assessment of
its potential hazards. This is a quick review of
readily available information to answer the
questions:
• Are hazardous substances likely to be
present?
-------
SUPERFUND
• How are they contained?
• How might contaminants spread?
• How close is the nearest well, home, or
natural resource area such as a wetland
or animal sanctuary?
• What may be harmed — the land,
water, air, people, plants, or animals?
Some sites do not require further action be-
cause the preliminary assessment shows that
they do not threaten public health or the envi-
ronment. 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 35,000 sites
maintained in this inventory.
If the preliminary assessment
shows a serious threat may exist,
what's the next step?
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 pollut-
ing the environment, such as runoff into
nearby streams. They also check to see if
people (especially children) have access to
the site.
How does the EPA use the results of
the site inspection?
Information collected during the site inspection
is used to identify the sites posing the most
serious threats to human health and the envi-
ronment. This way, the EPA can meet the
requirement that Congress gave them to use
Superfund monies only on the worst hazardous
waste sites in the Nation.
To identify the most serious sites, the EPA
developed the Hazard Ranking System (HRS).
The HRS is the scoring system the 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 that 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 poten-
tially affected by contamination at the site.
Only sites with high enough health and envi-
ronmental risk scores are proposed to be added
to the NPL. That's why 1,245 sites are on the
NPL, but there are more than 35,000 sites in
the Superfund inventory. Only NPL sites can
have a long-term cleanup paid for from
Superfund, the national hazardous waste trust
fund. Superfund can, and does, pay for emer-
gency actions performed at any site, whether
or not it's on the NPL.
Why are sites proposed to the NPL?
Sites proposed to the NPL 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 proposed 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. The NPL
is updated at least once a year, and it's only
after public comments are considered that
these proposed worst sites officially are added
to the list.
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 capabilities, and available tech-
-------
SUPERFUND
nologies. Many States also have their own list
of sites that require cleanup; these often contain
sites that are not on the NPL and are scheduled
to be cleaned up with State money. And, it
should be noted again that any emergency
action needed at a site can be performed by the
Superfund, whether or not a site is on the NPL.
A detailed description of the current progress in
cleaning up NPL sites is found in the section of
the 1991 National overview volume entitled
Cleanup Successes: Measuring Progress.
How do people find out whether the
EPA considers a site a national
priority for cleanup under the
Superfund Program?
All NPL sites, where Superfund is responsible
for cleanup, are described in the State and
Territorial volumes. The public also can find
out whether other sites, not on the NPL, are
being addressed by the Superfund program by
calling their Regional EPA office or the Super-
fund Hotline at the numbers listed in this book.
STEP 3: LONG-TERM CLEANUP
ACTIONS
After a site is added to the NPL, what
are the steps to cleanup?
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 chal-
lenges, there is no single all-purpose solution.
A five-phase "remedial response" process is
used to develop consistent and workable
solutions to hazardous waste problems across
the Nation:
1. Remedial Investigation: investigate in
detail the extent of the site contamination
2. Feasibility Study: study the range of
possible cleanup remedies
3. Record of Decision or ROD: decide
which remedy to use
4. Remedial Design: plan the remedy
5. Remedial Action: carry out the remedy
This remedial response process is a long-term
effort to provide a permanent solution to an
environmental problem that presents a serious
threat to the public or environment.
The first two phases of a long-term cleanup are
a combined remedial investigation and feasibil-
ity study (RI/FS) that determine the nature and
extent of contamination at the site and identify
and evaluate cleanup alternatives. These
studies may be conducted by the EPA or the
State or, under their monitoring, by private
parties.
Like the initial site inspection described earlier,
a remedial investigation involves an examina-
tion of site data in order to better define the
problem. However, 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 of the remedial investigation is
information that allows the EPA to select the
cleanup strategy that is best suited to a particu-
lar site or to determine that no cleanup is
needed.
Placing a site on the NPL does not necessarily
mean that cleanup is needed. It is possible for
-------
SUPERFUND
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 prelimi-
nary and conservative assessment of potential
risk. During subsequent site investigations, the
EPA may find either that there is no real threat
or that the site does not pose significant human
health or environmental risks.
How are cleanup alternatives
identified and evaluated?
The EPA or the State or, under their monitor-
ing, private parties identify and analyze spe-
cific site cleanup needs based on the extensive
information collected during the remedial
investigation. This analysis of cleanup alterna-
tives is called a feasibility study.
Since cleanup actions must be tailored exactly
to the needs of each individual site, more than
one possible cleanup alternative is always
considered. After making sure that all potential
cleanup remedies fully protect human health
and the environment and comply with Federal
and State laws, the advantages and disadvan-
tages of each cleanup alternative are compared
carefully. These comparisons are made to
determine their effectiveness in the short and
long term, their use of permanent treatment
solutions, and their technical feasibility and
cost.
To the maximum extent practicable, the rem-
edy must be a permanent solution and must use
treatment technologies to destroy principal site
contaminants. Remedies such as containing the
waste on site or removing the source of the
problem (like leaking barrels) often are consid-
ered 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,
depending on the size and complexity of the
problem.
Does the public have a say in the
final cleanup decision?
Yes. The Superfund law requires that the
public be given the opportunity to comment on
the proposed cleanup plan. Their concerns are
considered carefully before a final decision is
made.
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. The
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 commu-
nity know where they can get copies of the
study and other reference documents concern-
ing the site. Local information repositories,
such as libraries or other public buildings, are
established in cities and towns near each NPL
site to ensure that the public has an opportunity
to review all relevant information and the
proposed cleanup plans. Locations of informa-
tion repositories for each NPL site described in
this volume are given in Appendix B.
The public has a minimum of 30 days to
comment on the proposed cleanup plan after it
is published. These comments can be written
or given verbally at public meetings that the
EPA or the State are required to hold. Neither
the EPA nor the State can select the final
cleanup remedy without evaluating and provid-
ing written answers to specific community
comments and concerns. This "responsiveness
summary" is part of the 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
-------
SUPERFUND
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 technolo-
gies, are needed to clean up a single site.
If every cleanup action needs to be
tailored to a site, does the design
ofthe remedy need to be tailored,
too?
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 rem-
edy 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 six months to two 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 expected at the site,
special plans for environmental protection,
worker safety, regulatory compliance, and
equipment decontamination.
Once the design is completed,
how long does it take to actually
clean up the site, and how much
does it cost?
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 to decontami-
nate them, an action that takes limited time and
money. In most cases, however, a remedial
action may involve different and expensive
cleanup 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 de-
scribed in the ROD may need to be modified
because of new contaminant information
discovered or difficulties that were faced
during the early cleanup activities. Taking into
account these differences, each remedial
cleanup action takes an average of 18 months
to complete and ultimately costs an average of
$26 million to complete all necessary cleanup
actions at a site .
Once the cleanup action is
completed, is the site
automatically "deleted" from the
NPL?
No. The deletion of a site from the NPL is
anything but automatic. For example, cleanup
of contaminated groundwater may take up to
20 years or longer. Also, in some cases, long-
term monitoring of the remedy is required to
ensure that it is effective. After construction of
certain remedies, operation and maintenance
(e.g., maintenance of ground cover, groundwa-
ter monitoring, etc.), or continued pumping and
treating of groundwater may be required to
ensure that the remedy continues to prevent
future health hazards or environmental damage
and ultimately meets the cleanup goals speci-
fied in the ROD. Sites in this final monitoring
or operational stage of the cleanup process are
designated as "construction complete."
It's not until a site cleanup meets all the goals
and monitoring requirements of the selected
10
-------
SUPERFUND
remedy that the EPA can officially propose the
site for deletion from the NPL, and it's not
until public comments are taken into consid-
eration that a site actually can be deleted from
the NPL. All sites deleted from the NPL and
sites with completed construction are included
in the progress report found later in this book.
Can a site be taken off the NPL if
no cleanup has taken place?
Yes. But only if further site investigation
reveals that there are no threats present at the
site and that cleanup activities are not neces-
sary. In these cases, the EPA will select a "no
action" remedy and may move to delete the
site when monitoring confirms that the site
does not pose a threat to human health or the
environment.
In other cases, sites may be "removed" from
the NPL if new information concerning site
cleanup or threats show that the site does not
warrant Superfund activities.
A site may be removed if a revised HRS
scoring, based on updated information, results
in a score below the minimum for NPL sites.
A site also may be removed from the NPL by
transferring it to other appropriate Federal
cleanup authorities, such as RCRA, for further
cleanup actions.
Removing sites for technical reasons or trans-
ferring sites to other cleanup programs pre-
serves Superfund monies for the Nation's most
pressing hazardous waste problems where no
other cleanup authority is applicable.
Can the EPA make parties
responsible for the contamination
pay?
Yes. Based on the belief that "the polluters
should pay," after a site is placed on the NPL,
the EPA makes a thorough effort to identify
and find those responsible for causing con-
tamination problems at a site. Although the
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 the EPA and must
meet the same standards required for actions
financed through the Superfund.
Because these enforcement actions can be
lengthy, the 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 (CERCLA) for repaying the money the
EPA spends in cleaning up the site.
Whenever possible, the EPA and the Depart-
ment of Justice use their legal enforcement
authorities to require responsible parties to pay
for site cleanups, thereby preserving Superfund
resources for emergency actions and for sites
where no responsible parties can be identified.
11
-------
THE VOLUME
The site fact sheets presented in this
book are comprehensive summaries
that cover a broad range of information.
The fact sheets describe hazardous
waste sites on the NPL and their locations, as
well as the conditions leading to their listing
("Site Description"). The summaries list the
types of contaminants that have been discov-
ered and related threats to public and ecologi-
cal health ("Threats and Contaminants").
"Cleanup Approach" presents an overview of
the cleanup activities completed, underway, or
planned. The fact sheets conclude with a brief
synopsis of how much progress has been made
in protecting public health and the environ-
ment. The summaries also pinpoint other
actions, such as legal efforts to involve pollut-
ers responsible for site contamination and
community concerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
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. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities 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 clean-
How to Use
the State
Book
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary 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 the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to
know what the community can realistically
expect once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can 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 involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
13
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Dates when the site was
Proposed, made Final, and
Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially respon-
sible parties that are taking
responsibility for cleanup
actions at the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID* ABCOOOOOOO
EPA REGION XX
CONGRESSIONAL DIST XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
OUwrNMDM:
®
Site Responsibility: •
NPL Listing History
Flmh aaala.
Threats and Contaminants
Cleanup Approach
Response Action Status
©
Site 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.
14
-------
THE VOLUME
SITE DESCRIPTION
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes descrip-
tions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have con-
tributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
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 environ-
ments arising from the site contamination also are described.
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 often are 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 descrip-
tion.
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 the EPA to
achieve site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with
the site cleanup process are reported here.
15
-------
THE VOLUME
The "icons," or symbols, accompanying the text allow the reader to see at a glance which envi-
ronmental resources are affected and the status of cleanup activities at the site.
Icons in the Threats and
Contaminants Section
Contaminated Groundwater resources
in the Contaminated Groundwater in
the vicinity or underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used as a
drinking water source.)
Contaminated Surface Water and
Sediments on or near the site. (These
include lakes, ponds, streams, and
rivers.)
Contaminated Air in the vicinity of
the site. (Air pollution usually is
periodic and involves contaminated
dust particles or hazardous gas emis-
sions.)
Contaminated Soil and Sludges on or
near the site. (This contamination
category may include bulk or other
surface hazardous wastes found on the
site.)
Threatened or contaminated Environ-
mentally Sensitive Areas in the vicin-
ity of the site. (Examples include
wetlands and coastal areas or critical
habitats.)
Icons in the Response Action
Status Section
Initial Actions have been taken or are
underway to eliminate immediate
threats at the site.
Site Studies at the site to determine the
nature and extent of contamination are
planned or underway.
Remedy Selected indicates that site
investigations have been concluded,
and the EPA has selected a final
cleanup remedy for the site or part of
the site.
Remedy Design means that engineers
are preparing 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,
currently are underway.
Cleanup Complete shows that all
cleanup goals have been achieved for
the contaminated site or part of the
site.
Environmental Progress summa-
rizes the activities taken to date to
protect human health and to clean
up site contamination.
16
-------
NPL SITES
The State of
Florida
The State of Florida, located in the southeast comer of the United States within EPA Region 4,
covers 58,664 square miles consisting primarily of flat limestone pennisula. Florida experienced
a 33% increase in population between 1980 and 1990 and currently has approximately
12,938,000 residents, ranking 4th in U.S. populations. Principal state industries are services,
trade, government, manufacturing, tourism, agriculture, and commercial fishing. Florida prod-
ucts include electronic/electrical equipment, transportation equipment, and machinery for print-
ing and publishing.
How Many NPL Sites
Are in the State of Florida ?
Proposed
Final
Deleted
0
51
_2
54
Where Are the NPL Sites Located?
Congressional Districts 4,9,6 1 sites
Congressional Districts 5,11,12,15,19 2 sites
Congressional District 10,14,16,18 3 sites
Congressional District 2 4 sites
Congressional Distict 17 5 sites
Congressional District 1 6 sites
Congressional Districts 3,7 7 sites
What Type of Sites Are on the NPL
in the State of Florida?
# of sites
10
10
5
4
4
4
4
3
10
type of sites
Recyclers
Municipal & Industrial Landfills
Chemicals & Allied Products
Federal Facilities
Electroplating
Lumber & Wood Products
Metals & Allied Products
Petroleum Refining
Other (manufacturing, lithographs/silk
screening, electronics & electrical equipment)
17
April 1991
-------
NPL SITES
How Are Sites Contaminated and What Are the Principal* Chemicals?
50-
40-
30-
M
•s
20- -
10- •
1
&
m
GW Soil SW Seds Solid
Waste
Contamination Area
Air
Groundwater: Heavy metals (inor-
ganics) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs).
Soil and Solid Waste: Heavy metals
(inorganics), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), creosote (organics), and poly-
chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
Surface Water and Sediments:
Heavy metals (inorganics).
Air: Heavy metals (inorganics).
'Appear it 25% or more sitei
Where Are the Sites in the Superfund Cleanup Process?'
16
Sites
with I
Studies
Underway
5
Sites
with
Remedy
Selected
8
Sites
with
Remedy
Design
13
Sites
with
Cleanup
Ongoing
In addition to the activities described above, initial actions have been taken at 31 sites as interim
cleanup measures.
'Cleanup status reflects phases of site activities rather than administrative accomplishments.
April 1991
18
-------
THE NPL REPORT
The following Progress Report lists all
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 Super-
fund cleanup process are arrayed across the
top of the chart, and each site's progress
through these steps is represented by an arrow
(O) indicating the current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are 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 differ-
ent 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" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency cleanup or
initial action has been completed or currently
is underway. Emergency or initial actions are
taken as an interim measure to provide im-
mediate relief from exposure to hazardous site
conditions or to stabilize a site to prevent
further contamination.
• A final arrow in the "Site Studies"
category indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is ongoing.
• A final 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
Progress
To Date
Action" remedy is selected. In these cases, the
arrows are discontinued at the "Remedy
Selection" step and resume in the
"Construction Complete" category.
• A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently are
designing the technical specifications for the
selected cleanup remedies and technologies.
» A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions have
been started at the site and currently are
underway.
• A final 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 currently
may be undergoing long-term operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure that the
cleanup actions continue to protect human
health and the environment.
• A check in the "Deleted" category indicates
that the site cleanup has met all human health
and environmental goals and that the EPA has
deleted the site from the NPL.
Further information on the activities and
progress at each site is given in the site "Fact
Sheets" published in this volume.
19
April 1991
-------
I
a
ft
ftft
ft
ft
ft ftftftft
(Q
13
ftft
ft
ftftft ftftftft
o
O
4-*
(0
ftft
if ftftftft
0>
ft
in
*
55
a.
o
5l 1
2 tS
U-
15
a
3
C
c g
O cu Q
I
O
Q 05 O 03
o
•g
(5
.o
£
U)
o
I
Mi
I
I
u
8
s
51
ill
< *1 O ^ B M
IB 1 * « 8
-------
ft
fid
ft ft
ft ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft
ftftft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ftftftft ftftftft
ftftftft ft ftftft
ftftftftftftftftftftftftftft ftftftftftftft ftftft
1
ft ftftftftft ft
ftftftftft
•a-a-a-a-a-a-aj-a-a-a
.s .s .s .s .s .s .s 3 .s .s .s
888S8228SSS
21
April 1991
-------
I
3
^^ ^*
s I
1 11
tu E U.
llll
Q PQ pg Q
u §
« I
-------
THE NPL FACT SHEETS
Summary
of Site
Activities
EPA REGION 4
23
April 1991
-------
Who Do I Call with Questions?
The following pages describe each NPL site in Florida, providing specific
information on threats and contaminants, cleanup activities, and environmen-
tal progress. Should you have questions, please call the EPA's Region 4
Office in Atlanta, Georgia or one of the other offices listed below:
EPA Region 4 Superfund Community Relations Office (404) 347-3454
EPA Region 4 Superfund Office (404) 347-5065
EPA Superfund Hotline (800) 424-9346
EPA Headquarters Public Information Center (202) 260-2080
Florida Superfund Office (904) 488-0190
April 1991 24
-------
AGRICO CHEM
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980221857
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
2 miles southwest of
Pensacola Municipal Airport
The 30-acre Agrico Chemical Co. site is bordered on the north by undeveloped land that is used for
recreational purposes, on the east by interstate 110, on the south by Fairfield Drive, and on the west
by CSX Transportation tracks. Industrial activity on the site began in 1889, when a company started
producing sulfuric acid from iron pyrite. Around 1920, the American Agriculture Chemical
Company began making fertilizer from phosphate rock. The plant underwent numerous ownership
changes and its name was changed to Agrico. In 1975, Agrico stopped production, tore down the
buildings, and sold the land. All that remains on the site are the foundations of five buildings,
including a plant where phosphate was processed. Four ponds that were used to store liquid
manufacturing wastes lie to the north and east of the ruins. In 1958, a municipal water well 1 1/4
miles from the site was closed due to high acidity and fluoride concentrations. The primary aquifer
under the site is highly permeable, which facilitates the movement of contaminants into the
groundwater. Given the direction of the flow, any contamination could enter Bayou Texar or
Pensacola Bay. Thirteen county wells serving approximately 114,000 people lie within 3 miles of
the site. Few residents live in the immediate vicinity of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06724/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
IV
The groundwater, soil, and surface water are contaminated with lead and sulfuric acid.
There is a potential for the well water to become contaminated because of groundwater
migration, which would pose a threat to individuals who use the wells for their water
supply. However, residences in the immediate vicinity of the site are hooked up to a city
water supply.
25
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on water pollution at the
site.
Response Action Status
Water Pollution: Under EPA monitoring, the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination began an intensive study of site problems in 1989. This investigation will
determine the nature and extent of water pollution and will recommend the best strategies
for final cleanup. A draft report on the investigation is under review. Analysis of cleanup
alternatives is underway. A proposal to be submitted for public review is slated for completion in
late 1991.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined that
no immediate actions were needed at the Agrico Chemical Co. site since the contaminated well was
already closed. Further investigations into cleanup strategies are taking place and planned to be
completed in 1991.
April 1991 26 AGRICO CHEMICAL CO.
-------
AIRCO
PLATING CO.
FLORIDA
EPAID#FLD004145UO
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 18
Dade County
Miami
The 1 1/2-acrc Airco Plating Co. site has operated as an electroplating shop since 1957. Nickel,
cadmium, chromium, copper, and zinc plating are the chief processes. Before 1973, operators
disposed of plating wastes, including sludge, in three on-site seepage ponds. Since 1973, treated
wastes have been released to the Miami sewage system. Since 1982, workers have separated out the
sludges and shipped them to an EPA-approved hazardous waste facility. During a 1985
investigation, the EPA discovered that one of the former seepage ponds had been covered with
asphalt pavement and a lawn. Soil and groundwater near the ponds contained contaminants
associated with electroplating. The site lies over the recharge zone for the Biscayne Aquifer, which
supplies drinking water for all of Dade County. Four municipal well fields supplying water to
approximately 750,000 people are within 3 miles of the site. These wells are retrofitted with air
strippers, because of contamination from a variety of sources. The site is located in a primarily
industrial area about a mile north of the Miami International Airport. An estimated 6,500 people live
within a 1-mile radius of the site. The Miami Canal, which flows into the Miami River, is located
about 1/2 mile from the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Shallow groundwater in the areas of the ponds, surface and sub-surface soil near the
ponds, and the lawn area between the ponds are contaminated with heavy metals
including cadmium, chromium, copper, and nickel from former electroplating operations.
The individuals who are most at risk of contact with contaminated soils are workers
conducting cleanup activities at the site. People who use the groundwater in this area
could be exposed to heavy metals.
27
April 1991
-------
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: The parties potentially responsible for the contamination of the site began an
intensive study of soil and water contamination in 1989. This investigation will explore
the nature and extent of pollution of the soil and groundwater, and will recommend the best
strategies for final cleanup. It is slated for completion in 1993.
Site Facts: The site investigation was being performed by the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination under an order issued by Dade County. The EPA entered into a separate
agreement with the parties to complete site sampling and to evaluate cleanup technologies.
Environmental Progress
The EPA performed preliminary site investigations and determined that, with the air strippers on
municipal wells, there are no immediate threats at the Airco Plating Co. site while the potentially,
responsible parties complete further investigations leading to the selection of final cleanup activities.
April 1991 28 AIRCO PLATING CO.
-------
ALPHA CHEMIC
CORPORATION
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD041495441
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 10
Polk County
Kathleen, 3 miles north of Lakeland
Other Names:
Alpha Resins Corporation
The Alpha Resins Corporation (ARC), formerly known as Alpha Chemical Corporation, is a wholly-
owned subsidiary of the Alpha Corporation of Tennessee and has produced unsaturated polyester
resin for fiberglass manufacturers at this 32-acre site since 1967. The process yields wastewater
containing small amounts of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Under a State permit, the
company disposed of this waste in two unlined surface ponds (Pond #4 and #3-2), relying on natural
biological processes to break down the organics. In 1976, ARC began incinerating the wastewater
instead. Pond #4 dried up, and workers used the area as a solid waste landfill for a year, covering it
with soil in 1977. In 1977, Pond #3-2 was divided, and sludge waters were pumped from #2 to #3.
Pond #2 was lined with concrete to receive wastewater. No waste was discharged from Pond #2,
and this pond was covered with soil in 1988. In 1982, when ARC sought to line Pond #3 with
concrete for caustic wash water disposal, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulations
(FDER) requested groundwater monitoring information. New monitoring wells revealed
contamination of the surficial aquifer. Of the 23 organic compounds detected, ethyl benzene
occurred most often and in the highest concentrations. The area around the site is residential and
commercial. Approximately 650 people live within 1/2 mile of the site. Twenty feet of clay shield
the Floridian Aquifer from contaminated groundwater, this aquifer, which provides drinking water
for area residents, is not polluted. Surface water from the site drains into a vegetated, low-lying
wetland.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, sediments, and soil were found to be contaminated with VOCs, mainly
ethyl benzene and xylene from former process wastes. There is no health threat at this
time, since the surficial aquifer is not used for drinking water, and no contamination has
been detected in the deeper Floridian aquifer.
29
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The EPA selected a cleanup remedy for this site in 1988, which features
capping the small, unlined, Pond #3 to keep rainwater and runoff from spreading
contaminants and long-term monitoring of groundwater and surface water to assure the
effectiveness of cleanup. The parties potentially responsible for contamination at the site conducted
the engineering design and began cleanup activities in 1989. Construction of the cap was completed
later that year and sampling of the groundwater and surface water is ongoing. Monitoring of
groundwater and surface water samples will continue every 3 months, and have been showing a
decreasing trend in contamination.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was signed in 1989 by the State and the parties potentially
responsible for the contamination to clean up the site.
Environmental Progress
Cleanup activities are completed at the Alpha Chemical site and monitoring of groundwater and
surface water will continue to ensure the effectiveness of the remedy and safe conditions for nearby
residents and the environment. To date, monitoring has revealed decreasing levels of contamination
at the site as a result of the remedy implemented.
April 1991 30 ALPHA CHEMICAL CORPORATION
-------
AMERICAN
CREOSOTE WOR
(PENSACOLA PLAN
FLORIDA
EPA ID#FLD008161994
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
Pensacola
The 18-acre American Creosote Works, Inc. (Pensacola Plant) site is an inactive wood-treating
facility in Pensacola, located about 1/4 mile north of the confluence of Bayou Chico and Pensacola
Bay. It operated from the early 1900s until 1981, when the company filed for bankruptcy. Workers
treated poles with creosote before 1950, when they began using pentachlorophenol (PCP) with
increasing regularity. Operators discharged liquid process wastes into two unlined, 80,000-gallon
percolation ponds. Before 1970, these wastewaters were allowed to overflow through a spillway and
follow a drainage course into Bayou Chico and Pensacola Bay. Later, workers drew wastewaters off
the ponds periodically and discharged them into designated "spillage areas" on site. Additional
discharges occurred when heavy rainfall flooded the ponds, which then overflowed their dikes. The
site lies in a commercial and residential area. Withdrawal wells may serve as a conduit between the
shallow and deeper aquifer. No drinking water wells lie within the area of known contamination.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Major contaminants in the soil and groundwater are volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), PCP, and dioxin from the former wood-
treating processes. PAHs also were found in one sample of sediments from the drainage
ditch. Additional bay and biota sampling are needed to assess the impact on organisms
living in the bay sediments. The most significant transport route for contaminants is by
groundwater from the sludge lagoons to Pensacola Bay. Minor exposure routes for
people include inhaling dust on the site and accidentally ingesting or coming into direct
contact with contaminated soils.
31
April! 991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: emergency actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on soil cleanup and groundwater, sludge, and underlying soils cleanup.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: The EPA undertook several emergency actions at this site. In
1983, workers drained, treated, and discharged contaminated water in the on-site ponds,
solidifying the remaining sludge and temporarily capping this solidified material with a
layer of clay to keep rainfall and runoff from spreading contaminants. In 1984, the drums on the site
were staged and a fence was built around them. In 1985 and 1986, the cap was repaired and workers
installed a fence around the capped area.
Surface Cleanup: The EPA's remedies for soil cleanup include: (1) excavating,
screening, and stockpiling the contaminated surface soil; (2) treating the contamination
with slurry bioremediation; (3) replacing the excavated and treated soils on site; (4)
removing debris; (5) repairing the fence; (6) properly disposing of drilling muds; and (7) repairing
the existing clay cap. The EPA began the engineering design for soil biotreatment in 1989. The
design of the treatment is scheduled for completion in late 1991. Treatment of the contaminated
soils is expected to begin in 1992. Other cleanup activities including repair of the cap, disposal of
drilling muds, and fence repair are underway and scheduled for completion in mid-1991.
Groundwater, Solidified Sludges, and Underlying Subsurface Soils: Selection
of remedies for this phase is scheduled for 1991. Cleanup will begin following completion
of the engineering design of the selected remedies.
Environmental Progress
The soil excavations, capping, the installation of a fence, and other emergency actions performed by
the EPA have reduced the potential for exposure to contaminants at the American Creosote Works,
Inc. (Pensacola Plant) site while further investigations and soil cleanup remedies are being
completed.
April 1991 32 AMERICAN CREOSOTE WORKS, INC.
M (PENSACOLA PLANT)
-------
ANACONDA
ALUMINUM C
MILGO
ELECTRONIC
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD020536538
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 17
Dade County
Miami
Other Names:
Anaconda Aluminum
Applied Technologies and Engineering
Milgo Electronics Corporation
Site Description
The Anaconda Aluminum Co./Milgo Electronics Corp. site is composed of two facilities located
directly across the street from each other and covers 1 1/2 acres. The two facilities are Anaconda
Aluminum and Milgo Electronics; the Anaconda portion of the site covers approximately 1 acre.
Operations began in 1957 and consisted of an electrochemical process using acids and an aluminum-
laden caustic base to produce a film of protective coating on aluminum. Raw materials used in the
process included sulfuric acid, sodium hydroxide, caustic soda, detergents, and dyes. Waste
anodizing sludge was pumped to a cement neutralizing pit where sulfuric acid or caustic soda was
added to balance the pH levels. Air was used for mixing, and then solids were left to settle on the
bottom. The clear liquid was pumped to a soakage pit for disposal to the groundwater. The sludge
subsequently was disposed of at the County dump. The soakage pit had a holding capacity of
approximately 1,900 gallons and was licensed by the County. In 1979, the County required
Anaconda to install a groundwater monitoring well southeast of the pit. Anaconda ceased operations
in early 1983. Operations began at the Milgo portion of the site in 1961 and consisted of chrome,
nickel, and copper electroplating of data processing equipment and the manufacturing of cabinets for
electronic components. A chrome reduction treatment system discharged treated wastewater to a
360-square-foot drainfield on the premises. The system was designed to treat an average daily flow
of 7,200 gallons. Samples collected from the effluent in 1973 by the County contained iron,
chromium, zinc, and lead. Approximately 1,200 gallons of sludge generated yearly by the treatment
system were removed by tanker truck and hauled off site. Operations at Milgo ceased in summer
1984. Both companies disposed of liquid wastes via on-site drainfields. Sampling conducted in
1987 indicated heavy metal contamination in the groundwater. The contaminated groundwater
reaches the Biscayne Aquifer, the source of drinking water for approximately 750,000 residents of
the Miami area. The site is located in an industrialized area northeast of Miami International
Airport.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and State
actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 11/14/89
Final Date: 08/30/90
33
April 1991
-------
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater contains cyanide and heavy metals such as cadmium, lead, zinc, iron,
selenium, chromium, and copper from the former manufacturing and process waste
disposal practices. Sediment, surface water, and soils contain heavy metals such as
mercury, selenium, and arsenic. There is a potential health threat if people come into
direct contact with the contaminated groundwater, soil, sediments, or surface water.
However, sampling has indicated there are no immediate human health threats from this
site.
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: The EPA conducted an initial investigation of the site in 1989 and
determined that the site does not appear to pose an immediate threat to public health or the
environment. However, the EPA is planning to conduct a thorough investigation to
explore the nature and extent of contamination in 1992.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Anaconda Aluminum Co./Milgro Electronics Corp. site to the NPL, the EPA
determined that the site does not pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment while
further investigations are being planned.
ApriM991 34 ANACONDA ALUMINUM C07
MILGO ELECTRONICS CORP.
-------
ANODYNE, INC.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD981014368
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 17
Dade County
Sunshine State Industrial Park
in North Miami Beach
Site Description
The Anodyne, Inc. site is a building in North Miami Beach that covers less than an acre. The
building periodically is leased to various service-oriented businesses. From the early 1960s until
1975, however, Anodyne, Inc. produced lithographs and silkscreen prints on the site. Workers
reportedly disposed of wastes in an injection well near the building as early as 1960. In a 1973
inspection, Dade County discovered that the waste also was being dumped directly onto the ground.
Groundwater contamination was discovered in 1986 as a result of an EPA inspection of the site. The
Biscayne Aquifer, which supplies drinking water for all of Dade County, is directly beneath the site.
The site is located in an industrial park. The W.A. Oeffler and Westside well fields are within 3
miles of the site; they provide drinking water to approximately 148,000 people.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Samples indicated elevated levels of several heavy metals from former site operations in
the shallow on-site groundwater. Relatively low concentrations of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) were also detected in a groundwater sample. On-site soil samples
contained elevated levels of several heavy metals and VOCs. People may be at risk by
coming into direct contact with or accidentally ingesting contaminated soil or
groundwater.
35
April 1991
-------
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: One of the parties potentially responsible for contamination at this site began
a study to define the extent of contamination and to determine possible cleanup methods in
1990. This study will determine the nature and extent of soil and groundwater pollution
and will recommend the best cleanup alternatives. It is slated for completion in 1992.
Site Facts: The EPA started meeting with the parties potentially responsible for the contamination
of the site in 1989 to discuss funding for the cleanup. 745 Property Investments, one of the
potentially responsible parties, signed an Administrative Order on Consent in 1990 to conduct a
study of the nature and extent of contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Anodyne, Inc. site to the NPL, the EPA determined that the site does not currently
pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment while the studies into permanent
cleanup strategies are underway.
April 1991 36 ANODYNE. INC.
-------
B & B CHEMICAL
COMPANY, INC.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004574190
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 17
Dade County
Hialeah
The B & B Chemical Company, Inc. has manufactured industrial cleaning compounds on this 2-acre
site in Hialeah since 1962. The company prepares its products in mixing vats, which, along with the
company's tank trucks, are washed down once a year. Before 1976, the wash water was put into
unlined lagoons. Since then, the company has run it through a treatment system before discharging
it to the Hialeah sewers. Officials have been concerned about the impact of the lagoons on
groundwater quality since 1975. The underlying Biscayne Aquifer supplies drinking water for all of
Dade County. This site is in a highly industrialized area. Four public well fields are within 3 miles
of the site and serve approximately 750,000 people. One well is within 3,000 feet of the site.
Production from the well fields has been curtailed due to groundwater contamination. The Miami
Canal is 800 feet to the southwest of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 08/3(V90
Threats and Contaminants
In 1985, the EPA found volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including chlorobenzenes
and dichloroethylene from former manufacturing operations in monitoring wells on and
off the site; they also found chromium in on-site wells. Health threats include drinking or
coming into direct contact with polluted groundwater.
37
ApriM991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in an initial action and a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: B & B Chemical Company, under an agreement with Dade County,
operated the groundwater recovery and treatment system at the site until July 1989, when
they unilaterally stopped recovery of the groundwater. Groundwater recovery was
restarted in November 1989.
Entire Site: More information on the extent of contamination from the site is needed
before the EPA can select a cleanup remedy. The EPA is conducting an investigation,
which started in 1989, that will determine the nature and extent of groundwater
contamination. The study is slated for completion in 1992.
Environmental Progress
The earlier groundwater treatment performed by the potentially responsible parties and the shut-
down of affected wells have reduced the potential for exposure to contaminants from the B&B
Chemical Company, Inc. site while investigations are taking place.
April 1991 38 B&B CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC.
-------
BEULAH LAN
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980494660
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
Pensacola
The 80-acre Beulah Landfill site was operated by Escambia County from 1950 to 1984. Its northern
and southern sections were run independently. The northern landfill, used from 1950 to 1960,
accepted mostly municipal trash. The southern sludge disposal pit began receiving domestic septic
tank wastes in 1968 and continued to take municipal trash, industrial waste, demolition debris, and
municipal sludges until 1984, when the State ordered a halt to operations at the pit. From 1980 to
1986, the landfill operated under State order, accepting only specified wastes. Several residences
within 3 miles of the landfill draw drinking water from the upper 150 feet of the local sand and
gravel aquifer. The nearest well is 700 feet from the site. Eleven Mile Creek, at the downstream
edge of the site, is used for recreational activities.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
II
EPA tests showed that wastes on the site contain anthracene, naphthalene, fluoranthene,
pyrene, pentachlorophenol (PCP), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and zinc. The
groundwater and surface water also are contaminated with zinc. People trespassing on
the site could be exposed to contaminants in the wastes. People ingesting contaminated
groundwater may be at risk.
39
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on soil and groundwater
cleanup at the site.
Response Action Status
Soil and Groundwater: The EPA will undertake an intensive study of soil and
groundwater contamination at the site in 1991. This investigation also will recommend the
best strategies for final cleanup. It is slated for completion in 1993. Once the
investigation is completed, a final selection of a remedy will be made.
Site Facts: From 1980 to 1986, the landfill operated under a Consent Order with the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) to accept only specified wastes.
Environmental Progress
After proposing this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined
that there were no immediate actions needed at the Beulah Landfill site while investigations into
cleanup strategies are taking place.
April 1991 40 BEULAH LANDFILL
-------
BMI-TEXTRON
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD052172954
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 12
Palm Beach County
Lake Park
Other Names:
Bask Microelectronics, Inc.
From 1969 until 1986, operators of the 3 1/2-acre BMI-Textron facility made chrome-backed glass
plates used in producing electronic components. Workers used cyanide to etch the glass. The
facility discharged liquid wastes to percolation ponds and drain fields for four years under an
industrial wastewater permit issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
(FDER). Four wells at the facility monitored compliance with the terms of the permit. In 1983,
operators received a Notice of Violation from the State, and subsequently reported that the site's soil
and groundwater were contaminated with cyanide. Two municipal water systems draw from wells
within 3 miles of the site. They serve approximately 106,000 people in Lake Park, Riviera Beach,
North Palm Beach, Palm Beach Shores, and Palm Beach Gardens.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
IV
The groundwater and soil are contaminated with cyanide and fluoride from former
production processes. Shallow groundwater also is contaminated with barium,
chromium, and nitrates. Contaminated groundwater used for a water supply source on
the site poses potential health threats or could enter downgradient wells. A fence
surrounding the site limits threats from exposure through direct contact or inhalation of
the contaminated dust.
41
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on soil and groundwater contamination.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Under State order, the owner removed about 680 cubic yards of
cyanide-contaminated soil and transported it to an EPA-approved hazardous waste facility
in 1984. In 1986, the EPA discovered cyanide and fluoride in on-site groundwater and
soil. In 1986, again under State order, the owner agreed to develop a plan to clean up contaminated
groundwater. Approximately 200 cubic yards of contaminated soils were removed from the landfill.
In addition, a third area was capped with asphalt. A fence was installed to restrict access to the site.
Soil and Groundwater: Under EPA monitoring, the owner will undertake an intensive
study of the nature and extent of soil and groundwater contamination at the site. This
investigation also will recommend the best alternatives for final cleanup. It is slated to
start in 1992 and conclude in 1994.
Site Facts: In 1984, BMI and the State of Florida entered into an agreement requiring the company
to remove contaminated soils at the site and to submit a detailed monitoring program for determining
the nature and extent of groundwater contamination at the site. BMI agreed to comply with another
State Consent Order in 1986 to develop a plan to clean up contaminated groundwater. In response,
the company implemented an Interim Remedial Action Plan (IRAP), a Containment Assessment
Plan (CAP), and a Soil Removal Plan. An evaluation of potential risks to human health was
completed. As a result, contaminated soils were removed from the landfill, and another area of
contaminated soil was capped with asphalt. Employees notified officials in 1988 of concerns about
the water safety.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soils and capping of other areas have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to hazardous materials at the BMI-Textron site. Approximately 900 cubic yards of
contaminated soil have been removed, and a fence was installed to restrict access to the site. These
actions have protected the public health and the environment while investigations are being
conducted and cleanup activities are being planned.
April 1991 42 BMI-TEXTRON
-------
BROWN WOOD
PRESERVING
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980728935
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Suwannee County
2 miles west of Live Oak
Other Names:
LJv* Oak Parry
South Georgia Railway/Wood Plant
From 1946 until 1978, the Brown Wood Preserving site was operated as a wood-treatment facility on
this 55-acre site in Live Oak. Several different companies ran the facility over its 30-year lifespan;
the plant burned and was rebuilt in 1974. Operators used creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) in
pressure treatment processes and discharged wastewater into an open ditch, where it flowed into a 5-
acre unlined impoundment. A 3-acre upgradient lagoon contained 3,000 cubic yards of creosote
materials. The area surrounding the site is rural and light agricultural. Homes, businesses, light
industry, a trailer park, a private airport, and a County storage yard are all located within 1/2 mile of
the site. The trailer park houses approximately 450 residents. Sinkholes and public and private
wells lie within 2 miles of the site, but the aquifer is not currently threatened, because contamination
has not reached it.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
\
Testing during cleanup studies in 1985 and 1986 showed soils in the disposal lagoon and
drainage ditch to be contaminated with carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) from the wood-treatment processes. Sediments in the disposal lagoon and
drainage ditch also were found to be contaminated with PAHs. Direct contact with or
accidental ingestion of contaminated soil or dust could endanger human health.
43
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Initial actions were performed at the site in 1988. Activities
included: (1) treatment and discharge of approximately 200,000 gallons of lagoon and pit
water; (2) demolition, salvage, and removal of facilities and process equipment on site; (3)
excavation and solidification of 15,000 tons of contaminated sludges; and (4) backfilling of the retort
pit. These actions reduced the levels of contaminants in the soil. The site was fenced, and warning
signs were posted in 1988.
Entire Site: The EPA selected the following cleanup remedy for the site: (1) removing
the lagoon water, treating it (if necessary) and discharging it to a sewage treatment plant;
(2) excavating and treating the most severely contaminated soil and sludge and disposing
of it off site; (3) breaking down contaminants in the remaining soils biologically in a 14-acre
treatment area constructed with a liner and an internal drainage and spray irrigation system; (4)
covering this treatment area with clean fill after it served its purpose; and (5) monitoring
groundwater and the biological cleanup system for three years. The parties potentially responsible
for site contamination finished the cleanup actions outlined in the remedy to the EPA's satisfaction
in 1989. In conducting the cleanup activities, workers also: (1) cleared 6 acres; (2) removed an
abandoned railroad track; (3) installed a clay liner, (4) built containment berms around the perimeter;
(5) installed a treatment area surface drainage network and run-on drainage swales; (6) shaped the
runoff retention road; (7) placed contaminated soil in the treatment and stockpile area; and (8)
installed an irrigation system. Operation and maintenance will consist of quarterly sampling of the
biologically degraded soils and groundwater for three more years.
Site Facts: The Consent Decree between the EPA and the parties responsible for the
contamination was entered into on October 24,1988 for performance of the engineering design and
actual cleanup activities, as well as the operations and maintenance functions for the site. Under
EPA monitoring, the parties responsible for site contamination have finished cleaning up the site.
Environmental Progress
The Brown Wood Preserving site has been cleaned up and meets all Federal and State standards.
The site will be monitored for three additional years to ensure that the cleanup methods are effective
and continue to protect human health and the environment, at which time the site will be deleted
from the NPL.
April 1991 44 BROWN WOOD PRESERVING
-------
CABOT/KOPPEfS
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980709356
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 10
Alachua County
Gainesville
Other Name*:
K-MartSito
Cabot Carbon
Site Description
The Cabot/Koppers site covers 170 acres bridging two properties in Gainesville, near the intersection
of N. 23rd Avenue and N. Main Street. Koppers, a wood-treating operation, owns the western part
of the site and still operates on 82 acres of the site. Cabot Carbon formerly operated on the eastern
portion of the site, on its own 49 acres, making naval stores and charcoal from pine stumps.
Koppers preserves wood utility poles and timbers using creosote and chromated copper arsenate.
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) was used in the past. Koppers currently recycles its process wastes and
disposes of residues in an environmentally sound manner. The contamination on the site may be
attributable to the past use of wastewater holding ponds. The old pond areas since have been filled
with clean dirt and now are used as wood storage areas. During the years that Cabot Carbon
operated (1945-1965), the plant generated about 6,000 gallons of crude wood oil and pitch each day.
Workers discharged process wastewater containing pine tar into unlined surface impoundments. A
local developer purchased the land in 1966 and drained the contaminated ponds into a nearby
wetland and into Hogtown Creek. The land was sold again in 1977 to a different developer, who
began building a shopping complex. Construction workers mixed the remaining pine tar sludges
from the pond areas into the topsoil and built an unlined stormwater retention pond over the old
contamination site. Citizens soon noticed a dark-stained, foul-smelling liquid seeping into an
uncovered drainage ditch along N. Main Street. Gainesville's population is 151,300, and about 2/3
of the city is drained by Hogtown Creek. Approximately 2,000 people live within a 1/2-mile radius
of the site, and there are 11 schools within a 1-mile radius of 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: 09/24/84
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater is contaminated with arsenic; groundwater near the land surface contains
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and creosote compounds from the former process
waste disposal practices. The soil also is contaminated with creosote products; however,
contaminants were below levels that would pose adverse health effects. A trailer park
lies next to the contaminated ditch, and children play in that area. People coming into
direct contact with contaminated groundwater may be at risk. Nearby wetlands also may
be affected by contaminants from the site.
45
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The initial actions provide for the collection of up to 150,000 gallons of
leachate per day from the N. Main Street ditch. This water is pumped by the State from a
lift station on the ditch to the Kanapha Sewage Treatment Plant for treatment Water
quality data indicate that the leachate collection and removal system has been effective in
significantly removing contamination from Hogtown Geek.
Entire Site: The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) began an
intensive study of soil and groundwater contamination at the site in 1984. In 1987, when
the FDER ran out of funds, the EPA entered into a Consent Order with the parties
potentially responsible for the site contamination to conduct an investigation of the site. The
selected cleanup strategy includes soil washing and solidification, with other source soils undergoing
in-situ biotreatment. Groundwater will be pumped, treated, and discharged to a publicly owned
treatment works.
Site Facts: The FDER requested civil penalties, injunctive relief, and cost recovery in its 1983
complaint against Cabot Corporation, but the court struck all motions except cost recovery in 1984.
The parties potentially responsible, Beazer Materials & Services (formerly Koppers) and Cabot
Corporation, are working under a Consent Order and have completed site studies of the
contamination and evaluated cleanup options. There is much public concern about the extent of
contamination, public exposure, and present and future development of the site and surrounding
property.
Environmental Progress
The leachate pumping system operated by the State has been effective in removing much of the
contamination from Hogtown Creek and the N. Main Street ditch, thereby reducing the potential for
exposure to hazardous materials for the surrounding population while final cleanup strategies are
being planned at the Cabot/Koppers site.
Aprill 991 46 CABOT/KOPPERS
-------
CECIL FIELD
NAVAL AIR STAX
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD517002244
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
12 miles southwest of
downtown Jacksonville
> three
The Cecil Field Naval Air Station (NAS) site is divided into
the Yellow Water Weapons Department, and the Whitehouse
support of the base mission includes fuel storage and transportation
maintenance and repair of aircraft and engines. Maintenance
variety of materials that were disposed of on the facility. These
construction activities; municipal solid waste and municipal wa
miscellaneous industrial wastes including waste oils or solvents
disposal practices are surveyed regularly for conformance with
Approximately 3,500 people live on base and 2,200 people live
Water is supplied to base residents from wells that tap the Floridian
receive water from private wells that tap into the secondary
the base contains wetlands, rivers, streams, and agricultural
downstream of Cecil Field NAS waste sites are classified by th
Environmental Regulation (FDER) as Class III waters, which
for the propagation and management of fish and wildlife. Lake
sport fishing, and a recreational complex has been developed along
areas: NAS Cecil Field (proper),
Cjutlying Landing Field. Work in
systems and intermediate
activities over the years generated a
include: materials resulting from
wastewater treatment plant sludge; and
, paints, and spilled fuels. Current
local, State, and Federal regulations.
within a 1-mile radius of the base.
Aquifer. Off-base residents
aquifer. The area surrounding
. All surface waters within 3 miles
Florida Department of
suitable for recreational use and
Fretwell is stocked with bass for
its northeastern shore.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
Threats and Contaminants
artesian;
land
are
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
On-site groundwater near seven of the sources of contamination has been found to have
concentrations of heavy metals, solvents, paint wastes, and trichloroethylene (TCE) from
former waste disposal practices. Solvents have been identified in surface and subsurface
soils near the known sources of contamination. Sediments from Rowell Creek, which is
dammed to form Lake Fretwell, contain methylene chloride and heavy metals. Shallow
groundwater is used for irrigation and firefighting. The potential exists for on-site
contaminants to migrate into the groundwater in both aquifers and into off-base private
wells. If contaminated groundwater should move off site, local residents also could be
exposed to contaminants that have bioaccumulated in produce or aquatic life. Surface
water located on the site that has shown contamination includes: Yellow Water Creek and
its tributaries, Caldwell Branch, Sal Taylor Creek, Rowell Creek, and Lake Fretwell.
47
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in eight long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of various areas
of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The Navy has submitted work plans for site studies to the EPA; others are
expected in 1991. The Navy plans to further investigate the potential sources of
contamination and the migration of hazardous contaminants at the base landfills, oil/sludge
disposal areas, fire fighting training areas, rubble disposal area, ordnance disposal area, pesticide
disposal area and the seepage pit. Upon completion of these investigations, the Navy will begin
cleanup activities.
Site Facts: The Cecil Field NAS is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a
specially funded program established by the Department of Defense (DoD) in 1978 to identify,
investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DoD facilities.
Environmental Progress
After proposing the Cecil Field NAS site to the NPL, the EPA conducted studies that determined no
immediate risks to public health or the environment presently exist while studies into cleanup
technologies are being conducted by the Navy.
April 1991 48 CECIL FIELD NAVAL AIR STATION
-------
CHEMFORM, I
FLORIDA
EPAID#FLD080174402
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 14
Broward County
Pompano Beach
Jet engine parts were manufactured at the 4-acre Chemform, Inc. site from 1962 to 1985. The
operations included the manufacturing of a high-tech drilling machine, which involved the use of
acids. In 1977, the Broward County Pollution Control Board found the company in violation of
regulations for the discharge of industrial wastes onto the ground. In 1985, the EPA found the soil
and groundwater to be contaminated with heavy metals and other contaminants. The Biscayne ,
Aquifer is underneath the site and supplies all municipal water to Broward County. Four municipal
wells are located within 3 miles of the site and serve approximately 93,000 people.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and soil are contaminated with heavy metals including chromium,
nickel, and copper from former manufacturing processes. People who are exposed to
contaminated groundwater or soil through accidentally ingesting or coming in direct
contact with them may be at risk. Numerous cavities in the limestone underlying the site
facilitate movement of contaminants into the groundwater.
49
April 1991
-------
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 1990, removal of several drums took place. Additional actions
to remove soils may occur if sampling data currently being reviewed show leachate
contamination from the drums.
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination are conducting a
study to determine the type and extent of soil and groundwater contamination. Once the
study is completed, planned for in 1991, alternatives for the cleanup will be recommended.
Site Facts: In 1989, the EPA and the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination
signed an Administrative Order, requiring them to conduct a study of the site. Chem-Form, Inc. is
adjacent to Wilson Concepts of Florida, which also is on the NPL.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined that
immediate actions were needed at the Chemform, Inc. site while further investigations are continued.
The removal of drums from the site and the sampling and analysis of soils to evaluate the short-term
threat to groundwater were conducted in 1990.
April 1991 50 CHEMFORM, INC.
-------
<£
CITY INDUSTRIES, I
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD055945653
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Orange County
Winter Park
Other Names:
Chy Chemical
Site Description
The City Industries, Inc. site operated from 1971 to 1983 on a 1-acre parcel of land and was involved
in the receipt, handling, storage, reclamation, and disposal of a wide variety of waste chemicals
including solvents, paint/varnish wastes, plating wastes, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and inks.
The company abandoned the site in 1983, informing the State that it lacked the resources to continue
operations and leaving approximately 1,200 drums and 12,000 gallons of unknown liquids and
sludges in large tanks. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were found in the shallow aquifer
beneath the site. Approximately 120,000 people live within 3 miles of the site. The nearest
residence is a mile away from the site. Within 3 miles of the site are schools, nursing homes, and
hospitals. Municipal wells are located 1/4 mile upgradient of the site in the deeper Floridian aquifer.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and surface water are contaminated with VOCs from former waste
disposal practices. The soils were contaminated with VOCs, phthalates, and various
heavy metals. People who come in direct contact with or drink contaminated surface
water or groundwater may be at risk, although the groundwater is not now used for
drinking water. The shallow aquifer beneath the site is contaminated, and the
contaminant plume could migrate to the Floridian aquifer. The risk posed by the
contaminated soil has been reduced as a result of soil removal activity.
51
April 1991
-------
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 State crushed and removed 41 tons of drums and
disposed of 65 truck and tanker loads of contaminants at an EPA-approved facility. In
1984, the EPA emptied, cut open, and cleaned the holding tanks. Approximately 1,700
tons of contaminated soil were incinerated to remove the contaminants. The treated soil remains on
the site.
Entire Site: The EPA has selected a remedy that includes treating the extracted
groundwater by aeration, filtration, precipitation, carbon adsorption, and possibly,
biological treatment, followed by surface water discharge. The EPA began designing the
cleanup in 1990.
Site Facts: In 1984, the EPA issued an Administrative Order to City Industries requiring cleanup
of the site; the company ignored the Order. Also in 1984, the State filed a civil complaint against the
land owner, operator, and four companies associated with the operator. The EPA completed
negotiations with the potentially responsible parties to fund the activities necessary for cleaning up
the site.
Environmental Progress
The removal of solid waste and treatment of soil have eliminated all direct contact threats from
hazardous materials at the City Industries, Inc. site while cleanup activities are being planned.
April 1991 52 CITY INDUSTRIES, INC.
-------
COLEMAN-EVA
WOOD PRESERVI
CO.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD991279894
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
Whitehouse,
8 miles west of Jacksonville
The Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving Company site is a former wood-preserving facility located in
a residential and light industrial area of Whitehouse. The site covers 11 acres and consists of two
distinct areas: the western portion, which contained a wood treating facility, and the eastern portion,
which consisted of a landfill and had been used to dispose of wood chips and other wastes. Since
1954, Coleman-Evans produced wood products that contained pentachlorophenol (PCP). Wastes
from this process were discharged into an on-site drainage ditch and into two unlined sludge disposal
pits. Contamination was discovered in the groundwater in the area in 1980. As a result, the facility
constructed a waste water treatment system to clean the groundwater. Approximately 1,000 people
reside within a 1-mile radius of the site. This heavily populated residential area is not connected to a
municipal water supply; therefore, the area residents depend on private wells for their drinking
water. There are approximately 180 wells within a 1-mile radius of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
7TV
Shallow groundwater in the residential area adjacent to the site is contaminated with PCP,
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including phenol and toluene, and heavy metals
including chromium and lead from former process wastes. Sediments are contaminated
with PCP, and the soil is contaminated with heavy metals, PCP, oil, and grease. Area
residents are at risk if direct contact is made with contaminated soil or if contaminated
groundwater from the shallow aquifer is accidentally ingested.
53
Aprill 991
-------
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: The soils in the on-site waste pits were sampled, excavated, and
disposed. The water and oil that have been filtering into the excavated pits were sampled
and treated, and the pit was backfilled to the original grade with clean fill dirt.
Entire Site: The soils and sediments in which the POP levels exceed human health
standards will be treated by excavation, soil washing, biotreatment, and solidification/
stabilization. The soil that is not contaminated with PCP will be backfilled on site.
Groundwater recovery will be performed during the dewatering process. Recovered groundwater
will be stored and analyzed. If the PCP levels exceed the determined amount, groundwater will be
treated on site by carbon adsorption before being discharged to the surface water by way of the on-
site drainage ditch. Design of these technologies began in 1990 and is planned to be completed in
1992.
Site Facts: On October IS, 1984, the State of Florida issued an Administrative Consent Order to
Coleman-Evans Wood Co. to clean up the site. In 1980, complaints of taste and odor problems in
nearby private water wells led to investigations by State and local officials.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soils has reduced the potential for exposure to contaminated materials
at the Coleman-Evans Wood Preservation Co. site while permanent cleanup activities are being
designed.
April 1991 54 COLEMAN-EVANS WOOD PRESERVING CO.
-------
DAVIE LANDFI
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980602288
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 16
Broward County
10 miles southwest of Fort Lauderdale
Other Names:
Broward County Solid Waste
Disposal Facility
The Davie Landfill site, consisting of an 80-acre trash landfill, a 30-acre sanitary landfill, and a 10-
acre sludge lagoon near the intersection of Orange Drive and Boy Scout Road, began operation in
1964, accepting trash and ash from the County's adjacent garbage incinerator. LandfilUng activities
ceased in 1987, when the facility reached its design capacity. The solid waste landfill was used to
dispose of the municipal solid waste being burned at the on-site incinerator. Construction debris,
tires, and other wastes that could not be incinerated also were placed in the solid waste landfill. The
sludge lagoon was constructed in 1971 in an unlined natural depression on site to accept grease trap
pump-outs and septic tank and treated municipal sludges. The lagoon overflowed on several
occasions, resulting in surface water discharges to an adjacent borrow pit. The sludge lagoon was
closed in 1981. The incinerator was closed in 1975, because the excessive participate emissions
failed to meet new air regulations. The sanitary landfill was opened to replace the closed incinerator.
Dairy farms, ranches, and horse stables are located in the vicinity of the site. Approximately 50
homes are located to the south of the site; the nearest residence is 1/2 mile away. There are five
wells within 500 feet of the site and 21 within 1/4 mile. All municipal water supplies in the area
receive water drawn from the Biscayne Aquifer. The aquifer is the sole source of potable water for
about 10,000 residents in the area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
County actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and the water in the borrow pits on site and downgradient of the site
show elevated levels of sulfate, chloride, lead, and ammonia. Benzene, vinyl chloride,
and other compounds have been detected in monitoring wells and private wells south of
the landfill. Sludge from the lagoon was found to contain cyanide and sulfides. Potential
health threats include accidental ingestion, inhalation, and direct contact with
contaminated soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediments. The site is fenced, and
access to the site is restricted.
55
April 1991
-------
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: The State required the County to provide service connections to the
municipal water supply system for each affected residence near the site. The County
offered affected residents bottled water until the water lines were functional. The alternate
water supply now is in place. Cleanup technologies chosen to address sludge lagoon contamination
include dewatering and stabilization of the sludge lagoon contents, placement of treated sludge
lagoon contents in a lined sanitary landfill cell, and installation of an approved cover on the cell.
The County initiated site construction on the sludge lagoon in 1989, and cleanup activities are
completed. Studies are continuing, to determine whether the actions taken were sufficient to clean
up the groundwater.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply and completion of the cleanup activities have reduced the
danger of exposure to contamination while the County and the EPA are conducting further studies
into the effectiveness of the cleanup technologies at the Davie Landfill site.
April 1991
56
DAVIE LANDFILL
-------
DUBOSE OIL \
PRODUCTS CO
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD000833368
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
Cantonment, 10 miles north of Pensacola
The 20-acre Dubose Oil Products site consists of a process facility and three bermed ponds. The site
was an oil recovery facility that operated from 1979 through 1981. Waste materials handled on the
site included waste oils, petroleum refining waste, wood-treatment process waste, spent solvents,
spent "pickle liquors," and various paint wastes. These materials initially came to the site in bulk
tanker trailers and drums and then were stored in a treatment tank prior to processing. Spent solvent
and process wastes from petroleum refining and wood treatment operations were transported to the
facility in 55-gallon drums. Analysis of samples taken from the site indicated the presence of
numerous volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The site ceased operations in 1982. Dubose sold
some drums and crushed, stacked, and then buried a number of these drums on the site. This is a
rural residential area with some agricultural and forest land nearby. Approximately 2,400 people
live within 3 miles. The nearest residents live adjacent to the site. A low-lying area that forms the
headwaters of Jack Branch, a tributary of the Perdido River, is located along the northern edge of the
site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and soils are contaminated with low levels of VOCs and heavy metals
including manganese, iron, and aluminum from former process wastes. Iron naturally
occurs in the water in the area. Residents in the immediate area are provided with city
water supplies, which are not threatened by contaminated groundwater. However, in the
future, contaminants could leach into the groundwater, which could then migrate to a
nearby sand and gravel aquifer that is the source of drinking water in the area.
57
April 1991
-------
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 1984 and 1985, the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER) excavated 40,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and placed it in a
lined vault on site to prevent further contamination of the groundwater. Contaminated
leachate from the vault is being treated and discharged into the North Pond.
Entire Site: In 1990, the EPA selected a final remedy for site cleanup, which includes:
excavation and bioremediation of contaminated soils, drainage and filling of the on-site
ponds, placement of a topsoil layer over the ravine and former pond area followed by
grading and vegetation, installation of surface water runoff controls, groundwater monitoring, and
deed restrictions to prevent inappropriate future use of the site. The engineering design of the
cleanup remedy is expected to begin in 1991.
Site Facts: The State and the parties potentially responsible for site contamination signed a
Consent Decree, whereby these parties performed the studies to determine the extent of site
contamination and the alternative technologies for cleaning up the site. The public is concerned that
the dam holding the North Pond, which is not well built, will break and that the pond will
subsequently flood the downstream areas.
Environmental Progress
Provision of an alternate water supply and the containment of soil have reduced the potential for
exposure to contaminants and the further spread of these contaminants at the Dubose Oil Products
Company site while cleanup activities are designed.
April 1991 58 DUBOSE OIL PRODUCTS COMPANY
-------
FLORIDA STEEL
CORPORATIO
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD050432251
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 12
Martin County
2 miles northwest of Indiantown
The 150-acre Florida Steel Corporation site is a former steel mill that operated from
1970 to 1982, when it closed for economic reasons. During its operation, casting and rolling were
performed at extremely high temperatures. Subsequently, equipment and motors were cooled by
water, which picked up iron oxide and small particles from the hot steel and collected excess
lubricating oils and hydraulic fluid. The cooling water was captured by concrete drains and sumps
and then piped to a Concrete Recirculating Reservoir (CRR), where the iron oxide particles and
dense oils settled out. The floating oil that resulted from this process subsequently was removed by
an oil skimmer. In addition to the steel products, three types of by-products were associated with the
Indiantown Mill: (1) mill scale, the oxidized iron that separated from the hot steel as it was cooled
with water sprays, (2) slag, low-grade ore formed when lime was introduced as a flux into the
furnace to remove impurities, and (3) Emission Control (EC) dust, the fine particles generated as the
high temperatures of the electric arc furnace drove off and oxidized some of the iron and most of the
other volatile metals contained in the scrap. Some of the EC dust was spread over the facility's
roads, and 75,000 cubic yards were deposited on the southern portion of the site in waste piles.
Florida Steel began to collect EC dust in three baghouses and transported it to a chemical plant in
South Carolina for recovery of lead and zinc in 1980. The site was placed on the NPL in 1982, when
the EPA found arsenic, cadmium, and lead in the EC dust and groundwater. In addition,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were found at various locations on the site. Approximately 4,800
people live within a 2-mile radius of the site. The Indiantown public water supply comes from a
group of shallow wells located within 3 miles of the site. Swamp and unimproved land owned by
the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad adjoins three sides of the property.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
59
April 1991
-------
Threats and Contaminants
IV
Heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, and lead from former plant processes exist in
the on-site EC dust that has become airborne. The groundwater is contaminated with
sodium chloride; heavy metals including lead, cadmium, and iron; and radioactive
materials including radium and barium. Radium is a naturally occurring radioactive
element found in the soil at and around the site. Limited amounts of on-site surface soils
are contaminated by PCBs, a majority of which were cleaned up. Area residents could be
exposed, in the future, to metals and radium contaminants in their drinking water. Other
potential health threats include inhaling and coming into direct contact with airborne EC
dust. Swamps located adjacent to the site are threatened by contamination migrating
from the site.
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: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination removed
an area of on-site soil containing EC dust that was contaminated with PCBs in 1985. The
PCB-contaminated soils were treated by incineration on site.
Entire Site: In 1987, the potentially responsible parties began an investigation to
determine the best ways to clean up die site. The parties are conducting additional
groundwater and soil sampling, which is planned to be completed in 1992. The EPA
currently is waiting for the analytical results of these additional tests and will recommend the best
cleanup technology. In addition to the soil and groundwater investigations, the EPA currently is
examining two wetlands adjacent to the site. This investigation is planned to be completed in 1992.
Site Facts: Negotiations with the parties potentially responsible for site contamination were
concluded in 1987. As a result, these parties initiated an investigation to characterize site
contamination.
Environmental Progress
The removal and treatment of soil have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous
materials and has controlled the migration of contaminants from the site while further investigations
and cleanup activities take place at the Florida Steel Company site.
April 1991 60 FLORIDA STEEL CORPORATION
-------
GOLD COAST Olt
CORPORATION
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD071307680
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 16
Dade County
Miami
Gold Coast Oil Corporation operated a solvent reclaiming facility and bulk storage area on a 2-acre
site leased from the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad from 1971 to 1982. Wastes generated by the
recovery process were sprayed directly on the ground or stored in drums on site. In 1982, Seaboard
removed approximately 2,500 drums, 5 tanker loads of liquid waste from bulk storage tanks, and 40
loads of contaminated soil from the site to an approved facility. The groundwater is contaminated
and is part of the Biscayne Aquifer, the principal drinking water source for this part of Florida. The
area surrounding the facility is primarily industrial. The majority of the residents within a 3-mile
radius of the site are served by two public water supply wells fields that are not affected by the
contamination at the site. The site currently is inactive and is fenced with a locking gate.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
methylene chloride from the former solvent recovery activities. The soil is contaminated
with VOCs, as well as lead. Trespassers who came in direct contact with or accidentally
ingested contaminated groundwater or soil on the site may have been at risk. The
residents in the area obtain drinking water from municipal wells not affected by this site;
however, the groundwater plume may migrate to these wells. This site is one of many
contributors to the overall contamination of the Biscayne Aquifer. A treatment system
has been installed at the public water supply plants to remove heavy metals and VOCs
before water enters the distribution system.
61
April! 991
-------
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
Initial Actions: Early actions, undertaken by Seaboard in 1982, removed contaminated
materials and surface soils from the site.
Entire site: In 1987, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the site that included
excavating and removing soil and sludges to a federally approved facility; recovering the
contaminated groundwater and treating it before discharging it; and removing and
disposing of storage tanks and various structures and debris on the site. The majority of
contaminated soils and sludges have been removed. An air stripping system for treating the
contaminated groundwater has been installed. All cleanup activities are expected to be completed in
1993.
Site Facts: In 1982, Seaboard Coast Line Railroad evicted Gold Coast Oil from the property and
volunteered to perform initial removal activities.
Environmental Progress
By removing contaminated soil and other materials and installing a groundwater treatment system,
the EPA and the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination have made substantial
progress toward final cleanup of the Gold Coast Oil Corporation site. All direct contact threats from
the contaminated land have been eliminated. Ongoing groundwater treatment continue to reduce
contamination levels at the site.
April 1991 62 GOLD COAST OIL CORPORATION
-------
HARRIS CORPO
PALM BAY FACILI
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD000602334
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 11
Brevard County
Palm Bay
Other Names:
Harris Semiconductor
Harris Building 100
Harris Government
(Electronics) Systems
Harris Corp./
General Development Utilities
The Harris Corporation site covers 345 acres, and General Development Utilities, Inc. (GDU)
occupies part of the site. Harris manufactures a wide variety of electronic devices and components,
while GDU provides drinking water and manages the wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal
system for much of Palm Bay. GDU's well field consists of 25 producing wells and is located
adjacent to and downgradient from the Harris facility. The EPA found the wells to be contaminated,
although the precise origin and cause of the contamination is not known. GDU provides
approximately 33,000 residents of Palm Bay with drinking water. Approximately 27,500 people live
within 3 miles of the site. Also included within the 3-mile radius are schools, nursing homes,
hospitals, and a park.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with various volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
heavy metals including chromium and lead from former process waste disposal practices.
People who are exposed to the contaminated groundwater may be at risk.
63
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach .
This site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on groundwater treatment and surface water and sediments treatment.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: One well at GDU has been taken out of service. Harris operates
an extraction/treatment system, with the effluent used as process water. This process
water is treated and then injected into a deep well. Harris also paid for an air stripper at
GDU for the treatment of water from seven production wells.
Groundwater Treatment: The remedy selected by the EPA to clean the groundwater
includes continuing to pump the water and removing contaminants by air stripping. The
contaminants removed will be further treated before being released into the atmosphere.
Harris installed a groundwater system in 1985. According to tests conducted in 1988, groundwater
contamination levels have already been reduced, and this treatment is expected to continue until
1995.
Surface Water and Sediments Treatment: The EPA will monitor a study of the
type and extent of surface water and sediment contamination. Once the study is finished in
1993, alternatives for cleanup will be recommended.
Site Facts: In 1983, the State and Harris Corporation signed a Consent Agreement for Harris to
develop a groundwater restoration system.
Environmental Progress
The groundwater treatment facility continues to reduce the potential for exposure to hazardous
substances at the Harris Corp. (Palm Bay Plant) and is protecting the public water supply while
further investigations take place.
April 1991 64 HARRIS CORP. (PALM BAY PLANT)
-------
HIPPS ROAD
LANDFILL
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980709802
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
Jacksonville Heights
Site Description
The Hipps Road Landfill site covers 7 acres in what was once a cypress swamp. The site area
includes the landfill and an adjacent pond. During the 1960s, the facility accepted municipal and
industrial wastes including cans of trichloroethylene (TCE) and artillery rounds from U.S. Navy
facilities. The landfill ceased operations in 1970, was covered with a layer of soil, and was sold in
residential lots. Concerns first were reported in the early 1970s, when a pond adjacent to the landfill
developed a thick, smelly film, and fish and nearby vegetation died. The area residents depended
exclusively on private wells for water until tests in 1983 showed contamination. Residents were
given bottled water until the City extended the municipal water system. A residential area of about
150 homes surrounds the site. In the spring and summer of 1988, the potentially responsible party
purchased and removed five homes from the site. The landfill is situated above the flood plain.
Surface water is used for swimming, boating, and fishing.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
vinyl chloride and benzene. Fish and vegetation at a nearby pond have been threatened
by contaminants originating from the landfill. People who come in direct contact with or
accidentally ingest contaminated water may suffer adverse health effects.
65
April 1991
-------
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 1985, the EPA connected affected residences in the area to the
municipal water line. In 1986, the potentially responsible party purchased and removed
five houses from the site.
Entire Site: In 1986, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the site. This remedy was
amended in 1990 and includes recovering the groundwater and air stripping it to remove
the contaminants and properly closing the landfill. The second aspect of the site cleanup
plan, the landfill cover system, was completed in 1990 by Wastecontrol, Inc., the potentially
responsible party. Wastecontrol, Inc. has completed the technical specifications and design for
groundwater cleanup. Treatment of the groundwater is expected to begin in mid-1991 and end in
1992. Monitoring activities to ensure that the remedies have cleaned the site effectively are
scheduled to continue for 20 years, using funds provided by the State of Florida.
Site Facts: In 1989, Wastecontrol, Inc. and the EPA entered into a Consent Decree. Wastecontrol,
Inc. agreed to design the landfill cover system and the groundwater recovery system; they have
completed the landfill closure.
Environmental Progress
By providing an alternate water supply to nearby residents, removing houses from the site, and
covering the landfill, the EPA and the potentially responsible party have eliminated immediate
hazards at the Hipps Road Landfill site while cleanup activities continue. The completed landfill
cover also has reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials and has prevented the
further spread of contaminants to the groundwater.
April 1991 66 HIPPS ROAD LANDFILL
-------
HOLLINGSWOR
SOLDERLESS
TERMINAL
FLORIDA
EPA ID#FLD004119681
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 15
Broward County
Fort Lauderdale
The Hollingsworth Solderless Terminal site is located on 3 1/2 acres in an industrial and residential
area of Fort Lauderdale. The plant was in operation from 1968 to 1982 as a solderless terminal
manufacturing facility. The manufacturing process included using molten salt baths, degreasing
parts, and electroplating. The wash and process waters, which contained varying concentrations of
trichloroethylene (TCE) and heavy metals, were disposed of in on-site drainfields, by surface
discharges, and in a 100-foot-deep injection well. In addition, wastes periodically entered the
ground through spillage or other smaller drainfields. Several communities in the vicinity of the site
draw water from the shallow Biscayne Aquifer. The nearest residential area is located
approximately 200 yards southeast of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including vinyl chloride from former process
wastes, have been detected in some of the monitoring wells on the site. VOCs and heavy
metals including copper and tin have been detected in the soil. Potential health risks may
exist for individuals who ingest, come into direct contact with, or inhale VOCs from the
contaminated groundwater or soil.
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.
67
April 1991
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1982, Hollingsworth took several steps to determine the extent
of contamination at the site. The company pumped the injection well, installed 16 on-site
monitoring wells, sampled soil, conducted a groundwater gradient study, and sampled
public wells. In 1987, the EPA excavated the old drainfields, exposed contaminated soil to air to
allow contaminants to evaporate, and replaced the cleaned soil in the drainfields.
Entire Site: The approved cleanup plan for the site includes: excavation, aeration, and
on-site replacement of VOC-contaminated soils and recovery of contaminated
groundwater from the sand zones of the aquifer, with treatment and reinjection into the
aquifer. Aeration of the soils is neatly completed; construction for the groundwater treatment also is
completed, but the system is not operational yet Cleanup activities for the entire site are scheduled
to be completed by 1992.
Environmental Progress
The pumping of the well and evaporation of contaminants have reduced the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials at the facility or through the public water supply while the planned cleanup
activities are being negotiated.
April 1991
68
HOLLINGSWORTH SOLDERLESS TERMINAL
-------
HOMESTEAD Al
FORCE BASE
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FL7570024037
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 19
Dade County
25 miles southwest of Miami
The Homestead Air Force Base (AFB) site lies approximately 2 miles west of Biscayne Bay. The
surrounding area is semi-rural, and most of the base borders on agricultural land. Work to support
the base mission includes fuel storage (JP-4, gasoline, diesel, heating oil), transportation systems,
and various maintenance shops. These activities have resulted in waste materials being discharged
into the environment, including petroleum hydrocarbon fuels, solvents, pesticides, and heavy metals.
Current disposal practices are surveyed regularly for conformance with local, State, and Federal
regulations. The base is surrounded by a canal that discharges into Military Canal and, ultimately,
into Biscayne Bay. An estimated 1,600 people obtain drinking water from the Biscayne Aquifer,
and 18,000 acres of farmland within 3 miles of the site are irrigated from wells. The aquifer, which
underlies the site, is the sole source of potable water in the area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with petroleum from former disposal practices. The
canals surrounding Homestead AFB probably are hydraulically connected with the
aquifer, and contaminants have discharged into surface waters. Health risks may exist
for individuals who come in direct contact with or drink contaminated groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire
site.
69
April 1991
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The Air Force has been conducting various studies at the site, and is
conducting cleanup actions at one petroleum site. A thorough study of the entire site
began in 1990 to determine the extent of contamination on site and to identify alternative
technologies for the cleanup. The work at the site has been grouped into 11 areas, for which separate
cleanup decisions are expect ed. All studies are scheduled to be completed in 1992 or 1993, at
which time cleanup remedies will be selected.
Site Facts: Homestead AFB is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially
funded program established by the Department of Defense (DoD) in 1978 to identify, investigate,
and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DoD facilities.
Environmental Progress
After proposing this site to the NPL, the EPA and the U.S. Air Force performed preliminary site
investigations and determined that there were no immediate actions currently necessary at the
Homestead Air Force Base while further investigations and cleanup activities are taking place.
Aprj| 1991 70 HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE BASE
-------
JACKSONVILLE
NAVAL AIR STATI
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FL6170024412
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
9 miles south of Jacksonville
The Jacksonville Naval Air Station (NAS) site is located approximately 9 miles south of downtown
Jacksonville. The mission of Jacksonville NAS is to provide facilities, services, and managerial
support for the operation and maintenance of naval weapons and aircraft as designated by the Chief
of Naval Operations. Work in support of the base mission includes fuel storage for the
transportation systems and the overhaul, intermediate maintenance, and repair of aircraft and
engines. Maintenance activities over the years generated a variety of materials, some of which were
disposed of in a landfill on the base. These materials include wastes resulting from construction
activities; municipal solid waste and municipal wastewater treatment plant sludge; and
miscellaneous industrial wastes, including waste oils or solvents, paints, radium paint waste,
wastewaters containing heavy metals, and spilled fuels. Current disposal practices are regulated for
conformance with local, State, and Federal regulations. Three aquifers underlie the Jacksonville
NAS site: the Surficial, the Intermediate, and the Floridian. Drinking water is supplied to the base
via wells that tap the Floridian Aquifer. Off-base residents use the Intermediate aquifer as a drinking
water source. Approximately 300 people draw drinking water from private wells in shallow
groundwater within 3 miles of the Naval Air Station.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
The Navy found volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
and heavy metals including cadmium, chromium, and lead in soils and the shallow
groundwater near the potential sources of contamination. The Navy also found lead,
chromium, and cadmium in the St Johns River. There is no potential for direct contact
with contaminants because on-base housing is located adjacent to a capped landfill.
Several creeks and two small lakes are on the site. The St. Johns River is classified by
the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation as Class in waters; it is used for
recreation and the propagation and management of fish and wildlife. The St. Johns River
has a potential for contamination from glass beads used in aircraft paint stripping that
were disposed of in the river. The station encompasses freshwater wetlands and critical
habitats for the Florida manatee and the bald eagle, both designated as endangered
species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
71
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases directed at cleanup of the oil and
solvent disposal pit area and the wastewater treatment and industrial areas.
Response Action Status
Oil and Solvent Disposal Pit Area: The Navy is conducting investigation into the
nature and extent of contamination in the oil and solvent disposal area. Upon completion
in 1993, a cleanup remedy will be selected.
Wastewater Treatment and Industrial Areas: The Navy had taken interim
measures to control oil and solvents runoff from the old main dump into the St. Johns
River; however, the system is no longer operating. The Navy plans further investigations
of releases of hazardous substances and their migration from the wastewater treatment area, and the
industrial area. Scheduled to begin in 1992, these investigations will reveal the nature and extent of
the contamination problems at the station and will recommend the best strategies for final cleanup.
Site Facts: Jacksonville NAS is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially
funded program established by the Department of Defense (DoD) in 1978 to identify, investigate,
and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DoD facilities.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Jacksonville NAS site to the NPL, the EPA evaluated conditions at the site and
determined that the contaminated areas do not present an immediate threat to human health or the
environment while investigations into a permanent remedy are being conducted.
April 1991 72 JACKSONVILLE NAVAL AIR STATION
-------
KASSOUF-KIMM
BATTERY DISP
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980727820
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Tampa
Other Names:
Timberlaka Battery Disposal
58th Street Landfill
The Kassouf-Kimmerling Battery Disposal site includes a 1-acre landfill and a 4-acre wetland
located in Tampa. Before 1978, this site was mined for peat, but in 1978, excavations in the marsh
were filled 6 to 12 feet deep with lead battery casings and fill dirt that is now covered with a layer of
soil. The site is bordered on the east and west by freshwater marshland. Water flows from the
western to the eastern marsh via a canal across the landfill; a large lake lies to the north. The
immediate area of the landfill is uninhabited and is bordered on three sides by dense plant growth.
Approximately 1,500 wells are located within a 3-mile radius, although sampling has detected no
well contamination off the site. The population of the surrounding neighborhood is about 5,500.
The area to the south of the site is commercial and residential, with several churches, a school,
restaurants, offices, and a currently inactive fish farm nearby.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, soil, and surface water on the site are contaminated with heavy metals
including lead, cadmium, and arsenic from former waste disposal activities. Off-site
contamination is restricted to some lead in surface water and sediments. People exposed
to site contaminants over a long period of time could face health threats. The site is not
completely fenced, and trespassing is evident
73
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on source control and cleanup
of the marsh area.
Response Action Status —
Source Control: The EPA selected a remedy for source control at this site in 1989,
which includes: (1) excavating the landfill wastes and contaminated underlying soils; (2)
solidifying them and applying chemical fixation; (3) disposing of them on site in the
landfill area. The design of the selected remedy began in 1990 and is expected to be completed in
1992.
Marsh: The EPA arrived at a decision for cleanup of the contaminated marsh in 1990.
The EPA plans to remove the marsh sediment within 20 feet of the battery landfill to a
depth of 2 feet below the sediment surface and to remove the sediments from the canal
east of the site extending 150 feet from the battery landfill to a depth of 2 feet. Approximately
1,500 cubic yards of contaminated sediments will be excavated from the marsh. The excavated
sediments will be treated using a solidification and stabilization technology and will be placed with
the solidified landfill materials. The remainder of the marsh sediments will remain on site because
removing the contaminated material may cause contaminants to migrate. In addition, the canal that
currently allows the march to drain will be redesigned to allow the march to remain permanently
flooded. Existing wetlands also will be enlarged to compensate for the adverse effects caused by site
contaminants. The design for the marsh cleanup activities will be incorporated in the design for the
source control.
Site Facts: In 1983, the EPA issued an order requiring the potentially responsible parties to
monitor the groundwater and surface water, perform analysis of the battery fill material, and conduct
general soil sampling.
Environmental Progress
After preliminary investigations, the EPA determined that the Kassouf-Kimmerling Battery Disposal
site does not pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment while engineering designs
are being completed and the final cleanup activities are being planned.
April 1991 74 KASSOUF-KIMMERLING BATTERY DISPOSAL
-------
MADISON COU
SANITARY LAND
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD981019235
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Madison County
Northeast of Madison
The Madison County Landfill is a 133-acre site northeast of Madison that was owned and operated
by the City of Madison from 1971 until 1980. Industrial waste generated by local industries
reportedly was disposed of at the landfill, along with municipal waste, waste solvents, and waste
buffing compounds. During that time, ITT Thompson Industries, Inc. disposed of drums and waste
containing trichloroethene and other compounds. The County bought the landfill in 1980 and has
been operating it since then. The landfill is licensed by the State to accept municipal solid waste. In
1984, the County found trichloroethene in monitoring wells on the site and in private wells nearby.
An estimated 95 private wells and 3 city wells are within 3 miles of the site. Contamination of these
wells threatens the drinking water supply of 4,400 people.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, County,
municipal, and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06724/88
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including trichloroethene from former waste
disposal practices, were detected in on-site monitoring wells and private wells near the
site. Similar contaminants have been identified in the soils surrounding the landfill area.
Drinking contaminated groundwater poses a health risk to those using nearby wells.
75
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) removed
a number of drums from one location where ITT Thompson's drums had been buried.
Drums were removed from a second area in 1985. All materials were transported to an
EPA-approved hazardous waste facility. When private wells were found to be contaminated, the
County, and later ITT Thompson, provided bottled water and ice to affected families. In addition,
the City, County, and ITT Thompson installed water filtering systems and connected these homes to
city water lines to further ensure a safe drinking water supply.
Entire Site: In 1990, under EPA guidance, the parties potentially responsible for the site
contamination began an extensive study of the site's pollution problems. This
investigation will analyze the nature and extent of groundwater and soil contamination and
will suggest the best alternatives for final cleanup. It is scheduled for completion in 1992.
Site Facts: In February 1986, the FDER entered into a Consent Agreement with the City, County,
and ITT Thompson, requiring them to investigate groundwater and soil contamination near the site.
Environmental Progress
The drum removal and the provision of an alternate drinking water supply have reduced the potential
for exposure to contaminated substances at the Madison County Landfill site or to contaminated
groundwater while investigations into the final cleanup strategies are being conducted.
April 1991 76 MADISON COUNTY SANITARY LANDFILL
-------
MIAMI DRUM
SERVICES
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD076027820
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 16
Dade County
Miami
Other Names:
Biscayne Aquifer
Site Description
Miami Drum Services recycled drums for 15 years on this 1-acre site in a predominantly industrial
area of Miami. While the company was in operation, as many as 5,000 drums of various chemical
wastes including corrosives, solvents, phenols, and toxic metals were observed on the site. Surface
spills and percolation of contaminated wastewater saturated the soil at the facility. The Biscayne
Aquifer, which underlies the site, is contaminated with various toxic organic solvents and heavy
metals. The site is about 750 feet from the Medley Well Field, which extracts drinking water from
the Biscayne Aquifer during peak demand periods. Groundwater is less than 3 feet below the
surface. Dade County obtained a court order to close the facility in 1981. The property, now owned
by the County, was to become part of its new mass transit system. The EPA gave Dade County the
funds to clean up the site, and the County recommended excavation and off-site disposal of
contaminated soil, timed to meet its construction schedule. This site, along with the Northwest 58th
Street Landfill and the Varsol Spill Site, have been studied together as the "Biscayne Aquifer Sites."
Proposed on the NPL as a unit, they were considered to be a serious potential threat to regional water
supply. The three sites eventually were listed on the NPL as individual sites.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, County,
and potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
L\
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs), primarily vinyl chloride from
former waste disposal activities. On-site soils were contaminated with phenols, heavy
metals, oil and grease, pesticides, and other materials from the drum-cleaning operation.
People who come in direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater
may be at risk. No health threats exist for soils as a result of the cleanup activities.
77
April 1991
-------
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: The EPA formally selected the remedies for this site in 1982 and 1985.
Cleanup was separated into two phases: source control and groundwater cleanup. Source
Control: The EPA accepted the source control strategy proposed by Dade County in 1981.
The County mobilized its transportation funds to speed up cleanup activities, and by early 1982,
8,500 cubic yards of contaminated soil had been removed to an off-site disposal facility, and almost
a million gallons of groundwater were pumped and treated. Later in 1982, the EPA funded the
County's cleanup actions and a more intensive study of how contaminated groundwater was moving
from the site. The 1982 cleanup activities were adequate to control the source of contaminants, and
the site is now a railroad yard for the County Transit Authority. Groundwater: The remedy selected
in 1985 was to add air strippers at two water treatment plants. This technology evaporates volatile
contaminants out of the water. The State undertook the engineering design for groundwater cleanup
and finished it in 1987. The actual cleanup activities were delayed because the State declined to
conduct them, but the EPA negotiated a Cooperative Agreement with the local government and a
contract for assurances with the State. Construction is expected to be completed by late 1991.
Groundwater cleanup activities are scheduled to be completed by 1992.
Site Facts: Dade County filed suit against the former owner in 1981, seeking recovery of all funds
spent for site cleanup, compensatory damages for harm to natural resources, and punitive damages.
The EPA filed a cost recovery action. The parties potentially responsible for the contamination
settled in 1988 on source control action. Historic preservationists were concerned that the air
strippers proposed for cleaning up the groundwater would block the view of the historic Hialeah
Water Treatment Plant, but a compromise solved the problem.
Environmental Progress
The cleanup activities at the Miami Drum Services site have been successful in controlling the
source of contaminants, and efforts are being focused on treatment of the groundwater. The EPA
determined that the site does not presently pose an immediate threat to public health or the
environment while further actions are being planned to permanently clean up the contaminated
groundwater.
April 1991 78 MIAMI DRUM SERVICES
-------
MUNISPORT
LANDFILL
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD084535442
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 17
Dade County
North Miami
The Munisport Landfill is a 291-acre, inactive facility. Landfilling activities took place on only 171
acres of the facility. A developer leased the land from the City of North Miami and filled low-lying
areas with clean fill and construction debris. By 1974, the landfill was accepting municipal refuse.
Between 1972 and 1981, its operators piled several million cubic yards of solid waste 40 feet high,
and the facility was eventually shut down for improper disposal practices. The site's operators
created eight deep lakes on the site when they excavated the refuse and used debris to cover the
piles. Disposal records show that the site accepted domestic garbage, yard refuse, construction
debris, and hospital pathological wastes. Three major sampling and monitoring efforts were
mounted in the 1980s by the EPA and the City of North Miami. The site is bordered by major roads,
Florida International University, and a mangrove swamp, which separates the site from Biscayne
Bay. The Bay is classified as an outstanding Florida waterway and nature preserve and is a major
recreational area. Mangrove wetlands, which are becoming increasingly rare, are valuable as
wildlife habitat.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
I
Pollutants detected in groundwater, soil, and leachate samples include elevated levels of
ammonia and low levels of heavy metals, pesticides, and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from the former waste disposal activities. No public health risk exists under
current uses because possible exposure routes contain relatively low levels of
contaminants. A threat to the environment exists, however, due to the migration of
leachate from the site into the Mangrove Preserve. Contamination of the preserve can be
particularly serious because many pollutants, even at very low levels, can damage aquatic
life and can bioaccumulate and concentrate in the food chain. Birds from the rookery in
Greyolds Park feed in the Mangrove Swamp and are threatened by possible contaminants
there.
79
April! 991
-------
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 EPA began an intensive study of soil and water pollution at the site in
1987. A subsequent study of the Mangrove Preserve was conducted in 1989. In 1990, the
EPA selected the cleanup remedy from the alternatives resulting from the investigation.
Leachate will be treated for ammonia contamination in "air stripping ponds," after which it will be
cycled back through the landfill. The design of the cleanup strategy is expected to begin in 1991.
Closure of the landfill will be conducted under State authority.
Site Facts: Environmentalists and the State of Florida are concerned about the threat to aquatic
organisms in the preserve and are working with the EPA to develop a cleanup plan for the site.
Though no air pollution data are available, nuisance odors led to three citations while the site was
active.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined that
no immediate actions were needed to protect the public at the Munisport Landfill site while
engineering designs are being planned.
ApriM991 80 MUNISPORT LANDFILL
-------
NORTHWEST 58
STREET LANDFIL
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980602643
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 10
Dade County
Near the Town of Medley
Other Names:
Biscayne Aquifer
The Northwest 58th Street Landfill site, near the City of Miami Springs, is one of three NPL sites
that comprise the Biscayne Aquifer Superfund Study. The landfill is a 1-square-mile site near
Hialeah, along the eastern edge of the Everglades wetlands. From 1952 to 1982, the site operated as
a municipal landfill, receiving approximately 60,000 tons of waste in 1952 and increasing annually
over the 30 years of operation to over 1,000,000 tons per year. Small quantities of household
hazardous materials, such as pesticides, paints, and solvents were considered to be municipal waste.
In 1975, the landfill operation initiated a program of providing daily cover to the site; however, prior
to this, the operation did not compact wastes or add daily cover. Since 1982, the landfill has
received only quarry wastes of water-based paint sludges. The landfill is no longer receiving waste
and is undergoing formal closure procedures. Two major groups of public water supply well fields
are located downgradient within 2 miles of the site. These wells serve an estimated 750,000 people.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, County,
and potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Leachate from the landfill has contaminated groundwater with heavy metals including
arsenic and lead, as well as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as vinyl chloride.
Potential risks to individuals exist if they drink the contaminated groundwater. In 1986,
the U.S. Geological Survey identified a leachate plume migrating westerly from the site.
The County is selectively pumping well fields and has constructed hydraulic barriers to
control the plume.
81
April! 991
-------
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: The cleanup plan to be completed by the potentially responsible parties
includes: controlling leachate generation by a combination of grading, drainage control,
and capping; providing a public water supply to replace approximately 60 wells; and
landfill closure. The parties completed installing an alternate water supply in 1988 and a leachate
interception system in 1989. Additional cover is being applied to the landfill. The design for
closing the landfill was approved in 1990. This phase will include grading, capping, and
construction of stormwater management systems. Closure of the landfill is scheduled to be
completed by 1993.
Site Facts: The State of Florida has a civil suit pending against Dade County for failure to cease
operations by August 1981. The State and County are working together to develop a final plan for
closing the facility. The Department of Justice completed all notice requirements to the potentially
responsible parties and filed the Consent Decree with the court in January 1989. The County has
repaid EPA for past cleanup costs and is in compliance with the Consent Decree.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply and the installation of a leachate control system and
additional cover at the Northwest 58th Street Landfill site have reduced the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials while final cleanup activities are being completed.
April 1991 82 NORTHWEST 58TH STREET LANDFILL
-------
PARRAMORE
FLORIDA
EPA ID#FLD041140344
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Gadsden County
Mount Pleasant
The Parramore Surplus site is a 25-acre storage and resale company for Navy and Air Force surplus
equipment. Beginning in 1972, Parramore began storing drums on the property. The Florida
Department of Environmental Regulations (FDER) inspected the site and found 400 to 600 drums,
some of which were leaking and killing the vegetation. The site is located in a low-density
residential area with approximately 20 homes in the immediate vicinity of the site. Less than 100
people live within a 1-mile radius of the site. The area surrounding the site is primarily agricultural
and forest land.
Site Responsibility: This site was addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Deleted Date: 02/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
The soil was contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and heavy metals including lead.
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on source control at the site.
83
April1991
-------
Response Action Status
Source Control: The EPA, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulations
(FDER), and the owner of Parramore agreed that Parramore would remove the surface
contamination. After the removal was completed, samples were taken of the soil and three
new areas of contamination were located. Parramore cleaned these areas as well. Sampling after the
second removal in 1983 indicated that the contamination had been removed. In 1985, a modified
investigation was conducted by the EPA to determine whether all source materials had been
removed and whether there was any groundwater contamination directly related to the site. The
investigation determined that all sources of contamination had been successfully removed, with the
exception of the three small areas that had been the target of the second cleanup. It was determined
that the amount of the contamination present in these areas would not damage the environment or
threaten public health. A groundwater quality assessment was recommended, however, to ensure
that no groundwater contamination had occurred from past releases of hazardous substances at the
site. Groundwater monitoring wells were installed, followed by two periods of groundwater
sampling and analyses to ensure that the groundwater had not been adversely affected by past
releases of hazardous substances. The monitoring was completed in 1987, and the site was found to
be within safe standards and to pose no threat to human health or the environment. The site was
deleted from the NPL on February 21,1989.
Environmental Progress
All cleanup activities, including groundwater monitoring, were completed, and the Parramore
Surplus site was deleted from the NPL in 1989. The cleanup actions have achieved all established
goals for surface contamination, and the site is now safe to nearby residents and the environment.
April 1991 84 PARRAMORE SURPLUS
-------
PEAK OIL CO./
BAY DRUM CO.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004091807
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Tampa
Other Names:
Bay Drums
The 15-acre Peak Oil/Bay Drum site was constructed and began operations in 1954. Peak Oil
operations involved the use of a refining process to purify used oils and lubrication fluids. Major
compounds accepted for recycling were used crank-case oil, hydraulic fluid, and some transformer
fluids. An acid/clay purification and filtration process that generated sludge and oil-saturated clay
was used from 1954 until 1977, and these substances were discharged to three unlined lagoons. Two
of the lagoons have been backfilled. The Peak Oil site is located within 2 miles of the Brandon Well
Field, which is part of the Hillsborough County water supply system. Surface water from the Peak
Oil site drains to a wetland area to the southwest. Several private wells are located in the immediate
vicinity of the contaminated site, including a 200-foot deep Floridian Aquifer well and a production
well at the adjacent Reeves Southeastern Wire Corporation, also on the NPL. Residential
neighborhoods, light manufacturing facilities, warehouses, a domestic wastewater plant, a wetland,
and Hillsborough County's refuse-to-energy plant are located in the area around the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
The soils, sludges, surface water, and sediments on site are contaminated with
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and heavy
metals including arsenic and lead from former process wastes. In addition, the
groundwater is contaminated with PCBs. Potential health threats in the area may come
from contact with contaminated on-site soils or surface water runoff and from inhaling
contaminated dust in the air. There are several aquifers and a wetland in the area that
may contain contaminants from the site.
85
April 1991
-------
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: Incineration of contaminants was approved, and, in 1986,
contaminated soils were excavated and prepared for test burns in a mobile incinerator. As
of 1987, more than 1,500 tons of contaminated soil had been incinerated. In 1989, tanks
were cut up and disposed of off site. Used oil, contaminated with PCBs, and tank sludges also were
disposed of off site. This cleanup action was completed in 1990. Mixed oil/water were removed
and taken to an approved off-site facility.
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination are studying the
nature and extent of pollution at the site. Field activities for an area-wide hydrogeological
study began in 1989. Fields activities to identify the source of the contamination also
began in 1989. The investigation is planned for completion in 1992, at which time appropriate
remedies for site cleanup will be selected.
Site Facts: An Administrative Order on Consent for the site source characterization and the area-
wide hydrogeological cleanup investigation became effective in 1989.
Environmental Progress
The treatment of soil and disposal of some liquid wastes have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to hazardous substances at the Peak Oil site. These actions have protected the public
health and have prevented further environmental damage, while further cleanup activities are being
completed.
April 1991 86 PEAK OIL CO./BAY DRUM CO.
-------
PENSACOLA
NAVAL AIR
STATION
FLORIDA
EPAID#FL9170024567
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
6 miles southwest of Pensacola
The Pensacola Naval Air Station (NAS) is located on approximately 5,900 acres and is the home of
two major industrial tenant commands: the Naval Aviation Depot and the Public Works Center.
Work in support of the base mission includes fuel storage and transportation systems and depot-level
maintenance and repair of aircraft and engines. Maintenance activities over the years generated a
variety of disposed materials including waste materials from construction activities, municipal solid
waste, and municipal wastewater treatment plant sludge. Miscellaneous industrial wastes including
waste oils or solvents, paints, electroplating wastes, radium paint wastes, and insecticides were
discharged to storm sewers until 1973, when an industrial sewer and wastewater treatment system
were installed. Current disposal practices are monitored regularly for conformance with local, State,
and Federal regulations. The groundwater aquifer at Pensacola NAS extends to a depth of
approximately 400 feet. There are three drinking water wells on the facility tapping the upper
aquifer. An estimated 15,000 people on Pensacola NAS and 30,000 customers of Peoples' Water
Co. obtain drinking water from wells within 3 miles of the hazardous substances on site. The
surface water bodies surrounding the site include Pensacola Bay and a tidal creek known as Bayou
Grande. These surface waters are classified by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
as Class in water, for recreational use and the propagation and management of fish and wildlife.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including benzene and ethyl benzene from former
waste disposal practices, were detected in the monitoring wells. Arsenic and pesticide
compounds were found in soil samples taken at a pesticide mixing area. Heavy metals
were detected in surface water sediment. Drinking water wells currently are assumed to
be upgradient of the base. A large hazardous waste landfill is located next to the base
golf course and a picnic area. The NAS Marina is located where a storm drain from the
electroplating shops emptied into the bayou. Direct contact during recreation is a
possibility for those on base and could pose a health risk.
87
Aprill 991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed through five long-term remedial phases directed at cleanup of the sanitary
landfill, the industrial waste disposal/industrial supply storage areas, the industrial and hazardous
waste discharge area, the pesticide waste disposal area, and the 13 remaining areas of the site.
Response Action Status
Sanitary Industrial Landfill: An investigation into the nature and extent of
contamination at the sanitary industrial landfill is underway. The investigation is planned
to be completed in 1992.
Industrial Waste Disposal Area/Industrial Supply Storage Area: These are two
adjacent areas of contamination. Investigations into the extent of contamination of these
areas began in 1990 and are planned for completion in 1993.
Industrial and Hazardous Waste Discharge Area: An investigation into the nature
and extent of contamination of the industrial and hazardous waste discharge area began in
1990 and is scheduled for completion in 1993.
Pesticide Waste Disposal Area: An investigation into the extent of contamination at
the pesticide disposal area began in 1990 and is expected to be completed by 1993, at
which time an appropriate cleanup remedy will be selected.
Remaining Areas: The Navy plans to initiate investigations into the nature and extent
of contamination of 13 other areas within the Pensacola Naval Air Station. These include
the metal plating shops, radium paint sites, fuel burn pits, paint shops, several wastewater
treatment sites, soil and groundwater contamination, refueler repair shop, PCB storage area, Bayou
Grande area, wetlands, and the Pensacola Bay area. Upon completion of these investigations, the
EPA will select the most appropriate cleanup remedy for each of these areas.
Site Facts: Pensacola Naval Air Station is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a
specially funded program established by the Department of Defense (DoD) in 1978 to identify,
investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DoD facilities.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Pensacola Naval Air Station site to the NPL, the EPA evaluated conditions and
determined that no immediate threat to human health or the environment exists. The ongoing
investigations into the extent of contamination will determine the type of permanent remedy needed
at the site.
April 1991 88 PENSACOLA NAVAL AIR STATION
-------
PEPPER STEEL
& ALLOYS, INC.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD032544587
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 18
Dade County
10 miles northwest of Miami
The 30-acre Pepper Steel & Alloys, Inc. site is located in an industrial area with no sewage system
and is near three other NPL sites. Since the mid-1960s, the site has been the location of several
businesses. On-site activities included manufacturing of batteries, pre-cast concrete products, and
fiberglass boats, as well as the repair and service of trucks and heavy equipment Also, sandblasting
and painting services, a concrete batching plant, and an automobile scrap operation are located on
the site. Pepper Steel's activities included recycling of electrical transformers, where waste oil
containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) was dumped in wetlands on the site. Various trash and
waste products from these activities, including parts of rusted machinery, vehicles, aircraft, oil tanks,
transformers, underground storage tanks, and batteries have been deposited at the site.
Contamination has been identified in the soil, sediments, and groundwater in and around the site.
The site area is flat, and in many places the groundwater is only 1 to 2 feet below the surface.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, County,
and potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
L\
PCBs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and heavy metals such as lead and arsenic
from former site activities have been detected in the groundwater, sediments, and soil.
Accidental ingestion of and direct contact with contaminated soil, groundwater, and
sediments could pose a health hazard to nearby residents.
89
April 1991
-------
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
Initial Actions: Early in 1983, the EPA conducted a geophysical survey of the site and
identified about a dozen zones requiring further investigation. Soil samples determined
that PCBs were present in at least two zones. The EPA removed soil in these zones and
floating oil from the shallow aquifer underlying the site. The EPA also drilled observation wells and
sampled on-site wells and surface water in the immediate area.
Entire Site: The following actions were chosen by the EPA for the site cleanup: (1)
collection and off-site disposal of all free oil; (2) excavation of soils containing PCBs,
lead, and arsenic; (3) solidification of the contaminated soil with a cement-type mixture to
prevent the migration of the contaminants; (4) institutional controls such as deed restrictions to
ensure that future land use is compatible with the site; and (5) monitoring groundwater to ensure the
effectiveness of the cleanup. Florida Power and Light started the cleanup of the site in 1987. The
site cleanup is completed, and the EPA currently is drafting a closeout report. The EPA will monitor
the site to ensure that the cleanup remedies are effective. The site is scheduled to be deleted from
the NPL in 1994.
Site Facts: The EPA, the State of Florida, the County of Dade, and Florida Power and Light
signed a Consent Decree in 1987. Based on this Decree, Florida Power and Light took responsibility
for the design and implementation of the cleanup procedure. The site is planned to be deleted from
the NPL after a five-year review.
Environmental Progress
All cleanup activities, including the removal of soils and liquid waste, are completed at the Pepper
Steel & Alloys, Inc. site. The site again is safe for nearby residents and the environment while the
EPA conducts a final review before deleting the site from the NPL.
April 1991 90 PEPPER STEEL & ALLOYS, INC.
-------
PETROLEUM
CORPORATIO
FLORIDA
EPA ID* FLD980798698
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 14
Broward County
Pembroke Park
Other Names:
Pembroke Road
Petroleum Products Corporation refined, stored, and recycled oil on this 2-acre site from 1952 to
1972. Residents in a nearby trailer park became concerned when heavy rain triggered an overflow
of a disposal pit and produced an oil slick on a lake on the trailer park grounds in 1970. The
company initiated major changes in its operation and sold most of its property. The northern half of
the property was cleared and the disposal pit was filled in, but a tank farm remained. In 1979, the
State issued two warning notices to Petroleum Products because of oil discharges from the tank farm
area. The company cleaned up two oil-soaked areas, rehabilitated the tank farm berm, and filled in
low spots with clean fill. The site was converted to the Pembroke Park Mini Warehouses in 1985
and now houses small industrial and commercial businesses. The area surrounding the site is a
rapidly developing and growing residential area that supports a variety of recreational and industrial
activities. The population of Pembroke Park is 20,000. Approximately 150 people live in two trailer
parks adjacent to the site. There are more than 200 homes using public wells within 1/4 mile of the
site. The Hallandale municipal well field is 2 miles southeast of the site, and the Hollywood
municipal well field lies 3 miles northwest of the site; these well fields serve 150,000 people.
Located within the trailer park and a nearby golf course are a number of man-made lakes that are
used for irrigation.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
II
Groundwater is contaminated with oil, heavy metals including lead and chromium, and
low concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene from the
former process wastes. The soil is contaminated with lead and arsenic, and sludges and
surface water runoff are contaminated with lead. Soil, sludges, and runoff also contain
petroleum hydrocarbons. The well fields near the site draw water from the Biscayne
Aquifer. The aquifer beneath the site is connected to the Floridian Aquifer, which is
affected by salt water intrusion. Because most of the contaminated soil at the site is
underneath asphalt, there is little risk that people could come in direct contact with it until
cleanup activities begin. The lakes at the nearby trailer park and golf course could pose a
threat to people who accidentally drink the contaminated water.
91
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on groundwater containment and soil and groundwater cleanup.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1985, Petroleum Products removed the drums, storage tanks,
and contaminated sludge from the site and transported the materials to a federally approved
disposal facility. An oil recovery system was installed for a month in 1985 to facilitate the
removal of contaminants. The State installed a recovery system in 1987, and approximately 2,400
gallons of oil waste were recovered from the aquifer below the site. The tank farm was dismantled
and fenced to prevent trespassing.
Groundwater Containment: In 1990, the EPA selected a temporary groundwater
treatment remedy, which includes enhancing the existing oil recovery system while a
permanent cleanup remedy is being selected. Design of this interim remedy is scheduled to
begin in late 1991.
Groundwater and Soil: The EPA is scheduled to conclude a study in 1992 to
determine the type and extent of the contamination in the aquifer beneath the site. In the
course of the study, various alternatives for cleaning the groundwater will be evaluated.
Once the study has been completed and reviewed, the EPA will select a final cleanup remedy. The
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) is assessing an alternative called soil
washing to clean up the contamination at the site. Soil washing is a process through which
contaminants are extracted by injecting a water-based solution into the soil and then pumping the
mixture. The study is expected to be completed in 1992, at which time a final selection of the
cleanup technology will be made by the EPA and the FDER.
Site Facts: The EPA and Petroleum Products entered into a Consent Order in 1985. Under this
Order, the company agreed to take immediate actions at the site to reduce threats to human health
and the environment. A Consent Decree was signed March 26,1991 related to the actions to contain
groundwater contamination.
Environmental Progress
The removal of the major sources of contamination at the Petroleum Products site has reduced the
potential for exposure to contaminants and has reduced the level of contaminants in groundwater
while the investigations leading to a final cleanup remedy are taking place.
April 1991 92 PETROLEUM PRODUCTS CORPORATION
-------
PICKETTVILLE
ROAD LANDFILL
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980556351
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
5 miles northwest of Jacksonville
The Pickettville Road Landfill site covers 52 acres northwest of Jacksonville. The site began
operations in the early 1940s on a limited basis; full-scale operations started in 1968, when the City
of Jacksonville began using the site for a municipal dump. The site was dedicated to the disposal of
hazardous and solid wastes in 1971. Wastes deposited at the landfill included waste oil, liquid acid
waste from batteries, battery casings, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). All waste disposal
ceased in 1977, and the site was backfilled, graded, and seeded. In 1981, the EPA detected
contaminants in groundwater. Additional backfilling and regrading were completed in 1983 to curb
on-site erosion and leachate draining into nearby Little Sixmile Creek. The site is located in a semi-
rural area of mixed uses including residences, commercial establishments, and light industry. There
are over 300 residences and two schools located within a 1-mile radius of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic and lead and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and pyrene from former waste disposal
activities. Private wells contain barium. Sediments from Little Sixmile Creek are
contaminated with heavy metals, and the soil also is contaminated with heavy metals, as
well as PCBs and VOCs. People who accidentally ingest contaminated water may be at
risk. Well water is used for irrigating gardens, and contaminants may accumulate in
fruits and vegetables. Fish from Little Sixmile Creek may contain bioaccumulated
contaminants from the site leachate.
93
April1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: As an initial measure to prevent potential exposure and spread of site
contaminants, the site was backfilled, graded, and seeded in 1977 and again in 1983.
Entire Site: The remedy selected by the EPA includes implementing institutional
controls that will regulate future development of the site and limit groundwater usage in
the surficial aquifer in the area immediately north of the site; installing a protective cover
over the landfill in accordance with State closure requirements; installing a security fence to restrict
unauthorized site access; implementing a long-term monitoring program to continue the evaluation
of groundwater water quality; extending the city water main to residents affected by the
contaminated groundwater; and removing waste that has migrated from the site into Little Sixmile
Creek.
Site Facts: In 1988, the EPA and the parties potentially responsible for contamination at the site
signed an Administrative Order. Under this Order, the parties investigated the extent of
contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Pickettville Road Landfill site to the NPL, the EPA conducted an evaluation of site
conditions and determined that the initial actions taken at the site have controlled the immediate
threats to public health or the environment while the cleanup alternatives are being designed.
April 1991 94 PICKETJVILLE ROAD LANDFILL
-------
PIONEER SAND
COMPANY
FLORIDA
EPA ID#FLD056116965
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Escambia County
5 miles west of Pensacola
The 11-acre Pioneer Sand Company site is an inactive quarry that was licensed in 1974 to receive
shredded auto parts, construction debris, and various industrial sludges. Between 1974 and 1978,
phenols and resin compounds were deposited on the site by Newport Industries. Domestic and
industrial wastes, including plating sludges, were received from die Pensacola Naval Air Station.
Approximately 75% of the site is an excavation pit, while the remaining 25% is the fill area where
the wastes were deposited. In 1981, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER)
did not renew the disposal permit and ordered the dumping to cease. The State and the EPA
detected contaminants in the soil. A monitoring well installed by the company and one of the on-site
disposal ponds also were found to be contaminated. A well field for the City of Pensacola, which
has a population of approximately 67,000, is located within 3 miles of the site. Sampling of nearby
private wells indicated no off-site groundwater contamination.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
A monitoring well and surface water in the sludge pond contain elevated levels of heavy
metals including chromium and lead from the former waste disposal activities. Leachate
is contaminated with various heavy metals, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and
pentachlorophenol (PCP). The soil is contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) and heavy metals. Because the EPA took immediate action to remove the
contaminated soil, and the parties potentially responsible for the contamination are
currently monitoring the site, there is little threat to the area population.
95
April 1991
-------
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.
Response Action Status
Immediate Action: In 1986, the EPA excavated 20 tons of contaminated soil and
transported it to a federally approved facility.
Entire Site: In 1986, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the site, which includes:
closing the landfill and sludge pond areas according to Federal and State procedures;
collecting the leachate, treating it, and disposing of it on site; treating surface water and
discharging it on site; and long-term maintenance activities. The parties potentially responsible for
site contamination removed trash from the site and installed a security fence. During their
investigation prior to the design of a method for cleaning up the site, the potentially responsible
parties discovered a light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) in the landfllled area. They have
completed treatment of the LNAPL. The cleanup activity began in 1991 and is more than half
completed. To date, the leachate trench has been installed, treatment of water and LNAPL is
completed, and groundwater monitoring wells have been installed. Upon installation of the
geomembrane cap, the cleanup will be reviewed by the EPA to ensure its effectiveness.
Site Facts: The EPA and the potentially responsible parties entered into a Consent Decree in 1988.
In this action, the parties agreed to clean up the site.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soils reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the
Pioneer Sand site while cleanup activities are being completed. All direct contact threats from site
contamination have been eliminated.
April 1991 96 PIONEER SAND COMPANY
-------
PIPER AIRCRAF
BEACH WATER
DEPARTMENT
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004054284
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 11
Indian River County
Vero Beach
Other Names:
Vero Beech Welifield
The Piper Aircraft/Vero Beach Water & Sewer Department site covers 90 acres in Vero Beach. The
company began assembling and painting light aircraft in 1957 at the southern end of the Vero Beach
Municipal Airport. Chemicals used in these operations are stored in underground storage tanks.
During routine testing of the city water supply in 1978, the presence of contaminants was detected.
An area search and tank testing revealed the source to be a leaky pipe-fitting on a Piper Aircraft
storage tank. Well #15 of the City of Vero Beach well field subsequently was shut down due to
contamination. Six months later, the City developed two other wells to replace the one that was
closed. In 1981, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) took actions against
the company, after which Piper repaired the faulty equipment and began pumping out contaminated
groundwater. Approximately 10,000 people obtain drinking water from public wells located within
a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater in the on-site shallow aquifer, surface water, and the water in the Main
Canal on the site are contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE) and other volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) from the leaking underground storage tank. Although a
number of people obtain drinking water from nearby municipal wells, the health concerns
are minimal because the city wells were relocated and are being constantly monitored.
Oysters and fish from the Main Canal are contaminated with low levels of TCE and
present a health risk if they are eaten.
97
April! 991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Since 1981, when groundwater treatment began, an estimated 2,000
gallons of solvents have been removed by pumping the contaminated water from the site
through closed conduits 1/2 mile to the Main Canal. The contaminated water is sprayed
into the air to remove the contaminants and then discharged into the Main Canal.
Entire Site: Piper Aircraft is planning to study the type and extent of contamination at
the site beginning in 1992. Once the study is completed, alternatives for cleaning up the
site will be recommended. The EPA will then select cleanup technologies best suited to a
final remedy for the site contamination.
Site Facts: In 1981, the State and Piper Aircraft entered into a Consent Agreement, requiring the
company to perform repairs on equipment and to treat the contaminated groundwater.
Environmental Progress
By moving municipal wells and by pumping and air-treating the contaminated groundwater from the
Piper Aircraft/Vero Beach Water & Sewer Department site, the potential for exposure to hazardous
substances has been significantly reduced. These actions have protected the public water supply
while the investigations into a permanent cleanup remedy are taking place.
ApriM991 98 PIPER AIRCRAFT/VERO BEACH
WATER & SEWER DEPARTMENT
-------
REEVES SOU
GALVANIZIN
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD000824896
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Highway 574, east of Tampa
The Reeves Southeast Galvanizing Corp. site encompasses two areas on 28 acres and includes the
Reeves Southeastern Galvanizing Site (RSEG) covering 17 acres and the Reeves Southeastern Wire
Site (RSEW) covering 11 acres. Beginning in the 1960s, spent caustic, rinse, and acid process
wastes generated at RSEG and RSEW were neutralized and discharged to storage ponds. It is
believed that plating wastes were discharged in the same manner. These practices have caused
contamination of groundwater and surface water. When Hillsborough County issued a notice of
violation to the company in 1974, the company responded by upgrading its existing wastewater
treatment facility to an advanced system to neutralize the acid and to remove 90% of the heavy
metals. One pond at RSEW has been backfilled; two have not, but they are not used. Two ponds
exist at the RSEG area, but are not presently used. Residential neighborhoods, light manufacturing
facilities, warehouses, and a refuse-to-energy plant are located in the area surrounding the site.
County-owned water supply wells are located about a mile upgradient of the site. There are
approximately 56,000 people residing within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals such as zinc from former process
wastes. The soil and surface water also are contaminated with heavy metals, primarily
zinc. Sediments contain cyanide and heavy metals such as zinc and cadmium. Although
sampling has shown that municipal wells are not contaminated, private wells have not
been sampled. Since the groundwater is contaminated, it could affect the drinking water
wells. In addition to drinking polluted water, people who come in direct contact with or
accidentally ingest contaminated surface water or soils may be at risk.
99
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the soil and
surface water and of the groundwater.
Response Action Status
Soil and Surface Water: Under EPA guidance, the parties potentially responsible for
the site contamination are investigating the site. This investigation will determine the exact
contaminants and the extent of damage to the soil and surface water. The second phase of
field work is underway. Once the investigation is completed in 1992, various alternatives will be
recommended to clean up the site. The EPA then will select the most appropriate remedies for site
cleanup.
Groundwater: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination are
investigating the nature and extent of groundwater contamination at the site. Upon
completion of this investigation, expected in 1991, the EPA will select a remedy for
cleanup of the contaminated groundwater.
Site Facts: In 1989, the EPA and the parties potentially responsible for contamination at the site
signed an Administrative Order on Consent. Under this Order, the parties will conduct a study of the
site with EPA monitoring.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined that
there was no need for immediate actions while investigations leading to a final remedy selection are
taking place.
April 1991 100 REEVES SOUTHEAST GALVANIZING CORP.
-------
SAPP BATTERY
SALVAGE
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980602882
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Jackson County
Alford
The 45-acre Sapp Battery site contains three swamps connected by small channels. In 1970, Sapp
Battery Service, Inc. began an operation to recover lead from used batteries, dumping the acid
outside the plant, recovering the lead, and disposing of the broken battery casings in an on-site man-
made fishing pond. By 1977, the acid discharge began killing nearby cypress trees. Dead and
discolored vegetation, as well as strong sulfurous odors, have been noted along the drainage route
from the site. Sapp Battery undertook several steps to alleviate the problem; however, none of them
were effective. The owner stopped operations and abandoned the site in 1980. The site currently is
contaminating the Floridian Aquifer, which provides drinking water for most of the area residents
who depend on private wells. There are approximately 3,000 people living within a 3-mile radius of
the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and surface water are contaminated with lead from battery wastes. Soil
contaminants include heavy metals such as lead, antimony, and cadmium. People may be
exposed to heavy metals from drinking contaminated water or accidentally ingesting
contaminated soil.
101
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: emergency actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the entire site and the Steele Bay/off-site wetlands.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: In 1980, the EPA undertook an emergency cleanup action, which
resulted in a temporary restoration of pH levels similar to background levels downstream
from the site. In 1984, the EPA constructed a berm to contain surface water and moved
contaminated soil and sludges to a chemical management facility. In the same year, the Florida
Department of Environmental Resources excavated and removed roughly 9,000 cubic yards of highly
contaminated soil from the site.
Entire Site: In 1986, the EPA selected cleanup plans for the site that include: (1)
excavating soils and sediments; (2) stabilizing excavated soils and sediments; (3) on-site
disposal of the solidified materials into a cell built to sanitary landfill standards; (4)
removal and treatment of groundwater in the aquifers under the site; (5) treatment and discharge of
contaminated surface water from the on-site swamp and off-site Steele City Bay; and (6) a
monitoring program for drinking water wells within a 1-mile radius. In 1988, the EPA began
cleaning up the sources of site contamination. However, sampling indicated that more soil than had
been expected was contaminated, and the effort was suspended until the design phase is completed.
The engineering design of the approved cleanup activities for the source area is expected to be
completed in 1991. The design of the groundwater cleanup remedy is planned to begin in 1991.
Upon completion of the cleanup design for each portion of the site, cleanup activities will be started.
Steele City Bay/Off-site Wetlands: The cleanup remedy for the Steele City Bay and
the off-site wetlands was selected by the EPA in 1986. More information was required to
perform the design of the cleanup, so additional studies currently are underway. The
planned completion date for this investigation is 1992.
Site Facts: The cleanup plan for sediment excavation from Steele City Bay is being re-evaluated,
as excavation may reintroduce contaminants into surface waters. It may be more ecologically sound
to leave the sediments in place. Special Notice letters have been sent to potentially responsible
parties, requiring them to assist in the design and cleanup of the site.
Environmental Progress
The containment and removal of contaminated materials have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to hazardous materials while further investigations are taking place and cleanup
alternatives are being designed for the Sapp Battery Salvage site.
April 1991 102 SAPP BATTERY SALVAGE
-------
SCHUYLKILL M
CORPORATION
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD062794003
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
ONGRESSIONAL DIST. 09
Hillsborough County
Plant City
Schuylkill Metals Corporation (SMC) recovered lead from storage batteries on this 17 1/2-acre site
from 1972 through 1986. Before 1981, acid washdown from wastewater was stored in a 2-acre
unlined wastewater holding pond. Initially, lime was used to adjust the pH of the wastewater in the
holding pond, and later, ammonia was used for this purpose. The wastewater treatment system was
upgraded in 1981, and all wastewater was treated with sodium hydroxide for pH adjustment and was
discharged under permit to the publicly owned treatment works. Leachate containing heavy metals
and sulfuric acid is migrating from the unlined impoundments into an adjacent drainage ditch that
empties into Pemberton Creek. Heavy metals and ammonia contaminate the groundwater on site.
High levels of lead were found in the drainage ditch on site. The site is bounded by agricultural land
and a housing development. Approximately 20,000 residents live within 3 miles. A junior high
school, an elementary school, and a hospital are located within a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater contains contamination from heavy metals including lead and chromium, as
well as sulfate. Very high levels of lead also were found in the subsoil, surface water,
and sediments in a ditch on site that drains to Pemberton Creek and Marsh, an
environmentally sensitive area. People could be exposed to heavy metals in the
contaminated groundwater. Direct contact with or accidental ingestion of lead in the soil
is unlikely because the area is fenced, but trespassers could be exposed.
103
April! 991
-------
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 Florida and SMC, the party potentially responsible for
contamination at the site, have completed a study of the nature and extent of site
contamination and have evaluated the various technologies available for cleanup. Further
studies on the adjoining marshes have been conducted, as well as treatability studies for the soils. In
1990, the EPA decided on the best cleanup alternatives. They include excavation and solidification
of contaminated soils and treatment of surface water and groundwater. Contaminated wetlands
threaten the groundwater when they become dry, so one of the selected remedies is to keep the East
Marsh flooded. Fencing of the marshes and the creation of additional wetlands to compensate for
the continued exposure to contamination for some wildlife were two additional remedies chosen by
the EPA. The design of the remedies is scheduled to be completed in 1991.
Site Facts: A Consent Order between SMC and the Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation was signed in 1986 to study site contamination and the various methods to clean it up. In
March 1991, the EPA and Arrow Electronics, Inc., the parent company of SMC, signed a Consent
Decree to design and implement the selected cleanup actions.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA constructed a fence and performed preliminary site
investigations and determined that there were no immediate threats to public health or the
environment at the Schuylkill Metal site while cleanup activities are being designed.
April 1991 104 SCHUYLKILL METAL CORPORATION
-------
SHERWOOD
MEDICAL
INDUSTRIES
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD043861392
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Volusia County
3 miles north of Deland
Other Names:
Sherwood Medical Industries
The 42-acre Sherwood Medical Industries site currently is occupied by several manufacturing
buildings, a biological laboratory, sizeable parking areas, and additional structures, including a
wastewater treatment facility built in 1983. Sherwood Medical Industries has used the property
since 1959 for the manufacturing of medical supplies, primarily hypodermic needles. Industrial
operations currently include grinding, cleaning, hub processing, and de-coring of stainless steel and
aluminum parts used to manufacture hypodermic syringes. Sherwood also molds plastic syringes
and conducts in-house laboratory work. The Sherwood facility pumps approximately 175,000
gallons of water per day from the underlying Floridian Aquifer. Water drawn for industrial needs is
used for cleaning, manufacturing, and cooling/evaporation processes. Several manufacturing steps
result in wastewater that must be treated. The industrial wastewater facility on the site is licensed by
the Florida Department of Environmental Resources (FDER) to receive and treat wastewater from
the plant and to discharge the resulting effluent. The treated effluent currently is disposed of by
percolation and evaporation. In 1985, Sherwood Medical Industries installed an air stripper to treat
production water used in the facility's operations. Between 1971 and 1980, the company disposed
of about two tons of liquid and sludge waste into two unlined percolation ponds. During this time,
solids were removed from the ponds and placed into on-site, unlined impoundments. In 1982, the
Sherwood site was placed on the NPL at the request of the State of Florida because of the threat of
contamination from wastes stored in the holding ponds and impoundments. Subsequent testing
conducted by Sherwood Medical and the State revealed groundwater contamination in on-site wells.
Fifteen residences are in the immediate area of the site. Lake Mill borders the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from former
process wastes. The upper aquifer is contaminated, but is not currently used as a source
of drinking water. Contaminated groundwater could move off site or migrate downward
into the Floridian Aquifer.
105
April 1991
-------
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, Sherwood Medical notified the EPA that they would perform a
focused investigation at the site. During the investigation, Florida Health and
Rehabilitation Services received health-related complaints concerning private wells from
nearby residents. Chlorinated solvents were detected in samples from the on-site domestic water
supply well, but no violations of drinking water standards were found in samples from nearby
private wells. In 1987, the FDER asked Sherwood to sample the on-site water wells and a
downgradient residential well to assess the extent of contamination and to evaluate the need for
immediate cleanup activities to control and treat the contamination of the Floridian Aquifer.
Currently, Sherwood Medical is testing all private wells immediately adjacent to the site, along
Kepler Road, every 6 months. In 1991, the EPA selected a temporary remedy to prevent the
migration of contaminated groundwater off site. The remedy includes the installation of a system of
recovery wells in the surficial aquifer on site, installation of an on-site air stripper to treat recovered
groundwater, and discharge of treated groundwater into the on-site lake. Subsequent cleanup actions
for the surficial aquifer are planned to ensure that no migration of contaminants occurs. The
potentially responsible parties are designing this cleanup action and are scheduled to begin
implementing it in 1991.
Site Facts: The EPA and Sherwood Medical signed an Administrative Order on Consent for
Sherwood to study contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
The monitoring activities being performed at the Sherwood Medical site ensure that nearby residents
are not exposed to hazardous materials while cleanup activities are being designed and implemented.
ApriM991 106 SHERWOOD MEDICAL INDUSTRIES
-------
SIXTY-SECON
STREET DUM
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980728877
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Tampa
The Sixty-Second Street Dump is a 5-acre abandoned industrial waste dump in Tampa. The site
originally was used to mine sand. The areas excavated for sand subsequently were used by several
companies to dispose of various waste materials including shredded automobile parts, batteries,
waste cement, kiln dust, and kiln liners. The site came to the attention of the Hillsborough County
Environmental Protection Commission in 1976, when several fish kills occurred in the Peninsular
Fisheries breeding ponds on the western side of the dump. The site has been closed since 1976, but
unauthorized dumping of household garbage persisted for several years after the site closed. A fence
around the property presently prevents dumping. The site is located in the East Lake/Orient Park
neighborhood, which has a population of approximately 5,500 people. The residents in the vicinity
of the site use wells drawing on the Floridian Aquifer for their water supply. An 80-acre marshland
that drains into a nearby lake is located adjacent to the fish farm.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The disposal of wastes at the site has resulted in the release of heavy metals including
antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper and lead, as well as polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), in the soil. The surficial aquifer both on site and off site also is
contaminated with cadmium, chromium, and lead above health-based levels. During
heavy rain, water tends to accumulate in portions of the site, and the runoff may spread
contaminants in the soil and sediments to other areas. People may be at risk from coming
into direct contact with or accidentally ingesting the contaminated groundwater or soil.
Several fish kills have occurred, and a nearby marshland and fish farm are threatened.
107
April1991
-------
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: The State of Florida has completed investigating the extent of contamination
at the site. The remedy selected by the EPA in 1990 for the Sixty-Second Street Dump site
involves solidifying and stabilizing shredded auto parts and battery wastes and capping the
entire landfill. Groundwater in the shallow aquifer exceeding the drinking water standards for lead
and chromium will be recovered and treated, with discharge to either a local wastewater treatment
plant or to the Palm River. The design of the selected remedy is scheduled to begin in late 1991.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Sixty-Second Street Dump site to the NPL, the EPA determined that the site does
not currently pose an immediate threat to the public or the environment while engineering designs
for the selected remedy are being developed.
ApriM991 108 SIXTY-SECOND STREET DUMP
-------
STANDARD AIR
BUMPER CORP.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004126520
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 17
Dade County
Hialeah, north of
Miami International Airport
The Standard Auto Bumper Corporation has electroplated automobile bumpers, furniture, and other
metal objects with chrome on this 3/4-acre site since 1959. Before 1972, wastewater from the
electroplating and stripping process was discharged into a ditch between the process building and
railroad tracks. It was allowed to drain to the north, eventually percolating into the ground. In 1972,
the company began treating the plating waste before discharging it into a septic tank/percolation pit
and drain field system. Since 1979, treated wastewater has been discharged into the Hialeah sewer
system. The metal-containing sludge from the treatment is transported to an EPA-approved
hazardous waste facility. Currently, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 gallons per day of wastewater are
sent to a concrete diked area, where it is treated to convert hexavalent chromium to the less toxic
trivalent state before being discharged into the Hialeah sewer system. In 1985 and 1987, the EPA
detected heavy metals in surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater on the site. The most
extensive contamination was near the drainage pathway. The site is in the recharge zone of the
Biscayne Aquifer, which is a sole source supply of drinking water for all of Dade County. High
concentrations of contaminants also were found in the drain field system and percolation pits used
prior to 1972. It is unclear exactly what was placed in the pits. Four municipal well fields that
supply drinking water to approximately 750,000 people are within 3 miles of the site. One well is
within 4,200 feet of the site. Wells in the contaminated area have been taken out of service.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
I
Heavy metals including lead, cadmium, copper, chromium, and nickel from former waste
disposal practices contaminate the on-site groundwater, surface soil, and subsurface soil.
Potential risks to public health exist from direct contact with on-site industrial well water.
Risks also exist, especially for employees, from accidentally ingesting, inhaling, or
coming in direct contact with the contaminated soil and dust. The site is partially fenced
and guarded by dogs to reduce access to the site. Private drinking water wells located
downgradient of the site also may pose a health concern. Potential threats to the
environment include the migration of contaminants through groundwater flow, dust and
vapor particles traveling in the air, runoff from rainfall, and biota that may accumulate
contaminants from the soil, surface water, or groundwater.
109
April 1991
-------
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 1989, Standard Auto Bumper began excavating non-hazardous
waste soils and transporting them to solid waste landfills. They also excavated the sludge
pit and disposed of waste in a federally approved hazardous waste disposal facility.
Contaminated soil was taken either to an appropriate solid waste landfill or a hazardous waste
facility. Remaining soils above cleanup levels will be investigated and addressed during site cleanup
activities.
Entire Site: The EPA will use the Expanded Site Investigation done in 1987 and
additional studies to determine the nature and extent of heavy metal contamination at the
site and will study the feasibility of the alternative cleanup strategies. These studies are
scheduled to be completed in 1992, with design of the EPA's selected remedy to begin that same
year. The cleanup activities will focus on the groundwater contamination.
Site Facts: Standard Auto Bumper and the EPA signed an Administrative Order for the removal of
contaminants in 1989, which enforces a plan for remedial action agreed upon between Dade County
and Standard Auto. In 1990, an Administrative Order was signed requiring Standard Auto to
conduct site studies.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated sludges and soils has reduced the potential for exposure to
contamination at the Standard Auto Bumper Corp. site. This action has helped to protect the public
health and the environment while studies are ongoing.
April 1991 110 STANDARD AUTO BUMPER CORP.
-------
SYDNEY MIN
SLUDGE PO
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD000648055
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Brandon
Other Names:
Hillsborough County Sydney Mine
Site Description
The Sydney Mine Sludge Ponds site is a 9 1/2-acre former disposal site that was strip-mined for
phosphate rock from the 1930s through the 1950s. In late 1973, Hillsborough County leased a
portion of the Sydney Mine site from American Cyanamid and constructed a sludge disposal pond.
The pond received wastes from grease traps, septage waste, and waste oil. In 1979, the waste
disposal site was expanded and modified. At that time, the operation consisted of two primary
impoundments: a 1 1/2-acre septage pond and a 1/2-acre waste oil pond. About 16 million gallons
of waste including sludge, grease trappings, cutting oil, and other types of waste oil were placed in
the two ponds by haulers serving homes, schools, hospitals, and manufacturing and commercial
facilities in the area. A third impoundment was located adjacent to the eastern dike of the septage
pond and reportedly was used for disposal only on a few occasions. Waste disposal activities ended
in 1981, and Waste Management, Inc. purchased the property that same year. EPA tests in 1979
found contaminants in the ponds and in groundwater under the site. Approximately 4,000 people
within 3 miles of the site draw water from the underlying Floridian Aquifer.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, County, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic chemicals (VOCs). Site workers
and trespassers could be exposed to contaminated water, as well as to chemicals that
enter the air during the treatment process.
111
April! 991
-------
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: The County constructed an underground slurry wall around the
ponds to prevent contaminants from escaping and groundwater from entering.
Contaminated groundwater within the wall is being extracted, treated, and sprayed on the
surface. Surface cleaning consisted of excavation and incineration of more than 12,000 cubic yards
of contaminated materials. By 1989, the groundwater system treated more than 41 million gallons of
water. The sludge from the site has been burned, under controlled conditions, to break down the
contaminants.
Entire Site: The EPA will be monitoring the effectiveness of the existing pump and treat
system as well as undertaking modifications to the system, if necessary, and will ensure
that the system operates until sampling indicates that concentration levels of contaminants
have been reduced and remain at acceptable levels. The existing pump and treatment system is
being re-evaluated because the contamination plume has migrated beyond its reach. New pumping
wells may be needed.
Site Facts: Some of the parties potentially responsible for the contamination of the site were
issued an order to operate the groundwater treatment system and evaluate the performance of the
recovery and treatment system since they had not voluntarily agreed to do so. These parties have
been operating the system since 1989, and operation of the groundwater treatment system is
ongoing. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the existing system is to be completed in 1991.
Environmental Progress
The construction of a slurry wall and the treatment of contaminated soils, sludges, and groundwater
have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous substances at the Sydney Mine Sludge Ponds
site. These actions have helped to protect the public health and the environment while further
investigations and groundwater treatment take place.
April 1991 112 SYDNEY MINE SLUDGE PONDS
-------
TAYLOR ROA
LANDFILL
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980494959
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 0",
Hillsborough County
1/8 mile north of Seffner
The Taylor Road Landfill site consists of 40 acres. It is next to two other municipal landfills: the
Department of Transportation (DOT) Borrow Pit Landfill and the Hillsborough Heights Landfill.
These three landfills occupy a total of 200 acres. The Taylor Road Landfill operated from 1975 to
1980, and the DOT Borrow Pit Landfill and Hillsborough Heights Landfill both operated from 1980
to 1984. The three landfills were used for the disposal of municipal refuse, but unknown quantities
of industrial wastes may have been dumped at the sites as well. The community around the site is
mainly residential and agricultural. The closest residence is less than 1/8 mile from the site, and the
estimated population of the Seffner area is 27,000. Two schools are located within 1/2 mile of the
site. Approximately 580 wells are within 1 mile of the facility, and a community well system that
serves 2,500 people is located 1 mile downgradient from the landfill. The community to the
northeast of Seffner includes dairy farms, two of which are located between 1/4 and 1/2 mile
downgradient from the landfills.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and County
actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Private wells in the area are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including benzene and vinyl chloride and heavy metals including lead from the former
waste disposal activities at the site. Consuming contaminated groundwater and dairy
products could pose a health hazard to people. At one time, methane gas from the landfill
was detected at concentrations above the lower explosive limit near residences adjacent
to the site; the County installed a gas collection system in an attempt to correct this
problem. The Floridian Aquifer is the main source of potable water in the area, and
extensive sampling confirms that it is contaminated.
113
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
designed to clean up the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the Hillsborough County Utilities Department installed a
cap, drainage ditches, and methane gas control systems around each of the landfills. The
County also extended the water supply system to affected residences in the contaminated
area south of the landfill. At this time, the landfills have been capped and closed, and access to the
three landfills is restricted, because each is fenced and locked.
Entire Site: The EPA is planning to investigate the site to evaluate the full nature and
extent of the contamination. This effort is scheduled to be started in 1992. Because the
three large landfills are located adjacent to each other, it currently is impossible to
determine which one is responsible for contaminating the groundwater.
Site Facts: The EPA and the County have signed a Consent Decree with the Hillsborough County
Utilities Department. The Decree requires the County to install a public water supply to residences
with contaminated well water. It also requires the County to carry out a 30-year groundwater
monitoring program for the entire landfill.
Environmental Progress
The County's actions to cap and control the methane gas accumulation at the Taylor Road Landfill
have significantly reduced the threat of exposure to contaminants while the site is undergoing
investigations into the source of the contamination and the best technologies for permanent cleanup.
April 1991 114 TAYLOR ROAD LANDFILL
-------
TOWER
CHEMICAL
COMPANY
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004065546
Site Description —
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Lake County
Clermont, 15 miles west of Orlando
The 30-acre Tower Chemical Company (TCC) site is an abandoned chemical manufacturing facility.
During its operation, TCC owned and used two separate parcels of land; a main facility and an
irrigation field. From 1957 to 1981, TCC manufactured, produced, and stored various pesticides.
TCC discharged acidic wastewaters produced in the main facility into a 1/2-acre, unlined
percolation/evaporation pond where contaminants were solidified. TCC burned and buried the
wastes on a 1 1/2-acre plot located at the main facility. In 1980, the wastewater pond at the main
facility overflowed into an adjacent swamp and entered an unnamed stream north of the site. The
acidic wastewater migrated into Gourd Neck of Lake Apopka, where vegetation and aquatic animals
were affected. After two court orders, TCC stopped all discharges into the pond. High levels of
DDT and associated chemicals were detected at the main facility, and low fish populations were
noticed in the unnamed stream off site. The land of the former TCC plant was purchased by a group
of real estate investors who later resold it in 1981 to local farmers and various small manufacturing
firms. Approximately 1,000 people live near the site. The site is located in an area of mixed
agricultural, residential, and industrial uses.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Copper and pesticides, including DDT, have contaminated on-site surface and subsurface
soils, the shallow groundwater, and surface waters. Pesticides also contaminate on- and
off-site sediments. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including ethyl benzene are
present in on-site soils. Potential health threats include accidentally ingesting and
coming in direct contact with contaminated surface water, groundwater, and soil. The
main concern is that contaminants in the shallow aquifer may move into the deeper
Floridian Aquifer, which is the only source of drinking water to people in this area.
115
April 1991
-------
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 1983,2,275 square feet of contaminated soil, 1,545 cubic yards
of sediment, and 72 drums were excavated and disposed of off site. In addition, a million
gallons of wastewater were pumped from the pond, treated, and then discharged to the
unnamed stream. The EPA used clean fill to replace soil that was removed. The EPA built a system
to divert surface water runoff and also fenced the area. These actions were conducted to prevent
contaminants in the wastewater pond, on-site soil, and sediments from further migrating off site.
Entire Site: The EPA's remedies for cleanup of the site include: (1) removing and
treating on site approximately 100,000,000 gallons of contaminated groundwater, storing
it temporarily on site, followed by discharge to surface water, (2) excavating and burning
approximately 9,000 cubic yards of contaminated surface soil from both the overflow area and
portions of the burn/burial area of the site; (3) removing any drums that should have been excavated
during the previous removal activities, if any are found; (4) decontaminating the two storage tanks
and nearby concrete pads; and (5) diverting contaminated runoff. In 1987, the design for the water
treatment system for the former percolation/evacuation pond was completed. To date, the following
cleanup activities have been completed: installation of a private resident drinking water well to the
deep aquifer, plugging and abandonment of several monitoring wells, and transport and disposal of
5,000 gallons of contaminated water, which had been stored in site in a pool formed during previous
actions on the site.
Site Facts: In 1983, the EPA issued an order to Tower Chemical Company to clean up the site.
The EPA began cleanup activities at the site because the company did not respond.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soil, treatment of contaminated groundwater, and installation of a
drinking water well have reduced the potential for exposure to and the further spread of hazardous
materials at the Tower Chemical Company site while further cleanup activities take place.
April 1991 116 TOWER CHEMICAL COMPANY
-------
TRI-CITY OIL
CONSERVATIO
CORP.
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD070864541
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
Hillsborough County
Temple Terrace, near Tampa
The Tri-City Oil Conservationist Corporation property, occupying about 1/4 of an acre, housed a
heating oil business from 1960 to 1975. From 1978 to 1983, the facility acted as a waste oil and
distribution center. Three aboveground storage tanks and one known underground storage tank were
on site. While it operated, people complained to the State about the odor and sloppy practices at the
facility. In 1982, 3,000 gallons of oil were spilled. When the owner failed to clean up the site at the
request of the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER), the EPA removed the bulk
of the oil and later removed contaminated soil. Tri-City was dissolved involuntarily in 1983, and the
owners are in bankruptcy. An estimated 35 people are served by 9 private wells and live within a
block of the site. The site is about 3,000 feet from the Hillsborough River and within 3 miles of the
public well field serving the community's 16,000 residents.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through Federal
and potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Deleted Date: 01/19/88
Threats and Contaminants
Elevated levels of lead were found in initial sampling of the groundwater, but none were
found in later samples. Soil excavated from the area was heavily contaminated with
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals from former site activities.
Removal of contaminated soils and sludges in 1984, and again in 1986, has adequately
protected human health.
Cleanup Approach
The site was addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
117
April 1991
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The EPA cleaned up the 3,000-gallon oil spill in 1984 and excavated
850 cubic yards of contaminated soil and sludges, which were disposed of off site. The
excavated areas were brought back to their original grade using clean fill, and the EPA
planted grass to prevent erosion. Tests of soil, groundwater, and sediment in 1986 showed that the
source of contamination was removed.
Entire Site: After detailed site analyses, the EPA chose to perform no further action at
the site, since current contaminant levels do not exceed State or Federal drinking water
standards. The EPA deleted the site from the NPL in 1988.
Site Facts: The EPA issued an Administrative Order to the parties potentially responsible for
contamination at the site in 1984, informing them that their activities represented an imminent and
substantial danger to public health and the environment, and that they must promptly stop these
activities.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soil and sludge has restored the site to the environmental standards
established by the State and the EPA. Therefore, no further cleanup actions were necessary at the
site. The completed actions have protected the public health and the environment The Tri-City Oil
Conservationist Corp. site has been deleted from the NPL.
April 1991
118
TRI-CITY OIL CONSERVATIONIST CORP.
-------
VARSOL SPILL
FLORIDA
EPA ID* FLD980602346
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 18
Dade County
Miami International Airport
Other Names:
Biscayne Aquifer Site
Site Description
The Varsol Spill Site is located under a portion of the Miami International Airport. This site and two
others, the Miami Drum Services site and the Northwest 58th Street Landfill, are being collectively
considered as one management unit for the cleanup investigation and selection of cleanup activities.
They are related, in that they all lie on the Biscayne Aquifer, which is the sole source of drinking
water for the residents of southeastern Florida. Since 1966, there have been approximately 15 spills
and leaks at the site totaling 2 million gallons. This included an underground pipeline leak resulting
in the discharge of about 1,600,000 gallons of a petroleum solvent at the Miami International
Airport. An investigative study determined in 1985 that there was no trace of the solvent at or
around the airport. Several factors probably contributed to the dissipation of the contaminants in the
aquifer: some of the solvent was recovered; biodegradation is believed to have taken place; and the
hydrology of the area indicates that some of the solvent contributed to, and became part of, the
"background" contamination in the aquifer. The area surrounding the site is highly populated, with
10,000 people living within 3 miles. The Miami Springs Well Field, which provides drinking water
for a significant portion of Dade County, is located 2,000 feet from the walls of the airport.
Site Responsibility:
This site was addressed through Federal
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Dale: 09/01/83
Deleted Date: 09/01/88
Threats and Contaminants
The surface water and groundwater were contaminated with polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). The Varsol site is not a public health concern, as the contaminants
from the spill can no longer be identified in the groundwater.
119
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: After detailed site analyses, the EPA signed a decision in 1985, mandating
that no action needed to take place at this site because the Varsol site, itself, was not a
public or environmental threat. The site was deleted from the NPL in 1988.
Site Facts: Dade County brought enforcement action against Eastern Airlines, the owner of the
solvents that spilled. A Consent Agreement was signed to assess and clean up, if necessary, several
maintenance areas and tank farms.
Environmental Progress
No actions were needed at the Varsol Spill Site, as contaminants that were spilled at the site were no
longer detected in the area. Therefore, the possibility of exposure to hazardous substances at the site
is no longer a concern. The EPA performed final investigations and deleted the site from the NPL in
1988.
April 1991
120
VARSOL SPILL SITE
-------
WHITEHOUSE
OIL PITS
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980602767
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
10 miles south of Jacksonville
The Whitehouse Oil Pits site occupies approximately 7 acres of an upland area immediately adjacent
to a cypress swamp. The site itself consists of seven unlined pits, constructed by Allied Petroleum,
where waste oil sludge, acid, and contaminated waste oil from an oil reclaiming process were
disposed. The first pits were constructed in 1958, and, by 1986, the company had constructed and
filled the pits with approximately 127,000 cubic yards of waste. Allied Petroleum then went
bankrupt After assuming ownership of the property by tax default, the City of Jacksonville installed
and operated a treatment and dewatering system at the oil pits. In 1976, the dike around one of the
pits ruptured, spilling 200,000 gallons of wastes into wetlands along McGirts Creek. The pit was
backfilled after the incident. A second pit released its contents in 1976. Contamination has been
detected in all of the zones of the surficial aquifer. The site is located near the Whitehouse
community, which has a population of approximately 6,000 people. Most of the residents use
private wells for their drinking water source.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
II
The groundwater is contaminated with various heavy metals and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), including benzene, from the wastes disposed of at the site. The soil
is contaminated with lead, and arsenic has been found in the leachate. Accidental
releases of wastes have contaminated the nearby wetlands areas. Residents in the area
could be exposed to contaminated groundwater, however, at present, little contamination
has been detected.
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.
121
April 1991
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA conducted several initial cleanup actions in 1986 to
stabilize site conditions and to prevent the spread of contamination. A water treatment
system was developed and activated to drain the contaminated liquids from the pits. After
the pits were drained, they were filled with construction debris, scrap lumber, trees, wood chips, and
other non-degradable wastes to stabilize the pits. A 3-inch layer of automobile shredder waste was
placed over the fill, and a mixture of dirt and oil was placed over the shredder waste as a sealer. It
was then covered with 12 inches of sand and planted with local grasses. Ditches were constructed to
control runoff. Final monitoring of the test wells and drainage effluents showed remaining low
levels of chlorinated organics, heavy metals, and acids.
Entire Site: In 1985, the EPA selected a cleanup remedy that includes construction of a
slurry wall around the entire site to prevent migration of contaminants; recovery,
treatment, and removal of contaminated groundwater, removal of the contaminated
sediments from the northeastern tributary of McGirts Creek; and capping the entire site. A
treatability study to determine the effectiveness of selected alternative remedies for site cleanup has
been initiated. Preliminary results have indicated that some preferable cleanup alternatives may
exist, including bioremediation and solidification/stabilization. A final remedy will be chosen once
these studies are completed.
Environmental Progress
The treatment and stabilization of wastes have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to
hazardous substances at the Whitehouse Oil Pits site while further investigations and cleanup
activities are being completed.
April 1991 122 WHITEHOUSE OIL PITS
-------
WILSON CONCEP
OF FLORIDA, I
FLORIDA
EPA ID#FLD041184383
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 14
Broward County
Pompano Beach
Wilson Concepts of Florida, Inc. is a 2-acre site located in an industrial area of Pompano Beach.
This site is an active plant that has been manufacturing precision-machine parts since 1974. The
facility was leased from 1967 until 1974 by Southeast Tool and Die, Inc. (STD). In 1974, STD was
purchased by Wilson Concepts, Inc. The types of activities performed here include machining,
drilling, and milling of metal parts, along with vibrating, deburring, degreasing, steam cleaning, and
spray-coating of parts. On several occasions, Wilson has been cited for violations of County
regulations pertaining to the discharge of industrial wastes onto the ground and the overflow of
wastes from two 1,200-gallon underground tanks into a storm drain, which eventually also dripped
onto the ground. In 1986, the EPA discovered contamination on the ground, in groundwater samples
from monitoring wells, and in a water sample from the storm drain. An investigation in 1987 found
that Wilson was in violation of operating a hazardous materials facility without a license. The
Wilson Concepts site is located adjacent to Chemform, Inc., another NPL site. Approximately
93,000 people depend on drinking water from at least 4 municipal wells field located within 3 miles
of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
I
On-site groundwater and surface water located in the storm drain are contaminated with
heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the site spills and overflows.
On-site soils located near the storm drain are contaminated with heavy metals and VOCs.
The Biscayne Aquifer, a water-bearing rock foundation, underlies the site. It is a sole
source of drinking water for all the residents in Broward County. Numerous cavities in
the quartz sand that overlies the limestone of this rock foundation facilitate the movement
of contaminants into the groundwater, as well as the movement of contaminated
groundwater into drinking supplies. Should the Biscayne Aquifer become contaminated,
area residents using this resource would be at risk. In addition, direct contact with or
accidental ingestion of contaminated surface water or soil may present health risks.
123
April! 991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on soil and groundwater
cleanup.
Response Action Status
Soil and Groundwater: The potentially responsible parties for site contamination will
conduct investigations into the type and extent of contaminated soils and groundwater at
the site and will identify alternative cleanup actions. The work plan for the study currently
is under review by the EPA, and the field work for the study began in 1990.
Site Facts: The EPA sent Notice Letters to the potentially responsible parties in 1989, requesting
that these parties accept responsibility for conducting an investigation of site contamination and
cleanup methods. Later that year, the EPA and two parties signed an Administrative Order on
Consent to conduct the investigative study. One of the parties, CenTrust Bank, has been taken over
by Federal regulators and now is administered by the Resolution Trust Corporation. So far, this
takeover has slowed the process for cleaning the site, and the regulators have indicated that they will
not comply with the Administrative Order. Therefore, the EPA may need to take over responsibility
for cleaning the site. It is anticipated that the studies for the two adjacent sites, Wilson and Chem-
Form, will take place concurrently.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and determined that
there are no immediate threats to the surrounding community while investigations and cleanup
activities are taking place at the Wilson Concepts of Florida, Inc. site.
April 1991 124 WILSON CONCEPTS OF FLORIDA. INC.
-------
WINGATE ROAD
MUNICIPAL IN
DUMP
FLORIDA
EPAID#FLD981021470
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 15
Broward County
Fort Lauderdale
The Wingate Road Municipal Incinerator Dump covers 61 acres in Fort Lauderdale. The site
includes an incinerator, offices, and a 40-acre disposal area, all owned and operated by the City of
Fort Lauderdale. The incinerator and disposal areas were used from 1955 to 1978. Residential
wastes, commercial wastes, and incinerator residue were disposed of at the dump. The facility
received 480 tons of waste a day and operated 7 days a week. Cooling water was pumped into the
incinerator from on-site wells and then was discharged into an unlined lagoon in the southeastern
corner of the facility. Ash residues mixed with sludge material from the lagoon were spread onto the
ground in the disposal area. According to a resident of the area, hazardous waste may have been
dumped on the site. In 1981, a resident reported to the Broward County Health Department that 100
steel drums had been buried from 1955 to 1958 under a dirt road. The EPA conducted tests in 1985
in the area and found pesticides in the surface and subsurface soil in the dump area. Approximately
44,000 people reside within a mile of the site, and an estimated 353,000 people draw drinking water
from 4 municipal well fields within 3 miles of the site. Land use in the area is a combination of
residential, commercial, and industrial.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The soil and subsurface soil are contaminated with pesticides including DDT, aldrin, and
chlordane from former waste disposal practices at the site. Direct contact with or
accidental ingestion of the contaminated soil from the area of the hazardous substances
pose a potential health threat. The site is only partially fenced, making it possible for
people and animals to come into direct contact with hazardous substances. Elevated
pesticide concentrations also were reported in sediments from Rock Pit Lake, which is
used for recreational activities. The lake intersects the Biscayne Aquifer, presenting a
threat of contaminants entering the drinking water supply.
125
April 1991
-------
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: In preparation for initiating site cleanup activities, the EPA currently is
conducting a search for potentially responsible parties that have contributed to site
contamination. The EPA expects to begin a comprehensive investigation in 1991 of site
activities and will study various cleanup strategies. Once the study is completed, a final remedy
selection will be made.
Environmental Progress
After placing the Wingate Road Municipal Incinerator Dump site on the NPL, the EPA determined
that the site does not pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment while the site is
undergoing intensive investigations into permanent cleanup strategies.
April 1991
126
WINGATE ROAD MUNICIPAL
INCINERATOR DUMP
-------
WOODBURY CH
COMPANY
(PRINCETON PLA
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD004U6346
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 19
Dade County
1/2 mile southwest of Princeton
Since 1975, the 3-acre Woodbury Chemical Company has blended technical-grade materials in 50-
gallon vats to produce pesticides and fertilizers. The site consists of six buildings including an
office, warehouses, and production buildings, as well as several aboveground storage tanks, the
majority of which are diked Most of the facility grounds are paved, and the entire site is fenced. In
1985, the EPA identified various pesticides in four surface soil samples from the site. An estimated
17,600 people live within 3 miles of the site. These residents depend on the Biscayne Aquifer
underlying the site for their drinking water. The EPA has designated the aquifer as the sole source
of drinking water for Dade County. Three well fields and several private wells are within 3 miles of
the site, and one private well is 570 feet from the site. A canal that flows into Biscayne Bay is
approximately 2,350 feet to the northeast of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
II
The soil is contaminated with pesticides including aldrin, dieldrin, and chlordane from
former site operations. Direct contact with the contaminated soil may be a health threat.
Due to the proximity of the Biscayne Aquifer, there is the potential for off-site
groundwater contamination. According to the Florida Marine Patrol, manatees, which
are designated as an endangered species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are
frequently seen near the site.
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.
127
April! 991
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Contaminated soil was removed from the site by the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination in 1990. The soil was taken to an off-site
facility for proper disposal.
Entire Site: The EPA currently is investigating the site to determine the nature and
extent of contamination. Field work was completed early in 1991. The investigation is
planned for completion in 1992, at which time the best cleanup alternatives will be
determined.
Site Facts: Notice Letters were sent in 1990 to the parties potentially responsible for the
contamination of the site. The EPA has decided to complete site investigations on its own after
receiving an unacceptable offer to investigate site contamination from the potentially responsible
parties.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated soil has reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at
the Woodbury Chemical Company site and has reduced the potential for spread of contaminants.
These actions have helped to protect the public and the environment while investigations are taking
place.
April 1991 128 WOODBURY CHEMICAL COMPANY
(PRINCETON PLANT)
-------
YELLOW WAT
ROAD DUMP
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD980844179
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Duval County
1 mile south of Baldwin
Other Names:
Environmental Energy Co.
Prior to commercial development, the 14-acre Yellow Water Road Dump site was part of a dairy
farm. The site was purchased in the late 1940s; however, it was not until 1981, with the formation of
American Environmental Energy Corporation (AEEC), that the site was developed for commercial
uses. The AEEC was formed on the premise that insulation fluids contaminated with
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) could be removed from transformers, and the transformers could
then be salvaged. AEEC planned, through a joint venture with American Electric Corporation
(AEC), to dispose of the PCB-contaminated fluids in an on-site incinerator. From 1981 to 1984,
transformers, tanks, and drums filled with PCBs, waste oils, and solvents were transported to the site
for disposal. Incineration of PCBs never occurred, as neither AEEC nor AEC were issued permits to
conduct on-site incineration. The operation ended when the property was rezoned. By that time,
approximately 63,000 gallons of oil and transformer fluid containing PCBs had leaked from
containers, drums, and tanks, according to the EPA. Two residences with private wells are located
on the Yellow Water Road site property. A trailer park with 100 residents using private wells is
located approximately 1/4 mile to the east of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
ZE
PCBs, iron, and lead from former site operations have been found in the groundwater
both on and off site. PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, and arochlor were detected in the soil
samples taken from the site. Accidental ingestion of contaminated groundwater and
direct contact with contaminated soil and groundwater may pose health threats.
129
April! 991
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of soil and groundwater.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1984, the EPA removed drums from the site, empty drums
were crushed, and full drums were staged for sampling. Six tanks and a nearby pond were
sampled. Transformers were sampled, opened, decontaminated, and removed from the
site; the contaminated soil from the area was excavated. In 1985, a water treatment system was set
up for the water used in the cleanup and for the water in the pond. After the cleanup was completed,
the site was closed and public access was denied. In 1988, an on-site warehouse was demolished
and disposed of, contaminated soil was stockpiled off site, approximately 79,000 gallons of PCB-
contaminated liquids were incinerated and 700 transformers and 18,700 pounds of capacitors were
disposed of off site.
Soil: In 1990, the EPA selected a remedy for cleanup of the soil, which includes the
excavation of PCB-contaminated soil and sediments, treatment by stabilization/
solidification, and the placement of these soils in the former operations area. Excavated
areas will be backfilled and revegetated. In addition, the site will be fenced to restrict access, and
groundwater monitoring will continue, and a treatability study will be performed to verify the
effectiveness of the stabilization and solidification process. Design of the selected cleanup
alternatives began in 1991.
Groundwater: In early 1991, the EPA began additional investigations into the nature
and extent of groundwater contamination at the site. These studies will help determine the
full extent of migration of PCB contamination in the upper water table and will determine
if the lower water table has been affected by the contamination.
Site Facts: In 1985, the EPA secured a court order that prevented the owner of the site from
removing transformers from the site without the EPA's approval. The potentially responsible parties
are developing the designs of the selected soil cleanup under a Unilateral Administrative Order
issued in March 1991.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions taken to remove contaminated drums and to decommission transformers on
the site have significantly reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the Yellow
Water Road Dump site while the investigation into a permanent cleanup solution is taking place.
April 1991 130 YELLOW WATER ROAD DUMP
-------
ZELLWOOD GRO
WATER CONTA
FLORIDA
EPA ID# FLD049985302
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Orange County
1/2 mile west of the
Town of Zellwood
Other Names:
Drum Service
Company of Florida
The Zellwood Ground Water Contamination site covers 57 acres near Zellwood and is occupied by
four industries. Between 1963 and 1971, Drum Service Company of Florida, a drum recycling
facility, operated a wastewater disposal system without a regulatory permit, treating and disposing of
wastewater in two unlined on-site ponds. In 1980, the company eliminated the use of these ponds
and drained and removed contaminated sediments from them. Douglas Fertilizer and Chemical
Company and Southern Liquid Fertilizer discharged wastewater from their production process into
three unlined lagoons. Additionally, from 1960 to 1983, the Zellwin Farms Company facility, a
vegetable washing and packing plant, discharged wastewater from the vegetable washing process
into a ditch. Approximately 300 homes are located within a 1-mile radius of the site and depend on
private wells as their sole source of drinking water. The Town of Zellwood is 1/2 mile away, and
about 5,000 of its residents use groundwater for drinking water. A portion of the site is a marshy
wetland.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
l
The groundwater, sediments, soil, and sludges are contaminated with organics including
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, and heavy metals including
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and lead from former waste disposal practices at the site.
People who use contaminated groundwater as their source of drinking water may be at
risk. Those who come in direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated soil,
sludges, or sediments may be harmed. If contaminants have leached from the lagoon
areas into the on-site wetland, wildlife may be adversely affected.
131
April 1991
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on soil and groundwater cleanup.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: During an EPA inspection in 1982, an abandoned drum area was
discovered. Under EPA supervision, the party potentially responsible for the drums,
NAPA Properties, paid for their removal.
Soil: In 1987, the EPA had selected two remedies to clean up soil. In 1990, the EPA
amended the earlier remedy to include excavation of contaminated soil, followed by
solidification and fixation on site. If necessary, pond sediments will be similarly treated.
The EPA is preparing the technical design for cleaning up the soil. Once the design phase is finished
in 1991, soil cleanup activities will begin.
Groundwater: The EPA is planning to begin an investigation into the nature and extent
of groundwater contamination in 1992. This investigation is expected to be completed in
1993, at which time the EPA will evaluate the alternatives for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The removal of drums has eliminated immediate threats to the public at the Zellwood Ground Water
Contamination site while further investigations and the design of cleanup activities continue.
April 1991
132
ZELLWOOD GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION
-------
APPENDIX A
Glossary:
Terms Used
in the
Fact Sheets
133
-------
GLOSSARY
This glossary defines terms used
throughout the NPL Volumes. The
terms and abbreviations contained in
this glossary apply specifically to work
performed under the Superfund program in
the context of hazardous waste management.
These terms may have other meanings when
used in a different context.
Terms Used
in the NPL
Book
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 possibly may create toxic com-
pounds or release heavy metal contaminants
that remain in the environment long after the
acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A legal
and enforceable agreement between the EPA
and the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination. Under the terms of the Order,
the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally,
the EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for
site studies).
Aeration: A process that promotes break-
down of contaminants in soil or water by
exposing them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR): The Federal agency
within the U.S. Public Health Service charged
with carrying out the health-related responsi-
bilities of CERCLA.
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.
Ambient Air: Any unconfined part of the
atmosphere. Refers to the air that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity
of contaminated air sources.
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
purposes. The water contained in the aquifer
is called groundwater. A sole source aquifer
supplies 50% or more of the drinking water of
an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling
into the earth until water is reached, which,
from internal pressure, flows up like a foun-
tain.
135
-------
GLOSSARY.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring pro-
cess by which a compound is reduced in
concentration over time through adsorption,
degradation, dilution, and/or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in remov-
ing particulates from the air by passing it
through cloth bags in an enclosure.
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH
(greater than 7.0), which tend to be corrosive
in chemical reactions. When bases are mixed
with acids, they neutralize each other, form-
ing salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth
used to prevent the migration of contami-
nants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some
contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living
tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people, as
they breathe contaminated air, drink contami-
nated water, or eat contaminated food.
Biological Treatment: The use of bacteria or
other microbial organisms to break down
toxic organic materials into carbon dioxide
and water.
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using
naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants and
break them down into non-hazardous compo-
nents.
Bog: A type of wetland that is covered with
peat moss deposits. Bogs depend primarily
on moisture from the air for their water
source, are usually acidic, and are rich in plant
residue [see Wetland].
Boom: A floating device used to contain oil
floating on a body of water or to restrict the
potential overflow of waste liquids from
containment structures.
Borehole: A hole that is drilled into the
ground and used to sample soil or ground-
water.
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 generally is
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.
Carbon Disulfide: A degreasing agent
formerly used extensively for parts washing.
This compound has both inorganic and or-
ganic properties, which increase cleaning
efficiency. However, these properties also
cause chemical reactions that increase the
hazard to human health and the environment
Carbon Treatment: [see Carbon Adsorp-
tion].
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.
CERCLA: [see Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compensation, and Liabil-
ity Act].
Characterization: The sampling, monitor-
ing, and analysis of a site to determine the
136
-------
GLOSSARY
extent and nature of toxic releases. Character-
ization provides the basis for acquiring the
necessary technical information to develop,
screen, analyze, and select appropriate
cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the
potential for leaching or other movement.
Chromated Copper Arsenate: An insecti-
cide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This
salt is used extensively as a wood preservative
in pressure-treating operations. It is highly
toxic and water-soluble, making it a relatively
mobile contaminant in the environment.
Cleanup: Actions taken to eliminate a
release or threat of release of a hazardous
substance. The term "cleanup" sometimes is
used interchangeably with the terms remedial
action, removal action, response action, or
corrective action.
Closure: The process by which a landfill
stops accepting wastes and is shut down,
under Federal guidelines that ensure the
protection of the public and the environment.
Comment Period: A specific interval during
which the public can review and comment on
various documents and EPA actions related to
site cleanup. For example, a comment period
is provided when the EPA proposes to add
sites to the NPL. There is minimum 3-week
comment period for community members to
review and comment on the remedy proposed
to clean up a site.
Community Relations: The EPA effort to
establish and maintain two-way communica-
tion with the public. Goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related ac-
tions, assuring public input into decision-
making processes related to affected commu-
nities, and making certain that the Agency is
aware of, and responsive to, public concerns.
Specific community relations activities are
required in relation to Superfund cleanup
actions [see Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA): Congress enacted the
CERCLA, known as Superfund, in 1980 to
respond directly to hazardous waste problems
that may pose a threat to the public health and
the environment. The EPA administers the
Superfund program.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of
water, such as streams or rivers, come to-
gether.
Consent Decree: A legal document, ap-
proved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between the EPA and the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the
potentially responsible parties are required to
perform and/or the costs incurred by the
government that the parties will reimburse, as
well as the roles, responsibilities, and enforce-
ment options that the government may exer-
cise in the event of non-compliance by poten-
tially responsible parties. If a settlement
between the EPA and a potentially respon-
sible party includes cleanup actions, it must
be in the form of a Consent Decree. A Con-
sent 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 a pond or a lagoon, to pre-
vent the migration of contaminants into the
environment
137
-------
GLOSSARY.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or sub-
stance whose quantity, location, or nature
produces undesirable health or environmental
effects.
Contingency Plan: A document setting out
an organized, planned, and coordinated course
of action to be followed in case of a fire,
explosion, or other accident that releases toxic
chemicals, hazardous wastes, or radioactive
materials into the environment
Cooperative Agreement: A contract be-
tween the EPA and the States, wherein a State
agrees to manage or monitor certain site
cleanup responsibilities and other activities on
a cost-sharing basis.
Cost Recovery: A legal process by which
potentially responsible parties can be required
to pay back the Superfund program for money
it spends on any cleanup actions [see Poten-
tially Responsible Parties].
Cover: Vegetation or other material placed
over a landfill or other waste material. It can
be designed to reduce movement of water into
the waste and to prevent erosion that could
cause the movement of contaminants.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood preserv-
ing operations and produced by distillation of
tar, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocar-
bons and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
[see PAHs and PNAs]. Contaminating
sediments, soils, and surface water, creosotes
may cause skin ulcerations and cancer
through prolonged exposure.
Culvert: A pipe used for drainage under a
road, railroad track, path, or through an
embankment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a
chemical is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deminimis: This legal phrase pertains to
settlements with parties who contributed
small amounts of hazardous waste to a site.
This process allows the EPA to settle with
small, or de minimis contributors, as a single
group rather than as individuals, saving time,
money, and effort.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes,
soils, or chemicals.
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materi-
als. Disposal may be accomplished through
the use of approved secure landfills, surface
impoundments, land farming, deep well
injection, or incineration.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgra-
dient of a contaminated groundwater source
are prone to receiving pollutants.
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated,
that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or
industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes
discharged into surface waters.
Emission: Pollution discharged into the
atmosphere from smokestacks, other vents,
and surface areas of commercial or industrial
facilities.
Emulsiflers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil
and water.
138
-------
GLOSSARY
Endangerment Assessment: A study con-
ducted to determine the risks posed to public
health or the environment by contamination at
NPL sites. The EPA or the State conducts the
study when a legal action is to be taken to
direct the potentially responsible parties to
clean up a site or pay for the cleanup. An
endangerment assessment supplements an
investigation of the site hazards.
Enforcement: EPA, State, or local legal
actions taken against parties to facilitate
settlements; to compel compliance with laws,
rules, regulations, or agreements; and/or to
obtain penalties or criminal sanctions for
violations. Enforcement procedures may
vary, depending on the specific requirements
of different environmental laws and related
regulatory requirements. Under CERCLA,
for example, the EPA will seek to require
potentially responsible parties to clean up a
Superfund site or pay for the cleanup [see
Cost Recovery].
Erosion: The wearing away of land surface
by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally
from weather or surface runoff, but can be
intensified by such land-related practices as
farming, residential or industrial develop-
ment, road building, or timber-cutting. Ero-
sion may spread surface contamination to off-
site locations.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh
water from rivers and salt water from
nearshore ocean waters are mixed. These
areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt
marshes, and lagoons. These water ecosys-
tems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and
wildlife.
Evaporation Ponds: Areas where sewage
sludge or other watery wastes are dumped and
allowed to dry out.
Feasibility Study: The analysis of the
potential cleanup alternatives for a site. The
feasibility study usually starts as soon as the
remedial investigation is underway; together,
they are commonly referred to as the RI/FS
[see Remedial Investigation].
Filtration: A treatment process for removing
solid (paniculate) matter from water by
passing the water through sand, activated
carbon, or a man-made filter. The process is
often used to remove particles that contain
contaminants.
Flood Plain: An area along a river, formed
from sediment deposited by floods. Flood
plains periodically are innundated by natural
floods, which can spread contamination.
Flue Gas: The air that is emitted from a
chimney after combustion in the burner
occurs. The gas can include nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides,
particles, and many chemical pollutants.
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.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain
system constructed of perforated pipes, which
is used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft
coal into gas for use as a fuel.
Generator: A facility that emits pollutants
into the air or releases hazardous wastes into
water or soil.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, gener-
ally in response to a Special Notice letter,
made by a potentially responsible party,
consisting of a written proposal demonstrating
a potentially responsible party's qualifications
139
-------
GLOSSARY.
and willingness to perform a site study or
cleanup.
Groundwater: Underground water that fills
pores in soils or openings in rocks to the point
of saturation. In aquifers, groundwater occurs
in sufficient quantities for use as drinking and
irrigation water and other purposes.
Groundwater Quality Assessment: The
process of analyzing the chemical characteris-
tics of groundwater to determine whether any
hazardous materials exist.
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 pres-
ence of halogens.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The
principal screening tool used by the EPA to
evaluate relative risks to public health and the
environment associated with abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS
calculates a score based on the potential of
hazardous substances spreading from the site
through the air, surface water, or groundwater
and on other factors such as nearby popula-
tion. The HRS score is the primary factor in
deciding if the site should be on the NPL.
Hazardous Waste: By-products of society
that can pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment
when improperly managed. It possesses at
least one of four characteristics (ignitability,
corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity), or appears
on special EPA lists.
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site con-
taining exceptionally high levels of contami-
nation.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater,
with particular emphasis on the chemistry and
movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge
confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Incineration: A group of treatment technolo-
gies involving destruction of waste by con-
trolled burning at high temperatures, e.g.,
burning sludge to reduce the remaining
residues to a non-burnable ash that can be
disposed of safely on land, in some waters, or
in underground locations.
Infiltration: The movement of water or other
liquid down through soil from precipitation
(rain or snow) or from application of waste-
water to the land surface.
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid
flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treatment
plant.
Injection Well: A well into which waste
fluids are placed, under pressure, for purposes
of disposal.
Inorganic Chemicals: Chemical substances
of mineral origin, not of basic carbon struc-
ture.
Installation Restoration Program: The
specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its hazardous
waste sites and controlling the migration of
hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Intake: The source from where a water
supply is drawn, such as from a river or water
body.
Interagency Agreement: A written agree-
ment between the EPA and a Federal agency
that has the lead for site cleanup activities,
140
-------
GLOSSARY
setting forth the roles and responsibilities of
the agencies for performing and overseeing
the activities. States often are parties to
interagency agreements.
Interim (Permit) Status: Conditions under
which hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities, that were operating
when regulations under the RCRA became
final in 1980, are temporarily allowed by the
EPA to continue to operate while awaiting
denial or issuance of a permanent permit. The
facility must comply with certain regulations
to maintain interim status.
Lagoon: A shallow pond or liquid waste
containment structure. Lagoons typically are
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
commonly is used for disposal of composted
wastes and sludges.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is
placed in or on land. Sanitary landfills are
disposal sites for non-hazardous solid wastes.
The waste is spread in layers, compacted to
the smallest practical volume, and covered
with soil at the end of each operating day.
Secure chemical landfills are disposal sites for
hazardous waste. They are designed to
minimize the chance of release of hazardous
substances into the environment [see Re-
source Conservation and Recovery Act|.
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles
through or drains from waste, carrying soluble
components from the waste. Leach, Leach-
ing [v.t.]: The process by which soluble
chemical components are dissolved and
carried through soil by water or some other
percolating liquid.
Leachate Collection System: A system that
gathers liquid that has leaked into a landfill or
other waste disposal area and pumps it to the
surface for treatment.
Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier
designed to prevent leachate (waste residue)
from leaking from a landfill. Liner materials
include plastic and dense clay.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct, often
incremental, steps that are taken to solve site
pollution problems. Depending on the com-
plexity, site cleanup activities can be sepa-
rated into several of these phases.
Marsh: A type of wetland that does not
contain peat moss deposits and is dominated
by vegetation. Marshes may be either fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetland].
Migration: The movement of oil, gas,
contaminants, water, or other liquids through
porous and permeable soils or rock.
Mill Tailings: [See Mine Tailings].
Mine Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left
from mining operations. Tailings often
contain high concentrations of lead, uranium,
and arsenic or other heavy metals.
Mitigation: Actions taken to improve site
conditions by limiting, reducing, or control-
ling toxicity and contamination sources.
Modeling: A technique using a mathematical
or physical representation of a system or
theory that tests the effects that changes on
system components have on the overall
performance of the system.
Monitoring Wells: Special wells drilled at
specific locations within, or surrounding, a
hazardous waste site where groundwater can
be sampled at selected depths and studied to
obtain such information as the direction in
141
-------
GLOSSARY.
which groundwater flows and the types and
amounts of contaminants present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The EPA's
list of the most serious uncontrolled or aban-
doned hazardous waste sites identified for
possible long-term cleanup under Superfund.
The EPA is required to update the NPL at
least once a year.
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Naphthalene, pyrene,
and trichlorobenzene are examples of
neutrals.
Nitroaromatics: Common components of
explosive materials, which will explode if
activated by very high temperatures or pres-
sures; 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) is a
nitroaromatic.
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 the
EPA is not allowed to start work at a site or
initiate enforcement actions against poten-
tially responsible parties, although the EPA
may undertake certain investigatory and
planning activities. The 60-day period may
be extended if the EPA receives a good faith
offer within that period.
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC): The
predesignated EPA, Coast Guard, or Depart-
ment of Defense official who coordinates and
directs Superfund removal actions or Clean
Water Act oil- or hazardous-spill corrective
actions.
Operation and Maintenance: Activities
conducted at a site after a cleanup action is
completed to ensure that the cleanup or
containment system is functioning properly.
Organic Chemicals/Compounds: Chemical
substances containing mainly carbon, hydro-
gen, and oxygen.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is
discharged into receiving waters.
Overpacking: Process used for isolating
large volumes of waste by jacketing or encap-
sulating waste to prevent further spread or
leakage of contaminating materials. Leaking
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 used as a wood
preservative because of its toxicity to termites
and fungi. It is a common component of
creosotes and can cause cancer.
Perched (groundwater): Groundwater
separated from another underlying body of
groundwater by a confining layer, often clay
or rock.
Percolation: The downward flow or filtering
of water or other liquids through subsurface
rock or soil layers, usually continuing down-
ward to groundwater.
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances
produced from petroleum in refinery opera-
tions 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 often are
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.
142
-------
GLOSSARY
Physical Chemical Separation: The treat-
ment process of adding a chemical to a sub-
stance to separate the compounds for further
treatment or disposal.
Pilot Testing: A small-scale test of a pro-
posed treatment system in the field to deter-
mine its ability to clean up specific contami-
nants.
Plugging: The process of stopping the flow
of water, oil, or gas into or out of the ground
through a borehole or well penetrating the
ground.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater
flowing from a specific source. The move-
ment 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 density of contaminants
[see Migration].
Pollution: Generally, the presence of matter
or energy whose nature, location, or quantity
produces undesired health or environmental
effects.
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAIIs):
PAHs, such as pyrene, are a group of highly
reactive organic compounds found in motor
oil. They are a common component of creo-
sotes and can cause cancer.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A
group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications,
carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope immersion oils, and caulk-
ing compounds. PCBs also are produced in
certain combustion processes. PCBs are
extremely persistent in the environment
because they are very stable, non-reactive,
and highly heat resistant Chronic exposure
to PCBs is believed to cause liver damage. It
also is known to bioaccumulate in fatty
tissues. PCB use and sale was banned in
1979 with the passage of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and
biphenyls, are a group of highly reactive
organic compounds that are a common com-
ponent of creosotes, which can be carcino-
genic.
Poly vinyl Chloride (PVC): A plastic made
from the gaseous substance vinyl chloride.
PVC is used to make pipes, records, raincoats,
and floor tiles. Health risks from high con-
centrations of vinyl chloride include liver
cancer and lung cancer, as well as cancer of
the lymphatic and nervous systems.
Potable Water: Water that is safe for drink-
ing and cooking.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs):
Parties, including owners, who may have
contributed to the contamination at a Su-
perfund 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. PRPs may sign a
Consent Decree or Administrative Order on
Consent to participate in site cleanup activity
without admitting liability.
Precipitation: The removal of solids from
liquid waste so that the solid and liquid
portions can be disposed of safely; the re-
moval of particles from airborne emissions.
Electrochemical precipitation is the use of an
anode or cathode to remove the hazardous
chemicals. Chemical precipitation involves
the addition of some substance to cause the
solid portion to separate.
Preliminary Assessment: The process of
collecting and reviewing available informa-
tion about a known or suspected waste site or
release to determine if a threat or potential
threat exists.
143
-------
GLOSSARY.
Pump and Treat: A groundwater cleanup
technique involving the extracting of contami-
nated groundwater from the subsurface and
the removal of contaminants, using one of
several treatment technologies.
Radionuclides: Elements, including radium
and uranium-235 and -238, which break down
and produce radioactive substances due to
their unstable atomic structure. Some are
man-made, and others are naturally occurring
in the environment. Radon, the gaseous form
of radium, decays to form alpha particle
radiation, which cannot be absorbed through
skin. However, it can be inhaled, which
allows alpha particles to affect unprotected
tissues directly and thus cause cancer. Radia-
tion also occurs naturally through the break-
down of granite stones.
RCRA: [See Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act].
Recharge Area: A land area where rainwater
saturates the ground and soaks through the
earth to reach an aquifer.
Record of Decision (ROD): A public docu-
ment that explains which cleanup
alternative(s) will be used to clean up sites
listed on the NPL. It is based on information
generated during the remedial investigation
and feasibility study and consideration of
public comments and community concerns.
Recovery Wells: Wells used to withdraw
contaminants or contaminated groundwater.
Recycle: The process of minimizing waste
generation by recovering usable products that
might otherwise become waste.
Remedial Action (RA): The actual construc-
tion or implementation phase of a Superfund
site cleanup following the remedial design
[see Cleanup],
Remedial Design: A phase of site cleanup,
where engineers design the technical specifi-
cations for cleanup remedies and technolo-
gies.
Remedial Investigation: An in-depth study
designed to gather the data necessary to
determine the nature and extent of contami-
nation at a Superfund site, establish the
criteria for cleaning up the site, identify the
preliminary alternatives for cleanup actions,
and support the technical and cost analyses of
the alternatives. The remedial investigation
is usually done with the feasibility study.
Together they are customarily referred to as
the RI/FS [see Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at a site.
Remedy Selection: The selection of 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 con-
tamination will be naturally dispersed with-
out further cleanup activities, a "No Action"
remedy is selected [see Record of Decision].
Removal Action: Short-term immediate
actions taken to address releases of hazardous
substances [see Cleanup].
Residual: The amount of a pollutant remain-
ing in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubbing, or
other, process.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA): A Federal law that established a
regulatory system to track hazardous sub-
stances from the time of generation to dis-
posal. The law requires safe and secure
144
-------
GLOSSARY
procedures to be used in treating, transport-
ing, storing, and disposing of hazardous
substances. RCRA is designed to prevent
new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Retention Pond: A small body of liquid
used for disposing of wastes and containing
overflow from production facilities. Some-
times retention ponds are used to expand the
capacity of such structures as lagoons to store
waste.
Riparian Habitat: Areas adjacent to rivers
and streams that have a high density, diver-
sity, and productivity of plant and animal
species relative to nearby uplands.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contamina-
tion from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution device that uses a
spray of water or reactant or a dry process to
trap pollutants in emissions.
Sediment: The layer of soil, sand, and
minerals at the bottom of surface waters, such
as streams, lakes, and rivers, that absorbs
contaminants.
Seeps: Specific points where releases of
liquid (usually leachate) form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower
edges of landfills.
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.
Septage: Residue remaining in a septic tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is
necessary for choosing and designing cleanup
measures and monitoring their effectiveness.
Site Inspection: The collection of informa-
tion from a hazardous waste site to determine
the extent and severity of hazards posed by
the site. It follows, and is more extensive
than, a preliminary assessment. The purpose
is to gather information necessary to score the
site, using the Hazard Ranking System, and to
determine if the site presents an immediate
threat that requires a prompt removal action.
Slag: The fused refuse or dross separated
from a metal in the process of smelting.
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.
Smelter: A facility that melts or fuses ore,
often with an accompanying chemical change,
to separate the metal. Emissions from smelt-
ers are known to cause pollution.
Soil Gas: Gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between par-
ticles of soil. Such gases can move through
146
-------
GLOSSARY.
or leave the soil or rock, depending on
changes in pressure.
Soil Vapor Extraction: A treatment process
that uses vacuum wells to remove hazardous
gases from soil.
Soil Washing: A water-based process for
mechanically scrubbing soils in-place to
remove undesirable materials. There are two
approaches: dissolving or suspending them in
the wash solution for later treatment by
conventional methods, and concentrating
them into a smaller volume of soil through
simple particle size separation techniques [see
Solvent Extraction].
Stabilization: The process of changing an
active substance into inert, harmless material,
or physical activities at a site that act to limit
the further spread of contamination without
actual reduction of toxicity.
Solidification/Stabilization: A chemical or
physical reduction of the mobility of hazard-
ous constituents. Mobility is reduced through
the binding of hazardous constituents into a
solid mass with low permeability and resis-
tance to leaching.
Solvent: A substance capable of dissolving
another substance to form a solution. The
primary uses of industrial solvents are as
cleaners for degreasing, in paints, and in
Pharmaceuticals. Many solvents are flam-
mable and toxic to varying degrees.
Solvent Extraction: A means of separating
hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges,
and sediment, thereby reducing the volume of
the hazardous waste that must be treated. It
generally is used as one in a series of unit
operations. An organic chemical is used to
dissolve contaminants as opposed to water-
based compounds, which usually are used in
soil washing.
Sorption: The action of soaking up or at-
tracting substances. It is used in many pollu-
tion control systems.
Stillbottom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air
Stripping].
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
Super fund: The program operated under the
legislative authority of the CERCLA and
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) to update and improve environ-
mental laws. The program has the authority
to respond directly to releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances that may
endanger public health, welfare, or the envi-
ronment. The "Superfund" is a trust fund that
finances cleanup actions at hazardous waste
sites.
Surge Tanks: A holding structure used to
absorb irregularities in flow of liquids, includ-
ing liquid waste materials.
Swamp: A type of wetland that is dominated
by woody vegetation and does not accumulate
peat moss deposits. Swamps may be fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wet-
lands).
Thermal Treatment: The use of heat to
remove or destroy contaminants from soil.
Treatability Studies: Testing a treatment
method on contaminated groundwater, soil,
etc., to determine whether and how well the
method will work.
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, color-
less liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as
146
-------
GLOSSARY
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
Volatile Organic Compounds].
Unilateral [Administrative] Order: [see
Administrative Order],
Upgradient: An upward hydrologic slope;
demarks areas that are higher than contami-
nated areas and, therefore, are not prone to
contamination by the movement of polluted
groundwater.
Vacuum Extraction: A technology used to
remove volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from soils. Vacuum pumps are connected to a
series of wells drilled to just above the water
table. The wells are sealed tightly at the soil
surface, and the vacuum established in the
soil draws VOC-contaminated air from the
soil pores into the well, as fresh air is drawn
down from the surface of the soil.
Vegetated Soil Cap: A cap constructed with
graded soils and seed for vegetative growth,
to prevent erosion [see Cap],
Vitrification: The process of electrically
melting wastes and soils or sludges to bind
the waste in a glassy, solid material more
durable than granite or marble and resistant to
leaching.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs):
VOCs are manufactured as secondary petro-
chemicals. They include light alcohols,
acetone, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene,
dichloroethylene, benzene, vinyl chloride,
toluene, and methylene chloride. These
potentially toxic chemicals are used as sol-
vents, 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.
Waste Treatment Plant: A facility that uses
a series of tanks, screens, filters, and other
treatment processes to remove pollutants from
water.
Wastewater: The spent or used water from
individual homes or industries.
Watershed: The land area that drains into a
stream or other water body.
Water Table: The upper surface of the
groundwater.
Weir: A barrier to divert water or other
liquids.
Wetland: An area that is regularly saturated
by surface or groundwater and, under normal
circumstances, is capable of supporting
vegetation typically adapted for life in satu-
rated soil conditions. Wetlands are critical to
sustaining many species of 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.
Wildlife Refuge: An area designated for the
protection of wild animals, within which
hunting and fishing are either prohibited or
strictly controlled.
147
-------
APPENDIX B
Information
Repositories
for
NPL Sites
in Florida
149
-------
a -a
«!»&
&2Ss
CITY INDUSTRIES, INC.
8
o
5
COLEMAN-EVANS WOOD PRESERV
DAVIE LANDFILL
DUBOSE OIL PRODUCTS COMPANY
FLORIDA STEEL CORPORATION
GOLD COAST OIL CORPORATION
§
a.
HARRIS CORPORATION/PALM BAY
HIPPS ROAD LANDFILL
|
04
HOLLINGSWORTH SOLDERLESS TE
HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE BASE
[ (DELISTED)
f.
JACKSONVILLE NAVAL AIR STATIC
3
1
00
KASSOUF-KIMERLING BATTERY DI
151
-------
•C 3
o -S
0
+*
tg
(A
(73
Q.
I
(A
0
•c
I
oc
1
I
(A
S
„
r
£
J
X
co'
D
o
en
g"
j:
u
CO
^ 1
BO K u
Re
ill
o "« "3
^0 PQ ^^
i
.5
(0
S
152
*U.S. G.P.O. 1992-311-893:60629
------- |