&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/015
December 1992
PB93-963216
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
KANSAS
1992 UPDATE
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Publication #9200.5-7176
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Kansas
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, DC 20460
U S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
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) 486-4650
The complete set of the 49 State reports may be ordered as PB93-963250.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
A Brief Overview of Superfund v
Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model ix
How Superfund Works x
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book xi
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
.XV
THE NPL REPORT
Progress to Date xix
THE NPL FACT SHEETS i
THE GLOSSARY
Terms used in the NPL Book G-l
-------
INTRODUCTION
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SUPERFUND
During the second half of the Twentieth
Century, the environmental conse-
quences of more than 100 years of industrial-
ization in the United States became increas-
ingly clear. Authors such as Rachel Carson
wrote passionately about the often-hidden en-
vironmental effects of our modern society's
widespread use of chemicals and other haz-
ardous materials. Their audience was small at
first, but gradually their message spread.
Growing concern turned to action, as people
learned more about the environment and be-
gan to act on their knowledge
The 1970s saw environmental issues burst
onto the national scene and take hold in the
national consciousness. The first Earth Day
was observed in 1970, the year that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was
founded. By the end of the 1970s, Love Canal
in New York and the Valley of the Drums in
Kentucky had entered the popular lexicon as
synonyms for pollution and environmental
degradation.
Superfund Is Established
The industrialization that gave Americans the
world's highest standard of living also created
problems that only a national program could
address. By 1980, the U.S. Congress had
passed numerous environmental laws, imple-
mented by the EPA, but many serious hazard-
ous waste problems were slipping through the
cracks.
Responding to growing concern about public-
health and environmental threats from uncon-
trolled releases of hazardous materials, the
U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA). Popularly known as
Superfund, CERCLA had one seemingly
simple job—to uncover and clean up hazard-
ous materials spills and contaminated sites.
A Big Job
Few in Congress, the EPA, the environmen-
tal community, or the general public knew in
1980 just how big the nation's hazardous ma-
terials problem is. Almost everyone thought
that Superfund would be a short-lived pro-
gram requiring relatively few resources to
clean up at most a few hundred sites. They
were quite mistaken.
As the EPA set to work finding sites and
gauging their potential to harm people and
the environment, the number of sites grew.
Each discovery seemed to lead to another,
and today almost 36,000 hazardous waste
sites have been investigated as potential haz-
ardous waste sites. They are catalogued in
the EPA's computerized database, CERCLIS
(for the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
-------
INTRODUCTION
spouse, Compensation, and Liability Informa-
tion System).
The damage to public health and the environ-
ment that each site in CERCLIS might cause
is evaluated; many sites have been referred to
State and local governments for cleanup. The
EPA lists the nation's most serious hazardous
waste sites on the National Priorities List, or
NPL. (These Superfund sites are eligible for
federally-funded cleanup, but whenever pos-
sible the EPA makes polluters pay for the
contamination they helped create.) The NPL
now numbers 1,275 sites, with 50 to 100
added each year. By the end of the century,
the NPL may reach as many as 2,100 sites.
Superfund faces some of the most complex
pollution problems ever encountered by an
environmental program. Improperly stored or
disposed chemicals and the soil they contami-
nate are one concern. More difficult to correct
are the wetlands and bays, and the groundwa-
ter, lakes, and rivers often used for drinking
water that are contaminated by chemicals
spreading through the soil or mixing with
Quick Cleanup at
Non-NPL Sites
Long-standing hazardous waste sites are not
Superfund's only concern. The EPA also re-
sponds to hazardous spills and other emergen-
cies, hauling away chemicals for proper treat-
ment or disposal. Superfund teams perform or
supervise responses at rail and motor vehicle
accidents, fires, and other emergencies in-
volving hazardous substances. They also
evacuate people living and working near by,
if necessary, and provide clean drinking water
to people whose own water is contaminated.
Removal crews also post warning signs and
take other precautions to keep people and ani-
mals away from hazardous substances.
storm water runoff. Toxic vapors contaminate
the air at some sites, threatening the health of
people living and working near by.
Superfund aims to control immediate public-
health and environmental threats by tackling
the worst problems at the worst sites first.
Wherever possible, Superfund officials use
innovative treatment techniques—many de-
veloped or refined by the EPA—to correct
hazardous materials problems once and for
all. Many of the treatment techniques they use
did not exist when the program was created.
The EPA Administrator had challenged Su-
perfund to complete construction necessary
for cleanup work at 130 NPL sites by the end
of the 1992 federal fiscal year. By September
30, 1992, the end of fiscal year 1992, con-
struction had been completed at a total of 149
NPL sites. Superfund is well on its way of
meeting the Administrator's goal of complet-
ing construction at 200 NPL sites by the end
of fiscal year 1993, and 650 sites by the end
of fiscal year 2000.
Superfund employee prepares equipment for grotindwater
treatment.
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
Quick Cleanups, or Removals, are not limited
to emergencies. When cleanup crews at con-
taminated sites find hazardous substances that
immediately threaten people or the environ-
ment, they act right away to reduce the threat
or to remove the chemicals outright. As the
EPA implements the Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model (SACM), more and more sites
will undergo quick cleanups, and many of
these will be cleaned up completely without
ever being included on the NPL. (See
"Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Ac-
celerated Cleanup Model.")
Some of Superfund's most significant gains in
public health and environmental protection
have been won by the removal program. As of
March 31, 1992, the Emergency Response
The Public's Role
Superfund is unique among federal programs
in its commitment to citizen participation. Al-
though the EPA is responsible for determin-
ing how dangerous a site is and how best to
clean it up, the Agency relies on citizen input
as it makes these decisions.
Community residents are often invaluable
sources of information about a hazardous
waste site, its current and previous owners,
and the activities that took place there. Such
information can be crucial to experts evaluat-
ing a site and its potential dangers.
Residents also comment on EPA cleanup
plans by stating their concerns and prefer-
ences at public meetings and other forums and
in formal, written comments to Agency pro-
posals. The EPA takes these comments and
concerns seriously, and has modified many
proposals in response to local concerns. For,
ultimately, it is the community and its citizens
that will live with the results of the EPA's de-
cisions and actions; it is only fair that citizens
participate in the process.
Superfund employee removing drums jrom a Superfund site.
Program had logged more than 2,300 removal
completions since Superfund was established.
A Commitment to
Communication
The Superfund program is very serious about
public outreach and communication. Com-
munity relations coordinators are assigned to
each NPL site to help the public understand
the potential hazards present, as well as the
cleanup alternatives. Local information re-
positories, such as libraries or other public
buildings, have been established near each
NPL site to ensure that the public has an op-
portunity to review all relevant information
and the proposed cleanup plans.
The individual State volumes contain sum-
mary fact sheets on NPL sites in each State
and territory. Together, the fact sheets provide
a concise report on site conditions and the
progress made toward site cleanups as of
March 1992. The EPA revises these volumes
periodically to provide an up-to-date record of
program activities. A glossary of key terms
relating to hazardous waste management and
Superfund site cleanup is provided at the back
of this book.
VII
-------
INTRODUCTION
Superfund is, of course, a public program, and
as such it belongs to everyone of us. This vol-
ume, along with other State volumes, com-
prises the EPA's report on Superfund
progress to the program's owners for the year
1992.
VIII
-------
INTRODUCTION
STREAMLINING SUPERFUND: THE SUPERFUND
ACCELERATED CLEANUP MODEL
Historically, critics and supporters alike
have measured Superfund's progress
by the number of hazardous waste sites de-
leted from the NPL. Although easy enough to
tally, this approach is too narrow. It misses
the major gains Superfund makes by reducing
major risks at the nation's worst hazardous
sites long before all clean-up work is done
and the site deleted. It also ignores the Re-
moval Program's contributions to meeting
Superfund's twin mandates of maximizing
public health and environmental protection.
Renewing Superfund's commitment to rapid
protection from hazardous materials, the EPA
is streamlining the program. The Superfund
Accelerated Cleanup Model, or SACM, will
take Early Actions, such as removing hazard-
ous wastes or contaminated materials, while
experts study the site. SACM also will com-
bine similar site studies to reduce the time re-
quired to evaluate a site and its threats to
people and the environment. This way, imme-
diate public health and environmental threats
will be addressed while long-term cleanups
are being planned.
Emergencies such as train derailments and
motor vehicle accidents will continue to be
handled expeditiously. Teams of highly
trained technicians will swing into action
right away, coordinating the cleanup and re-
moval of hazardous substances to ensure pub-
lic safety as quickly as possible.
Breaking With Tradition
The traditional Superfund process begins with
a lengthy phase of study and site assessment,
but SACM will save time by combining sepa-
rate, yet similar, activities. Each EPA Region
will form a Decision Team of site managers,
risk assessors, community relations coordina-
tors, lawyers, and other experts to monitor the
studies and quickly determine whether a site
requires Early Action (taking less than five
years), Long-term Action, or both.
While the site studies continue, the Decision
Team will begin the short-term work required
to correct immediate public health or environ-
mental threats from the site. Besides remov-
ing hazardous materials, Early Actions in-
clude taking precautions to keep contaminants
from moving off the site and restricting access
to the site. Early Actions could eliminate most
human risk from these sites, and Superfund
will further focus its public participation and
public information activities on site assess-
ment and Early Action.
Long-Term Solutions
While Early Actions can correct many hazard-
ous waste problems—and provide the bulk of
public health and environmental protection—
some contamination will take longer to cor-
rect. Cleanups of mining sites, wetlands, estu-
aries, and projects involving incineration of
contaminants or restoration of groundwater
can take far longer than the three to five years
envisioned for Early Actions. Under SACM,
these sites will be handled much as they are
now.
Also under SACM, the EPA will continue its
pursuit of potentially responsible parties who
may have caused or contributed to site con-
tamination. Expedited enforcement and
procedures for negotiating potentially respon-
sible party settlements will secure their par-
ticipation. Superfund personnel will continue
to oversee clean-up work performed by poten-
tially responsible parties.
IX
-------
INTRODUCTION
HOW SUPERFUND WORKS
Each Superfund site presents a different
set of complex problems. The same haz-
ardous materials and chemicals often con-
taminate many sites, but the details of each
site are different. Almost always, soil is con-
taminated with one or more chemicals. Their
vapors may taint the air over and around the
site. Contaminants may travel through the soil
and reach underground aquifers which may be
used for drinking water, or they may spread
over the site to contaminate streams, ponds,
and wetlands. The contaminating chemicals
may interact with each other, presenting even
more complicated cleanup problems.
Superfund's cleanup process is arduous and
exacting. It requires the best efforts of hun-
dreds of experts in science and engineering, r
public health, administration and manage- !
ment, law, and many other fields.
The average NPL site takes from seven to ten
years to work its way through the system,
from discovery to the start of long-term
cleanup. Actual cleanup work can take years,
decades if contaminated groundwater must
be treated. Of course, imminent threats to
public health or the environment are cor-
rected right away.
The diagram to the right presents a simplified
view of the cleanup process. The major steps
in the Superfund process are:
• Site discovery and investigation to iden-
tify contaminants and determine whether
emergency action is required;
• Emergency site work such as removing
contaminants for proper treatment or dis-
posal, and securing the site to keep people
and animals away, if warranted by condi-
tions at the site;
• Site evaluation to determine how people
living and working nearby, and the envi-
ronment, may be exposed to site contami-
nants;
• Detailed studies to determine whether con-
ditions are serious enough to add the site to
the National Priorities List of sites eligible
for federally funded cleanup under Super-
fund;
• Selection, design, and implementation of a
cleanup plan, after a thorough review of
the most effective cleanup options, given
site conditions, contaminants present, and
their potential threat to public health or the
environment.
• Follow-up to ensure that the cleanup work
done at the site continues to be effective
over the long term.
The Superfund Process
From the earliest stages, EPA investigators
work hard to identify those responsible for the
contamination. As their responsibility is es-
tablished, the EPA negotiates with these "re-
sponsible parties" to pay for cleaning up the
problem they helped create. This "enforce-
ment first" policy saves Superfund Trust Fund
monies for use in cleanups where the respon-
sible parties cannot be identified, or where
they are unable to fund cleanup work.
-------
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book
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 discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents 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 environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
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-
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.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID* ABCOOOOOOO
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
Environmental Progress
xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xx
Site Repository
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xx
SITE REPOSITORY
Lists the location of the primary site repository. The site
repository may include community relations plans, public
meeting announcements and minutes, fact sheets, press
releases, and other site-related documents.
XII
-------
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.
XIII
-------
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 vicinity or underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used as a drink-
ing 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 vicinity
of the site. (Examples include wet-
lands and coastal areas or critical
habitats.)
Icons in the Response
Action Status Section
Initial, Immediate, or Emergency
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.
XIV
-------
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
xv
-------
Superfund
Activities in
Kansas
The State of Kansas is located within
EPA Region 7, which includes the four central
*^"'"'"~ States. The State covers 82,277 square miles.
According to the 1990 Census, Kansas experienced a 5 percent increase in population between 19X0
and 1990, and is ranked thirty-second in U.S. population with approximately 2,478,000 residents.
The Environmental Response Act, enacted in 1981 and most recently amended in 1988, estab-
lishes the Environmental Response Fund (ERF) and provides enforcement authorities for addressing
hazardous substances as well as hazardous wastes. The statute allows the State to issue orders
compelling the polluters to perform or pay for site cleanup. In the event that a polluter does not
adhere to a State issued order, the State may collect penalties under the Federal Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act (RCRA), nuisance, or water laws. Kansas maintains three cleanup funds: the
Water Plan Special Revenue-Contamination Remediation account, the ERF, and the Hazardous
Waste Perpetual Care Trust Fund. The Water Plan Special Revenue account is the primary fund for
cleanup of the State sites, and it is used to pay for studies and design, removals, emergency response,
long-term cleanup actions, and operation and maintenance activities, as well as the 10 percent State
contribution required by the Federal Superfund program. The ERF is used primarily for emergency
response actions. The Hazardous Waste Perpetual Care Trust Fund is primarily designated to support
RCRA activities; however, up to 20 percent of the Fund may be used for emergencies at facilities
closed prior to 1981. Currently, 10 sites in the State of Kansas have been listed as final on the NPL;
one site has been deleted. One new site was proposed for listing in 1992.
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Kansas
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Kansas include:
Federal Facilities
Rubber
and Plastic
Production
Facilities
Manufacturing
Facilities
Petroleum
and Refining
Operations
Landfills and
Recycling
Plants
Mining
Operations
Facts about the 12 NPL sites
in Kansas:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at five
sites.
Two sites endanger sensitive environ-
ments.
Nine sites are located near residential
areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
KANSAS
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Sediments
Soil
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of Kansas, potentially responsible
parties are paying for or conducting cleanup
activities at seven sites.
Percentage of Sites
VOCs
Heavy Metals
PCBs
Pesticides/Herbicides
Creosotes
Acids
Radiation
Others*
75%
67%
17%
17%
17%
8%
8%
8%
'Contaminants include sulfur dioxide and ammonia
For Further Information on NPL Sites and Hazardous
Waste Programs in the State of Kansas Please Contact:
EPA Region 7 Public Affairs
Office
National Response Center
Kansas Department of Health
and Environment: Bureau of
Environmental Remediation
EPA Region 7 Waste Management
Division: Superfund Branch
EPA Superfund Hotline
For information concerning
community involvement
To report a hazardous
waste emergency
For information about the
State's responsibility in the
Superfund Program
For information about the
Regional Superfund Program
For information about the
Federal Superfund Program
(913)551-7003
(800) 424-8802
(913) 296-1660
(913)551-7062
(800) 424-9068
March 1992
XVIII
-------
THE NPL REPORT
PROGRESS TO DATE
The following Progress Report lists all
sites currently on, or deleted from, the
NPL and briefly summarizes the status of ac-
tivities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup
process are arrayed across the top of the chart,
and each site's progress through these steps is
represented by an arrow C1^) 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 ac-
complishments.
O An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
O A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been 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 specifica-
tions 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 cur-
rently are underway.
^ A final arrow in the "Construction Com-
plete" category is used only when all
phases of the site cleanup plan have
been performed, and the EPA has deter-
mined 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 pro-
tect human health and the environment.
/ A check in the "Deleted" category indi-
cates 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.
XIX
-------
W
03
(0
(0
•8
4)
|^^
CO
0>
JJJ
**
£
(0
0)
CO
Q.
z
OB
Q.
(Q
O
O
•n
^f
CB
I
Progress
March
i
la
If
I8
Q.D)
2-E
m°
So>
S C
00
^=
§0)
E2
£^
f«
0
£i
a
o)*S
±iT3
0)3
8
11
— $
K
s
&
*
|
i
!
«
1992
ft ft
f>
U
ft
ft ft
ft ft
m so
oo o
S 0*
11
fc FT(
>-S
S ^
S H
8l
><
^
is
IM Q
ARKANSAS CIT
BIG RIVER SAN]
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft
fO CO
0 0
s s
11
E E
w
si
u S
p
Q
3
it
CHEROKEE COI
DOEPKE DISPOi
ft
^5.
§
§
•a
•1
^
3
s
1
o
>H
H
o
ft
ft
ON
8°
r— i
CO
1
1
£
C/3
S
%
(X
2
£
Q
STROTHERFffiL
/v
/ x.
/ X
/ x^
/ *ts ^^
/ ^i X
/ a X
Z .
ft ft
0
O 04
5 B
0 0
1 1
[T( (^
y| ^
u u
S S5
g g
8 8
u w
C/3 C/3
C/3
H
w
1
^
1 <
<: ^
1 9
S
O aj
'O *•
" iu
B.M
-Sill
uo
-Ififl
K^|
^
•^
i
1
;|
•^
^
^
"1
3
1
.8
6^
I
|
a
1
•S
10
1
S;
3 S CQ
00™
« P £
C5 rff" ^^
^ip
04 K
KX
-------
29TH & MEAD
GROUND WATE
CONTAMINATIO
KANSAS
EPAID#KSD007241656
Site Description
REGION 7
jwick County
Wichita
The 29th & Mead Ground Water Contamination site covers approximately 1,440 acres at the
intersection of 29th and Mead Streets in a highly industrialized area of Wichita. Studies
conducted from 1983 to 1986 by the Kansas Department of Health and the Environment
(KDHE) and the U.S. Geological Survey confirmed heavy metals and organic contamination
in shallow wells on and around the site. The actual boundary and the extent of groundwater
contamination have not been clearly defined. There are several potential industrial sources of
contamination in the area that include facilities currently in operation and facilities that have
ceased operations. An estimated 3,300 people obtain drinking water from public and private
wells drawing from the shallow aquifer within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including trichloroethylene (TCE), carbon tetrachloride, toluene, and vinyl
chloride. People who come in direct contact with or ingest contaminated
groundwater may be at risk. Also, the contamination on site could pollute
Chisholm Creek, which is used for recreational purposes.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the
entire site and the Coleman Area.
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for the groundwater
contamination are carrying out an investigation to determine the nature and extent
of contamination and to identify cleanup alternatives. The investigation is expected
to be completed by 1995.
Coleman Area: In 1991, the State began an investigation to determine the
nature and extent of soil and groundwater contamination and to identify cleanup
alternatives at the Coleman Area. The primary contaminant at this location is
TCE. The investigation is expected to be completed in 1992.
Site Facts: The KDHE has identified more than 70 parties potentially responsible for the
wastes associated with groundwater contamination at and in the vicinity of the site. In 1987,
the parties organized a steering committee to negotiate future investigations and remedial
activities. In 1989, the steering committee signed a Consent Agreement with the KDHE to
complete an investigation of the site.
Environmental Progress
Extensive investigations are taking place to determine the source of contamination at the
29th and Mead Ground Water Contamination site so that cleanup efforts may begin. The
EPA has determined that the site currently does not pose an immediate threat to the
neighboring communities or the environment as long as the contaminated wells are not used.
Site Repository
KDHE, District Office, 1919 Amidon, Witchita, KS 67203
March 1992 2 29TH & MEAD GROUND
WATER CONTAMINATION
-------
57TH AND N
BROADWAY
SITE
KANSAS
EPAID#KSD981710247
EPA REGION 7
Sedgewick County
ichita Heights, near Wichita
Site Description
The 57th and North Broadway Streets site is located in an area that is both residential and
commercial. The sources of contamination in this area are close to the intersection of these
two streets. Local and State officials were first alerted to the presence of contamination in
1983 when a resident complained about the poor quality of the drinking water. Subsequent
investigations led to the detection of contamination of soil and residential and industrial wells
in this 180-acre area. In 1989, the Kansas Department of Health and the Environment
(KDHE) identified four parties potentially responsible for site contamination in 1989: an oil
refining plant, a trucking company, an abandoned gas station, and an abandoned paint factory
which generated paint sludge and cooling water. Other sources of contamination may have
originated from other local tire companies, trucking companies, and gas stations as well as an
area landfill.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 02/07/92
Threats and Contaminants
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including benzene, toluene, and xylene, and
heavy metals, including arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, and lead, have been
detected in on-site soil and residential and industrial wells.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and one long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1990, the EPA provided bottled water to residents and
small businesses affected by site contamination using Superfund emergency funds.
A water supply line is being constructed using funds from a State grant and is
expected to be completed in 1992.
Entire Site: The EPA is scheduled to begin investigations into the nature and
extent of contamination at the site in early 1993.
Environmental Progress
Immediate actions such as the provision of bottled water and the construction of a water
supply line to affected residences and small businesses have reduced the risks posed to the
safety and health of the nearby population while investigations are being completed by the
EPA.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 4 57TH AND NORTH BROADWAY
STREETS SITE
-------
ARKANSAS
CITY DUMP
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980500789
EPA REGION 7
Cowley County
In southwest Arkansas City,
3 1/2 miles north of the
Oklahoma State Line
Other Names:
Milllkin Refinery
Site Description
The Arkansas City Dump is a 200-acre site in southwestern Arkansas City. From 1916 until
the mid-1920s, an oil refinery on site treated partially refined crude oil with sulfuric acid to
separate asphalt and paraffins. This process created an acidic sludge waste product. Operators
disposed of about 1 1/2 million cubic feet of sludge in the northern waste area. Municipal
wastes were disposed of at the site after an explosion and fire in 1927 destroyed the oil
refinery. Between 500,000 and 1 million gallons of residual oil product from the refinery
operation are present in the subsurface soils. Such wastes tend to be acidic and contain
potentially toxic concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Much of the
organic contamination is related to the release of petroleum products and cannot be
addressed under the Superfund program because of a clause in the law that excludes cleanup
of petroleum products; however, the organic contaminants do not present a current threat to
public health or the environment. The remainder of the wastes at the site consist of domestic
and municipal solid wastes. These wastes also do not appear to present a current threat to
public health or the environment. The site lies within the 100-year flood plain of the
Arkansas River and is separated from the river by a levee. The surrounding land includes
commercial and residential areas. Approximately 6,500 people live within a 3-mile radius of
the site. About 60 homes are situated next to the eastern boundary. A city park lies to the
southwest, and several businesses employ 100 to 150 people on the site. Groundwater
upgradient from the site is used for drinking water by Arkansas City and by private
residences. Private wells downgradient from the site are used primarily for irrigation. The
City's water supply comes from wells across the river from the site and is not at risk of
contamination by the site. All residents downgradient from the dump have access to the City's
water supply.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
L\
Air released from a borehole on the site contained sulfur dioxide. Groundwater
under the site was contaminated with PAHs, heavy metals, and ammonia. Soil
contained PAHs associated with petroleum products. The undisturbed sludge may
have presented a direct contact hazard; it contained sulfuric acid that could have
caused chemical burns or eye irritation. Contaminants have not been detected in
the Arkansas River. Wells located downslope and east of the site indicated low
levels of PAHs. These wells are used primarily for irrigation.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the source
of contamination.
Response Action Status
Groundwater and Sediments: By 1989, the EPA had assessed the remaining
portions of the site, namely, the oil-contaminated sediments and groundwater, and
determined that they did not pose a threat. Therefore, no further cleanup action
was required for these areas. In addition, the EPA lacks jurisdiction to clean up petroleum-
related problems under the Superfund program due to the "Petroleum Exclusion" clause in
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Source Control: In 1991, the EPA selected a remedy for the northern waste
area to cleanup acidic sludges by neutralizing them with high pH materials and
covering the area with soil after treatment was complete. Cleanup began in 1991
and was completed in 1992.
Environmental Progress
All construction has been completed at the Arkansas City Dump site and the EPA is
considering the site for deletion.
Site Repository
Arkansas City Public Library, 120 E. Fifth Ave., Arkansas City, KS 67005
March 1992 6 ARKANSAS CITY DUMP
-------
BIG RIVER SAND
COMPANY
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980686174
EPA REGION 7
Sedgwick County
-^f-kSOO w. 21st St., Wichita
Site Description
The Big River Sand Company site is a 123-acre sand and gravel mining operation that lies 1/2
mile west of the Arkansas River and next to the Wichita Valley Center Floodway. The
western half of the site has been, and continues to be, extensively mined. The eastern half
belongs to the former owner of the entire property. During the 1970s, roughly 2,000 drums of
paint-related waste were disposed of on the site, next to a 5-acre sand quarry lake. In 1978,
the Big River Sand Company bought 80 acres of the site and, in 1982, under the sales
agreement and a court order, the previous owner started moving the drums to his side of the
property. Nearly 200 drums had been transferred before the Kansas Department of Health
the and Environment (KDHE) stopped the action. The facility was not licensed to store or
dispose of the waste and on-site workers did not use protective equipment. The State's
intervention in 1982 showed that drums on site were damaged, corroded, and leaking. Waste
solvents and paint sludges from several drums contained metals and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), which were flammable. In 1984, the State and the property owner
completed a surface cleanup. All paint wastes were taken off site, as were about 2,000 barrels
and four large solvent storage tanks. State analysts found solvents and heavy metals in nearby
residential wells in 1982 and 1984. Approximately 25 homes lie within 1/4 mile to the west of
the property. Two offices and three homes are located on the site's southern edge. An
estimated 1,000 people draw drinking water from wells within a 3-mile radius of the site.
Groundwater also is used for crop irrigation and industrial processes.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater and private wells contain low levels of metals such as lead
and selenium from the former drum storage practices. Surface soils contained
metals and organic contaminants. This site presents no significant threat to human
health or the environment, since cleanup actions and natural processes have
reduced contaminant levels; however, people using private wells in the area should
be advised that the natural levels of iron, manganese, and selenium in their wells
are higher than State and Federal standards recommend.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
Intensive investigations of site conditions showed that the site does not pose a threat to
people or the environment.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: After an intensive study of the soil and groundwater contamination
at this site, the EPA selected a remedy of "No Further Action" in 1988. The EPA
and the State agreed that the site does not pose a significant threat to public
health or the environment and that undertaking cleanup steps would not be appropriate.
Site Facts: The State ordered a potentially responsible party to conduct cleanup of surface
contamination in September 1982.
Environmental Progress
After intensive investigations, the EPA and the State determined that the Big River Sand
Company site does not pose a threat to the community or the environment, and the process
to delete the site from the NPL currently is underway.
Site Repository
Wichita Public Library, 223 S. Main Street, Wichita, KS 67202
March 1992
BIG RIVER SAND COMPANY
-------
CHEROKEE
COUNTY
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980741862
Site Description
EPA REGION 7
Cherokee County
Other Name*:
Tar Creek Area Site
Trl-State Mining District
Tar Creek-Cherokee County
The Cherokee County site is a mining area covering about 110 square miles. It is part of a
larger area sometimes called the Tri-State Mining District, which encompasses Cherokee
County in Kansas, Jasper County in Missouri, and Ottawa County in Oklahoma. One
hundred years of widespread lead and zinc mining created piles of mine tailings, covering
4,000 acres in southeastern Cherokee County alone. The mine tailings, containing lead, zinc,
and cadmium, have leached into the shallow groundwater. Runoff from the waste piles also
moves contaminants into nearby streams. The EPA has divided this site into six subsites that
correspond to six general mining locations. Cleanup work is further along at the Galena
subsite, in the east-central portion of the entire site, than at the other subsites. This 25-
square-mile area has large tracts of mine and mill wastes, water-filled craters where the
ground has collapsed, open mineshafts, and pits. Wastes have affected the quality of the
shallow groundwater, a primary drinking source for the residents of the area, and the surface
water. Several heavy metals were found in water samples from private wells. Surrounding
lands are used for residences, business, light industry, farming, and grazing. Of the 22,320
people living in Cherokee County, 3,600 of them reside in Galena. Galena's city water does
not contain contaminants. Another 1,100 residents live outside the town and depend on
groundwater from the contaminated aquifer for drinking supplies.
Site Responsibility:
This 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
Radon gas from the mining operations has been detected in the air around the
Galena subsite. Private wells in Galena contain lead, cadmium, selenium, zinc, and
chromium. Acidic waters in mine shafts throughout the site, tailing piles and
surface waters in the mine pits, and streams across from the site contain significant
concentrations of lead, zinc, and cadmium. Risks to public health include
accidentally ingesting soil or mine wastes; inhaling contaminated household dust;
stirring up and inhaling metal-laden dusts while motorbiking on the tailings piles;
touching contaminated soils, wastes, or surface waters; or ingesting contaminated
surface waters, foodstuffs, or groundwater. Acid mine drainage containing dissolved
heavy metals contributes to the transport of heavy metals into the Spring River,
Short Creek, and Shoal Creek; analysts have found contamination in fish from
local surface waters. Polluted mine water also surfaces in Oklahoma's Tar Creek.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in six stages: immediate actions and five long-term remedial
phases directed at an alternate water supply; cleanup of the Spring River, Treece, and Baxter
Springs subsites; and cleanup of the Galena groundwater and surface water.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA installed water treatment units on eight
contaminated wells in Galena in 1986. In 1987, the EPA conducted a county-wide
study of wells and a water supply monitoring program for public and private
sources of water. This study showed that two more homes needed the treatment units. These
units were installed, and along with the other units, continue to be maintained by the EPA.
Bottled water is being supplied to two residences with wells contaminated by cadmium. The
bottled water supply will continue until the alternate public water supply is operational.
Alternate Water Supply: The EPA selected an approach for supplying an
alternate source of water to Galena in 1987. It features: (1) collecting clean
groundwater through existing wells owned by the City; (2) distributing that water
through a pipeline network to the houses, businesses, and farms within the subsite, but
outside the municipal water system; (3) rehabilitating two wells needed for the project; and
(4) drilling a new well if the existing ones cannot be fixed. The remedy includes the
construction and equipment necessary to establish an alternate water supply to the area.
Based on public comments, the EPA decided to amend the cleanup actions to include
construction of two deep aquifer wells to collect water and two water storage tanks. These
wells will be maintained and operated independently of the City of Galena. Water line
easement acquisition activities began in 1991 and arc expected to be completed in mid-1993.
Construction of the two deep aquifer wells and the two water storage tanks was completed in
1992.
Spring River Subsite: The Spring River runs through all the other subsites and
will be handled appropriately, pursuant to each respective subsite cleanup plan.
Treece Subsite: The EPA initiated investigation activities at the Treece subsite
in 1988. The parties potentially responsible for contamination of this area took
over the study in early 1990. This investigation is exploring the nature and extent
of soil and water pollution at the subsite and will recommend the best strategies for final
cleanup. The investigation is expected to be completed in early 1993.
Baxter Springs Subsite: The EPA initiated an investigation at the Baxter
Springs subsite in 1987. The parties potentially responsible for contamination of
this area took over the study in early 1990. This study is exploring the nature and
extent of soil and water pollution at the subsite and will recommend the best strategies for
final cleanup. The investigation is expected to be completed in late 1992.
March 1992 10 CHEROKEE COUNTY
-------
Galena Ground water and Surface Water: In 1989, the EPA, with the
agreement of the State, selected a remedy for cleaning up the groundwater and
surface water in the Galena subsite. It includes: (1) removing and selectively
placing mine waste below the ground surface; (2) diverting surface streams away from the
contaminants; (3) recontouring the land surface to control runoff and erosion; and
(4) investigating deep aquifer wells. The engineering designs for the first three activities
above are expected to be completed by the EPA in 1992. The investigation and design of
activities associated with the deep aquifer wells have been completed. Implementation of
cleanup activities is expected to begin in mid-1992 and will involve plugging four wells and
cleaning up one well. The site cleanup is expected to begin early in 1993.
Site Facts: The EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to the potentially responsible
parties in May 1990 to design the groundwater and surface water cleanup activities at the
Galena subsite. However, the EPA assumed control of the remedy design in July 1990,
because the parties failed to comply with the Order.
Environmental Progress
The EPA and the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination at the Cherokee
County site have been actively involved in providing water treatment systems and a temporary
alternate water supply to affected residents, reducing the potential for exposure to
contaminants while further studies and cleanup actions are underway.
Site Repository
Galena Public Library, 315 W. Seventh, Galena, KS 66739
CHEROKEE COUNTY 11 March 1992
-------
DOEPKE
DISPOSAL
(HOLLIDAY)
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980632301
EPA REGION 7
Johnson County
rn bluffs of the Kansas River Valley
Other Names:
Doepke-Holliday Site
Site Description
Between 1963 and 1970, the 80-acre Doepke Disposal (Holliday) site operated as a private
industrial and commercial landfill and accepted unknown quantities of wastes such as paint
sludges, solvents, pesticides, metal sludges, and fiberglass resins. Liquids seeping from the site
flow through a culvert under Holliday Drive into the Kansas River. In the early 1960s, many
wastes were burned and buried. Liquids were later stored in ponds on the site. In 1966, with
County approval, 374 drums of various pesticides and solvents were placed with fire debris in
a trench. When the State closed the site in 1970, it was covered and terraced. Approximately
150 people live within a mile of the site, and 2,500 live within 3 miles. Residents of Johnson
County get drinking water from 21 wells in the Kansas River alluvial aquifer and from a river
intake about 3/4 mile downstream of the site; 200,000 people are served by these systems.
About 30 wells lie within 3 miles; the nearest is 1/2 mile away. Contaminants are not
migrating off site in large enough concentrations to affect water quality in the Kansas River.
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
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, soil, and leachate are contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and heavy metals from former waste disposal
activities. Subsurface soils and wastes contain significant concentrations of
contaminants and could threaten people working or trespassing on the site. On-site
contaminated groundwater is not being used, so exposure to contaminants is
unlikely.
12
March 1992
-------
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 selected a remedy for this site in 1989 featuring: removal
and off-site treatment of contaminated liquids currently ponded underground in
the area of the former surface impoundments; construction of an impermeable
multi-layer cap over the majority of the waste disposal area; collection and, if necessary, off-
site treatment of significant groundwater seepage; extended groundwater monitoring of the
effectiveness of the remedy; and deed and access restrictions. The potentially responsible
parties have completed a pre-design hydrogeological study and expect to complete the final
cleanup design in mid-1993. Actual cleanup will begin when the design is complete and
negotiations are final.
Site Facts: In 1987, Deffenbaugh Industries, Inc. entered into a Consent Agreement with
the EPA to study site contamination and to develop cleanup options. An Administrative
Order on Consent was signed with the potentially responsible parties in 1990 to design the
remedy for the site.
Environmental Progress
Following the listing of this site on the NPL, the EPA completed a site assessment and
determined that the Doepke Disposal (Holliday) site poses no immediate threat to public
health or the environment while the technical specifications for site cleanup are being
designed.
Site Repository
Johnson County Public Library, 8700 West 63rd Street, Merriam, KS 66201
DOEPKE DISPOSAL (HOLLIDAY) 13 March 1992
-------
FORT RILEY
KANSAS
EPA ID# KS62140a0756
****l J
*Ow
EPA REGION 7
Geary County and Riley County
~~ Near Junction City
Site Description
The Fort Riley site is a 152-square-mile Army base. Fort Riley, established in 1853, has been
a major fort since the Civil War. Its operations are diverse and involve seven landfills,
numerous motor pools, burn and flrefighting pit areas, hospitals, pesticide and mixing areas,
dry cleaners, and shops. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, waste motor oils,
chlorinated solvents, and mercury were deposited in landfllls above and below the water table
and were spilled or dumped on the ground near buildings. The most serious problems are the
sanitary landfill at Camp Funston and spills of dry cleaning solvents and pesticide residues at
the Main Post. A 1984 study revealed vinyl chloride and other VOCs in shallow monitoring
wells downgradient of the Camp Funston Landfill. Groundwater along the Republican and
Kansas Rivers is the sole source of drinking water for Fort Riley, Ogden, and Junction City.
A Fort Riley water supply well is 3/4 mile from a former dry cleaning building. Municipal and
Army wells within 3 miles of the base provide drinking water for approximately 47,800 people.
Groundwater also is used for crop irrigation. People use the Kansas River along the site
property for recreational activities.
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
Shallow monitoring wells downgradient of the Camp Funston Landfill are
contaminated with vinyl chloride and VOCs. Pesticides have been found in soils.
Landfill debris contains waste oils and degreasing solvents. This site is in the flood
plains of the Republican and the Kansas Rivers, and high waters could move
contaminants into these recreational streams. Fort Riley is the winter home of the
endangered bald eagles; exposure to chemicals from the site is a potential threat to
them.
14
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed by two long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the
entire site and cleanup of the Pesticide Storage Facility.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1990, under EPA supervision, the Army began a study of soil and
groundwater contamination at the site. As a result, the Army has written plans for
investigations of the Camp Funston Landfill and the former dry cleaning facility.
The investigations are scheduled to be completed in 1995, at which time the Army will
recommend cleanup alternatives.
Pesticide Storage Facility: In 1992, under EPA monitoring, the Army began a
study to determine the nature and extent of contamination and to identify
cleanup alternatives for the Pesticide Storage Facility. The study is expected to
be completed in 1995.
Site Facts: Fort Riley 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 Fort Riley site to the NPL, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers
assessed site conditions and determined that there were no immediate actions needed at the
Fort Riley site while studies are taking place and long-term cleanup activities are being
planned.
Site Repository
Manhattan Public Library, Juliette and Poyntz, Manhattan, KS 66502
FORT RILEY 15 March 1992
-------
HYDRO-FLEX Ig
KANSAS
EPAID# KSD007135429
EPA REGION 7
Shawnee County
Topeka
Site Description
Since 1970, Hydro-Flex Inc. has manufactured specialized tubing, hoses, heat exchangers, and
fittings at this 3-acre site. From 1970 to 1981, operators discharged rinse water and sludges
from a chromate metal finishing bath through a septic tank and into a series of buried silos.
Wastes also were discharged into the on-site injection well. These open-ended vertical shafts
were filled with porous fill material and penetrated to within 2 feet of an aquifer, the sole
source of drinking water in the area. Operators discharged a maximum of 320 gallons per day
to the silos and periodically allowed the overflow of wastes from the third silo onto
neighboring cropland. These techniques were abandoned when municipal sewers became
available in 1981. The silos were filled with sand and covered with earth. In 1987, the Kansas
Department of Health and the Environment (KDHE) detected process-related metals in on-
site wells. A 1989 site visit showed that access to the site was unrestricted, but tall grass had
covered the disposal areas and they appeared untouched for some time. The only evidence of
the past disposal practice is distressed plant growth and discolored soils over the three areas.
Approximately 30 people live within a 1-mile radius of the site, many in older residences that
pre-date the industrial zoning of the area. Approximately 6,500 people obtain drinking water
from public and private wells within 3 miles of the site. The Kansas River and Soldier Creek
are within a 1-mile radius of the site, and Topeka's surface water intake on the Kansas River
is located about a mile to the south. Two public water supply wells lie about 1 1/2 miles
northeast 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: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater both on and off the site contained low levels of various heavy metals.
The chief threat to public health from this site was drinking contaminated
groundwater.
16
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
Intensive investigations of site conditions showed that the site does not pose a threat to
people or the environment.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Under State monitoring, the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination conducted an investigation to determine the nature and extent of
contamination and any needed strategies for final cleanup. The investigation was
completed in 1992. The EPA determined that no further cleanup actions are necessary at
the site, as it does not pose a threat to public health or the environment. The EPA expects to
begin deletion proceedings in early 1993, following a final site inspection.
Environmental Progress
The EPA determined that the Hydro-Flex Inc. site does not pose a threat to public health or
the environment. Proceedings leading to the deletion of the site from the NPL will begin
once a final site inspection is completed.
Site Repository
Contact the Region 7 Superfund Community Relations Office.
HYDRO-FLEX INC.
17
March 1992
-------
JOHNS'
POND
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980631980
EPA REGION 7
Sedgwick County
Wichita
Other Names:
Johns' Oil Sludge Pit
Site Description
The Johns' Sludge Pond site covers 1/2 acre and is located in a sparsely populated, heavily
industrialized area in northern Wichita. From 1951 to 1970, Super Refined Oil, which no
longer is in business, recycled waste oil and disposed of an estimated 7,000 cubic yards of oily
sludge into an unlined pond. The principal hazard associated with the site was the acidity of
the sludge and the water lying above it. Historically, the site would overflow periodically
during periods of heavy rainfall, releasing its contents to the surrounding surface waters. Most
of the site was owned by the Johns' Estate. The City of Wichita condemned the remainder of
the site in the 1970s to provide drainage along the adjacent highway and, as a result, owns
the remainder of the property. A drainage ditch adjacent to the site carries surface water
from the site to Chisholm Creek, 1 1/2 miles downgradient of the site. Chisholm Creek flows
into a concrete ditch receiving runoff from the adjacent highway and empties into the
Arkansas River to the south of the city. Private wells in the area are only used for irrigation
and process water. Fishing takes place in a borrow pit located adjacent to the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Deleted Date: 01/06/92
Threats and Contaminants
The EPA found heavy metals including lead, as well as volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in groundwater on the site. Site
sludge was highly acidic and contained PCBs and heavy metals including aluminum,
lead, chromium, and zinc. Before cleanup, the site contained highly acidic sludge,
topped by acidic water. Site cleanup activities have alleviated the potential harm
to public health and the environment.
18
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site was addressed through initial actions; further investigations have shown that no
other cleanup actions are required.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Under EPA monitoring, the City of Wichita's Department of
Public Works removed sludge from the impoundment and stockpiled it on the
adjacent ground surface, installed a compacted clay soil liner on the bottom and
sidewalls of the empty impoundment, solidified stockpiled sludge with cement kiln dust, re-
deposited it in the lined disposal cell, constructed a compacted clay cap above the solidified
sludge, and covered the cap with soil and vegetation. Deed restrictions were placed on the
property, preventing land uses that would interfere with the effectiveness of these actions.
The site was fenced to prevent dirt bike riding and other activities that could damage the cap
and cover, and no-trespassing signs were posted. The EPA decided to install additional
monitoring wells to determine the direction of groundwater flow and the nature and degree
of contamination, if any, of downgradient groundwater. Sedgwick County and the City of
Wichita continue to conduct monitoring and maintenance of the cap and vegetative cover.
Entire Site: After an intensive study of the site in 1989 and consultation with the
State of Kansas, the EPA determined that no further cleanup actions are required
for the Johns' Sludge Pond at this time. The EPA finds that the cleanup already
conducted at the site by the City of Wichita is protective of public health and the
environment.
Site Facts: In 1983, the EPA issued a Consent Order to the City of Wichita, requiring the
City to submit a site cleanup plan for the EPA's approval. An interim cleanup plan was
submitted, approved, and implemented. The EPA evaluated the adequacy of the interim
cleanup and, in 1989, determined that no further action is required at the site, except for
continued site monitoring and maintenance.
Environmental Progress
The numerous cleanup actions performed by the City of Wichita have eliminated the
potential for exposure to hazardous substances at the Johns' Sludge Pond site. The EPA has
determined that no further cleanup actions are needed at this time and that the site once
again is safe to nearby residents and the environment. The John's Sludge Pond site was
deleted from the NPL on June 1, 1992. The site will continue to be closely monitored to
ensure long-term effectiveness of the cleanup actions.
Site Repository
Wichita City Hall, 455 N. Main, Wichita, KS 67202
JOHNS' SLUDGE POND 19 March 1992
-------
OBEE ROAD
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980631766
EPA REGION 7
Reno County
Obeeville
Other Names:
Hutchison City Dump
Site Description
The Obee Road site is a plume of contaminated groundwater located in Obeeville. An
investigation in 1983 by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) was
prompted by a citizen's concern over the taste and odor of his well water. Sampling by the
KDHE showed volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the shallow aquifer. The source of the
contamination is suspected to be an old city landfill on the eastern edge of the Hutchinson
Municipal Airport. Before closing in 1973, the landfill accepted unknown quantities of liquid
wastes and sludges from local industries, as well as solvents from small metal-finishing
operations at local aircraft plants. The landfill now is covered with vegetation. Septic tank
systems in the area are another potential source of contamination. Approximately 1,900
people in Obeeville obtained drinking water from private wells that drew water from the
contaminated aquifer before alternate water sources were provided. The area around the site
is rural; some residents have farm animals on their property.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/22/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with VOCs such as trichloroethylene (TCE), vinyl
chloride, and chloroform. Soil is contaminated with VOCs including meta-xylene
and toluene. Although the residences in the area now are connected to the public
water supply, the private wells have not been plugged. Therefore, there is the
possibility that the contaminated groundwater may be used for domestic purposes,
such as watering gardens. People who come into direct contact with or ingest the
contaminated soil, or eat vegetables grown in the contaminated soil may be at risk.
20
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a single long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: In 1985, the City of Hutchison constructed a water line extension
to the residents affected by the contaminated well water. An alternate water
supply also was provided to the Obee school system adjacent to the landfill, which
was drawing water from a contaminated well.
Entire Site: In early 1990, the potentially responsible parties, under State
supervision, began conducting a study to determine the extent of soil and
groundwater contamination and to identify the sources responsible. This study, due
to be completed in 1994, will lead to the selection of the final cleanup remedy.
Site Facts: In March 1990, a group of the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination signed a Consent Agreement with the KDHE to complete an investigation of
the site.
Environmental Progress
Providing an alternative water supply greatly reduced the potential for exposure to
contaminated well water. After adding the Obee Road site to the NPL, the EPA determined
that no other immediate actions were required while investigations leading to the selection of
a final cleanup remedy are taking place.
Site Repository
Hutchison Public Library, 901 North Main, Hutchison, KS 67504
OBEE ROAD 21 March 1992
-------
PESTER
REFINERY CO
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD000829846
PA REGION 7
Butler County
El Dorado
Site Description
The Pester Refinery Co. site occupies 10 acres in El Dorado. Refinery operations began in
1917. Refining wastes have been stored in a burn pond and these materials periodically were
ignited through the mid-1970s. The burn pit is adjacent to the West Branch of the Walnut
River, which is used for recreational activities. In 1987, the Kansas Department of Health
and the Environment (KDHE) found seepage from the impoundment entering the river, and
later the same year, confirmed contamination of the river. Seepage from the burn pond has
been diked, forming a seepage pit. Rainwater and contaminated pond water, which have
accumulated at the lagoon surface, have overflowed on occasion and discharged to the river
and adjacent flood plain. An estimated 160 people obtain drinking water from private wells
within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL USTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/29/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contaminants include lead and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
such as vinyl chloride. Heavy metals, including lead and chromium, and VOCs have
contaminated the burn pond sediments. The soil is contaminated with heavy
metals. The burn pond sludge and surface water are contaminated with heavy
metals and VOCs. Direct contact with or accidental ingestion of contaminated
groundwater, soil, sediments, or surface water could pose a health risk. This site
lies within the 100-year flood plain, and if flooding did occur, contamination could
spread.
22
March 1992
-------
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 1990, the potentially responsible parties began conducting an
investigation into the nature and extent of the contamination at the site and
alternatives for cleanup. The study is expected to be completed in late 1992.
Site Facts: In 1986, the State issued an Administrative Order to Pester to conduct studies
on how to close the impoundment. The owner has demonstrated that he cannot afford to pay
for the cleanup and has filed for bankruptcy. A past owner and the creditors of the bankrupt
entity presently are negotiating with the State.
Environmental Progress
The EPA determined that no immediate actions are necessary at the Pester Refinery Co. site
while investigations leading to the selection of a final cleanup remedy are taking place.
Site Repository
Contact the Region 7 Superfund Community Relations Office.
PESTER REFINERY CO.
23
March 1992
-------
STROTHER
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
KANSAS
EPA ID# KSD980862726
EPA REGION 7
Covvley County
tijear Winfield and Arkansas City
Site Description
Strother Field Industrial Park is located near Winfield and Arkansas City and covers
approximately 2 square miles. Until 1946, the site was a military facility. The site now consists
of about 20 industrial and commercial businesses, as well as two inactive solid waste landfills.
The landfills were used for the disposal of various industrial wastes. Groundwater is
contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Until 1983, the Strother Field
Commission operated a water supply system, consisting of eight wells on the site. The
groundwater no longer is used for drinking, but still is used for industrial processes. Drinking
water was provided by trucks until the Commission installed two wells upgradient of the
contaminant plume. Approximately 2,300 people live within a 3-mile radius of the site. The
size of the worker population on the site is approximately 2,000. There are private and public
wells located in the vicinity of the site; some private wells are in the industrial park.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Samples collected and analyzed by the State indicated the presence of VOCs
including trichloroethylene (TCE) in several wells used for industrial processes
only. People who ingest or come in contact with contaminated groundwater may be
at risk. Workers may inhale VOCs generated from air stripping operations taking
place on the site.
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.
24
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: After the use of the industrial park wells as a source of
drinking water was discontinued, water was brought in by tank trucks. The
Strother Field Commission installed two wells upgradient of the contaminated
plume to supply water. Two of the eight wells remained in use to supply process water for the
industries located on the field. For the last several years, the Strother Field Commission has
pumped these wells in order to contain groundwater contamination beneath the site. In 1985,
General Electric installed groundwater extraction wells and air stripping towers to remove
VOCs from the groundwater under an Administrative Order with the Kansas Department of
Health and Environment (KDHE).
Entire Site: The State is monitoring an investigation by the potentially responsible
parties that will identify the types of contaminants remaining in the groundwater
and other areas and will recommend remedies for final site cleanup upon its
completion, scheduled for 1993.
Site Facts: In 1985, the State issued an Administrative Order to General Electric Co., one
of the parties potentially responsible for wastes associated with the northern zone of the site.
The Order called for the company to sample soil; monitor groundwater; construct a
groundwater flow model and use it to help locate, construct, and operate withdrawal wells
under the guidance of the State; and submit a plan for a treatment and disposal system. The
State issued another Administrative Order in January 1986 to each of the four potentially
responsible parties associated with the southern zone of the site. The Order requires one
potentially responsible party to treat the water from the public supply well, each of the
companies to drill monitoring wells on the southern end of the field, and three of the parties
to submit data on chemical use during the past 20 years. In March 1990, General Electric
signed a Consent Agreement with the KDHE to complete an investigation of the site.
Environmental Progress
The Strother Field Commission and General Electric, in conjunction with the State and the
EPA, have greatly reduced the possibility of drinking contaminated groundwater by supplying
a safe drinking water source and installing a treatment system for the groundwater while
studies into a final cleanup solution for the Strother Field Industrial Park site are underway.
Site Repository
Strother Field Commission, Terminal Building, Fourth and "A" Street,
Cowley County, KS 67156
STROTHER FIELD 25 March 1992
INDUSTRIAL PARK
-------
GLOSSARY
Terms Used in the NPL Book
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. A table of common
toxic chemicals found at NPL sites, their sources, and their potential threats is located
on page G-15
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds 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). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized 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.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
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 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, 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
removing 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, forming salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used
to prevent the migration of contaminants.
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 contaminated
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 else-
where.
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 ground-
water 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 organic
G-2
-------
GLOSSARY
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 Environmen-
tal Response, Compensation, and Liability Act].
Characterization: The sampling, monitoring,
and analysis of a site to determine the extent and
nature of toxic releases. Characterization
provides the basis for acquiring the necessary
technical information to develop, screen, ana-
lyze, and select appropriate cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the poten-
tial 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 inter-
changeably 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. Also, 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 communication
with the public. The goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related actions,
assuring public input into decision-making
processes related to affected communities, and
making certain that the Agency is aware of, and
responsive to, public concerns. Specific com-
munity relations activities are required in
relation to Superfund cleanup actions [see
Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, 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 together.
Confined Aquifer: An aquifer in which
groundwater is confined under pressure that is
significantly greater than atmospheric pressure.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
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, or the costs incurred by the govern-
ment that the parties will reimburse, and the
roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. If a settlement between the EPA and a
potentially responsible party includes cleanup
actions, it must be in the form of a Consent
Decree. A Consent Decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order
on Consent].
Containment: The process of enclosing or
containing hazardous substances in a structure,
typically in a pond or a lagoon, to prevent the
migration of contaminants into the environment.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or substance
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 radioac-
tive materials into the environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract
between 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 pre-
serving operations and produced by distilla-
tion of tar, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Con-
taminating 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 embank-
ment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a chemi-
cal is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deletion: A site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL when Superfund response actions at the
site are complete. A site is deleted from the
NPL when a notice is published in the Federal
Register.
De minimis: 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.
G-4
-------
GLOSSARY
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Dioxin: An organic chemical by-product of
pesticide manufacture which is known to be one
of the most toxic man-made chemicals.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materials.
Disposal may be accomplished through the use
of approved secure landfills, surface impound-
ments, land farming, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgradi-
ent of a contaminated groundwater source are
prone to receiving pollutants.
Ecological Assessment: A study of the
impact of man-made or natural activity on living
creatures and their environment.
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 facili-
ties.
Emulsifiers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil and
water.
Endangerment Assessment: A study
conducted 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; 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 Recov-
ery].
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. In this
volume, the feasibility study is referred to as a
site study [see also Remedial Investigation].
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
Filtration: A treatment process for remov-
ing solid (particulate) 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.
General Notice Letter: [See Notice Letter].
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 and willing-
ness to perform a site study or cleanup.
Groundwater: 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. Hazardous waste
possesses at least one of four characteristics
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxic-
ity), or appears on special EPA lists.
Heavy Metals: Metallic elements with high
atomic weights, such as arsenic, lead, mercury,
and cadmium. Heavy metals are very hazardous
even at low concentrations and tend to accumu-
late in the food chain.
Herbicide: A chemical pesticide designed to
control or destroy plants, weeds, or grasses.
G-6
-------
GLOSSARY
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site contain-
ing exceptionally high levels of contamination.
Hydrocarbons: Chemical compounds that
consist entirely of hydrogen and carbon.
Hydrology: The properties, distribution, and
circulation of water.
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 controlled
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 precipita-
tion (rain or snow) or from application of
wastewater 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 sub-
stances of mineral origin, not of basic carbon
structure.
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,
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 or incor-
porate 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 chemi-
cal landfills are disposal sites for hazardous
waste. They are designed to minimize the
chance of release of hazardous substances into
the environment [see Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act].
Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by
which soluble chemical components are dis-
solved and carried through soil by water or
some other percolating liquid.
G-7
-------
GLOSSARY
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through
or drains from waste, carrying soluble compo-
nents from the waste.
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
complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into several of these phases.
Long-term Response Action: An action
which requires a continuous period of on-site
activity before cleanup goals are achieved.
These actions typically include the extraction
and treatment of groundwater and monitoring
actions.
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, con-
taminants, 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 controlling
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 which
groundwater flows and the types and amounts of
contaminates present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The
EPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified
for possible long-term cleanup under Super-
fund. The EPA is required to update the NPL
at least once a year.
Natural Attenuation: [See Attenuation].
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Water is the most
commonly known neutral, however, naphtha-
lene, pyrene, and trichlorobenzene also 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 potentially respon-
sible parties, although the EPA may undertake
certain investigatory and planning activities.
G-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The 60-day period may be extended if the EPA
receives a good faith offer from the PRPs
within that period. [See also Good Faith Offer].
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, hydrogen, 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 may be 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.
Pesticide: A substance or mixture of sub-
stances intended to prevent, destroy, or repel any
pest. If misused, pesticides can accumulate in
the foodchain and contaminate the environment.
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances
produced from petroleum in refinery operations
and as fuel oil residues. These include
fluoranthene, chrysene, mineral spirits, and
refined oils. Petrochemicals are the bases from
which volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
plastics, and many pesticides are made. These
chemical substances 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 poison-
ous.
Physical Chemical Separation: The
treatment process of adding a chemical to a
substance 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 determine
its ability to clean up specific contaminants.
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 movement
of the groundwater is influenced by such factors
as local groundwater flow patterns, the character
of the aquifer in which groundwater is con-
tained, 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.
G-9
-------
GLOSSARY
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs):
PAHs, such as pyrene, are a group of highly
reactive organic compounds found in motor oil.
They are a common component of creosotes 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 caulking
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 Substances Control Act.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and
biphenyls, are a group of highly reactive organic-
compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Polyvinyl 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 concentra-
tions 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 associated with a Superfund site who
may be liable for the cost of remedying the
release of hazardous substances. This may
include owners or operators of the site or trans-
porters who disposed of materials at the site.
PRPs may admit liability, or liability may be
determined by a court of law. PRPs may sign a
Consent Decree or Administrative Order on
Consent to participate in the site cleanup without
admitting liability.
Precipitation: The removal of solids from
liquid waste so that the solid and liquid portions
can be disposed of safely; the removal of
particles from airborne emissions. Electro-
chemical 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 information
about a known or suspected waste site or release
to determine if a threat or potential threat exists.
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 envi-
ronment. 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. Radiation also occurs naturally through
the breakdown of granite.
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.
G-10
-------
GLOSSARY
Record of Decision (ROD): A public
document 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 con-
struction 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 contamina-
tion at a Superfund site, establish the criteria
for cleaning up the site, identify the prelimi-
nary alternatives for cleanup actions, and
support the technical and cost analyses of the
alternatives. The remedial investigation is
usually done with the feasibility study. In this
volume, the remedial investigation is referred
to as a site study [see also Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at the 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 without
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 re-
maining in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or the particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubber.
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
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 the
store waste.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contaminants
from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution control 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.
G-11
-------
GLOSSARY
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 the 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 t<
after the treatment process.
tank
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 neces-
sary for choosing and designing cleanup mea-
sures 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 subsurface
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 smelters
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
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 ap-
proaches: dissolving or suspending them in the
wash solution for later treatment by conven-
tional methods, and concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through simple particle
size separation techniques [see Solvent Extrac-
tion].
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
hazardous constituents. Mobility is reduced
through the binding of hazardous constituents
into a solid mass with low permeability and
resistance to leaching.
G-12
-------
GLOSSARY
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
attracting substances. It is used in many
pollution control systems.
Special Notice Letter: [See Notice Let-
ter].
StillbOttom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air Strip-
ping].
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
Superfund: 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 re-
leases of hazardous substances that may endan-
ger public health, welfare, or the environment.
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, including
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 Wetlands].
Thermal Treatment: The use of heat to
remove or destroy contaminants from soil.
Treatability Studies: Testing a treatment
method on contaminated ground water, 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
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 contaminated
areas and, therefore, are not prone to contamina-
tion 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.
G-13
-------
GLOSSARY
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 poten-
tially toxic chemicals are used as solvents,
degreasers, paints, thinners, and fuels. Because
of their volatile nature, they readily evaporate
into the air, increasing the potential exposure to
humans. Due to their low water solubility,
environmental persistence, and widespread
industrial use, they are commonly found in soil
and groundwater.
Waste Treatment Plant: A facility that
uses a series of tanks, screens, filters, and
other treatment processes to remove pollut-
ants 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.
G-14
-------
GLOSSARY
Some Common Contaminants at NPL Sites
Contaminant
Category
Example
Chemical Types
Sources
Potential Health
Threats*
Heavy Metafe
Volatile Organic
Compounds
(VOCs).
Polychforinated
Creosotes
RacBatfon
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Lead, Manga-
nese, Mercury, Nickel,
Silver, Selenium, Zinc
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
Perchloroethylene (PCE),
Acetone, Benzene,
Ketone, Methyl chloride,
Toluene, Vinyl Chloride,
Dichlorethylene
Chlordane, DDT 4-4, DDE,
Heptachlor, Aldrin, Endrin,
Atrazine, Dieldrin, Toxa-
phene
Polyaromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs), Polynuclear
aromatics (PNAs),
Phenolic Tars, Pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP)
Radium-226, Radon,
Uranium-235, Uranium-
238
Electroplating, batteries,
paint pigments, photogra-
phy, smelting, thermom-
eters, fluorescent lights,
solvent recovery
Solvents and degreasers,
gasoline octane enhanc-
ers, oils and paints, dry
cleaning fluids, chemical
manufacturing.
Agricultural applications,
pesticide and herbicide
production
Electric transformers and
capacitors, insulators and
coolants, adhesives,
caulking compounds,
carbonless copy paper,
hydraulic fluids.
Wood preserving, fossil
fuel combustion
Mine tailings, radium
products, natural decay of
granites
Tumors, cancers, and kidney,
brain, neurological, bone and
liver damage
Cancers, kidney and liver
damage, impairment of the
nervous system resulting in
sleepiness and headaches,
leukemia
Various effects ranging from
nausea to nervous disorders.
Dioxin is a common by-product
of the manufacture of pesti-
cides and is both highly toxic
and a suspected carcinogen.
Cancer and liver damage.
Cancers and skin ulcerations
with prolonged exposure
Cancer
Sources: Toxic Chemicals—What They Are, How They Affect You (EPA, Region 5)
Glossary of Environmental Terms (EPA, 1988)
"The potential for risk due to these contaminants is linked to a number of factors; for example, the length and level of exposure
and environmental and health factors such as age.
*U.S. G.P.O..-1993-341-835:81051
G-15
-------
|