&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/019
December 1992
PB93-963220
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
MARYLAND
1992 UPDATE
-------
Publication #9200.5-721 B
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Maryland
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management Agenc>
Washington, DC 20460 n s Environmental ^MW
-------
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
sponse, 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 groundwater
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
Superfund employee removing drums from a Superfund site.
Program had logged more than 2,300 removal
completions since Superfund was established.
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.
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, f
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;
1 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 REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
Environmental Progress
Site Repository
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx:
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
Maryland
The State of Maryland ^ \i*M \^LJ^y I is located with"1 EPA Region 3'
which includes the five mid-Adan- ^*"\t\ QvW > / tic States and the District of
Columbia. TheStatecovers 10,460square ^L*-& miles. According to the 1990
Census, Maryland experienced a 13 percent increase in population between 1980 and
1990, and is ranked nineteenth in U.S. population with approximately 4,782,000 residents.
Title 7-Hazardous Material and Hazardous Substances, Subtitle 2-Controlled Hazardous Sub-
stances of the Annotated Code of Maryland, Environmental Article provides the State with enforce-
ment authorities, including the right to compel polluters to conduct or pay for cleanup activities.
While the State prefers to settle with polluters, it does have the authority to conduct cleanup activities
itself and then recover the cost of cleanup at a later time in those cases where polluters are unable or
unwilling to pay. The State may apportion liability among polluters if there is a reasonable basis upon
which contributions to cleanup costs can be determined. The 1990 statute also created the Hazardous
Substance Control Fund to pay for cleanup activities conducted by the State, including emergency
response actions, studies and design activities, long-term cleanup activities, operation and mainte-
nance activities, and the 10 percent contribution from the State required under the Federal Superfund
program. Currently, 10 sites in the State of Maryland have been listed as final on the NPL; two have
been deleted. No new sites have been proposed for listing in 1992.
The Department of the Environment
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Maryland
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Maryland include:
Manufacturing
Facilities
Landfills
Wood
Production
and Treatment
Operations
Federal
Facilities
Storage and
Disposal Facilities
Facts about the 12 NPL sites
in Maryland:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at nine
sites.
Four sites endanger sensitive environ-
ments.
Ten sites are located near residential
areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
MARYLAND
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 Maryland, potentially responsible
parties are paying for or conducting cleanup
activities at six sites.
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCs
PCBs
Creosotes
Cyanide
Pesticides/Herbicides
Plastics
Other*
Petrochemicals/Explosives
Acids
83%
67%
25%
25%
25%
17%
17%
17%
8%
8%
*Other contaminants include ammonia
compounds and phosphorus
For Further Information on NPL Sites and Hazardous
Waste Programs in the State of Maryland Please Contact:
EPA Region 3 Environmental
Education and Outreach Branch
National Response Center
The Department of the Environment
Waste Management
EPA Region 3 Site Assessment
Section
EPA Supetfund 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
(215} 597-9370
(800) 424-8802
(410)631-3304
(215)597-8229
(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 (c>) 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.
i-> 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.
O 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.
O A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and cur-
rently are underway.
O 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
-------
0)
Q
S
S
TJ
JO
i_
(0
*cs
«*—
o
0)
CQ
4^
CO
*•*
CO
_J
Q.
Z
OB
Q.
C
(0
(D
O
•D
(5
>
Progress Tov
la
If
C O
§0
O
Q.O)
3.C
m 0)
•^ C
oo
•0&
E *
0=0
"Is
iji
0) d)
DC en
w
2'l
(0
31
CD ^
11
IT
S
to
Q
j
Q.
Z
O
U
0)
(0
0)
55
ft
ft
ft
ft
o
1
13
c
E
HARFORD/
BALTIMORE
j GROUND
*)
ABERDEEN PROVINC
(EDGEWOOD ARE,
ft
ft ft
ft ft
OS -H
1 §
13 13
c c
UH PL,
si
HARFORD
ANNEARUND:
j
GROUND
LANDFILL)
JNTY LANDFIL
ABERDEEN PROVING
(MICHAELSVILLE
ANNE ARUNDEL COI
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft ft
o ts
go oo
— O
o £J
•8
13 u
c "£j
E Q
HARFORD
BALTIMORE
•FILL
INDUSTRIES
BUSH VALLEY LANE
CHEMICAL METALS
ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft
vo m
90 go
R R
S S
TO CQ
c e
u_ u.
BALTIMORE
ALLEGHANY
;TREET DRUMS
KANE & LOMBARD S
LIMESTONE ROAD
ft
ft
ft
ft
VO
S
1
13
e
PL,
si
ANNEARUND:
r^>
•D PRESERVER!
| MID-ATLANTIC WOC
ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
OO CO
go go
OO -H
11
1
w 13
"3 .S
Q LU
Si
ANNEARUND:
CECIL
ll
MIDDLETOWN ROAE
SAND, GRAVEL & ST
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
VO
go
1
13
c
UH
ST. MARY'S
JSID WOOD
SOUTHERN MARYLA
TREATING
/
z_
ft
ft
^
s
o
13
c
E
U
s
Y LANDFILL
WOODLAWN COUNT
/V
/ x.
/ X
/ X
/ x.
/ « s ^^
' . 4i .'S ^
« E/3 1
O cu
Wl J- ^ *i
o .-S -a 2 §•
35 £•» |
oU
U
a. M
^|£|-|
S'S J B"
uo
*> .a "2 §o
w S '5 1 J
*
•5*"°
— -a is a "
S5 S 3 «
S,
_3^
^
K
-S
^
g.
c
o
^
^
•b
^
S5
•5
1
s;
-s;
1
2
%>
_^u
'>
1
s reflects actual site
a
|
1
1
March 1992
xx
-------
ABERDEE
PROVING
GROUND
(EDGEWOOD AREA)
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MD2210020036
EPA REGION 3
Harford and Baltimore
Counties
Other Names:
USA Aberdeen Proving Ground
Coast Guard - Upper Chesapeake Range
USA Edgewood Arsenal
US Coast Guard - Poole Island Range
Site Description
The Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) occupies 79,000 acres of land and water near the head
of the Chesapeake Bay. The APG consists of two areas that are listed separately on the
NPL: the Edgewood area and the Michaelsville area. The Edgewood area is 13,000 acres and
includes Gunpowder Neck, Pooles Island, Carroll Island, and Graces Quarters. The
Edgewood area is separated from the Michaelsville area by the Bush River. The Edgewood
area was used for the development and testing of chemical agent munitions. From 1917 to
the present, the Edgewood area conducted chemical research programs, manufactured
chemical agents, and tested, stored, and disposed of toxic materials. The Edgewood area has
large areas of land and water and numerous buildings that are contaminated or suspected of
contamination. Virtually all the land areas of the site reportedly are contaminated or
potentially contaminated. Substances disposed of in the area include significant quantities of
napalm, white phosphorus, and chemical agents. On-site surface waters include rivers,
streams, and wetlands. There are 38,600 people living within 3 miles of the site. On-site
residences house military personnel and military dependents. Four Edgewood-area standby
water supply wells in the Canal Creek area previously served approximately 3,000 people. The
Long Bar Harbor well field of the County Department of Public Works and the well field
used by the Joppatowne Sanitary Subdistrict serve 35,000 people within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 02/21/90
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Preliminary on-site groundwater sampling has identified various metals,
phosphorus, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including chloroform and
benzene. Preliminary on-site soil contamination sampling has identified various
VOCs, metals, and unexploded ordnance in surface and subsurface soil.
Preliminary on-site surface water sampling has identified various metals,
phosphorus, and VOCs. People who accidentally ingest or come in direct contact
with contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil, or sediments may be at risk.
The wetlands area is a designated habitat for bald eagles.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in 12 stages: initial actions and 11 long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the entire site, grouped here according to type of activity.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: As an initial action, the Army conducted an environmental
monitoring program in 1977 and 1978 at the Edgewood area. Evidence was found
of substantial groundwater and surface water contamination. Contamination at
the Edgewood area has been identified in separate study areas, which will be addressed in
future cleanup actions. In 1991, a leaking underground storage tank was removed from the
Nike site. Other removal efforts include: testing and removing underground storage tanks,
removing contaminated soil and taking post excavation samples, and removing surface wastes
from the G-street location and transporting the wastes to an off-site disposal facility.
O-Field, J-Field, Canal Creek, and Carroll Island: Investigations have begun
at these areas to determine the nature and extent of contamination present. The
O-Field and J-Field study areas both require separate source control and
groundwater cleanup phases. Large quantities of munitions were disposed of in varying
methods at these areas. A landfill, several disposal pits, and burn areas and a former
munitions production plant are among the targets for cleanup in these areas. White
phosphorus, mustard gas, lewesite, and other chemical agents have been identified as the
principal contaminants of these areas. The investigations taking place at these areas are
scheduled to be completed at various times during 1993 and 1994.
March 1992 2 ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
(EDGEWOOD AREA)
-------
Carroll Island, Graces Quarters, Nike Site, and Bush River: Investigations
are underway at these areas to determine the nature and extent of contamination.
These areas were principally use for testing chemical and biological agents, as well
as for chemical warfare training. The Bush River area has been used mainly for chemical
storage, but also contains a facility that has been used for radioactive waste material
handling. It is believed that many of the chemicals tested or stored in these areas have
contaminated the surrounding environment. Investigations at these areas are scheduled to be
completed at various times during 1993 and 1994.
O-Field Groundwater: In late 1991, remedies were selected to address cleanup
at the O-Field groundwater area. The remedies selected include: contaminated
groundwater plume containment through downgradient extraction using newly
installed wells; on-site treatment of extracted groundwater using chemical precipitation for
inorganics removal followed by ultra-violet oxidation for organics destruction; and discharge
of the treated groundwater to the Gunpowder River. The technical design of these remedies
began in 1991, and is scheduled to be completed in 1993.
Westwood Area: The Westwood area covers approximately 523 acres and was
used as a bomb drop-test area. There is an active solid waste landfill on site, which
is licensed to receive only rubble and asbestos wastes. A spill of radioactive
material occurred at the Westwood Area and reportedly was cleaned up. An investigation is
underway to define the extent of contamination at this site. The investigation is scheduled to
be completed in late 1993.
Other Edgewood Areas: This investigation includes all areas not covered by
specific study areas. Other study areas may be added as deemed necessary by this
investigation, which is planned for completion in late 1993.
Site Facts: The Aberdeen Proving Ground 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
The various initial actions taken at the site have reduced the threat of exposure to
contaminants at the Aberdeen Proving Ground (Edgewood Area) site while final studies are
underway and cleanup activities are being designed.
Site Repository
Harford County Public Library, Aberdeen Branch, 21 Franklin Street, Aberdeen, MD 21001
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND 3 March 1992
{EDGEWOOD AREA)
-------
ABERDEEN
PROVING GRO
(MICHAELSVILL
LANDFILL)
MARYLAND
EPA ID#MD3210021355
EPA REGION 3
Harford County
Other Names:
USA Edgewood Arsenal
US Coast Guard -
Poole Island Range
US Coast Guard -
Upper Chesapeake Range
Site Description
The Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) occupies 79,000 acres of land and water near the head
of the Chesapeake Bay. The APG consists of two areas that are listed separately on the
NPL: the Michaelsville area and the Edgewood area. The Michaelsville area consists of
17,000 acres, including the 20-acre Michaelsville Landfill, the Phillips Field Disposal Area, the
White Phosphorous Munition Burial Site, and numerous known or suspected solid waste
management units that may be sources of contamination. The Michaelsville area is separated
from the Edgewood area of the site by the Bush River. The area contains firing ranges,
impact areas, vehicle test tracks, a fire training area, and laboratories in support of the
testing activities. The Michaelsville Landfill operated as a sanitary landfill from the 1970s until
1980. The landfill received household garbage and refuse from the installation. The Phillips
Field Disposal Area includes the active Phillips Field Landfill, Disposal Areas 1 through 4,
and two grease pits. The active Phillips Field Landfill is a construction debris landfill and lies
on top of an older landfill that is unlined and is about 16 feet deep. The White Phosphorous
Munition Burial Site is believed to be within a 15-acre area in the Chesapeake Bay near
Mosquito Creek. Allegedly, munitions were buried under 2 feet of soil at the location. The
Michaelsville area is bordered on the west by the Bush River and to the northeast and south
by the Chesapeake Bay. The area is drained by seven creeks plus the Bush River. There are
38,600 people living within 3 miles of the site. Residences located on the Michaelsville area of
the site house military personnel and dependents. Harford County and town of Aberdeen
have water supply wells on the APG property, near the site boundaries.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 10/04/89
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Preliminary groundwater and surface water sampling has identified various heavy
metals, phosphorous, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Soil is contaminated
with pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). People who come in direct
contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil,
or sediments may be at risk. There also is a possible risk of bioaccumulation of
contaminants in the food chain.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in six stages: initial actions and five long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of Michaelsville Landfill Source Control and Groundwater, the Phillips
Field Disposal Area, the White Phosphorous Underwater Munitions Burial Site, the
Aberdeen Fire Training Area, and other Michaelsville Areas.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The Army has begun excavating pesticide-contaminated soil at
the golf course and sampling is underway. Abandoned underground storage tanks
also are being removed. Soil sampling around the tanks has been conducted to
determine if additional excavation and soil removal are required. Visually contaminated soil
has been removed at each location and post excavation soil samples have been taken. Wells
are installed in each case where contaminated soil is left in place. In 1991, soil contaminated
with pesticides was removed from the site and again from the golf course and incinerated at
an off-site location.
Michaelsville Landfill Source Control and Groundwater: The Michaelsville
Landfill operated as a sanitary landfill from 1970 until 1980 and received
household garbage and refuse from the installation. In addition, there are reports
of pesticides, waste oils, paints, solvents, and other materials having been dumped illegally in
this landfill. The landfill originally was excavated to depths below the water table, but was
later excavated to a higher depth. Two separate investigations are underway to determine the
nature and extent of groundwater and source contamination. Upon completion of these
investigations, scheduled for late 1993, appropriate cleanup technologies will be selected and
cleanup will begin.
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND 5 March 1992
(MICHAELSVILLE LANDFILL)
-------
Phillips Field Disposal Area: The Phillips Field Disposal Area consists of the
active Phillips Field Landfill, Disposal Areas 1-4, and two grease pits. The active
Phillips Field landfill is a construction debris landfill located on top of an older
landfill. Disposal Areas 1-4 consist of small landfills, borrow pits, and burn pits. Oil wastes
suspected to include solvents and transformer oil were dumped in the grease pits until they
closed in 1980. An investigation currently is underway to determine the nature and extent of
contamination in this area and the most appropriate ways to cleanup this contamination. The
investigation is scheduled for completion in 1993.
White Phosphorous Underwater Munitions Burial Site: This 15-acre site
was reported to have munitions buried in soil and underwater. An investigation
was completed in 1991, and it was determined that suspected contamination does
not exist. Therefore, no further action is needed.
Aberdeen Fire Training Area: An investigation currently is underway to
determine the nature and extent of contamination at the Aberdeen Fire Training
Area. This investigation is scheduled for completion in late 1993.
Other Michaelsville Areas: This investigation includes all areas not included in
the other specific study areas. Identified areas include, but are not limited to, the
Kirk Incinerator, the Shell Washout Facility, settling tanks, Disposal Areas 5-11,
and the Melt Load Facility. This investigation began in 1991 and is expected to be completed
in 1994.
Site Facts: The EPA and the Army entered into an Interagency Agreement in March 1990.
Under this agreement, the Army will conduct investigations and cleanup activities at the site.
APG (Michaelsville Landfill) 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
The EPA and the Army have excavated contaminated soil at the golf course, around the
underground storage tanks, and at other areas. Underground storage tanks are being
removed, and the Army has isolated various areas of contamination at the Michaelsville site.
Completed investigations at the White Phosphorous Underwater Munitions Burial Site
concluded that no further cleanup actions were needed at this area. Further investigations
leading to the final selection process for cleaning up the various remaining areas currently are
being conducted.
March 1992 6 ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
(MICHAELSVILLE LANDFILL)
-------
Site Repository
Harford County Public Library, Aberdeen Branch, 21 Franklin Street, Aberdeen, MD 21001
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
(MICHAELSVILLE LANDFILL)
March 1992
-------
ANNE ARUND
COUNTY LAN
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980705057
REGION 3
Arundel County
Glen Burnie
her Names:
ump
Landfill
Site Description
The Anne Arundel Landfill site is a 130-acre parcel, in the suburban Baltimore town of Glen
Burnie, that was used by the County of Anne Arundel as a municipal solid waste landfill for
domestic waste, from 1970 until it was closed in 1982. Beginning in 1945, 80 acres of the site
were used as a gravel and sand excavation operation owned by a private individual. During
and following the excavation of borrow soils, the site was used as an "uncontrolled dump,"
with open burning. In 1968, the site was reported as having two large surface water ponds,
into which the residues from the burning were placed. By 1969, most of the 80 acres was used
for dumping. Anne Arundel County took over the site and began operations in 1970. In the
late 1970s, the State began to investigate the possible presence of hazardous substances at
the site. Monitoring wells installed in 1980 showed that groundwater was contaminated. The
Patapsco Aquifer, which lies under the site, is the most productive water source in the county
and is an important source of water for public and private wells. An estimated 93,000 people
live within 3 miles of the site, which is in a mixed industrial, commercial, and residential area.
Approximately 3,000 people live within a mile of the site, and less than 100 live within 1,000
feet.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and County actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/16/88
Final Date: 02/11/91
Threats and Contaminants
Sampling by the EPA of 11 groundwater monitoring wells in 1983 confirmed that
the groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
cyanide, and heavy metals including lead. The EPA also found the sediments of
Furnace Creek to be contaminated with lead and cyanide. Contaminants in the
groundwater may pose a threat to people in the area because the underlying
Patapsco Aquifer is a water supply source for municipal and domestic wells. This
water system is interconnected to Baltimore's water supply. Contamination found
in sediments may pose a threat to the ecosystem of Furnace Creek which borders
the site and connects to the Chesapeake Bay.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: an initial action and a single long-term remedial
phase directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: Gas venting pipes have been inserted to prevent methane buildup
in the old uncontrolled dump area.
cleanup.
Entire Site: The State is monitoring drinking water sources to test for the
migration of contaminants. In 1991, the County began an intensive study to
determine the nature and extent of contamination and to identify alternatives for
Site Facts: Maryland's Solid Waste Department and the County signed an agreement
requiring the County to conduct site investigations. After the agreement was signed, the
State opposed the listing of the site on the NPL due to the use of unfiltered inorganic
samples as the basis for listing. In May 1992, the court ruled in favor of the State.
Currently, there is no enforceable schedule to complete the site study.
Environmental Progress
The installation of gas venting pipes to eliminate the danger of explosion from methane
buildup has reduced the potential for the Anne Arundel County Landfill site to pose an
immediate threat to the surrounding public or the environment while the site is awaiting
further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Not established.
ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY LANDFILL
March 1992
-------
BUSH V
LANDFIL
MARYLAND
EPAID#MDD980504195
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Harford County
Abingdon
Other Names:
Harris Landfill
Before 1977, the 29-acre Bush Valley Landfill site allegedly was used for the open burning of
trash. The property, which was privately owned, was used as a landfill for municipal wastes
from 1975 to 1982. During this period, the landfill had a State permit to accept municipal
wastes. Between 1979 and 1984, the State issued orders to the owner to neutralize leachates
and build drainage ditches and containment berms as part of the landfill's operating
procedures and closure plans. The owner of the facility never complied fully with the orders.
During a site inspection in 1984, the EPA observed erosion and leachate seeping from slopes
at the landfill. The landfill did not contain diversion ditches or leachate collection systems and
was only partially covered. The Ferryman Water Treatment Plant supplies approximately
35,000 people from eight municipal wells. Three of the eight wells are within 3 miles of the
site. A few private wells are nearby, the closest of which is a shallow well 500
feet away. The residents closest to the site have been placed on a public water supply
system.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/16/88
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
An on-site groundwater monitoring well contained volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including vinyl chloride from former waste disposal practices. Also, the
EPA observed soil leachate seeping from slopes of the landfill. Potential risks exist
if contaminated groundwater is used as a drinking water supply or if people come
in direct contact with contamination. Runoff from the landfill goes to two basins
on the site; one of these basins runs into Bynum Run, which is near the site. A
wetland that adjoins the site could become contaminated, threatening the wildlife
in the area.
10
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: In 1992, the parties potentially responsible for contamination began
conducting an intensive study to determine the nature and extent of contamination
and to identify alternatives for cleanup. After completion of this investigation,
expected in 1994, the EPA will select the most appropriate remedy to clean up the site.
Site Facts: An Administrative Order was issued on December 21, 1990, requiring the
potentially responsible parties to conduct an investigation at the site.
Environmental Progress
After listing this site on the NPL, the EPA performed a preliminary investigation and
determined that conditions at the Bush Valley Landfill site do not pose an immediate threat
to nearby residents or the surrounding environment while the investigations are underway and
cleanup activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Not established.
BUSH VALLEY LANDFILL
11
March 1992
-------
CHEMICAL
INDUSTRIES
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980555478
PA REGION 3
Baltimore County
Baltimore
Other Names:
Ml
Site Description
The Chemical Metals Industries site is divided into two areas: a former gas station that
operated on one area and was also used as a dump yard for chemicals, and a laboratory and
manufacturing center that contained chemical processing equipment designed for
recrystallization of solid materials from liquid solutions. Gwynn's Falls, a tributary to the
Patapsco River, is located near the site. There are approximately 10,000 people living within 3
miles of the site. The site is located in a mixed residential and industrial area, with 20 homes
located between the two site areas.
Site Responsibility: This site was addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Deletion Date: 12/30/82
Threats and Contaminants
Specific contaminants detected in the air, soil, and surface water included cyanides,
ammonia compounds, acids, caustics, and heavy metal salts. Health threats at the
site included coming in direct contact with contaminated air, surface water, and
soils; breathing contaminated air; and drinking contaminated surface water or
accidentally ingesting contaminated soils. Danger of fire and explosion from
volatized chemicals on the site posed an additional threat to nearby residents.
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
contamination at the entire site.
12
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: All materials posing an immediate threat were identified, removed,
and disposed of in 1982. Drums and scrap debris were removed from the site and
liquid organic waste was removed. Liquid inorganic wastes were treated to make
them acceptable for discharge to the city sewer system. The underground storage tank at the
former gas station was filled with concrete slurry. A clay cap and topsoil were applied and
compacted over the site. Sand blasters removed chemical contamination from the walls of the
former gas station. The interior of the laboratory and manufacturing area were cleaned and
decontaminated. The site was fenced and police and fire personnel were made available to
ensure site security. As a result of the cleanup activities and subsequent sampling to ensure
the effectiveness of the remedy, the EPA, in cooperation with the State of Maryland,
determined that the site no longer posed a threat to the public. The site was deleted from the
NPL in 1982.
Site Facts: The Chemical Metals Industries site was placed on the Interim Priorities List in
October 1981. All cleanup actions were completed before the first proposed NPL was
established.
Environmental Progress
By performing all cleanup actions described above, the EPA has eliminated or contained
contamination sources at the site. In conjunction with the State, the EPA has determined
that the Chemical Metals Industries site has been cleaned to established standards and is no
longer a threat to the public or the environment.
Site Repository
Information is no longer available.
CHEMICAL METALS INDUSTRIES 13 March 1992
-------
KANE & LO
STREET DR
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980923783
EPA REGION 3
Baltimore County
Orangeville Subdivision
in Baltimore
Site Description
The approximately 10-acre Kane & Lombard Street Drums site operated as part of an open
dump between 1962 and 1984 and accepted demolition, municipal, and industrial wastes. The
site and some of the adjacent properties have a long history of excavation and filling.
Approximately 1,200 drums containing hazardous materials have been removed from the site.
There are approximately 37,000 people within 3 miles of the site. Residential developments
and a large medical complex are found about 1/3 mile from the site, and a large park area is
about 3/4 mile from the site. A high school and its recreation areas border the property. The
site lies along the edge of an industrial and commercial strip that borders a railroad and
highway network. Herring Run and Back River, downgradient of the site, are an arm of the
Chesapeake Bay and are used for fishing, crabbing, and recreational purposes.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including vinyl chloride and benzene and metals including cadmium and beryllium
from former waste disposal practices. Specific contaminants detected in soils
include VOCs, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polynuclear aromatics (PNAs),
phthalates, and lead. Health threats include exposure to contaminated soil and air
through ingestion, inhalation, and direct contact.
14
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: emergency actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control and cleanup of contaminated groundwater.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: In 1984, the EPA removed approximately 1,150 drums
from the site. The majority of full drums contained flammable solids. An
additional drum containing PCBs was removed and stored, pending shipment to a
disposal facility. The site was covered with 12,000 cubic yards of topsoil, and surface contours
were reshaped to prevent surface water from mixing with contaminants and moving off site.
The EPA also installed a fence for security purposes.
Source Control: In 1987, the final selection of cleanup technologies to address
contamination was made. It included construction of a slurry wall around the waste
disposal areas, construction of a multi-layer soil cap, construction of a drainage
system, and continued groundwater monitoring. The EPA prepared the technical
specifications and design for the selected cleanup technologies. Final source control activities
were completed in 1991.
Groundwater: The State is conducting a second investigation to determine the
nature and extent of groundwater contamination emanating from the site. This
investigation will identify alternatives for cleanup and is scheduled to be completed
in 1993.
Site Facts: In 1983, the State of Maryland issued an order to the potentially responsible
parties to conduct cleanup activities. The parties appealed the order, and the State requested
the EPA's assistance to clean up the site.
Environmental Progress
By removing wastes, fencing, and completing source control measures, the EPA and the State
have reduced the potential for exposure to contamination at the Kane & Lombard Street
Drums site. Ongoing investigation activities are evaluating the nature and extent of
groundwater contamination so that remaining cleanup activities can be planned.
Site Repository
Highland Multi-Purpose Center, 3411 Banle Street, Baltimore, MD 21224
KANE & LOMBARD STREET DRUMS 15 March 1992
-------
LIMESTON
ROAD
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980691588
EPA REGION 3
Allegheny County
12 miles southeast of Cumberland
Other Names:
and Cement & Supply
Iggs Sanitation
Site Description
The 210-acre Limestone Road site consists of two parcels of land: the former Diggs
Sanitation Company and the Cumberland Cement and Supply Company. The site includes
large areas of landfilled and dumped commercial, residential, and demolition refuse on both
properties. It is estimated that approximately 110 tons of chromium-containing sludge also
were disposed of on the properties in April 1979. Beginning in the mid-1970s, various
contractors were allowed to dump clean fill (housing demolition wastes) on the property to
provide a larger and more level working surface. Allegations were made that 11 tons of
hazardous waste have been disposed of on the Diggs property as an extension of previous
filling and grading operations. There are approximately 425 people living within a mile of the
site. The site is bordered by several residences and the Cumberland City Dump. There is one
residence on the Diggs property, and 18 residences are within 1/2 mile downgradient of the
site. The residences are supplied with groundwater from private wells.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Inorganic chemicals and heavy metals including zinc and lead were detected in
on-site soils during test pit sampling. The surface water is contaminated with
chromium, cadmium, and zinc. Possible health threats include direct contact with
or accidental ingestion of contaminated soil or surface water. There also is a
possibility that groundwater may become contaminated through runoff from the
soil or surface water.
16
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the
entire site and groundwater cleanup.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The EPA has selected the following remedies for cleanup of the site
contamination: (1) reshaping site surface contours to manage water infiltration
and runoff; (2) capping contaminated soil on all properties; (3) fencing both
properties; (4) continuing monitoring of groundwater, surface water, and sediment; (5)
completing a historical review of pertinent geological information; (6) chemically analyzing
shale to determine its composition; (7) re-evaluating and establishing background data control
points for groundwater; and (8) frequent groundwater sampling, as well as increasing stream
and residential sampling. In addition, the EPA remedy requires evaluating the effects of
natural conditions on the overall water quality of the area. The potentially responsible parties
began preparing the technical specifications and design of the selected cleanup technologies
in 1992. Cleanup activities will begin once the design phase is completed, expected in 1993.
Groundwater: In 1992, a supplemental investigation began to explore the nature
and extent of groundwater contamination. The study is expected to be completed
in 1994, at which time alternative cleanup options will be identified for the site.
Site Facts: In 1988, the potentially responsible parties entered into a Consent Decree with
the EPA to conduct cleanup activities at the site. The State subsequently filed a motion to
intervene, requesting that it be made a party to the Consent Decree on equal terms with the
EPA. The issue related to the State's role was settled among the parties, and the decree was
amended and signed by the parties, the State, and the EPA. The Decree was entered in court
in 1990.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Limestone Road site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary
investigations and found that the site does not currently pose an immediate threat to public
health or the environment while further investigations are underway and cleanup activities
are being planned.
Site Repository
Allegany County Library, 31 Washington Street, Cumberland, MD 21502
LIMESTONE ROAD 17 March 1992
-------
MID-ATLAN
WOOD
PRESERVERS, I
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD064882889
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Anne Arundel County
Harmans
Other Names:
Mantle Harmans Wood
Treatment Factory
The Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc. site is an active wood-treating facility that stands on
a 3-acre parcel in Harmans. It consists of two impoundments that straddle Shipley Avenue
near its intersection with Dorsey Road. Both are enclosed by chain-link fencing. The
operation employs a two-part chromated copper arsenate (CCA) process. In the first part,
workers pressure-treat lumber in an enclosed processing plant; in the second, the wood is
allowed to drip and dry. From 1976 until 1981, operators allowed the contaminated drippings
to fall directly onto the ground. Surface water runoff from the site drains toward Stoney Run
Creek, while the groundwater moves in a northwesterly direction. The surface soils are
contaminated with wood-treating metals. The pollution was determined to have come from
the overflow of a CCA storage tank and from lumber drippings. The owner undertook certain
cleanup activities in 1980; however, some contaminated soils remained. The area surrounding
the site is industrial, commercial, and residential. The closest residence is within 200 feet of
the site. Stoney Run Creek flows north through a wetland area approximately 600 feet west
of the site, extending 4 miles before discharging to the Patapsco River near Elkridge. Stoney
Run is restricted to secondary recreational use.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater beneath and downgradient of the site was contaminated with arsenic
and chromium from a spill of CCA solution, but recent sampling shows little
remaining effect from that release. Heavy metals including arsenic and chromium
from former process wastes have been detected in elevated concentrations in the
soils on the site. Individuals are at risk from direct contact with, accidental
ingestion of, or inhalation of contaminated residues in the soils. The wetlands and
stream areas near the site are not being adversely affected but are subject to a
monitoring plan.
18
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a single long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Under orders from the State, the owner developed plans to
remedy the groundwater contamination in 1980. Operational changes included
leaving the drying wood on the concrete drainage pad longer before moving it to
the storage lot and modifying the drainage pad so that it collects all waste drippings for reuse.
All wastes captured by the drip pad are recirculated within the process system, and sludges
are shipped off site for disposal. The owner also removed 26 cubic yards of contaminated soil
from beneath the chemical storage tank overflow pipe and disposed of it at an EPA-approved
facility.
Entire Site: A study of groundwater and soil contamination at the site was
completed in 1990 and was financed by the owner. This investigation explored the
nature and extent of contamination and recommended strategies for final cleanup.
In 1990, remedies were selected for site cleanup, including: excavation, stabilization and off-
site disposal of arsenic-contaminated soils; capping of arsenic-contaminated soils in areas
where the concentrations are not high enough to warrant removing the soils; construction of
an enlarged roofed drip pad; environmental monitoring; and deed restrictions. Design of the
remedies is currently being prepared by the potentially responsible parties and is scheduled to
be completed in 1993.
Environmental Progress
The owner's actions to limit the spread of groundwater contamination and the removal of
contaminated soil from the site have reduced the potential of the further spread of
contamination at the Mid-Atlantic Wood Preservers, Inc. site while the final cleanup
approach is being designed and implemented.
Site Repository
Provinces Branch Library, Severn Square Shopping Center, 2624 Annapolis Road,
Severn, MD 21144
MID-ATLANTIC WOOD PRESERVERS, INC. 19 March 1992
-------
MIDDLETO
ROAD DUMP
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980705099
EPA REGION 3
Anne Arundel County
Maryland Route 50, near Annapolis
Other Names:
ale Dlckerson Dump
Site Description
The Middletown Road Dump, situated on approximately 2 1/2 acres, is a privately owned
dump located off Route 50 near Annapolis. The facility, now inactive, took in rubble and
construction debris for several decades without proper State permits. In 1981, it was
discovered that about 40 drums and four dumpster loads of suspected hazardous substances
were on the site. The owner was forced to initiate cleanup when a drum-crushing accident
spread contaminants over 1/2 acre. That year, the State shut down the dump because of its
violations of State water pollution and hazardous waste laws. Approximately 5,000 people live
within 1 mile of the site; 2,500 people within 3 miles are served by groundwater in both public
and private wells. A stream flowing off the site enters Whitehawk Creek, which is used for
recreation.
Site Responsibility: This site was addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Deleted Date: 04/18/88
Threats and Contaminants
Soil was contaminated with heavy metals such as lead, aluminum, chromium, zinc,
cyanide, barium, and cadmium. Access to the site was unrestricted, making the risk
of direct contact with contaminated areas possible; however, no contamination
remains on site.
Cleanup Approach
The site was addressed through emergency actions; further investigations showed that no
other cleanup actions were required.
20
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: In 1983, the EPA conducted an emergency cleanup to
eliminate immediate threats from contamination. EPA workers performed the
following: removed contaminated soil and 5-gallon pails of marine paint; sampled
the soil to confirm that contaminant removal had been adequate; installed six groundwater
monitoring wells around the site perimeter; sampled and tested drums; and moved 1 million
tires elsewhere on the site to expedite subsurface investigation. More drums were discovered
under the tires. The EPA later removed 68 drums, 70 contaminated tires, and 610 tons of
contaminated soil.
Entire Site: The EPA and the State conducted an intensive investigation of site
conditions during and after the emergency removal. The study evaluated water,
soil, and sediment quality in the vicinity of the site. It revealed that as a result of
the previous EPA cleanup actions, the hazardous wastes had been eliminated, and that no
threat to public health remained. The site contains only uncontaminated trash and tires.
Declaring that no further cleanup action was warranted, the EPA, with agreement from the
State, deleted the site from the NPL in April 1988.
Environmental Progress
The EPA, through emergency removal of hazardous wastes and evaluations of the extent of
contamination at the Middletown Dump, successfully cleaned up the site. After further
studies, the EPA, with concurrence by the State, determined that the site no longer posed a
threat to the surrounding community or the environment, and deleted the site from the NPL
in 1988.
Site Repository
Information is no longer available.
MIDDLETOWN ROAD DUMP
21
March 1992
-------
SAND, GF
AND STONE
MARYLAND
EPAID#MDD980705164
EPA REGION 3
Cecil County
3 miles west of Elkton
Other Names:
Elkton Quarry
Maryland Sand and Gravel
Site Description
From 1969 to 1974, 3 acres of the Sand, Gravel, and Stone site, which is on a 200-acre
parcel, were used for the disposal of bulk wastes such as processing wastewater, sludges, and
still bottoms, and over 1,000 drums of various waste material. The operator dug pits and
disposed of approximately 700,000 gallons of waste into them, including drums and sludges. In
1982, the EPA detected volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the groundwater at the site,
although water samples from nearby homes were not contaminated. Approximately 570
people live within a 1-mile radius of the site; 8,000 are within 3 miles. The nearest home is
1,800 feet downgradient from the site. Upgradient homes are not at risk. Elk Nest State
Forest is within 3 miles, as is the Elk River estuary and wetlands. Mill Creek, a headwater
located on the site, is a spawning area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The shallow groundwater has been shown to contain heavy metals including
cadmium and chromium, VOCs including benzene and toluene from former waste
disposal practices, and semi-volatile organic compounds. Heavy metals, pesticides,
and VOCs have been detected in sediments and surface water. Soil is
contaminated with VOCs. Accidental ingestion of shallow on-site groundwater can
be a potential health risk. Trespassers are at risk by coming into direct contact
with, inhaling, or accidentally ingesting contaminated soils. Site access is restricted
by a fence around the perimeter of the facility. Fish samples taken from
downstream show no sign of being contaminated.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on drum and shallow aquifer cleanup, cleanup of the deep aquifers, and on-
site soil cleanup.
22
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Under State order, the owner removed 200,000 gallons of
liquid waste from the site in 1974. In 1985, a temporary fence was constructed
around the site to limit access.
Drums and Shallow Aquifer: In 1983, the EPA began an investigation into the
nature and extent of contamination. The study resulted in recommendations to
remove buried materials to an approved facility and to pump and treat shallow
groundwater and leachate. Fencing was proposed to limit access and was completed in 1989.
Design of a groundwater treatment unit is underway and is expected to be completed in 1993.
Deep Aquifers: In 1986, the potentially responsible parties began an intensive
study to determine the nature and extent of deep aquifer contamination and to
identify alternatives for cleanup. The EPA selected on-site and off-site
groundwater monitoring and on- and/or off-site point-of-use treatment for the contaminated
groundwater, as necessary, as the appropriate cleanup options. Design specifications and
plans for cleanup actions are currently under review.
On-Site Soils: An intensive study of on-site soil contamination is slated for 1993.
This investigation will determine the nature and extent of the problem and will
identify the best approaches for cleanup.
Site Facts: In 1985, a steering committee of potentially responsible parties volunteered to
perform investigations, signing a Consent Order in 1986. Forty-one potentially responsible
parties and the EPA signed a Consent Decree in November 1987, in which the parties agreed
to conduct cleanup actions and to pay a portion of the EPA's past and future oversight costs.
In 1991, 43 potentially responsible parties signed a Consent Decree agreeing to implement
additional cleanup actions associated with the deep aquifers.
Environmental Progress
The immediate construction of a fence around the site to limit public access, the removal of
liquid wastes, and the excavation and removal of buried drums have reduced the potential for
direct contact with hazardous materials at the Sand, Gravel, and Stone site while further
studies are underway and cleanup actions are being planned.
Site Repository
Cecil County Public Library, Elkton Branch, 301 Newark Avenue, Elkton, MD 21921
SAND, GRAVEL, AND STONE
23
March 1992
-------
SOUTHER
MARYLAND
WOOD TREATI
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980704852
EPA REGION 3
Saint Mary's County
Hollywood
Site Description
Four acres of the 25-acre Southern Maryland Wood Treating (SMWT) site, located about 50
miles southeast of Washington, D.C., were used to treat wood from 1965 to 1978. The facility
treated wood with creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) and is now inactive. Operators
disposed of process wastes in six unlined lagoons. Additional waste was released via spillage
and drippings from treated wood. In 1977, under an order from the Maryland Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene, the potentially responsible parties attempted to clean up the site
and dispose of the lagoon liquids and landfarming lagoon sludges in two areas on site via
spray irrigation and land treatment, respectively. Sludges were mixed with wood chips and
sewage sludge, and were spread over a 3-acre section of the site. This attempt was not
successful, and now the top several feet of soil in this area are contaminated with polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Soil under the former lagoon area also is heavily
contaminated from seepage from the lagoons. Surface soil in other areas of the site was
contaminated by drippings from treated wood. The site is surrounded by residential and
agricultural areas. About 40 homes are located within 1/2 mile of the site, and 150 homes are
within a mile of the site. Approximately 260 people living within 3 miles of the site depend on
wells for drinking water.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal and State
actions.
Threats and Contaminants
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs), PAHs,
and PCP from the wood treatment operations. The main threat to public health is
long-term exposure to carcinogens found in PAHs in the site's subsurface and
surface soils. Surface water and sediments are also contaminated with PAHs.
24
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: After a preliminary assessment of the site in 1985 indicated
widespread soil contamination, as well as on-site groundwater, surface water, and
sediment contamination, the EPA initiated an immediate cleanup action. Filter
fences were installed in the site drainage ways to reduce downstream migration of
contaminants. In addition, by 1986, approximately 1,400 cubic yards of contaminated soil
were excavated from the northwestern bank of the freshwater pond. The soils then were
placed onto a synthetic liner east of the former lagoon area and capped with a synthetic
cover. A decontamination pad was used to clean the heavy excavation equipment.
Entire Site: The cleanup remedies selected for this site in 1988 include:
(1) excavating and incinerating contaminated soils and sediments on site;
(2) installing a barrier to control groundwater migration through the pond and
process area; (3) pumping and treating contaminated groundwater and surface water;
(4) backfilling, regrading, and replanting the site where necessary; and (5) monitoring
groundwater, surface water, sediment, and organisms. The cleanup processes will be
completed in different phases; the first phase is to install a barrier wall around the pond and
process area and then constructing a permanent decontamination area. The design of this
phase was finished in 1989. Construction was completed in 1991. The next phase will
accomplish the remainder of the cleanup actions. The pre-design work of the remedy is
underway for this phase, and is expected to be completed in 1992.
Site Facts: In 1980, a Consent Decree was signed between the State and SMWT
Corporation, one of the potentially responsible parties, to conduct immediate cleanup actions
at the site.
Environmental Progress
Excavating, treating, fencing, and capping contaminated soils, and installing a barrier wall
around the pond and process area at the SMWT site have prevented the further spread of
contaminants and have reduced the risk to the public while the site awaits the completion of
the remaining cleanup remedies selected.
SOUTHERN MARYLAND WOOD TREATING 25 March 1992
-------
Site Repository
St. Mary's County Memorial Library, Route 1, Leonard town, MD 20650
March 1992 26 SOUTHERN MARYLAND WOOD TREATING
-------
LANDFILL
MARYLAND
EPA ID# MDD980504344
Site Description
Cecil County owned and operated the 37-acre Woodlawn County Landfill from 1965 to 1979,
when it was closed under a State order. Before becoming a landfill, the property was a
privately-owned sand and gravel quarry. Operators filled two large quarry pits with
agricultural, municipal, and industrial wastes. According to State records, the only
documented hazardous waste disposal at the site was polyvinyl chloride (PVC) sludge from
the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company (now Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.). This sludge
initially was disposed of throughout the site, but between 1978 and 1981 three designated
disposal cells were put into use. Analyses by the EPA, State, and parties potentially
responsible for site contamination showed contamination of on-site groundwater as well as
stream sediments near the site. An estimated 5,700 people draw drinking water from public
and private wells within 3 miles of the site. The nearest private well is within 400 feet of the
landfill. All homeowners adjacent to the site use private wells as their sole source of drinking
water. Samples obtained from 13 domestic wells surrounding the site were found to be free
of site-related contamination at levels of concern. However, recent sampling has indicated
the presence of vinyl chloride in one private well. The contaminated stream enters Basin
Run, a State-designated trout stream, about 2 miles from the site.
D~~~~~ -U-I-* TU •«. • u • AA A^ u NPL LISTING HISTORY
Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/01/87
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
including vinyl chloride, benzene, and toluene; pthalates; polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs); and heavy metals including manganese, lead, cadmium, and
arsenic. VOCs and heavy metals are found in stream sediments. Vinyl chloride
has been detected in the on-site sludge. Possible health threats include accidentally
ingesting or coming in direct contact with contaminated groundwater or sludge.
27 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The potentially responsible parties agreed to undertake an intensive
study of soil and groundwater contamination at the site and to recommend the
best approaches for cleanup. Prior to the beginning of the investigation, 19
monitoring wells were installed by Cecil County and the State. Twelve additional wells were
installed during the investigation. The investigation began in 1988 and is scheduled for
completion in 1993, after which the EPA will select the most appropriate remedies to clean
up the site.
Site Facts: The EPA signed a Consent Order in 1988 with the Firestone Tire and Rubber
Company (now Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.) and Cecil County to conduct a site investigation.
Environmental Progress
After adding the site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that the Woodlawn County Landfill site presents no immediate threats to the
nearby population or the environment while further studies are taking place.
Site Repository
Cecil County Public Library, Elkton Branch, 301 Newark Avenue, Elkton, MD 21921
March 1992 28 WOODLAWN COUNTY LANDFILL
-------
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: Anyunconfinedpartofthe
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 Ar sen ate: 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 fanning, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Down gradient: 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 inking
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 tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is 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].
Still bottom: 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.
Superf und: 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 groundwater, soil, etc.,
to determine whether and how well the method
will work.
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, color-
less liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as
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)
Herbicides
Poiychlorinated
Creosotes
Racfiatfon
(Raefenudides)
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 pieserving, 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.:1993-341-835:81019
G-15
------- |