vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102 G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/034
December 1992
PB93-963235
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
OKLAHOMA
1992 UPDATE
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Publication #9200.5-7366
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Oklahoma
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, DC 20460 .. s Environmental Protection
-------
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
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.
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.
Superfund employee prepares equipment for groundwaler
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.
-------
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,
public health, administration and manage-
ment, law, and many other fields.
The average NPL site takes from seven to ten
years to work its way through the system,
from discovery to the start of long-term
cleanup. Actual cleanup work can take years,
decades if contaminated groundwater must
be treated. Of course, imminent threats to
public health or the environment are cor-
rected right away.
The diagram to the right presents a simplified
view of the cleanup process. The major steps
in the Superfund process are:
• Site discovery and investigation to iden-
tify contaminants and determine whether
emergency action is required;
• Emergency site work such as removing
contaminants for proper treatment or dis-
posal, and securing the site to keep people
and animals away, if warranted by condi-
tions at the site;
• Site evaluation to determine how people
living and working nearby, and the envi-
ronment, may be exposed to site contami-
nants;
• Detailed studies to determine whether con-
ditions are serious enough to add the site to
the National Priorities List of sites eligible
for federally funded cleanup under Super-
fund;
• Selection, design, and implementation of a
cleanup plan, after a thorough review of
the most effective cleanup options, given
site conditions, contaminants present, and
their potential threat to public health or the
environment.
• Follow-up to ensure that the cleanup work
done at the site continues to be effective
over the long term.
The Superfund Process
From the earliest stages, EPA investigators
work hard to identify those responsible for the
contamination. As their responsibility is es-
tablished, the EPA negotiates with these "re-
sponsible parties" to pay for cleaning up the
problem they helped create. This "enforce-
ment first" policy saves Superfund Trust Fund
monies for use in cleanups where the respon-
sible parties cannot be identified, or where
they are unable to fund cleanup work.
-------
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book
The site fact sheets presented in this book
are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
'once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
STATE
EPA ID* ABCOOOOOOO
Threats and Contaminants
Cleanup Approach
XXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
Response Action Status
xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx
Site Facts:
^^^cxxxx:
Environmental Progress
Site Repository
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 Ground-water 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
-------
jf Major CHI«s
• NPLSH»S
Superfund
Activities in
Oklahoma
The State of Oklahoma is
located within EPA Region 6, which
includes the five south central
States. The State covers 69,919 square miles. According to the 1990 Census, Oklahoma experi-
enced a 4 percent increase in population between 1980 and 1990, and is ranked twenty-eighth in
U.S. population with approximately 3,146,000 residents.
The Controlled Industrial Waste Disposal Act provides the State with the authority to
implement the Superfund program at the State level. General authority to implement the pro-
gram has been granted to the Department of Health. This authority includes the right to access
the site and the option to impose civil and criminal penalties on polluters. In practice, the State
orders polluters to conduct or pay for cleanup activities by invoking its enforcement authorities.
The State may conduct emergency response actions and removals at abandoned sites; however,
the cost of cleanup cannot be recovered from polluters except under the Federal Superfund
program. Permit fees and funds transferred from the Public Health Special Fund are placed in
the Controlled Industrial Waste Fund that finances, in addition to cleanup activities, the 10
percent contribution from the State required by the Federal Superfund program. Currently, 10
sites in the State of Oklahoma have been listed as final on the NPL. No new sites have been
proposed for listing in 1992.
The Department of Health
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Oklahoma
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Oklahoma include:
Mining
Operations
Landfills
Federal
Facilities
Petroleum and
Refining
Operations
Facts about the 10 NPL sites
in Oklahoma:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at nine
sites.
Three sites endanger sensitive envi-
ronments.
Eight sites are located near residential
areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
OKLAHOMA
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Ground
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCs
PCBs
Pesticides/Herbicides
Petrochemicals/Explosives
Acids
Creosotes
80%
60%
30%
30%
30%
20%
10%
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of Oklahoma, potentially respon-
sible parties are paying for or conducting
cleanup activities at five sites.
For Further Information on NPL Sites and Hazardous
Waste Programs in the State of Oklahoma Please Contact
EPA Region 6 Office of External
Affairs, Community Relations
National Response Center
The Department of Health:
Solid Waste Service
EPA Region 6 Hazardous Waste
Management Division
EPA Superfund Hotline
For information concerning
community involvement
To report a hazardous
waste emergency
For information about the
State's responsibility in the
Superfund Program
For information about the
Regional Superfund Program
For information about the
Federal Superfund Program
(214) 655-2200
(800) 424-8802
(404) 271-7159
(214)655-6740
(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 (^>) indicating the
current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are organized
into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to
address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and
surface water pollution, or to clean up differ-
ent areas of a large site. In such cases, the
chart portrays cleanup progress at the site's
most advanced stage, reflecting the status of
site activities rather than administrative ac-
complishments.
O An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
^> A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been selected. In these cases,
the arrows are discontinued at the
"Remedy Selection" step and resume in
the "Construction Complete" category.
^ A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently
are designing the technical specifica-
tions for the selected cleanup remedies
and technologies.
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.
^ 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
Is
O 4)
ffi
o
CO
Q.
Z
OB
Q.
U
C
CO
.2
O
I
CO
CO
Q)
O)
O
o
CL o>
3 C
c 5
S °>
00
f §>
(4
II
C M
~ 0)
DC
0)
n
O
3
1
n
0)
55
fj fr fr
fj fr fr fr fr
fj fr fr fr fr fr fr
frfrfTfTfrfrfrfrfrfr
ft ft fr fr ft ft ft fr ft
g^ go go go go
£SJOJOQJS£S-^ OJ^IO
gggggggg££
UH UH UH U, UH UH PU E UH UH
SA
Q S
^
^
o
III
OOP.
o o
G H
o o
oU
u
Q. W)
-III!
uo
as'i'.l
'Sf a -
^0 ^ QJ
OS on
a,
1
K
C
b
r£
«
1.
§•
§
8S2
March 1992
XX
-------
COMPASS
INDUSTRIES
(AVERY DRIVE)
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD980620983
Site Description
REGION 6
Tulsa County
'handler Park
(f)ther Names:
Cl andler Landfill
Compass Industries (Avery Drive) is a 30-acre abandoned landfill situated on a bluff
overlooking the Arkansas River to the west of Tulsa. Operating from 1972 to 1976, it served
as one of the major municipal landfills in the Tulsa area. Unknown wastes have been dumped
at the site since the mid-1950s. The limited records available indicate that several types of
hazardous wastes were dumped there, including toxic chemicals, metals, and carcinogenic
materials. Prior to that, the site was used for limestone quarrying. During the 1970s, poor
operating practices and open burning resulted in several fires at the landfill. The most recent
fire burned underground for several years, occasionally breaking out into the open. The waste
is piled approximately 20 feet deep. The State Health Department began to study air and
water quality in 1983, when residents complained about odors at the site. The site is in a rural
area, but is immediately west of Chandler Park, a recreational area. The nearest residence is
1/4 mile from the site, and the nearest drinking water well is 1/2 mile away, although it is
upgradient from the site and currently is not in use.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL Listing History
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The soil is contaminated with toxic metals and organic compounds. Contaminants
include oily sludges, jet fuel, solvents, acids, caustics, bleaches, benzene,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides. However, soil no longer poses a
threat due to the installation of a clay cap over the contaminated area. The low
concentrations of contaminants in the groundwater are within Federal standards.
In the past, the site was troubled by recurrent fires. Toxic air emissions from
burning material threatened nearby residences. In addition, trespassers from the
nearby recreational area were at risk of coming in contact with contaminated
materials, as people have used the site for target practice; however, the site is
fenced now making trespassing unlikely. The area near the site is a habitat for the
endangered bald eagle.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions to limit access to the site and a
long-term remedial phase to control the source of contamination.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA installed a fence around the site and put warning
signs around its perimeter in mid-1988.
Source Control: In 1987, the EPA selected the following remedies: installing an
EPA-approved cap over the landfill area to isolate contaminated materials and
reduce the amount of water seeping into and through the landfill; diverting surface
water to reduce overland flows and infiltration; grading the site to encourage site runoff and
prevent erosion; and collecting and treating contaminated shallow groundwater before
discharge to the Arkansas River. The construction phase began in 1989. The clay cap was
completed in 1990 and final seeding of the site took place in 1991. Further sampling of the
groundwater showed that the low levels of contaminant concentrations do not pose a threat
to people or the environment. Therefore, the remedy for groundwater cleanup was canceled.
A final site inspection, conducted in 1991, verified that the cleanup has been effective.
Samples taken in early 1992, as part of the operations and maintenance program, verified
that the cleanup continues to protect public health and the environment.
Site Facts: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination performed the
cleanup, pursuant to an Administrative Order.
Environmental Progress
The construction of a fence to limit access to the site has reduced the exposure potential of
the Compass Industries (Avery Drive) site. Completion of the clay cap has contained material
on site and surface water diversion techniques will help keep pollutants from migrating off
site. The site is currently in a five-year operations and maintenance phase to ensure that the
site cleanup remedy continues to protect public health and the environment.
Site Repository
Page Memorial Library, 6 East Broadway, Sand Springs, OK 74063
March 1992 2 COMPASS INDUSTRIES (AVERY DRIVE)
-------
DOUBLE EAGLE
REFINERY
COMPANY
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD00718871
A REGION 6
klahoma County
Oklahoma City
Site Description
The Double Eagle Refinery Company, located southeast of the intersection of 4th Street NE
and Martin Luther King Avenue, has been in operation since 1929. Until around 1980, this
7-acre facility refined used motor oils by acidulation, distillation, and filtration. Areas of
concern include: a sludge lagoon, six smaller earthen impoundments, and numerous structures
and pieces of abandoned refinery equipment. An inventory done by the site owner in 1990
showed 13 steel buildings, a fire tube boiler, two heat exchanges, five vacuum
precoat/scrapper filters, two concrete settling cells, and approximately 100 steel tanks of
varying dimensions. Although the equipment appears to be contaminated to various degrees,
the tanks are empty. Since the inventory, the owner has removed some of the equipment
from the site. About 36,000 cubic yards of waste oils contaminated with heavy metals are in
surface impoundments on site. According to the company, the oils come from truck fleets,
garages, automobile dealers, industries, and City, State, and Federal agencies throughout the
State. In addition, waste solvents and other products were collected from major industrial
companies in Oklahoma. Approximately 6,100 cubic yards of nearby land have been
contaminated. The land use in the area is mixed industrial-residential. About 28,500 people in
Del City and Smith Village obtain drinking water from public and private wells within 3 miles
of the site. The site is located 1/2 mile from a school and 1/4 mile from a residential area.
Surface waters within 3 miles of the site are used for recreational activities. The North
Canadian river is located approximately 1/2 mile south of the site. Wetlands are located
adjacent to the site and wildlife in the area includes migratory fowl and small mammals. The
Fourth Street Superfund site is about 500 feet northeast of the Double Eagle Refinery
Company site. Cleanup at both sites may be interrelated as proves necessary.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88 -
Final Date: 03/31/89
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Sediments from the ponds and drainage areas, the surrounding soil areas,
groundwater, and surface water are contaminated with barium, lead, zinc, acid
base-neutral compounds, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Groundwater in
the area is shallow (10 to 25 feet in some cases) and soils are permeable,
conditions that help contaminants move into groundwater. There is a health risk
from direct contact with the materials, but this has been lessened since the area
was fenced. Wetlands are located adjacent to the site.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control and the cleanup of groundwater.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1988, the EPA ordered the site owner to fence the
northern side of the site, so that people and animals could not come in direct
contact with hazardous substances. The fence was erected in 1989.
Source Control: The EPA began conducting an investigation of the sources of
contamination at the site in 1989. The study is expected to conclude in 1992, at
which point the EPA will select the technologies to control the sources.
Groundwater: Investigations to determine the nature and extent of groundwater
contamination and to identify cleanup alternatives began in mid-1992 and are
expected to be completed in late 1993.
Environmental Progress
Fencing the Double Eagle Refinery Company site has reduced the potential of exposure to
hazardous substances, making the area safer while investigations are taking place.
Site Repository
Ralph Ellison Library, 2000 Northeast 23, Oklahoma City, OK 73111
March 1992 4 DOUBLE EAGLE REFINERY COMPANY
-------
FOURTH S
ABANDONE
REFINERY
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD98069647
Site Description
A REGION 6
klahoma County
Oklahoma City
The Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery is an abandoned 28-acre facility that operated from
1940 to 1968, and was comprised of numerous oil and sludge disposal pits. More recent
dumping has occurred in the form of old concrete and building materials and government
surplus supplies. An inactive oil well and a gas well are on site. Elevated levels of semi-
volatile and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been identified in soil, sediment, and
sludge. Approximately 32,500 people live within 3 miles of the abandoned refinery. The
nearest surface water body is the North Canadian River, which is approximately 1/2 mile
south of the site. Wetlands are located adjacent to the site. The Double Eagle Refinery
Company site, also on the NPL, is about 500 feet southwest of the Fourth Street Abandoned
Refinery site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
Soil samples contain barium, lead, chlordane, and crude oil constituents.
Groundwater and sludge from the site are contaminated with nickel, benzene, and
numerous VOCs. Given the hydrogeology of the site, there is significant potential
for groundwater contamination in the two aquifers. The land drains to the south
and east, thus threatening the North Canadian River. Also, the site was not
completely fenced, making it possible for people and animals to come in direct
contact with hazardous substances.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on source control and cleanup of the groundwater.
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1985, the State decontaminated junk autos, stored two drums
of benzene, and capped and seeded the area. The EPA fenced the site and
posted warning signs in 1989.
Source Control: Between 1985 and 1987, the EPA performed surveys and field
sampling at the site. The EPA currently is conducting an investigation to
determine the extent of contamination to surface water, sediment, soil, sludge, and
tar areas, as well as to track the movement of contaminants through the air. The
investigation, scheduled to be completed in 1992, will recommend alternatives for cleanup.
Further studies of specific aspects of the site may be proposed in the future.
Groundwater: Investigations to determine the nature and extent of groundwater
contamination and to identify cleanup alternatives began in mid-1992 and are
expected to be completed in late 1993.
Environmental Progress
Decontamination of junk autos, confinement of benzene, and capping of the area have
reduced the potential of exposure to contamination at the Fourth Street Abandoned Refinery
site, making it safer while awaiting further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Ralph Ellison Library, 2000 Northeast 23, Oklahoma City, OK 73111
March 1992
FOURTH STREET ABANDONED REFINERY
-------
HARDAG
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD0004000l$
EPA REGION 6
McClain County
ile west of Criner on Hwy. 122
Other Names:
Hardage Landfill
Criner Landfill
Criner/Hardage Waste Disposal
Site Description
The 60-acre Hardage/Criner site was licensed by the State of Oklahoma from 1972 to 1980 to
accept industrial and hazardous wastes such as asbestos, cyanides, and flammable sludges. Pits
excavated to receive wastes filled rapidly; wastes were then transferred to two temporary
ponds. In the west pond, liquid wastes were slurried with soil and transferred to the south
pond. When the south pond filled, wastes were stacked 15 to 20 feet above the ground,
becoming a sludge mound. In the mid-1970s, drums were no longer emptied but were piled at
the northern end of the main pit, called the drum mound. These practices resulted in
pesticides, solvents, acids, and metal sludges contaminating surface water, groundwater, and
surface soil. The nearest residence in this rural area is at the southwestern site boundary.
Adjacent to the North Criner Creek flood plain,- the site is surrounded by cattle grazing land.
Shallow groundwater from the site has moved into the North Criner Creek alluvium.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Solvents, paint sludge, and inks have contributed to the contamination of soil,
groundwater, and surface waters. Contamination found in each area includes:
heavy metals, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), oils, and methylene
chloride. Inhalation of dusts and vapors generated from the soils on site poses a
potential risk for workers and trespassers. Fugitive dusts and vapors from on-site
soil disruption could be inhaled off site. There is no known current use of the
groundwater, but any use of contaminated groundwater would be hazardous.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the source area and the groundwater.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1982, the potentially responsible parties started
decontaminating the site by mixing pit fluids with soil, excavating visibly
contaminated soils from mixing areas and temporary ponds, capping the source
areas with a soil cover, and consolidating wastes in source areas. The parties potentially
responsible for contamination fenced the site in 1987. In 1988, heavy rains caused slope
damage to the western face of the barrel mound. The potentially responsible parties
performed the repair, restored the other eroded mound areas, and provided a new water
supply for 12 residences.
Source Area: In 1986, the EPA chose the following remedies, to be carried out
by the potentially responsible parties, for cleaning up the source of contamination:
excavation of approximately 180,000 cubic yards from the principal source areas
(the drum mound, main pit, and sludge mound) to the bedrock; separation of wastes;
treatment and disposal of solids in an on-site approved landfill; incineration of organic liquids;
and treatment and disposal of inorganic liquids. A public comment period was held in 1989 to
explore options other than those listed. In 1989, the EPA revised the 1986 remedy selection.
The revised cleanup remedy calls for soil vapor extraction of the source areas, consolidation
of contaminated soils, and removal of contaminated liquids followed by off-site incineration
and capping of the source areas. To date, interceptor wells have been installed in the
southwest area of the site and liquid extraction wells have been installed in the drum mound
and Drum Pit areas. Extracted contaminants will be taken off-site for incineration. All
cleanup activities are expected to be completed in mid-1993.
Groundwater: The EPA's selected remedy, which was reviewed by the public in
1989, is to build a V-shaped trench to intercept contaminated groundwater over
most of the site. Another interceptor trench will catch groundwater that is moving
into the alluvium located under North Criner Creek. The captured groundwater will be
pumped to an on-site treatment unit, and then the treated water will be discharged to North
Criner Creek. The groundwater and surface water will be monitored, surface drainage
controlled, and the use of contaminated groundwater prevented through institutional controls.
Site Facts: In 1978, the State of Oklahoma filed complaints against the facility for suspected
lead poisoning of the air around the site. A ruling in 1982 found that the potentially
responsible parties were liable for all costs of removal or remedial actions. A complaint was
filed against 36 generators and transporters in 1986. A partial Consent Decree was signed by
the potentially responsible parties in 1987 for the groundwater cleanup. In August 1990, the
Federal District Court selected the cleanup remedy proposed by the potentially responsible
parties.
March 1992 8 HARDAGE/CRINER
-------
Environmental Progress
The initial actions taken by the potentially responsible parties to decontaminate the soil,
excavate contaminated soils, and cap the source areas as described above have reduced the
potential exposure of nearby residents to the waste at the Hardage/Criner site, making it
safer while it awaits further remedial activities.
Site Repository
Purcell City Library, 919 North 9th Street, Purcell, OK 73080
HARDAGE/CRINER
March 1992
-------
MOSLEY ROAD
SANITARY
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD98062086B
A REGION 6
klahoma County
east of Oklahoma City
Site Description
The Mosley Road Sanitary Landfill covers 72 acres and was used from 1975 to 1987 as a
commercial, residential, and industrial landfill. In 1976, the landfill accepted approximately 2
million gallons of hazardous substances under a Temporary Emergency Waiver for Hazardous
Waste Disposal issued by the Oklahoma State Department of Health. According to the
permit application, pesticides, industrial solvents, sludges, waste chemicals, and emulsions
were deposited into two unlined pits. Since then, the pits have been buried under as much as
20 feet of solid refuse and fill. Concerns about groundwater contamination brought the site
to the EPA's attention. Hazardous wastes were disposed of near the base of the landfill; a
long-term risk could exist if wastes leak into the groundwater. The landfill lies above the
Garber-Wellington Formation, an aquifer that serves as a high-quality drinking water source
for many Oklahoma City residents. The surrounding area is both residential and commercial.
An estimated 57,000 people obtain drinking water from public and private wells within a
3-mile radius of the site. Six homes are located within 1/2 mile from the site and obtain
drinking water from private wells.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The soil is contaminated with pesticides, industrial solvents, sludges, waste
chemicals, emulsions, and other substances disposed of in the landfills. Potential
contamination of groundwater connected to the public drinking water system may
pose a threat to public health.
10
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Under an agreement with the EPA, Waste Management of
Oklahoma, Inc. and Mobile Waste Controls, Inc. are performing a study that will
determine the nature and extent of site contamination and will identify and
evaluate potential remedies for site problems. The investigation was completed in 1991.
Cleanup decisions will be finalized in 1992 and actual site cleanup is planned for 1993.
Site Facts: Waste Management of Oklahoma, Inc. signed an Administrative Order with the
EPA in 1989 to conduct an investigation into the nature and extent of site contaminants.
Environmental Progress
The investigation into a permanent solution is being carried out, and the EPA will decide on
a final remedy soon. Meanwhile, the EPA assessed conditions at the Mosley Road Sanitary
Landfill site and determined that the site does not warrant immediate cleanup actions.
Site Repository
Crutcho Elementary School, 2401 North Air Depot, Oklahoma City, OK 73141
MOSLEY ROAD SANITARY LANDFILL
11
March 1992
-------
OKLAHOWBCnzq
REFINING
COMPANY
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD0915988t&
Site Description
PA REGION 6
Caddo County
uth Basket! Street in Cyril
The 160-acre Oklahoma Refining Company site is an abandoned oil refinery that was active
from 1908 to 1984. The operator at the site placed process wastes, some reactive or
flammable, into approximately 50 impoundments, many of which were unlined. Other wastes
were tilled into the soil or placed in a waste pile. In 1981, the EPA observed leachate coming
from the site, threatening nearby Gladys and Chetonia Creeks, which are used for
recreational activities. In 1984, the owner declared bankruptcy and abandoned the facility. In
1986, the EPA found an on-site monitoring well to be contaminated with heavy metals. The
Rush Springs Sandstone aquifer, which lies beneath the site, is considered to be a potential
source of drinking water; however, no one is currently drinking water from the contaminated
portion of the aquifer. Approximately 1,600 people obtain drinking water from public and
private wells within 3 miles of the site. One private well is located within 1,000 feet of the
site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals, including arsenic and lead.
Process wastes from oil refining were tilled into the soil through a landfarming
operation, but the soil contaminants are unspecified. While surface water is not
contaminated, it will be addressed by cleanup activities since often it mixes in with
drinking water supplies. Many of the wastes remaining on site are flammable or
reactive and pose the threat of fire or explosion. The site is unfenced, making it
accessible to people and animals. Gladys Creek, which is adjacent to the site, has
been shown to be affected by contamination from the site.
12
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1989, the EPA surveyed the site to determine the nature of
emergency actions required. As a result of the survey, a fence was erected to limit
access to the site in 1990. Netting was placed over the impoundments, further
reducing the risk of direct contact with the hazardous waste. Additionally, the drums on the
site were disposed of in late 1991.
Entire Site: In 1989, the Oklahoma State Department of Health began an
investigation to assess the extent of contamination in soil, groundwater, and
surface waters and to identify appropriate cleanup strategies. The cleanup remedy
was selected in mid-1992 and includes: biological treatment of surface waters, recycling,
neutralization of acidic and caustic waste deposits, and interception and treatment of
groundwater. The design of these cleanup activities is expected to begin in early 1993.
Site Facts: The EPA issued an Administrative Order in 1980, requiring the potentially
responsible parties to reduce site discharge to Gladys Creek.
Environmental Progress
Initial cleanup actions to control contamination and to fence the Oklahoma Refining
Company site have reduced the potential for direct exposure to hazardous substances, making
the area safer while cleanup activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Cyril City Hall, 202 West Main Street, Cyril, OK 73029
OKLAHOMA REFINING COMPANY 13 March 1992
-------
SAND SPRINGS
i
PETROCHEMICAim
COMPLEX
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD980748446
Site Description
ERA REGION 6
Tulsa County
Sand Springs,
to the Arkansas River
The 235-acre Sand Springs Petrochemical Complex site, approximately 3 miles west of the
Tulsa city limits, operated as a refinery from the turn of the century through the late 1940s.
It was later developed as an industrial area consisting of chemical manufacturers, solvent and
waste oil recovery operations, transformer salvaging and recycling, and various other
industries. The site contains acid sludge pits, a surface impoundment, spray ponds, and solvent
and waste oil lagoons. The refinery left two unlined pits about 10 feet deep, containing
sulfuric acid sludge and heavy metals. Over the years, sludge seeped into the Arkansas River
levee, releasing contaminants into the river. Other industries stored or disposed of hazardous
substances in drums, tanks, and unlined pits, or simply buried them on the site. These
substances included volatile organic compounds (VOCs), acids, caustics, chlorinated solvents,
and sludges containing heavy metals. The nearest residence is located on site. Drinking water
wells are in use within 1/2 mile, although they are upgradient of the contaminated site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed by
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
2GJ
The primary contaminants of concern affecting the soil, shallow groundwater,
sediments and sludge are VOCs and heavy metals such as lead and chromium. The
Arkansas River has been shown to be contaminated by past seepage of sulfuric
acid sludges and heavy metals through the levee. Individuals are at risk from direct
contact with or accidental ingestion of contaminated soil, groundwater, or sludges.
14
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on control of the sources of contamination and cleanup of the groundwater.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Under orders from the EPA, some of the parties
potentially responsible for the contamination removed drums and tanks from the
site. The EPA also removed 400 drums of hazardous material, repaired the fence,
and sampled and analyzed the pits, on-site soil, and the on-site monitoring wells.
Source Control: In September 1987, the EPA determined that incineration of
the contaminated soil and sludges is the most efficient remedy for this site.
However, the remedy of solidification or stabilization of wastes that was proposed
during the public comment period will be allowed if the responsible parties can demonstrate
that these techniques provide comparable protection of public health and environment in the
given time period. ARCO started the engineering design for the remedy in 1988, including a
bench-scale pilot test to determine the most appropriate solidification technique. In 1991,
ARCO performed further testing for solidification/stabilization techniques. Design of a
wastewater treatment plant was completed in 1991 and construction has begun. Cleanup
activities are scheduled to be completed in 1994.
Groundwater: In 1988, following a study by the State, the EPA selected a "no
action" cleanup remedy for the groundwater phase. This approach features
monitoring groundwater and Arkansas River water for 30 years. The EPA believes
that once the sources of contamination are removed, groundwater pollution will dissipate
naturally over time, via the natural flushing action of the aquifer. In addition to monitoring,
signs will be posted, warning residents of the dangers of coming in direct contact with site
contamination. Groundwater monitoring began in 1990. To date, contamination levels have
not been significantly reduced.
Site Facts: In 1984, the EPA issued two Administrative Orders for drum and tank removal.
In 1987, an Administrative Order was issued to the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination, who conducted on-site incineration and solidification treatability studies. A
Consent Decree was signed in 1990 by ARCO, the State, and the EPA for design and
cleanup of site contaminants.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions undertaken to remove contaminated drums and tanks and to repair
the fence surrounding the site have reduced the exposure potential at the Sand Springs
Petrochemical Complex site while cleanup activities are taking place.
SAND SPRINGS 15 March 1992
PETROCHEMICAL COMPLEX
-------
Site Repository
Page Memorial Library, 6 East Broadway, Sand Springs, OK 74063
March 1992
16
SAND SPRINGS
PETROCHEMICAL COMPLEX
-------
TAR CREEK
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD980629844
Site Description
EPA REGION 6
Ottawa County
gh the towns of Miami, Richer,
din, Quapaw, and Commerce
The Tar Creek (Ottawa County) site covers a 40-square mile portion of the Tri-State Mining
District (Picher Mine Field), which covers 100 square miles. The area produced significant
quantities of lead and zinc in the 1920s and 1930s. When major mining operations ceased in
the early 1970s, groundwater accumulated in the mines. The acid water reacted with the
surrounding rock, causing many of the metals present to dissolve and resulting in high
concentrations of zinc, lead, and cadmium in the water. In 1979, acid mine water with high
concentrations of heavy metals began to discharge to the surface from boreholes and the
abandoned mine shafts, contaminating the surface water in Tar Creek. This problem, along
with the potential for contaminating the drinking water source under the mining area,
prompted the U.S. Geological Survey and the State to investigate the site. In 1981, the State
declared the site its number one pollution problem. The towns of Miami, Picher, Cardin,
Quapaw, and Commerce are located within the site area boundary. The nearby population of
approximately 21,000 receives its drinking water from the Robidoux Aquifer.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, sediments, and surface water were contaminated with heavy
metals including lead, zinc, and cadmium. The upper aquifer was contaminated
with heavy metals. Several people use the upper aquifer as a source of drinking
water. The lower aquifer was threatened due to several boreholes and leaking
abandoned wells connecting the aquifers. The lower aquifer serves several towns
and rural communities including the towns of Miami and Picher. Because the
Picher town water well passes through a highly mineralized rock formation, the
high levels of heavy metal contaminants indicated major casing failure in the well.
Runoff of surface waters had degraded Tar Creek. Wetlands are found on the site
and also were subject to contamination.
17
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: an initial action and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on contamination at the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: In 1985, an emergency water supply was put in place by the
National Guard. The EPA plugged the contaminated well using sand and
corrosion-resistant concrete. Backup wells were used to flush the city lines.
Subsequently, water quality in these two wells returned to normal and the National Guard
discontinued water delivery. The EPA drilled the new well, connected it to the water system,
and re-tested the water.
Entire Site: The selected remedies included diverting and diking the two major
inflow areas in Kansas and a third in Oklahoma, plugging aquifer wells, and
developing a monitoring plan. A total of 83 wells were plugged. These cleanup
activities were completed in 1986. The State currently is monitoring the effectiveness of the
remedy. A report is being prepared by the State to assess the effectiveness of the remedy and
will be reviewed by the EPA in 1993. The first 5 year review period will immediately follow.
Site Facts: In 1982, the EPA awarded a Cooperative Agreement to the State for a site
investigation and a study of alternative cleanup strategies.
Environmental Progress
Actions by the State of Oklahoma and the EPA have reduced the potential for contaminants
in the shallow groundwater to migrate to deeper drinking water aquifers and have achieved
the groundwater cleanup standards established for the site. The State also has completed
cleanup activities at the Tar Creek (Ottawa County) site for surface water improvement.
Site Repository
Miami Public Library, 200 North Main Street, Miami, OK 74354
March 1992 18 TAR CREEK (OTTAWA COUNTY)
-------
TENTH c
STREET DUiytPf
JUNKYARD
OKLAHOMA
EPA ID# OKD980620961?
REGION 6
klahoma County
Oklahoma City
Other Names:
Frazier Pit
Site Description
The 3 1/2-acre Tenth Street Dump/Junkyard site in Oklahoma City was used as a municipal
landfill before 1959. It housed a private salvage yard from 1959 to 1979, after which it
became a private automobile junkyard. During the salvage of electrical equipment, large
amounts of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) oil was spilled on the ground. A fire at the site
destroyed 1,000 old tires, which may have contributed to a black tar-like substance on the
ruined soil. Workers indiscriminately bulldozed drums of benzene and methylene chloride
onto sections of the site along with other debris. About 30,000 people draw drinking water
from public and private wells within 3 miles of the site; the nearest is within 1/4 mile.
Residential property is adjacent to the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/22/87
Threats and Contaminants
The soils have high levels of PCBs. Residents, trespassers, and children are
potentially threatened by direct exposure to contaminated soils and waste left on
the site. The North Canadian River is threatened by contaminated runoff from the
site. Contaminants from the soil also may threaten nearby groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing cleanup of the entire site.
19
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The first phase of the initial action started in 1985 and included
decontamination of the automobiles, spare parts, office building, and tire repair
machine shop. After decontamination, workers backfilled the wash pit. Because
contamination was widespread, the entire site was capped to prevent rainfall and erosion
from spreading pollutants. In a second cleanup phase, an 18-inch clay layer was placed on the
site. The entire area was fenced and posted. The cap was seeded in 1986. Workers moved the
hazardous waste drums and left them on site, pending disposal arrangements.
Entire Site: In 1990, the EPA selected a remedy for cleanup of the site, which
includes excavation, on-site chemical dechlorination, and on-site disposal of
contaminated soils. Engineering designs for the cleanup activities began in 1991
and are expected to be completed in 1994.
Site Facts: In 1985, the EPA issued an Administrative Order to the potentially responsible
parties to decontaminate and remove junked cars, remove and properly dispose of electrical
equipment and drums containing hazardous substances, install a fence, and build a synthetic
liner and clay cap to prevent runoff from spreading contaminants.
Environmental Progress
The EPA has completed many cleanup activities at the Tenth Street Dump/Junkyard site,
including decontamination of hazardous items and fencing and capping the site, making the
site safer as cleanup activities are being designed.
Site Repository
Ralph Ellison Library, 2000 Northeast 23, Oklahoma City, OK 73111
March 1992 20 TENTH STREET DUMP/ JUNKYARD
-------
TINKER
FORCE BA!
(SOLDIER CREEK/
BUILDING §0|1
OKLAHOMA
•PA REGION 6
Oklahoma County
rtoma City metropolitan area
Other Names:
fUSAF Tinker Air Force Base
EPA ID#OK1571724391
Site Description
The Tinker Air Force Base (Soldier Creek/Building 3001) site is located in the northeastern
portion of the 220-acre base, east of the North-South runway. It encompasses Building 3001,
the two adjacent underground storage tank areas, adjacent Soldier Creek, and the
contaminated groundwater under the base. Tinker Air Force Base (AFB) was activated in
1942. Its primary mission was to serve as a worldwide repair depot for aircraft and associated
equipment and weaponry. The Building 3001 complex used large quantities of industrial
solvents in its business of maintaining aircraft and rebuilding jet engines. In the past, waste
oils, solvents, paint sludges, and plating waste generated from maintenance activities were
disposed of in two industrial waste pits, 1 mile south of Soldier Creek and Building 3001.
Since 1979, industrial wastes have been disposed of off site. Four landfills and the
groundwater are contaminated with chromium and trichloroethylene (TCE). As of 1988, four
drinking water wells at the base were polluted. The closest municipal well, 1/2 mile to the
northwest, serves approximately 55,400 people. The nearest residences and drinking wells are
300 feet from the site. The base has 19,500 workers and 2,700 residents.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
m
Four potable groundwater wells are contaminated with high concentrations of TCE
and cadmium. Soil and sediments are contaminated with TCE and chromium.
Surface water is contaminated with nickel and cadmium. Drinking contaminated
groundwater poses a threat to residents and workers. Municipal wells for Midwest
City are at least 500 feet deep, and therefore are not at great risk of becoming
contaminated.
21
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: emergency actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of contaminants at the Building 3001 Complex and Soldier Creek.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: In 1985, the Air Force removed tanks in Building 3001,
contaminated soil from on-base streams, and contaminants from the groundwater
under one of the site's facility. In addition, a cap was installed at one of the
landfills, with additional capping on its Southeastern corner. Two wells were plugged in 1986.
In 1990, contaminated liquids were removed from the waste pit. The pit has since been
cleaned, backfilled, and capped.
Building 3001 Complex: In 1987, the Air Force contracted with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to do an 18-month study that is the equivalent of the
Superfund investigation into site contaminants and remedies. In 1990, a remedy
was selected for the site, which includes the extraction of contaminated groundwater and
treatment by air or steam stripping, metals precipitation, and fine filtration. Engineering
designs began in 1990 and are expected to be fully completed in 1993. The removal of fuel
products above the water table began in mid-1991.
Soldier Creek: Investigations into the nature and extent of the contamination at
Soldier Creek began in 1990. These studies are expected to be completed and
remedy selection is anticipated in 1993.
Site Facts: Tinker AFB is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially
funded program established by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1978 to identify,
investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DOD
facilities.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated materials and the capping of a landfill by the Air Force has
greatly reduced the chances of hazardous exposure at the Tinker AFB (Soldier
Creek/Building 3001) site, making it safer while the Air Force completes final investigations
and begins cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Midwest City Public Library, 8143 West Reno Avenue, Midwest City, OK 73110
March 1992 22 TINKER AIR FORCE BASE
(SOLDIER CREEK/ BUILDING 3001)
-------
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-]5
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds or release
heavy metal contaminants that remain in the
environment long after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A
legal and enforceable agreement between the
EPA and the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally, the
EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for site
studies). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized vessel. The contaminants are evaporated
into the air stream. The air may be further
treated before it is released into the atmosphere.
Ambient Air: Any unconfmed part of the
atmosphere. Refers to the air that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity of
contaminated air sources.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand,
or gravel capable of storing water within cracks
and pore spaces, or between grains. When
water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient
quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used
for drinking or other purposes. The water
contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
A "sole source aquifer" supplies 50 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in
removing particulates from the air by passing it
through cloth bags in an enclosure.
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH
(greater than 7.0), which tend to be corrosive in
chemical reactions. When bases are mixed with
acids, they neutralize each other, forming salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used
to prevent the migration of contaminants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some
contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living
tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people, as they
breathe contaminated air, drink contaminated
water, or eat contaminated food.
Biological Treatment: The use of bacteria
or other microbial organisms to break down
toxic organic materials into carbon dioxide and
water.
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using
naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants and
break them down into non-hazardous compo-
nents.
Bog: A type of wetland that is covered with
peat moss deposits. Bogs depend primarily on
moisture from the air for their water source, are
usually acidic, and are rich in plant residue [see
Wetland].
Boom: A floating device used to contain oil
floating on a body of water or to restrict the
potential overflow of waste liquids from
containment structures.
Borehole: A hole that is drilled into the
ground and used to sample soil or ground-water.
Borrow Pit: An excavated area where soil,
sand, or gravel has been dug up for use else-
where.
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a
synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated
materials. The surface of the cap generally is
mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in
which contaminants are removed from ground-
water and surface water by forcing water
through tanks containing activated carbon, a
specially treated material that attracts and holds
or retains contaminants.
Carbon DiSUlfide: A degreasing agent
formerly used extensively for parts washing.
This compound has both inorganic and organic
G-2
-------
GLOSSARY
properties, which increase cleaning efficiency.
However, these properties also cause chemical
reactions that increase the hazard to human
health and the environment.
Carbon Treatment: [see Carbon Adsorp-
tion].
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of
holes in a landfill where waste is dumped,
compacted, and covered with layers of dirt.
CERCLA: [see Comprehensive Environmen-
tal Response, Compensation, and Liability Act],
Characterization: The sampling, monitoring,
and analysis of a site to determine the extent and
nature of toxic releases. Characterization
provides the basis for acquiring the necessary
technical information to develop, screen, ana-
lyze, and select appropriate cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the poten-
tial for leaching or other movement.
Chromated Copper Arsenate: An insecti-
cide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This
salt is used extensively as a wood preservative
in pressure-treating operations. It is highly toxic
and water-soluble, making it a relatively mobile
contaminant in the environment
Cleanup: Actions taken to eliminate a release
or threat of release of a hazardous substance.
The term "cleanup" sometimes is used inter-
changeably with the terms remedial action,
removal action, response action, or corrective
action.
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops
accepting wastes and is shut down under Federal
guidelines that ensure the protection of the
public and the environment.
Comment Period: A specific interval during
which the public can review and comment on
various documents and EPA actions related to
site cleanup. For example, a comment period is
provided when the EPA proposes to add sites to
the NPL. Also, there is minimum 3-week
comment period for community members to
review and comment on the remedy proposed to
clean up a site.
Community Relations: The EPA effort to
establish and maintain two-way communication
with the public. The goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related actions,
assuring public input into decision-making
processes related to affected communities, and
making certain that the Agency is aware of, and
responsive to, public concerns. Specific com-
munity relations activities are required in
relation to Superfund cleanup actions [see
Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA): Congress enacted the
CERCLA, known as Superfund, in 1980 to
respond directly to hazardous waste problems
that may pose a threat to the public health and
the environment. The EPA administers the
Superfund program.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of
water, such as streams or rivers, come together.
Confined Aquifer: An aquifer in which
groundwater is confined under pressure that is
significantly greater than atmospheric pressure.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
Consent Decree: A legal document, ap-
proved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between the EPA and the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the
potentially responsible parties are required to
perform, or the costs incurred by the govern-
ment that the parties will reimburse, and the
roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. If a settlement between the EPA and a
potentially responsible party includes cleanup
actions, it must be in the form of a Consent
Decree. A Consent Decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order
on Consent].
Containment: The process of enclosing or
containing hazardous substances in a structure,
typically in a pond or a lagoon, to prevent the
migration of contaminants into the environment.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or substance
whose quantity, location, or nature produces
undesirable health or environmental effects.
Contingency Plan: A document setting
out an organized, planned, and coordinated
course of action to be followed in case of a
fire, explosion, or other accident that releases
toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, or radioac-
tive materials into the environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract
between the EPA and the States, wherein a State
agrees to manage or monitor certain site cleanup
responsibilities and other activities on a cost-
sharing basis.
Cost Recovery: A legal process by which
potentially responsible parties can be required
to pay back the Superfund program for money
it spends on any cleanup actions [see Poten-
tially Responsible Parties].
Cover: Vegetation or other material placed
over a landfill or other waste material. It can
be designed to reduce movement of water into
the waste and to prevent erosion that could
cause the movement of contaminants.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood pre-
serving operations and produced by distilla-
tion of tar, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Con-
taminating sediments, soils, and surface
water, creosotes may cause skin ulcerations
and cancer through prolonged exposure.
Culvert: A pipe used for drainage under a
road, railroad track, path, or through an embank-
ment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a chemi-
cal is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deletion: A site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL when Superfund response actions at the
site are complete. A site is deleted from the
NPL when a notice is published in the Federal
Register.
De minimis: This legal phrase pertains to
settlements with parties who contributed small
amounts of hazardous waste to a site. This
process allows the EPA to settle with small, or
de minimis contributors, as a single group rather
than as individuals, saving time, money, and
effort.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes, soils,
or chemicals.
G-4
-------
GLOSSARY
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Dioxin: An organic chemical by-product of
pesticide manufacture which is known to be one
of the most toxic man-made chemicals.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materials.
Disposal may be accomplished through the use
of approved secure landfills, surface impound-
ments, land farming, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgradi-
ent of a contaminated groundwater source are
prone to receiving pollutants.
Ecological Assessment: A study of the
impact of man-made or natural activity on living
creatures and their environment
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated,
that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or
industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes
discharged into surface waters.
Emission: Pollution discharged into the
atmosphere from smokestacks, other vents, and
surface areas of commercial or industrial facili-
ties.
Emulsifiers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil and
water.
Endangerment Assessment: A study
conducted to determine the risks posed to public
health or the environment by contamination at
NPL sites. The EPA or the State conducts the
study when a legal action is to be taken to direct
the potentially responsible parties to clean up a
site or pay for the cleanup. An endangerment
assessment supplements an investigation of the
site hazards.
Enforcement: EPA, State, or local legal
actions taken against parties to facilitate
settlements; to compel compliance with laws,
rules, regulations, or agreements; or to obtain
penalties or criminal sanctions for violations.
Enforcement procedures may vary, depending
on the specific requirements of different
environmental laws and related regulatory
requirements. Under CERCLA, for example,
the EPA will seek to require potentially
responsible parties to clean up a Superfund
site or pay for the cleanup [see Cost Recov-
ery].
Erosion: The wearing away of land surface
by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally
from weather or surface runoff, but can be
intensified by such land-related practices as
farming, residential or industrial develop-
ment, road building, or timber-cutting. Ero-
sion may spread surface contamination to off-
site locations.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh
water from rivers and salt water from
nearshore ocean waters are mixed. These
areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt
marshes, and lagoons. These water ecosys-
tems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and
wildlife.
Evaporation Ponds: Areas where sewage
sludge or other watery wastes are dumped and
allowed to dry out.
Feasibility Study: The analysis of the
potential cleanup alternatives for a site. The
feasibility study usually starts as soon as the
remedial investigation is underway. In this
volume, the feasibility study is referred to as a
site study [see also Remedial Investigation].
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
Filtration: A treatment process for remov-
ing solid (particulate) matter from water by
passing the water through sand, activated
carbon, or a man-made filter. The process is
often used to remove particles that contain
contaminants.
Flood Plain: An area along a river, formed
from sediment deposited by floods. Flood
plains periodically are innundated by natural
floods, which can spread contamination.
Flue Gas: The air that is emitted from a
chimney after combustion in the burner
occurs. The gas can include nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides,
particles, and many chemical pollutants.
Fly Ash: Non-combustible residue that results
from the combustion of flue gases. It can
include nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, water
vapor, sulfur oxides, as well as many other
chemical pollutants.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain
system constructed of perforated pipes, which is
used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft
coal into gas for use as a fuel.
General Notice Letter: [See Notice Letter].
Generator: A facility that emits pollutants
into the air or releases hazardous wastes into
water or soil.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, gener-
ally in response to a Special Notice letter, made
by a potentially responsible party, consisting of
a written proposal demonstrating a potentially
responsible party's qualifications and willing-
ness to perform a site study or cleanup.
Groundwater: Water that fills pores in soils
or openings in rocks to the point of saturation.
In aquifers, groundwater occurs in sufficient
quantities for use as drinking and irrigation
water and other purposes.
Groundwater Quality Assessment: The
process of analyzing the chemical characteris-
tics of groundwater to determine whether any
hazardous materials exist.
Halogens: Reactive non-metals, such as
chlorine and bromine. Halogens are very
good oxidizing agents and, therefore, have
many industrial uses. They are rarely found
by themselves; however, many chemicals
such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
some volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
and dioxin are reactive because of the pres-
ence of halogens.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The
principal screening tool used by the EPA to
evaluate relative risks to public health and the
environment associated with abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS
calculates a score based on the potential of
hazardous substances spreading from the site
through the air, surface water, or groundwater
and on other factors such as nearby popula-
tion. The HRS score is the primary factor in
deciding if the site should be on the NPL.
Hazardous Waste: By-products of society
that can pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment
when improperly managed. Hazardous waste
possesses at least one of four characteristics
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxic-
ity), or appears on special EPA lists.
Heavy Metals: Metallic elements with high
atomic weights, such as arsenic, lead, mercury,
and cadmium. Heavy metals are very hazardous
even at low concentrations and tend to accumu-
late in the food chain.
Herbicide: A chemical pesticide designed to
control or destroy plants, weeds, or grasses.
G-6
-------
GLOSSARY
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site contain-
ing exceptionally high levels of contamination.
Hydrocarbons: Chemical compounds that
consist entirely of hydrogen and carbon.
Hydrology: The properties, distribution, and
circulation of water.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater,
with particular emphasis on the chemistry and
movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge
confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Incineration: A group of treatment technolo-
gies involving destruction of waste by controlled
burning at high temperatures, e.g., burning
sludge to reduce the remaining residues to a
non-burnable ash that can be disposed of safely
on land, in some waters, or in underground
locations.
Infiltration: The movement of water or
other liquid down through soil from precipita-
tion (rain or snow) or from application of
wastewater to the land surface.
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid
flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treatment
plant.
Injection Well: A well into which waste
fluids are placed, under pressure, for purposes
of disposal.
Inorganic Chemicals: Chemical sub-
stances of mineral origin, not of basic carbon
structure.
Installation Restoration Program: The
specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its hazardous
waste sites and controlling the migration of
hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Intake: The source from where a water supply
is drawn, such as from a river or water body.
Interagency Agreement: A written agree-
ment between the EPA and a Federal agency
that has the lead for site cleanup activities,
setting forth the roles and responsibilities of the
agencies for performing and overseeing the
activities. States often are parties to interagency
agreements.
Interim (Permit) Status: Conditions under
which hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities, that were operating
when regulations under the RCRA became
final in 1980, are temporarily allowed by the
EPA to continue to operate while awaiting
denial or issuance of a permanent permit. The
facility must comply with certain regulations
to maintain interim status.
Lagoon: A shallow pond or liquid waste
containment structure. Lagoons typically are
used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges,
liquid wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfarm: To apply waste to land or incor-
porate waste into the surface soil, such as
fertilizer or soil conditioner. This practice
commonly is used for disposal of composted
wastes and sludges.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is
placed in or on land. Sanitary landfills are
disposal sites for non-hazardous solid wastes.
The waste is spread in layers, compacted to the
smallest practical volume, and covered with soil
at the end of each operating day. Secure chemi-
cal landfills are disposal sites for hazardous
waste. They are designed to minimize the
chance of release of hazardous substances into
the environment [see Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act].
Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by
which soluble chemical components are dis-
solved and carried through soil by water or
some other percolating liquid.
G-7
-------
GLOSSARY
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through
or drains from waste, carrying soluble compo-
nents from the waste.
Leachate Collection System: A system
that gathers liquid that has leaked into a landfill
or other waste disposal area and pumps it to the
surface for treatment.
Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier
designed to prevent leachate (waste residue)
from leaking from a landfill. Liner materials
include plastic and dense clay.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct,
often incremental, steps that are taken to solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the
complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into several of these phases.
Long-term Response Action: An action
which requires a continuous period of on-site
activity before cleanup goals are achieved.
These actions typically include the extraction
and treatment of groundwater and monitoring
actions.
Marsh: A type of wetland that does not
contain peat moss deposits and is dominated by
vegetation. Marshes may be either fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetland].
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, con-
taminants, water, or other liquids through porous
and permeable soils or rock.
Mill Tailings: [See Mine Tailings].
Mine Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left from
mining operations. Tailings often contain high
concentrations of lead, uranium, and arsenic or
other heavy metals.
Mitigation: Actions taken to improve site
conditions by limiting, reducing, or controlling
toxicity and contamination sources.
Modeling: A technique using a mathematical
or physical representation of a system or theory
that tests the effects that changes on system
components have on the overall performance of
the system.
Monitoring Wells: Special wells drilled at
specific locations within, or surrounding, a
hazardous waste site where groundwater can be
sampled at selected depths and studied to obtain
such information as the direction in which
groundwater flows and the types and amounts of
contaminates present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The
EPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified
for possible long-term cleanup under Super-
fund. The EPA is required to update the NPL
at least once a year.
Natural Attenuation: [See Attenuation].
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Water is the most
commonly known neutral, however, naphtha-
lene, pyrene, and trichlorobenzene also are
examples of neutrals.
Nitroaromatics: Common components of
explosive materials, which will explode if
activated by very high temperatures or pres-
sures; 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) is a
nitroaromatic.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter
notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A
Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day formal
period of negotiation during which the EPA is
not allowed to start work at a site or initiate
enforcement actions against potentially respon-
sible parties, although the EPA may undertake
certain investigatory and planning activities.
G-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The 60-day period may be extended if the EPA
receives a good faith offer from the PRPs
within that period. [See also Good Faith Offer].
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC): The
predesignated EPA, Coast Guard, or Depart-
ment of Defense official who coordinates and
directs Superfund removal actions or Clean
Water Act oil- or hazardous-spill corrective
actions.
Operation and Maintenance: Activities
conducted at a site after a cleanup action is
completed to ensure that the cleanup or
containment system is functioning properly.
Organic Chemicals/Compounds:
Chemical substances containing mainly
carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is
discharged into receiving waters.
Over packing: 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 then-
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].
Stillbottom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air Strip-
ping]-
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
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
(VQCs)
Herbicides
Poiychlorinated
Creosotes
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 (PGP)
Radium-226, Radon,
Uranium-235, Uranium-
238
Electroplating, batteries,
paint pigments, photogra-
phy, smelting, thermom-
eters, fluorescent lights,
solvent recovery
Solvents and degreasers,
gasoline octane enhanc-
ers, oils and paints, dry
cleaning fluids, chemical
manufacturing.
Agricultural applications,
pesticide and herbicide
production
Electric transformers and
capacitors, insulators and
coolants, adhesives,
caulking compounds,
carbonless copy paper,
hydraulic fluids.
Wood preserving, fossil
fuel combustion
Mine tailings, radium
products, natural decay of
granites
Tumors, cancers, and kidney,
brain, neurological, bone and
liver damage
Cancers, kidney and liver
damage, impairment of the
nervous system resulting in
sleepiness and headaches,
leukemia
Various effects ranging from
nausea to nervous disorders.
Dioxin is a common by-product
of the manufacture of pesti-
cides and is both highly toxic
and a suspected carcinogen.
Cancer and liver damage.
Cancers and skin ulcerations
with prolonged exposure
Cancer
Sources: Toxic Chemicals—What They Are, How They Affect You (EPA, Region 5)
Glossary of Environmental Terms (EPA, 1988)
'The potential for risk due to these contaminants is linked to a number of factors; for example, the length and level of exposure
and environmental and health factors such as age
*U.S. G.P.O.: 1993-341-835:81032
G-15
------- |