&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5)02 G)
EPA/540/R-93/037
December 1992
PB93-963239
SUPERFUND:
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
a
RHODE ISLAND
1992 UPDATE
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
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.
Super-fund 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 groundwater
treatment.
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
Quick Cleanups, or Removals, are not limited
to emergencies. When cleanup crews at con-
taminated sites find hazardous substances that
immediately threaten people or the environ-
ment, they act right away to reduce the threat
or to remove the chemicals outright. As the
EPA implements the Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model (SACM), more and more sites
will undergo quick cleanups, and many of
these will be cleaned up completely without
ever being included on the NPL. (See
"Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Ac-
celerated Cleanup Model.")
Some of Superfund's most significant gains in
public health and environmental protection
have been won by the removal program. As of
March 31, 1992, the Emergency Response
Superfund employee removing drums from a Superfund site.
Program had logged more than 2,300 removal
completions since Superfund was established.
The Public's Role
Superfund is unique among federal programs
in its commitment to citizen participation. Al-
though the EPA is responsible for determin-
ing how dangerous a site is and how best to
clean it up, the Agency relies on citizen input
as it makes these decisions.
Community residents are often invaluable
sources of information about a hazardous
waste site, its current and previous owners,
and the activities that took place there. Such
information can be crucial to experts evaluat-
ing a site and its potential dangers.
Residents also comment on EPA cleanup
plans by stating their concerns and prefer-
ences at public meetings and other forums and
in formal, written comments to Agency pro-
posals. The EPA takes these comments and
concerns seriously, and has modified many
proposals in response to local concerns. For,
ultimately, it is the community and its citizens
that will live with the results of the EPA's de-
cisions and actions; it is only fair that citizens
participate in the process.
A Commitment to
Communication
The Superfund program is very serious about
public outreach and communication. Com-
munity relations coordinators are assigned to
each NPL site to help the public understand
the potential hazards present, as well as the
cleanup alternatives. Local information re-
positories, such as libraries or other public
buildings, have been established near each
NPL site to ensure that the public has an op-
portunity to review all relevant information
and the proposed cleanup plans.
The individual State volumes contain sum-
mary fact sheets on NPL sites in each State
and territory. Together, the fact sheets provide
a concise report on site conditions and the
progress made toward site cleanups as of
March 1992. The EPA revises these volumes
periodically to provide an up-to-date record of
program activities. A glossary of key terms
relating to hazardous waste management and
Superfund site cleanup is provided at the back
of this book.
VII
-------
INTRODUCTION
Superfund is, of course, a public program, and
as such it belongs to everyone of us. This vol-
ume, along with other State volumes, com-
prises the EPA's report on Superfund
progress to the program's owners for the year
1992.
VIII
-------
INTRODUCTION
STREAMLINING SUPERFUND: THE SUPERFUND
ACCELERATED CLEANUP MODEL
Historically, critics and supporters alike
have measured Superfund's progress
by the number of hazardous waste sites de-
leted from the NPL. Although easy enough to
tally, this approach is too narrow. It misses
the major gains Superfund makes by reducing
major risks at the nation's worst hazardous
sites long before all clean-up work is done
and the site deleted. It also ignores the Re-
moval Program's contributions to meeting
Superfund's twin mandates of maximizing
public health and environmental protection.
Renewing Superfund's commitment to rapid
protection from hazardous materials, the EPA
is streamlining the program. The Superfund
Accelerated Cleanup Model, or SACM, will
take Early Actions, such as removing hazard-
ous wastes or contaminated materials, while
experts study the site. SACM also will com-
bine similar site studies to reduce the time re-
quired to evaluate a site and its threats to
people and the environment. This way, imme-
diate public health and environmental threats
will be addressed while long-term cleanups
are being planned.
Emergencies such as train derailments and
motor vehicle accidents will continue to be
handled expeditiously. Teams of highly
trained technicians will swing into action
right away, coordinating the cleanup and re-
moval of hazardous substances to ensure pub-
lic safety as quickly as possible.
Breaking With Tradition
The traditional Superfund process begins with
a lengthy phase of study and site assessment,
but SACM will save time by combining sepa-
rate, yet similar, activities. Each EPA Region
will form a Decision Team of site managers,
risk assessors, community relations coordina-
tors, lawyers, and other experts to monitor the
studies and quickly determine whether a site
requires Early Action (taking less than five
years), Long-term Action, or both.
While the site studies continue, the Decision
Team will begin the short-term work required
to correct immediate public health or environ-
mental threats from the site. Besides remov-
ing hazardous materials, Early Actions in-
clude taking precautions to keep contaminants
from moving off the site and restricting access
to the site. Early Actions could eliminate most
human risk from these sites, and Superfund
will further focus its public participation and
public information activities on site assess-
ment and Early Action.
Long-Term Solutions
While Early Actions can correct many hazard-
ous waste problems—and provide the bulk of
public health and environmental protection—
some contamination will take longer to cor-
rect. Cleanups of mining sites, wetlands, estu-
aries, and projects involving incineration of
contaminants or restoration of groundwater
can take far longer than the three to five years
envisioned for Early Actions. Under SACM,
these sites will be handled much as they are
now.
Also under SACM, the EPA will continue its
pursuit of potentially responsible parties who
may have caused or contributed to site con-
tamination. Expedited enforcement and
procedures for negotiating potentially respon-
sible party settlements will secure their par-
ticipation. Superfund personnel will continue
to oversee clean-up work performed by poten-
tially responsible parties.
IX
-------
INTRODUCTION
HOW SUPERFUND WORKS
Each Superfund site presents a different
set of complex problems. The same haz-
ardous materials and chemicals often con-
taminate many sites, but the details of each
site are different. Almost always, soil is con-
taminated with one or more chemicals. Their
vapors may taint the air over and around the
site. Contaminants may travel through the soil
and reach underground aquifers which may be
used for drinking water, or they may spread
over the site to contaminate streams, ponds,
and wetlands. The contaminating chemicals
may interact with each other, presenting even
more complicated cleanup problems.
Superfund's cleanup process is arduous and
exacting. It requires the best efforts of hun-
dreds of experts in science and engineering,
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
prqblem they helped create. This "enforce-
ment first" policy saves Superfund Trust Fund
monies for use in cleanups where the respon-
sible parties cannot be identified, or where
they are unable to fund cleanup work.
-------
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book
The site fact sheets presented in this book
are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID# ABCOOOOOOO
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
Environmental Progress
Site Repository
xxxxxx xxx
xxxxxxxx xxxxxx
I
SITE REPOSITORY
Lists the location of the primary site repository. The site
repository may include community relations plans, public
meeting announcements and minutes, fact sheets, press
releases, and other site-related documents.
XII
-------
THE VOLUME
SITE DESCRIPTION
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes descrip-
tions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have con-
tributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
THREATS AND CONTAMINANTS
The major chemical categories of site contamination are noted, as well as
which environmental resources are affected. Icons representing each of the
affected resources (may include air, groundwater, surface water, soil, and
contamination to environmentally sensitive areas) are included in the margins
of this section. Potential threats to residents and the surrounding environ-
ments arising from the site contamination also are described.
CLEANUP APPROACH
This section contains a brief overview of how the site is being cleaned up.
RESPONSE ACTION STATUS
Specific actions that have been accomplished or will be undertaken to clean
up the site are described here. Cleanup activities at NPL sites are divided
into separate phases, depending on the complexity and required actions at the
site. Two major types of cleanup activities often are described: initial,
immediate, or emergency actions to quickly remove or reduce imminent
threats to the community and surrounding areas; and long-term remedial
phases directed at final cleanup at the site. Each stage of the cleanup strategy
is presented in this section of the summary. Icons representing the stage of
the cleanup process (initial actions, site investigations, EPA selection of the
cleanup remedy, engineering design phase, cleanup activities underway, and
completed cleanup) are located in the margin next to each activity descrip-
tion.
SITE FACTS
Additional information on activities and events at the site are included in this
section. Often details on legal or administrative actions taken by the EPA to
achieve site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with
the site cleanup process are reported here.
xiii
-------
THE VOLUME
The "icons," or symbols, accompanying the text allow the reader to see at a glance which envi-
ronmental resources are affected and the status of cleanup activities at the site.
Icons in the Threats
and Contaminants
Section
Contaminated Groundwater resources
in the vicinity or underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used as a drink-
ing water source.)
Contaminated Surface Water and
Sediments on or near the site. (These
include lakes, ponds, streams, and
rivers.)
Contaminated Air in the vicinity of
the site. (Air pollution usually is
periodic and involves contaminated
dust particles or hazardous gas emis-
sions.)
Contaminated Soil and Sludges on or
near the site. (This contamination
category may include bulk or other
surface hazardous wastes found on the
site.)
Threatened or contaminated Environ-
mentally Sensitive Areas in the vicinity
of the site. (Examples include wet-
lands and coastal areas or critical
habitats.)
Icons in the Response
Action Status Section
Initial, Immediate, or Emergency
Actions have been taken or are
underway to eliminate immediate
threats at the site.
Site Studies at the site to determine
the nature and extent of contamination
are planned or underway.
Remedy Selected indicates that site
investigations have been concluded,
and the EPA has selected a final
cleanup remedy for the site or part of
the site.
Remedy Design means that engineers
are preparing specifications and
drawings for the selected cleanup
technologies.
Cleanup Ongoing indicates that the
selected cleanup remedies for the
contaminated site, or part of the site,
currently are underway.
Cleanup Complete shows that all
cleanup goals have been achieved for
the contaminated site or part of the
site.
XIV
-------
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
xv
-------
Superfund
Activities in
Rhode Island
* Major Cities
• NPL Sites
The State of Rhode Island is located within
EPA Region 1, which includes the six States of New
England. The State covers 1,212 square miles.
According to the 1990 Census, Rhode Island experi-
enced a 6 percent increase in population between 1980 and
1990, and is ranked forty-third in U.S. population with approxi-
mately 1,007,000 residents.
The Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1978, most recently
amended in 1987, provides enforcement authorities for cleanup of aban-
doned, uncontrolled, or inactive sites. The statute grants the State the
authority to make polluters liable for site cleanup regardless of fault, issue subpoenas, collect
penalties and punitive damages from polluters, and recover costs from polluters who refuse to
participate in site cleanup activities. In 1984, the statute was amended to create the Environmen-
tal Response Fund. In addition to the required 10 percent contribution from the State under the
Federal Superfund program, this Fund provides for site investigation, emergency response,
removals, site evaluation, long-term cleanup actions, and temporary water supplies and resident
relocation. Currently, 11 sites in the State of Rhode Island have been listed as final on the NPL.
One new site was proposed for listing in 1992.
The Department of Environmental Management
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Rhode Island
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Rhode Island include:
Other
Landfills
Storage and
Disposal
Facilities
Manufacturing
Facilities
Mining
Operations
Federal Facilities
Facts about the 12 NPL sites
in Rhode Island:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at nine
sites.
Nine sites endanger sensitive environ-
ments.
Eleven sites are located near residen-
tial areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
RHODE ISLAND
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
Percentage of Sites
VOCs
Heavy Metals
PCBs
Creosotes
Pesticides/Herbicides
Petrochem ica Is/Explosives
Plastics
100%
75%
33%
17%
17%
17%
8%
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of Rhode Island, potentially respon-
sible parties are paying for or conducting
cleanup activities at eight sites.
For Further Information on NPL Sites and
Hazardous Waste Programs in the State of Rhode
Island Please Contact:
EPA Region 1 Superfund
Community Relations Section
National Response Center
The Department of Environment
Management: Division of Air and
Hazardous Materials, Environmental
Response Section
EPA Region 1 Superfund Office:
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 inf6rmation about the
Federal Superfund Program
(617)565-2713
(800) 424-8802
(401) 277-2797
(617)573-5707
(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 O^) indicating the
current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are organized
into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to
address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and
surface water pollution, or to clean up differ-
ent areas of a large site. In such cases, the
chart portrays cleanup progress at the site's
most advanced stage, reflecting the status of
site activities rather than administrative ac-
complishments.
^ An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
O A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been selected. In these cases,
the arrows are discontinued at the
"Remedy Selection" step and resume in
the "Construction Complete" category.
^> A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently
are designing the technical specifica-
tions for the selected cleanup remedies
and technologies.
^> A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and cur-
rently are underway.
^> A final arrow in the "Construction Com-
plete" category is used only when all
phases of the site cleanup plan have
been performed, and the EPA has deter-
mined that no additional construction
actions are required at the site. Some
sites in this category currently may be
undergoing long-term operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure
that the cleanup actions continue to pro-
tect human health and the environment.
/ A check in the "Deleted" category indi-
cates that the site cleanup has met all
human health and environmental goals
and that the EPA has deleted the site
from the NPL.
Further information on the activities and
progress at each site is given in the site "Fact
Sheets" published in this volume.
XIX
-------
•o
I
a
Q
.2 2
tj 5
o t>
o
ao,
go
jg>
00
ft
ft
ft ft
(0
J2
fl^
T3
O
DC
^^M
O
Q)
re
CO
0)
*•*
C/)
1
CO
_ 1
a.
z
a.
3
C
(0
Q)
O
Progress Toward
TJ**
§t>
«
M /«*
•• C/J
.8
±S TJ
(/) 3
55
Si
P
•Eg
CE
5!
CTJ
o
Q.
Z
o
U
O)
CO
2
c/5
ft
ft ft ft
ft
NO -0 co
^s. ^s. ^s.
000
S ^ S
1 1 1
IL, j-7] iju
PROVIDENCE
PROVIDENCE
PROVIDENCE
CENTRAL LANDFILL
DAVIS (GSR) LANDFILL
DAVIS LIQUID WASTE
ft
ft
ON
QO
»n
-
1
E
WASHINGTON
t—y
%
C
C
g
DAVISVILLE NAVAL CONS!
BATTALION CENTER
ft
ft
m
3°
R
8
c
E
PROVIDENCE
LANDFILL AND RESOURCE
RECOVERY, INC.
ft
ft
ON
QO
V>
~
.1
E
NEWPORT
=y
§
NEWPORT NAVAL EDUCAT1
TRAINING CENTER
ft
ft
m
8
1
E
PROVIDENCE
U
O
tO
Q.
ft
ft ft
ft ft
rO ON
2£. 2?
R$
g 2
1 1
E E
KENT
WASHINGTON
1
E
PICILLO FARM
ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANI
ft
ft ft
ft ft
ro
2£. *"""
^ 0^
s S
1 §•
E £
PROVIDENCE
WASHINGTON
S
STAMINA MILLS, INC.
WEST KINGSTON TOWN DU
URI DISPOSAL AREA
ft
ft
ft
m
50
R
8
.1
a.
PROVIDENCE
WESTERN SAND & GRAVEL
la
us _*• w **
w ^5 0 "S.
0 55 '? -g E
oU
U
CUM
^ .-S -JS § gj
M uo
>> _
SS^-SF
M S 'E 1 1
= l|ll
to * 5-s
Ctfw
(^
^jgfi| |
"'a
VI^K^A
^
S
-------
CENTRAL LAN
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID980520183
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
Johnston
Other Names:
!d> Island Central Landfill
ilvestri Bros. Landfill
Johnston Site
Site Description
The Central Landfill site covers approximately 155 acres of a 600-acre tract in Johnston.
Licensed by Rhode Island and supported by State funds, this active municipal landfill receives
approximately 85 percent of Rhode Island's solid waste. State records indicate that 1 1/2
million gallons of hazardous wastes generated within the State were disposed of at the site in
1978 and 1979. In 1982, the owner complied with a State order to close the areas that had
received hazardous wastes. These areas have been excavated, backfilled, and capped to
prevent further contamination of the groundwater and surface water and revegetated as part
of the closure plan. Approximately 4,000 people live within 3 miles of the site. The nearest
home is 1/2 mile away. Nearby private wells downgradient from the site are contaminated
with solvents. The bedrock aquifer may be contaminated, and the adjacent wetlands also may
be affected. Cedar Swamp Brook, used for recreational boating, flows southeast along the
southwest perimeter of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, surface water, and sediments are contaminated with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), including toluene and methylene chloride from
disposal of solvents. The EPA has determined that the public is not at immediate
risk from site contamination, however, people who drink water from nearby wells
are under potential health risk from elevated lead levels in groundwater. Cedar
Swamp Brook and adjacent wetlands also may contain contamination.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a single long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The current owner has installed a landfill gas collection and
combustion system, which is used to generate electricity, and public water lines in
the area of central landfill. The current owner also purchased all residential land
within 1,000 feet of the landfill, and has offered to purchase all residential property up to
2,000 feet from landfill.
Entire Site: In 1987, the owner began a study to determine the extent and nature
of site contamination and to evaluate alternatives for cleanup. The site is being
addressed in two phases. The first phase will address cleanup and control of the
source of contamination. The second phase will address the cleanup of offsite contaminated
groundwater, surface water, and sediments. Groundwater monitoring and sampling wells
have been completed. The EPA expects to evaluate study findings and select a cleanup
remedy in 1993. At that point, the EPA will outline the owner's further responsibilities for
cleaning up the site.
Site Facts: The owner of the landfill entered into a Consent Order with the EPA, signed in
1987, to conduct a study of the contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
The installation of public water lines and the purchase of residential property around the
landfill has reduced the threat of health risks to the public while studies at the Central
Landfill are being conducted and the final cleanup alternatives are being addressed.
Site Repository
Marion J. Mohr Memorial Library, 1 Memorial Drive, Johnston, RI 02919
March 1992 2 CENTRAL LANDFILL
-------
DAVIS (GSR)
LANDFILL
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID980731459
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
Glocester/Smithfield
Site Description
The Davis (GSR) Landfill is a 58-acre inactive landfill located in the towns Glocester and
Smithfield and is located near the Davis Liquid Waste Site in Smithfield, which was placed on
the NPL in 1983. Between 1974 and 1976, the landfill, which was privately owned and
licensed by the State to accept municipal wastes, accepted wastes from Glocester, Smithfield,
Warwick, and Providence. In 1978, the State declined to renew the permit because the
facility, during the previous year, had violated numerous rules and regulations for operating
solid waste management facilities. Numerous legal actions to close the site ensued, and the
State Supreme Court ruled in favor of the State in 1982, at which time the site became
inactive, but it was not properly capped or stabilized. The State found both surface water and
groundwater contamination on site, and the EPA confirmed off-site contamination. Fifteen
people live within 1,000 feet of the site. Approximately 200 residents who utilize private water
wells live within a 1-mile radius, and within a 3-mile radius there are approximately 4,700
people using private wells.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site groundwater, surface water, and sediments are contaminated with
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), such as toluene and benzene and heavy
metals including lead. Access to the site is limited only by a locked gate on the
access road. Direct contact with or accidental ingestion of contaminated on-site
surface water, sediment, or groundwater may pose a potential health threat.
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: In 1990, the EPA began an investigation into the nature and extent
of contamination at the site, the results of which will lead to the identification of
cleanup alternatives. Completion of the investigation is planned for 1994, at which
time the EPA will select a final cleanup remedy.
Environmental Progress
In 1990, the EPA conducted tests of the site conditions and determined that the Davis
Landfill poses no immediate threat to the public or the environment while the investigation
leading to final cleanup activities is taking place.
Site Repository
East Smithfield Public Library, 50 Esmond Street, Esmond, RI 02917
March 1992 4 DAVIS (GSR) LANDFILL
-------
DAVIS LIQUI
WASTE
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID980523070
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
Smithfield
The Davis Liquid Waste site is a disposal facility for hazardous wastes covering approximately
10 acres and located in a rural section of Smithfield. Throughout the 1970s, the site accepted
liquid and chemical wastes such as paint and metal sludges, oily wastes, solvents, acids,
caustics, pesticides, phenols, halogens, metals, fly ash, and laboratory Pharmaceuticals. Liquid
wastes were transported in drums and bulk tank trucks and were dumped directly into unlined
lagoons and seepage pits. The operator periodically excavated the semi-solid lagoon materials,
dumped them at several locations on the site, and covered them with soil. Other operations
included the collection of junked vehicles and machine parts, metal recycling, and tire
shredding. These activities resulted in soil, surface water, sediment, and groundwater
contamination, both on and off the site. In 1978, discovery of off-site well contamination
prompted the State Superior Court to prohibit further dumping of hazardous substances on
the Davis property. The owner still is using sections of the disposal area and adjacent
property (20 acres) as a staging and storage area for 10 to 15 million tires. The area is
residential; the nearest homes are within 1,500 feet of the site. There are 240 people living
within 1 mile and 4,700 people within 3 miles of the site; the nearest well is 300 feet away.
The property is bordered on the north and south by wetlands and swamp areas.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contamination consists of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
heavy metals including arsenic and lead from the lagoons and seepage pit areas.
The soil, lagoon sediments, and surface water also are contaminated with VOCs
and heavy metals. Residential wells to the north and northeast of the site are
contaminated with VOCs. People could be exposed to contaminants by ingesting
contaminated groundwater, coming in contact with contaminated soils on site, or
by inhaling chemicals that evaporate from the soil or surface water. Because the
bordering wetlands have been filled with tires and waste material, water elevations
have increased, resulting in a large area of stressed wetland vegetation.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on provision of a new water supply line and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1985 to 1986, the EPA sampled, packed, and staged
approximately 600 intact and crushed drums and shipped them off site for
approved disposal. At the same time, bottled water for drinking and cooking was
supplied by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management to residences with
contaminated wells. This temporary action provided a safe water supply while a permanent
remedy was being investigated.
Water Supply Line: Residents with contaminated wells are being provided a
permanent source of clean water. This water distribution system will serve 120 lots
along Forge Road, Log Road, Burlingame Road, and Bayberry Road. The new
system includes construction of a 300,000-gallon water storage tank, a water main, pumping
stations, and connections to existing residences. For undeveloped lots, the EPA will bring a
service connection up to the property line so that future connection may take place at the
owner's expense. Installation of the water storage tank and waterline piping to residents in
the vicinity of the site has been completed. The EPA is currently reviewing the workplan for
the design and construction of pump stations needed to complete the system. Construction of
the system is planned for completion in 1995.
Entire Site: The EPA has obtained a court order for access to the site to clean
it up. Features of the remedy include excavating 25,000 cubic yards of raw waste
and contaminated soils for on-site incineration and treating on-site groundwater
using an air stripper, followed by carbon filtration to remove the contaminants from the air;
cleaned water will be recirculated into the aquifer. In addition, soil will be tested. Clean soil
will be used to backfill the area; the rest will be placed in an EPA-approved landfill located at
the site. The remedy selected for cleaning up the site now is being designed by an
environmental engineering design firm under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers oversight and
EPA monitoring. Design activities are expected to be completed in 1993. The EPA expects
soil cleanup to be completed in two years, and groundwater cleanup to take five to 10 years.
Site Facts: Discovery of off-site well contamination in 1978 resulted in the State Superior
Court banning dumping on the site. The EPA obtained a Court Order to gain temporary
access to the site. The Department of Justice is preparing a motion for a "conditional" site
access to be entered in the Rhode Island Federal Court. The site owner has resisted attempts
by Federal officials to investigate the site for cleanup and has continued to conduct business
operations within 100 feet of the hazardous dumping site.
March 1992 6 DAVIS LIQUID WASTE
-------
Environmental Progress
The initial cleanup actions at the Davis Liquid Waste site to remove drums and provide an
alternative water supply have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous substances in
the drinking water and on the site while it awaits the completion of planned cleanup
activities.
Site Repository
East Smithfield Public Library, 50 Esmond Street, Esmond, RI 02917
DAVIS LIQUID WASTE
March 1992
-------
DAVISVILLE NA
CONSTRUCTIO
BATTALION C
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID# RI6170022036
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Washington County
In N. Kingstown, 18 miles south of
Providence
Other Names:
Camp Fogarty
Qalf Pasture Point Landfill
NCBC Davisville
Allen Harbor Estuary
DOD/NCBC/Allens Harbor Landfill
The Davisville Naval Construction Battalion Center (NCBC), located 18 miles south of
Providence in North Kingstown, covers approximately 1,500 acres. A military installation since
1951, its primary mission is to provide mobilization support to Naval construction forces.
Much of the NCBC-Davisville site is contiguous with Narragansett Bay and consists of three
areas, including the Main Center, the West Davisville storage area, and Camp Fogarty, a
training facility 4 miles west of the Main Center in the town of East Greenwich. Adjoining
NCBC's South Boundary is the decommissioned Naval Air Station Quonset Point, which was
given to the Rhode Island Port Authority in 1973. The Navy disposed of wastes in all four
areas. The Navy has identified at least 24 areas with potential hazardous contamination, but
the Department no longer owns several of them. These areas are being investigated by the
Army Corps of Engineers; chief among the areas is the Camp Avenue Landfill at the
decommissioned Naval Air Station. The Navy's current studies focus on ten areas: the Allen
Harbor Landfill (the largest of the areas) received solvents, paint thinners, degreasers,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from transformers, sewage sludge, and contaminated fuel oil
from 1946 to 1972; the Calf Pasture Landfill, which received "decontamination agents" and
various other contaminants; the Construction Equipment Department (CED) Battery Acid
Disposal Area; the CED Solvent Disposal Area; the Transformer Oil Disposal Area (near
Building 37); the Solvent Disposal Area; the Defense Property Disposal Office (DPDO) Film
Processing Disposal Area; the Camp Fogarty Disposal Area; the Fire Fighting Training Area;
and the Disposal Areas Northwest of Buildings W-3, W-4 and T-l. About twenty 5-gallon
cans of calcium hypochlorite were disposed of in a drainage ditch on the site between 1960
and 1971. In 1973, thirty to forty 35-gallon cardboard containers of a chloride compound
were stored at the site and deteriorated over time. From 1968 to 1974, about 2,500 3-gallon
cans also were disposed of. From 1968 to 1974, the Transformer Oil Disposal Area received
30 gallons of PCB-containing oil, which was drained from transformers and poured on the
ground east of Building 37. The surrounding area is single-family residential. Approximately
27,000 people get their drinking water from public wells within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/15/89
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Heavy metals including lead, cadmium, silver, mercury, and chromium were found
in the sediments and on the shoreline of Allen Harbor. Other contaminants in
Allen Harbor include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PNAs), solvents, and PCBs. Soil contamination is not
specified, but dumping practices involved organic solvents, PCBs, sewage sludge,
contaminated fuel oil, and halogens. Some public wells are located upgradient
between 1 and 3 miles from disposal sites. The potential for contamination of
these wells is small. Groundwater is shallow (2-4 feet in some areas), and the soil
is permeable, conditions that facilitate movement of contaminants into the
groundwater. In addition, it has been shown that Allen Harbor is polluted. A
number of salt marshes that could be affected by contamination from the site have
been identified in the Allen Harbor, Calf Pasture Point, and Narragansett Bay
areas.
Cleanup Approach
The Navy has separated its cleanup efforts into four stages: initial actions and three
long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the Allen Harbor Landfill, the DPO/FPD,
and other areas of the site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1991, the Navy removed materials from two on-site buildings
that were contaminated by PCB spills. An additional study is being planned to
address the removal of the remaining PCB-contaminated materials that were not
Allen Harbor Landfill: In 1985, the water, sediment, and organisms in Allen
Harbor were sampled as part of the confirmation studies and found to be
contaminated. Given the landfill's location adjacent to the Harbor, it is likely that
leachate will migrate into the Harbor. A study of the nature and extent of site contamination
and assessment of possible cleanup alternatives is scheduled for completion in 1994.
DPO/FPD: The Navy took 16 soil samples from the transformer oil disposal area
in 1985 and six samples in 1986 and analyzed them for PCBs. An additional study
of the nature and extent of site contamination and assessment of possible cleanup
choices is scheduled for completion in 1994. The migration potential of contaminants off site
is moderate to high. Groundwater flow is assumed to be toward Hall Creek, which is 600 feet
from the site.
DAVISVILLE NAVAL CONSTRUCTION 9 March 1992
BATTALION CENTER
-------
Other Areas: Studies of the nature and extent of contamination at eight
additional areas identified by the Navy are scheduled for completion in 1994.
These areas include the CED Battery Disposal Area, CED Solvent Disposal Area,
Transformer Oil Disposal Area, Calf Pasture Point, Camp Fogarty Disposal Area, Fire
Fighting Training Area, and the Disposal Area northwest of buildings W-3, W-4 and T-l. A
magnetometer study was conducted at the Calf Pasture Point area to locate the cans
containing contaminants. Soil borings were taken in 1985 to determine the depth of
contamination. The mobility of contaminants is moderate to high; however, the effect on the
groundwater to date is minimal.
Site Facts: NCBC 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. In
1988, the EPA and the Naval Ocean Systems Center began conducting a study at the Allen
Harbor landfill, under a Memorandum of Agreement.
Environmental Progress
The removal of materials from two on-site buildings has reduced threats to the public and the
environment while studies leading to the cleanup of the site are underway.
Site Repository
North Kingstown Free Library, 100 Boone Street, North Kingstown, RI 02852
March 1992
10
DAVISVILLE NAVAL CONSTRUCTION
BATTALION CENTER
-------
LANDFILL AND
RESOURCE
RECOVERY, I
(L&RR)
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID093212439
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
1/2 mile east of Slatersville Reservoir
in North Smithfield
Site Description
The Landfill and Resource Recovery, Inc. (L&RR) site is a 28-acre landfill on a 36-acre
parcel of land. The site originally was a sand and gravel pit and was used for small-scale
refuse disposal from 1927 to 1974. In 1974, the site was sold and developed into a large-scale
disposal facility accepting commercial, municipal, and industrial wastes. Until 1979, an
estimated 1 1/2 million gallons of hazardous wastes were accepted and disposed with other
wastes in the central portion of the landfill. The hazardous wastes included many types of
bulk and drummed organic and inorganic materials in liquid, sludge, and solid forms. In 1979,
the operator placed a polyvinyl chloride cover over the area containing hazardous waste to
prevent rainwater from entering. Landfilling of commercial and residential wastes continued
until 1985, when the owners closed the landfill and placed another synthetic cover over nearly
the entire landfill. Soil was placed over the synthetic cover, and it was partially planted with
vegetation. Although the area still is rural, there are approximately 10,000 residents in a
25-square-mile area; the area appears to be undergoing a substantial growth in residential
development. Within a 1/2-mile radius of the site, there are fewer than 50 residences and no
multi-residential housing developments. More than 3,000 people live within 3 miles of the site.
An industrial park is located approximately 3,000 feet to the north, and Air National Guard
installations are approximately 1,000 feet to the east and 3,000 feet to the south of the site.
Most, if not all, residences in the site vicinity obtain their drinking water from individual wells.
Trout Brook, adjacent to the site, and the Slatersville Reservoir, into which it discharges, are
used for fishing and other recreation, but are not public water supply sources.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
11
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
The air at the landfill vents is contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and benzene. The groundwater
on site is contaminated with arsenic, lead, and VOCs from waste liquids disposed
of on site and from rainwater entering the landfilled wastes and causing
contamination to move into the groundwater. The surface water on the site is
contaminated with lead. The only health threat is from gaseous emissions from the
landfill. The landfill is enclosed by a single-strand fence. The only significant
environmental threat is to the wetlands surrounding the site. The wetlands are
being affected by sand eroding from the landfill. The eroded sand is not
contaminated; however, it is filling in the wetlands, destroying vegetation and
decreasing the ability of the wetland area to support plant and animal life.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1977, the owner installed monitoring wells on site to ensure
compliance with State regulations. The owner closed the landfill in 1985, and 3/4
of the site was covered with a synthetic cap to minimize infiltration of rain and
melted snow. Soil also was used to establish a vegetative cover. The cap was designed and
constructed with gas vents to prevent the buildup of gases under the cap. These vents
currently are sealed. The selected long-term remedy for this site includes: (1) installation of
more substantial fencing; (2) stabilization of the steep side slopes of the landfill and
installation of a synthetic cap over the uncapped area of the landfill, with establishment of a
vegetative cover over the entire landfill; (3) collection and thermal destruction of underlying
gases; and (4) groundwater and air monitoring. Design of these cleanup actions by the
potentially responsible parties began in 1990.
Site Facts: In 1985, the landfill was closed by the owner under a Consent Order with the
State. In 1990, an Administrative Order was issued to the potentially responsible parties to
conduct design and cleanup activities.
Environmental Progress
Closing the landfill, installing a cover, and constructing a fence to limit access to the site have
reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the Landfill and Resource
Recovery site while cleanup activities are being designed and implemented.
March 1992 12 UVNDFILL AND RESOURCE
RECOVERY, INC. (L&RR)
-------
Site Repository
Municipal Annex Building, 85 Smithfield Road, North Smithfield, RI 02895
LANDFILL AND
RECOVERY, INC. (L&RR)
13
March 1992
-------
NEWPORT NAVAL
EDUCATION AN
TRAINING CEN
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID# RI6170085470
EPA REGION 1
Newport County
Aquidneck Island
Other Names:
U.S. Navy McAllister
DOD/NETC/McAllister Point Landfill
Site Description
The 1,400-acre Newport Naval Education and Training Center (NETC) site has been used by
the Navy as a refueling depot since 1900. From 1955 to the mid-1970s, the 6-acre McAllister
Point Landfill, along the shore of Narragansett Bay, accepted wastes consisting primarily of
domestic refuse, acids, solvents, paint, waste oil, and oil contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs). Three tank farms are located in the Melville area and one in Midway.
Sludge from nearby tank farms was dumped on the ground or burned in chambers. Other
contaminated areas on site, such as the Melville North Landfill, are classified as Formerly
Used Defense sites and are being addressed separately. Surface water and groundwater flow
from the landfill into the bay, which is used for boating and fishing. One tank farm is 300 feet
from a coastal wetland. An estimated 4,800 people obtain drinking water and 220 acres of
land are irrigated from private wells within 3 miles of hazardous substances at the site.
Approximately 10,000 people live within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/15/89
Threats and Contaminants
Monitoring wells detected petroleum products and heavy metals, including lead and
copper, in the groundwater. Groundwater also is contaminated with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and petroleum
hydrocarbons. Sediments collected from Narragansett Bay contain lead, copper
and nickel. Landfill soil and leachate contain heavy metals, petroleum
hydrocarbons, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Initial studies have shown
that none of the areas within the site pose an immediate threat to public health.
However, the site warrants a study to assess potential long-term impacts. Tidal
action of the Narragansett Bay may spread contamination to nearby wetlands.
14
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: initial actions and three long-term remedial phases
focusing on the McAllister Point Landfill, Tank Farms, and the remaining areas of the site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: A 1991 investigation revealed elevated levels of total petroleum
hydrocarbons in soils. This led to the removal of the contents of tanks 53 and 56.
These tanks are being closed pursuant to the State of Rhode Island hazardous
waste closure requirements. Another action also is planned to remove known soil
contamination and to address groundwater contamination around the tanks.
McAllister Point Landfill: An investigation into the nature and extent of site
contamination is underway. This investigation will include ambient air and
radiological surveys, a geophysical survey, surface and subsurface soil sampling, and
groundwater sampling. A second investigation, which began in 1992, will define the source
and extent of soil and groundwater contamination. Off-shore sediment sampling will be
conducted in mid-1992 to evaluate ecological risks. Investigation are planned for completion
in 1992.
Tank Farms: An investigation into the nature and extent of site contamination
due to the tank farms is underway, including ambient air and radiological surveys,
a soil gas survey, surface soil sampling, groundwater sampling, surface
water/sediment sampling, and underground storage tanks investigations. Additional
investigations are planned that will further define the extent of contamination associated with
the ruins, characterize the sludge material in the oil/water separator, confirm the
contamination levels in on-site groundwater, and determine the significance of inorganic
contaminant levels in soil and groundwater. Investigations are planned for completion in
1992.
Other Site Areas: Investigations of the contamination at the remaining site areas
are underway, including the former Fire Fighting Training Area, the Coddington
Cove Rubble Fill, the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, and the Gould Island
Electroplating Shop. These studies will define the source and extent of soil and groundwater
contamination.
Site Facts: This site is being addressed under 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.
NEWPORT NAVAL EDUCATION 15 March 1992
AND TRAINING CENTER
-------
Environmental Progress
Following listing of this site on the NPL, the EPA completed a site assessment and
determined that the Newport Naval Center does not pose an immediate threat to public
health or the environment at the present time. The Newport Naval Center site is safe while it
awaits the start of cleanup actions.
Site Repository
Newport Public Library, Aquidneck Park, Newport, RI 02840
March 1992
16
NEWPORT NAVAL EDUCATION
AND TRAINING CENTER
-------
PETERSON/
PURITAN, IN
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID# RID055176283
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
Along the Blackstone River in
Cumberland and Lincoln
Other Names:
Blackstone Valley
Site Description
The Peterson/Puritan, Inc. site is located along the Blackstone River within the towns of
Cumberland and Lincoln. The site is about two miles long and extends approximately 2,000
feet to the east and west of the main river channel. The Peterson/Puritan, Inc. plant was
built in 1959 and began packaging aerosol consumer products. In 1976, following a major fire,
the plant was rebuilt. The site "study area" comprises an industrial park, including the
Peterson/Puritan facility, extraction areas, an inactive landfill known as J.M. Mills Landfill, an
inactive solid waste transfer station sand and gravel operations, Rhode Island State park
development, affected municipal water supply wells, the Dexter Quarry/Dupaw Dump, and
numerous interspersed areas of undeveloped land along the Blackstone River. The Martin
Street well and Lenox Street well in the Town of Cumberland and the Quinnville well field in
the Town of Lincoln were closed due to contamination and remain out of service. Attempts
to flush contaminants from the wells were abandoned after repeated efforts to remove the
contaminants failed. The Peterson/Puritan Inc., site is located in a mixed industrial and
residential area. There are approximately 12,000 people living within a 4-mile radius of the
site; the nearest residence is less than 1/4 mile away. Approximately 17,000 people were
affected by the contaminated groundwater prior to abandoning the Lenox Street Well. The
town of Lincoln has since been connected to alternate water supplies.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with chlorinated solvents, volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including acetone and benzene; phthalates; and heavy metals
such as chromium, lead, and mercury. Certain sediment sample locations are
contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Surface water is
contaminated with low concentrations of VOCs. People are at risk if they come in
direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater, surface water,
sediment, leachate or potentially contaminated soil. The site is located in a flood
plain, which may cause water, sediments, plants, and animals to become
contaminated.
17
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: initial action and two long-term remedial phases
directed at cleanup of the primary source area and the J.M. Mills Landfill.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: In 1992, a fence was constructed to restrict access to the J.M.
Mills landfill and a drum containing contaminated materials was removed from
the base of the landfill.
Primary Source Area: The party potentially responsible for contamination at the
site completed a preliminary study on the nature and extent of the contamination.
Based on the initial investigation, the EPA determined that a more detailed study
to further characterize contaminant source is required. The study is currently underway. Once
this study is completed, scheduled for mid-1993, the EPA will evaluate the recommended
alternatives and will select the final cleanup remedy.
J.M. Mills Landfill: A separate investigation, scheduled to begin in 1994, will
characterize the nature and extent of contamination at the landfill. Following the
completion of this study, final cleanup remedies will be selected.
Site Facts: After a preliminary investigation in 1982, the EPA identified the
Peterson/Puritan facility as the major source of the contamination in the Quinnville well field.
The Town of Lincoln filed a lawsuit against Peterson/Puritan, Inc. based on these findings. In
1984, the company reached a settlement with Lincoln and assisted with the cost of the town's
new water supply. The company also installed a recovery well on its property for the purpose
of capturing contaminated groundwater underlying its property. In 1987, an Administrative
Order was issued to Peterson/Puritan, Inc. to take over the site investigation from the EPA.
Environmental Progress
The initial actions have provided a safe drinking water supply to affected area residents, and
access to the landfill has been restricted while the EPA awaits the results of the ongoing
investigations to select final cleanup remedies.
Site Repository
Cumberland Public Library, 1464 Diamond Hill Road, Cumberland, RI 02864
March 1992
18
PETERSON/ PURITAN, INC.
-------
PICILLO FAR
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID980579056
EPA REGION 1
Kent County
Piggy Hill Lane in Coventry
Other Names:
Candy Box Farm
Site Description
The Picillo Farm site is a portion of a former 100-acre pig farm. More than 10,000 drums of
hazardous waste and an undetermined bulk volume of liquid chemicals were disposed of into
several unlined trenches on an 8-acre area of the farm. The site was discovered in 1977,
when a fire and explosion occurred. After requiring the property owners to halt the illegal
disposal operations, the State of Rhode Island conducted an emergency removal of drums
containing sodium aluminum hydride. From 1980 through 1982, the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management and the EPA excavated the trenches and
removed the majority of the wastes. The contaminated soil was stored on site in three piles.
These piles were moved off site in 1988. More than 2,000 people live within 3 miles of the
site. There are 50 residences located within a mile of the site; two are within 1/4 mile. All
residences rely on private wells for their water; these wells are sampled approximately once a
year by the Rhode Island Department of Health. The site lies near the upper Roaring Brook
watershed, which is a tributary to the Moosup River. Groundwater and surface water runoff
flows away from the disposal site toward an unnamed swamp, Great Cedar Swamp, and
Whitford Pond, which is used to irrigate a cranberry bog.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
19
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Air on the site contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and pesticides. On-site
groundwater is contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and VOCs
including toluene and xylene. Off-site groundwater and surface water in the swamp
are contaminated with VOCs. On-site soil is contaminated with phenols, PCBs,
and VOCs. Potential threats include direct contact with contaminated soil, surface
water, or sediments; drinking of groundwater; and inhalation of VOCs.
Contaminated surface water and sediments may pose ecological risks, especially to
the nearby wetlands.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: emergency actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on controlling the source of the contamination and cleanup of groundwater
and surface water.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: From 1980 to 1982, the EPA and the State conducted
emergency actions by removing 10,000 buried drums from five trenches on the
site. Bulk wastes also were removed. Contaminated soils were dug from trenches
and were stockpiled on site.
Source Control: The remedy selected by the EPA and performed by the parties
potentially responsible for the site contamination included: disposal of 3,500 cubic
yards of PCB-contaminated soils and 3,000 cubic yards of phenol-contaminated
soils off site in an approved landfill; installation of a fence; installation of a surface drainage
control system; and closure of the site. These remedies were completed in 1988. The Rhode
Island Department of Health samples private wells in the vicinity approximately once a year.
The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management is responsible for operation
and maintenance of the cleanup remedies.
Groundwater and Surface Water: The EPA is studying the on- and off-site
groundwater and surface water contamination, as well as residual soil
contamination. The investigation will define the nature and extent of
contamination, present human and ecological risk assessments and will recommend
alternatives for the final cleanup. The field investigation is expected to be completed in 1992,
and the risk assessment and selection of final cleanup remedies are scheduled for completion
in late 1993.
March 1992 20 PICILLO FARM
-------
Site Facts: In 1988, the EPA entered into an agreement with 12 potentially responsible
parties. Four of these companies removed contaminants and closed down the site under close
monitoring by the EPA in 1988.
Environmental Progress
With the cleanup actions described above, the EPA has reduced the potential for accidental
contact or exposure to contaminated soil and dust. Removing the contaminated soil from the
trenches also addressed the source of contamination to groundwater, which will be cleaned up
in future actions at the Picillo Farm site.
Site Repository
Greene Public Library, Hopkins Hollow Road, Greene, RI 02827
PICILLO FARM
21
March 1992
-------
ROSE HILL
REGIONAL
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID#RID980521025
EPA REGION 1
Washington County
Rose Hill Road
Site Description
The Rose Hill Regional Landfill site is a former municipal landfill located in the Town of
South Kingstown. The Town leased the land for a domestic and industrial waste disposal
facility, which operated from 1967 to 1983. In 1983, the facility became inactive, and the
operator reportedly graded and seeded the disposal areas. A transfer station for municipal
waste, currently owned and operated by the Town, is located on a portion of the site. Three
separate areas on the site received waste: a solid waste landfill, a bulky waste disposal area,
and a sewage sludge landfill. Current owner-operated activities within the site boundary
include a hunting preserve, field skeet range, qualifying range, kennel and field training of
bird dogs, and a pet cemetery. An estimated 17,300 people obtain water from wells within 3
miles of the site. The area is rural to residential, with forested areas, fields, small farms and
sand/gravel extraction activities nearby. The site is bordered by the Saugatucket River to the
east, and Mitchell Brook flows through the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/21/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
On-site monitoring wells contain several volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including chloroform, benzene, and xylenes, as well as some heavy metals.
Observations indicate that Mitchell Brook, an unnamed brook, and the
Saugatucket River could be affected by contaminated runoff from the site. Three
private wells adjacent to the site are contaminated with low levels of organic
compounds, as is on-site soil. The site is not completely fenced, making it possible
for people to come into direct contact with hazardous substances. Saugatucket
Pond, 2,000 feet downstream, is used for fishing and swimming. A freshwater
wetland is 500 feet downstream and also could be subject to contamination.
22
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1985, the Town of South Kingstown Utilities Department
extended the municipal water line to residences on Rose Hill Road with
contaminated wells.
Entire Site: An investigation into the nature and extent of contamination in three
separate disposal areas is planned for completion in late 1993. The scope of the
investigation includes sampling of groundwater, surface water, soils and sediments.
Expanded studies include an ecological impact assessment, and a methane migration
evaluation. The EPA will evaluate the recommended cleanup alternatives and will select final
remedies in late 1993.
Environmental Progress
With the provision of a safe drinking water supply to the affected residents, the EPA has
determined that the site does not currently pose an imminent threat to the public or the
surrounding environment. The EPA will continue to assess conditions at the Rose Hill
Regional Landfill site as studies leading to the selection of cleanup alternatives are continued.
Site Repository
South Kingstown Public Library, 1057 Kingstown Road, Peace Dale, RI 02883
ROSE HILL REGIONAL LANDFILL
23
March 1992
-------
STAMINA
MILLS, INC.
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID# RID980731442
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
North Smithfield
Other Names:
Forestdale-Stamlna
Mills, Inc.
6
Site Description
Stamina Mills is on a 5-acre parcel of land and began operating as a textile mill in the early
1900s. It was closed for an undetermined period of time during the Depression and changed
ownership in the 1940s. In 1969, a solvent scouring system for removing oil and dirt from
newly woven fabric was installed. Some time during that year, a trichloroethylene (TCE) spill
occurred and never was cleaned up. In 1975, the mill was closed. In 1977, a fire destroyed the
manufacturing complex; the site has been vacant and unused since then. In 1981, in response
to the discovery of private well contamination, the Rhode Island Water Resources Board and
the Town of North Smithfield installed a public water line to area residences. However, not
all residences connected to the service; the EPA provided resources to extend the water
system and complete connections to those residences in 1984. By 1987, all residences were on
the public water supply. The Village of Forestdale, with a population of approximately 1,000,
is within a 1/2-mile radius of the site. A school and private residences with nearly 300 people
are within 1/4 mile of the site. Industrial and commercial facilities with about 1,200 people are
within 1/2 mile of the site. The site is bordered by wetlands and the Branch River to the
south.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs), primarily
TCE and its constituents. Sediments are contaminated with TCE, dieldrin, and
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The soil is contaminated with TCE, the
pesticide dieldrin, and heavy metals including lead, arsenic, and cadmium, as well
as PAHs. Surface water is contaminated primarily with VOCs. People who trespass
on the site potentially are at risk from direct contact with contaminated soils,
surface water, or groundwater. In 1986, a security fence was erected to prevent
entry to the site.
24
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup alternatives for the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1981, the Rhode Island Water Resources Board and the
Town of North Smithfield installed a public water line to area residences and
provided bottled water to those residences that were not connected to the
services. In 1984, the EPA provided resources for extending the public water system and
connecting additional residences to the system. By 1987, all residences were on the public
water supply. In 1986, the EPA also installed a fence to prevent entry to the site. In 1988, the
EPA removed two tanks from the site, pumped the waste from the tanks, and sent it to an
approved hazardous waste facility. In 1990, the EPA removed the contents of an
aboveground storage tank, decontaminated the tank shell, and disposed of the tank contents
at an approved hazardous waste facility.
Entire Site: Based on its investigation, the EPA selected the following remedy to
clean up the site: in-situ vacuum extraction of soil contaminated with
trichloroethylene (TCE) in the spill area, which involves installation of a number
of shallow wells to withdraw air containing TCE and other VOCs for carbon treatment, and
excavation of approximately 550 cubic yards of landfill waste and sediments to be redeposited
into a landfill under the new multi-layer cap to be installed. Groundwater will be extracted
and treated with ultraviolet light and hydrogen peroxide, an innovative technology, to remove
VOCs. Mill raceways will be sealed, and on-site buildings will be demolished. Deed
restrictions will be used at the site to regulate land use and preserve the integrity of the
remedy's components. The septic tank location will be confirmed and its contents tested and
removed. The contents of the tank and the tank itself will be disposed of. A monitoring
program for the groundwater, soil, surface water, and sediments will be implemented to
ensure the effectiveness of the remedy selected. Demolition activities are expected to begin in
the summer of 1992 and are planned for completion in the fall of 1992. The removal of the
partially standing structures and debris will allow workers to begin cleanup activities at other
areas of the site, including the contaminated soil, groundwater and on-site landfill. The
technical design of these remaining cleanup remedies is planned for completion in 1994.
Site Facts: In 1991, an Administrative Order was issued to the operator of the site to
demolish on-site structures and remove the debris. A plan was submitted by the operator to
EPA to perform this cleanup action, which was approved in 1992.
STAMINA MILLS, INC. 25 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
The initial actions of providing a public water supply and fencing of the site have reduced the
potential of people to be exposed to the contamination at the Stamina Mills site. A
deteriorating tank containing low pH hazardous substances was removed and properly
disposed of. Some drums of hazardous substances will be addressed in the near future,
further reducing the potential for exposure to contamination while the site awaits Gnal
cleanup activities.
Site Repository
North Smithfield Public Library, 20 Main Street, Slatersville, RI 02876
March 1992
26
STAMINA MILLS, INC.
-------
WEST KINGSTO
TOWN DUMP/U
DISPOSAL AREA
RHODE ISLAND
EPAID* RID981063993
EPA REGION 1
Washington County
South Kingstown
Other names:
S{>uth Kingstown Landfill No. 2
URI Gravel Bank
Sherman Farm
Site Description
This site consists of two adjacent properties, the West Kingston Town Dump and the
University of Rhode Island (URI) Disposal Area. Known in the past as "South Kingstown
Landfill #2", the 6 1/2 acre West Kingston Town Dump received solid waste from the Town
of South Kingstown beginning in the 1930s. In the early 1950s, the Town of Narragansett and
URI also began disposing of their solid waste in the landfill. This disposal of solid waste went
unregulated until 1967, when the Rhode Island Department of Health (RI DOH) noted,
during a site inspection, that wastes disposed of at the site were from industrial, residential,
commercial, and institutional sources. Numerous operational violations were subsequently
cited by RI DOH. A 1975 study conducted by the URI Department of Civil Engineering and
the Rhode Island Water Resources Board resulted in the discovery of a leachate plume
beneath the landfill which was contaminating groundwater as far as 1,200 feet west of the
dump. From 1945 to 1987, solid waste was also accepted at the 12-acre URI Disposal Area,
referred to in the past as the "URI Gravel Bank" or the "Sherman Farm." After closure of
the town dump in 1978, the URI Disposal Area began to accept most of URFs waste,
including small quantities of empty paint cans, oil containers, and pesticide containers. Lab
equipment, machinery, closed drums, and old tanks buried on site were discovered by the
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM) during a 1987
inspection. RI DEM instructed URI to remove contaminated debris from the site, an action
which was completed by URI in 1987. Vehicle access to the site is restricted by a locked
chain-link gate across the gravel access road at its intersection with Plains Road. An
estimated 15,800 persons obtain their drinking water supply from three major public wells
within 4 miles of the site. An additional 12,000 persons are supplied by private wells, the
nearest being approximately 1,000 feet northwest of the site. Three private wells
approximately 875 feet west of the site were closed in 1988 due to contamination. The
Chipuxet River valley basin is located alongside the site. Hundred Acre Pond, part of the
river, is an estimated 1,500 feet from the site. The river basin is a major groundwater
resource.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/29/91
27
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Private wells near the site are contaminated with various volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). VOCs also have been detected in the on-site pond. Heavy
metals, including lead, were detected by on-site monitoring wells. Wetlands on site
may be at risk from contaminated surface water.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
on focusing on cleanup of the site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1987, URI removed 159 tons of materials and
transported them to regulated waste disposal facilities.
Entire Site: An investigation to determine the extent of contamination at the
entire site is planned to begin in early 1994.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal and disposal of materials has reduced health hazards on-site while
investigations to determine final cleanup remedies are being planned.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 28 WEST KINGSTON TOWN DUMP/
URI DISPOSAL AREA
-------
WESTERN
SAND&
GRAVEL
RHODE ISLAND
EPA ID# RID009764929
EPA REGION 1
Providence County
Burrillville, adjacent to Douglas Pike
Site Description
Western Sand & Gravel, a 20-acre site located in a rural residential area of Burrillville, was a
sand and gravel quarry operation from 1953 until 1975. The quarrying operation is continuing.
From 1975 to April 1979, approximately 12 acres of the 20-acre site were used for the
disposal of liquid wastes, including chemicals and septic waste. Over time, the wastes
penetrated into the porous soil and contaminated the groundwater. Contents of tank trucks
were emptied directly into 12 open lagoons and pits, none of which were lined with protective
materials. The pits were concentrated on a hill that slopes to Tarkiln Brook, which is used for
recreational purposes and drains into the Slaterville Reservoir. The State closed the disposal
operation because nearby residents complained of odors. Approximately 600 people within a
1-mile radius of the site depend on groundwater. Eight homes were found to have
contaminated wells.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including toluene, trichloroethylene (TCE), trichloroethane, benzene,
chlorobenzene, and dichloroethane. The water of Tarkiln Brook contains similar
contaminants. The soil also is contaminated with VOCs. Prior to the capping of
the soil and sludge and the installation of carbon filters, potential exposure to
VOCs may have occurred by inhalation, ingestion, or direct contact with
contaminated soil or groundwater.
29
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: initial actions to limit the spread of contamination
and three long-term remedial phases concentrating on installation of a permanent water
supply, capping of the contaminated soil and sludge, and investigating the extent of
groundwater contamination and cleanup alternatives.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Early in 1980, the State began to pump one lagoon dry to halt
leachate movement. Approximately 60,000 gallons of liquid chemical and septic
waste were removed for off-site disposal. A groundwater recirculation system was
installed.
Water Line: The EPA will install a permanent alternate water supply to service
approximately 56 parcels of land, and the potentially responsible parties installed
carbon canister filters as a temporary protective measure in all the homes in the
affected area until the permanent water supply is functional. Construction of the water line
was completed in 1990. A schedule for operation of the water line currently is being
negotiated between the State and the EPA. Additional tests of the system have been
required by the state. Operation of the water line will begin following evaluation of test
results.
Soil Capping: The parties potentially responsible for the contamination have
installed a 2 1/2-acre cap over the areas of contaminated soil and sludge and
graded the site to promote runoff and drainage. Also included are fencing, fence
maintenance, and posting of the site and cap. Cleanup was completed in 1988.
Groundwater: The potentially responsible parties conducted an investigation to
determine the extent of contamination and to evaluate alternatives for cleanup of
the groundwater. The investigation was completed in early 1991. Based on the
investigation, the EPA selected a remedy of natural attenuation. The site will be monitored
until 1995. At that time, a system to pump and treat the groundwater will be installed if
monitoring shows that natural cleanup is not occurring as predicted. The potentially
responsible parties will monitor groundwater and conduct evaluations every three years, with
EPA oversight.
Site Facts: Approximately 45 potentially responsible parties entered into a Consent Decree
with the EPA and agreed to pay for past costs, to construct a cap, to conduct an investigation
to determine the nature and extent of contamination, and to identify alternatives for cleanup
of contaminated groundwater. The parties also will pay the EPA to construct the permanent
alternate water supply.
March 1992 30 WESTERN SAND & GRAVEL
-------
Environmental Progress
The initial actions including fencing, capping, and grading the contaminated areas of the
Western Sand & Gravel site and installing the carbon canister filters have met the goals for
cleanup of the land, thereby protecting human health and the environment while the site
awaits remaining cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Burrillville Town Hall, 105 Harrisville Main Street, Harrisville, RI 02830
WESTERN SAND & GRAVEL
31
March 1992
-------
GLOSSARY
Terms Used in the NPL Book
This glossary defines terms used throughout the NPL Volumes. The terms and
abbreviations contained in this glossary apply specifically to work performed
under the Superfund program in the context of hazardous waste management. These
terms may have other meanings when used in a different context. A table of common
toxic chemicals found at NPL sites, their sources, and their potential threats is located
on page G-15
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds or release
heavy metal contaminants that remain in the
environment long after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A
legal and enforceable agreement between the
EPA and the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally, the
EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for site
studies). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized vessel. The contaminants are evaporated
into the air stream. The air may be further
treated before it is released into the atmosphere.
Ambient Air: Anyunconfinedpartofthe
atmosphere. Refers to the air that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity of
contaminated air sources.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand,
or gravel capable of storing water within cracks
and pore spaces, or between grains. When
water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient
quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used
for drinking or other purposes. The water
contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
A "sole source aquifer" supplies 50 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in
removing participates 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 blown 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 die 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
Poly cyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs):
PAHs, such as pyrene, are a group of highly
reactive organic compounds found in motor oil.
They are a common component of creosotes and
can cause cancer.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A
group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications,
carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope immersion oils, and caulking
compounds. PCBs also are produced in certain
combustion processes. PCBs are extremely
persistent in the environment because they are
very stable, non-reactive, and highly heat
resistant. Chronic exposure to PCBs is believed
to cause liver damage. It also is known to
bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. PCB use and
sale was banned in 1979 with the passage of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and
biphenyls, are a group of highly reactive organic
compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC): A plastic made
from the gaseous substance vinyl chloride. PVC
is used to make pipes, records, raincoats, and
floor tiles. Health risks from high concentra-
tions of vinyl chloride include liver cancer and
lung cancer, as well as cancer of the lymphatic
and nervous systems.
Potable Water: Water that is safe for drink-
ing and cooking.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs):
Parties associated with a Superfund site who
may be liable for the cost of remedying the
release of hazardous substances. This may
include owners or operators of the site or trans-
porters who disposed of materials at the site.
PRPs may admit liability, or liability may be
determined by a court of law. PRPs may sign a
Consent Decree or Administrative Order on
Consent to participate in the site cleanup without
admitting liability.
Precipitation: The removal of solids from
liquid waste so that the solid and liquid portions
can be disposed of safely; the removal of
particles from airborne emissions. Electro-
chemical precipitation is the use of an anode or
cathode to remove the hazardous chemicals.
Chemical precipitation involves the addition of
some substance to cause the solid portion to
separate.
Preliminary Assessment: The process of
collecting and reviewing available information
about a known or suspected waste site or release
to determine if a threat or potential threat exists.
Pump and Treat: A groundwater cleanup
technique involving the extracting of contami-
nated groundwater from the subsurface and the
removal of contaminants, using one of several
treatment technologies.
Radionuclides: Elements, including radium
and uranium-235 and -238, which break down
and produce radioactive substances due to their
unstable atomic structure. Some are man-made,
and others are naturally occurring in the envi-
ronment. Radon, the gaseous form of radium,
decays to form alpha particle radiation, which
cannot be absorbed through skin. However, it
can be inhaled, which allows alpha particles to
affect unprotected tissues directly and thus cause
cancer. Radiation also occurs naturally through
the breakdown of granite.
RCRA: [See Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act].
Recharge Area: A land area where rainwater
saturates the ground and soaks through the earth
to reach an aquifer.
G-10
-------
GLOSSARY
Record of Decision (ROD): A public
document that explains which cleanup
alternative(s) will be used to clean up sites
listed on the NPL. It is based on information
generated during the remedial investigation
and feasibility study and consideration of
public comments and community concerns.
Recovery Wells: Wells used to withdraw.
contaminants or contaminated groundwater.
Recycle: The process of minimizing waste
generation by recovering usable products that
might otherwise become waste.
Remedial Action (RA): The actual con-
struction or implementation phase of a
Superfund site cleanup following the remedial
design [see Cleanup].
Remedial Design: A phase of site cleanup
where engineers design the technical specifi-
cations for cleanup remedies and technolo-
gies.
Remedial Investigation: An in-depth
study designed to gather the data necessary to
determine the nature and extent of contamina-
tion at a Superfund site, establish the criteria
for cleaning up the site, identify the prelimi-
nary alternatives for cleanup actions, and
support the technical and cost analyses of the
alternatives. The remedial investigation is
usually done with the feasibility study. In this
volume, the remedial investigation is referred
to as a site study [see also Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at the site.
Remedy Selection: The selection of the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few
sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site
contamination, or that any remaining con-
tamination will be naturally dispersed without
further cleanup activities, a "No Action"
remedy is selected [see Record of Decision].
Removal Action: Short-term immediate
actions taken to address releases of hazardous
substances [see Cleanup].
Residual: The amount of a pollutant re-
maining in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or the particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubber.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA): A Federal law that established
a regulatory system to track hazardous sub-
stances from the time of generation to dis-
posal. The law requires safe and secure
procedures to be used in treating, transport-
ing, storing, and disposing of hazardous
substances. RCRA is designed to prevent
new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Retention Pond: A small body of liquid
used for disposing of wastes and containing
overflow from production facilities. Some-
times retention ponds are used to expand the
capacity of such structures as lagoons the
store waste.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contaminants
from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution control device
that uses a spray of water or reactant or a dry
process to trap pollutants in emissions.
Sediment: The layer of soil, sand, and
minerals at the bottom of surface waters such
as streams, lakes, and rivers, that absorbs
contaminants.
G-11
-------
GLOSSARY
Seeps: Specific points where releases of
liquid, usually leachate, form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower
edges of landfills.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in
the ground used for the storage of liquids,
usually in the form of leachate, from waste
disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves
the pit by moving through the surrounding
soil.
Septage: Residue remaining in a septic tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is neces-
sary for choosing and designing cleanup mea-
sures and monitoring their effectiveness.
Site Inspection: The collection of informa-
tion from a hazardous waste site to determine
the extent and severity of hazards posed by the
site. It follows, and is more extensive than, a
preliminary assessment. The purpose is to
gather information necessary to score the site,
using the Hazard Ranking System, and to
determine if the site presents an immediate
threat that requires a prompt removal action.
Slag: The fused refuse or dross separated
from a metal in the process of smelting.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial
or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Slurry Wall: Barriers used to contain the flow
of contaminated groundwater or subsurface
liquids. Slurry walls are constructed by digging
a trench around a contaminated area and filling
the trench with an impermeable material that
prevents water from passing through it. The
groundwater or contaminated liquids trapped
within the area surrounded by the slurry wall
can be extracted and treated.
Smelter: A facility that melts or fuses ore,
often with an accompanying chemical change,
to separate the metal. Emissions from smelters
are known to cause pollution.
Soil Gas: Gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between par-
ticles of soil. Such gases can move through
or leave the soil or rock, depending on
changes in pressure.
Soil Vapor Extraction: A treatment
process that uses vacuum wells to remove
hazardous gases from soil.
Soil Washing: A water-based process for
mechanically scrubbing soils in-place to remove
undesirable materials. There are two ap-
proaches: dissolving or suspending them in the
wash solution for later treatment by conven-
tional methods, and concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through simple particle
size separation techniques [see Solvent Extrac-
tion].
Stabilization: The process of changing an
active substance into inert, harmless material,
or physical activities at a site that act to limit
the further spread of contamination without
actual reduction of toxicity.
Solidification/Stabilization: A chemical
or physical reduction of the mobility of
hazardous constituents. Mobility is reduced
through the binding of hazardous constituents
into a solid mass with low permeability and
resistance to leaching.
G-12
-------
GLOSSARY
Solvent: A substance capable of dissolving
another substance to form a solution. The
primary uses of industrial solvents are as
cleaners for degreasing, in paints, and in
Pharmaceuticals. Many solvents are flam-
mable and toxic to varying degrees.
Sol vent 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 MeteJs
Volatile Organic
Compounds
(VQGs)
Herbiektes
Poivchforinated
Creosotes
Radiation
{Radiionucjjcfes}
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Lead, Manga-
nese, Mercury, Nickel,
Silver, Selenium, Zinc
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
Perchloroethylene (PCE),
Acetone, Benzene,
Ketone, Methyl chloride,
Toluene, Vinyl Chloride,
Dichlorethylene
Chlordane, DDT 4-4, DDE,
Heptachlor, Aldrin, Endrin,
Atrazine, Dieldrin, Toxa-
phene
Polyaromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs), Polynuclear
aromatics (PNAs),
Phenolic Tars, Pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP)
Radium-226, Radon,
Uranium-235, Uranium-
238
Electroplating, batteries,
paint pigments, photogra-
phy, smelting, thermom-
eters, fluorescent lights,
solvent recovery
Solvents and degreasers,
gasoline octane enhanc-
ers, oils and paints, dry
cleaning fluids, chemical
manufacturing.
Agricultural applications,
pesticide and herbicide
production
Electric transformers and
capacitors, insulators and
coolants, adhesives,
caulking compounds,
carbonless copy paper,
hydraulic fluids.
Wood preserving, fossil
fuel combustion
Mine tailings, radium
products, natural decay of
granites
Tumors, cancers, and kidney,
brain, neurological, bone and
liver damage
Cancers, kidney and liver
damage, impairment of the
nervous system resulting in
sleepiness and headaches,
leukemia
Various effects ranging from
nausea to nervous disorders.
Dioxin is a common by-product
of the manufacture of pesti-
cides and is both highly toxic
and a suspected carcinogen.
Cancer and liver damage.
Cancers and skin ulcerations
with prolonged exposure
Cancer
Sources:
Toxic Chemicals—What They Are, How They Affect You (EPA, Region 5)
Glossary of Environmental Terms (EPA, 1988)
"The potential for risk due to these contaminants is linked to a number of factors; for example, the length and level of exposure
and environmental and health factors such as age.
* U.S. G.P.O.:1993-341-835:81014
G-15
------- |