vEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/038
December 1992
PB93-963240
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
SOUTH CAROLINA
1992 UPDATE
rinted on Recycled Paper
-------
Publication #9200.5-7406
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
South Carolina
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, DC 20460
-------
If you wish to purchase copies of any additional State volumes, contact:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 486-4650
The complete set of the 49 State reports may be ordered as PB93-963250.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
A Brief Overview of Superfund v
Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model ix
How Superfund Works x
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book xi
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
.XV
THE NPL REPORT
Progress to Date xix
THE NPL FACT SHEETS i
THE GLOSSARY
Terms used in the NPL Book G-l
-------
INTRODUCTION
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SUPERFUND
During the second half of the Twentieth
Century, the environmental conse-
quences of more than 100 years of industrial-
ization in the United States became increas-
ingly clear. Authors such as Rachel Carson
wrote passionately about the often-hidden en-
vironmental effects of our modern society's
widespread use of chemicals and other haz-
ardous materials. Their audience was small at
first, but gradually their message spread.
Growing concern turned to action, as people
learned more about the environment and be-
gan to act on their knowledge
The 1970s saw environmental issues burst
onto the national scene and take hold in the
national consciousness. The first Earth Day
was observed in 1970, the year that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was
founded. By the end of the 1970s, Love Canal
in New York and the Valley of the Drums in
Kentucky had entered the popular lexicon as
synonyms for pollution and environmental
degradation.
Superfund Is Established
The industrialization that gave Americans the
world's highest standard of living also created
problems that only a national program could
address. By 1980, the U.S. Congress had
passed numerous environmental laws, imple-
mented by the EPA, but many serious hazard-
ous waste problems were slipping through the
cracks.
Responding to growing concern about public
health and environmental threats from uncon-
trolled releases of hazardous materials, the
U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA). Popularly known as
Superfund, CERCLA had one seemingly
simple job—to uncover and clean up hazard-
ous materials spills and contaminated sites.
A Big Job
Few in Congress, the EPA, the environmen-
tal community, or the general public knew in
1980 just how big the nation's hazardous ma-
terials problem is. Almost everyone thought
that Superfund would be a short-lived pro-
gram requiring relatively few resources to
clean up at most a few hundred sites. They
were quite mistaken.
As the EPA set to work finding sites and
gauging their potential to harm people and
the environment, the number of sites grew.
Each discovery seemed to lead to another,
and today almost 36,000 hazardous waste
sites have been investigated as potential haz-
ardous waste sites. They are catalogued in
the EPA's computerized database, CERCLIS
(for the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
-------
INTRODUCTION
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Informa-
tion System).
The damage to public health and the environ-
ment that each site in CERCLIS might cause
is evaluated; many sites have been referred to
State and local governments for cleanup. The
EPA lists the nation's most serious hazardous
waste sites on the National Priorities List, or
NPL. (These Superfund sites are eligible for
federally-funded cleanup, but whenever pos-
sible the EPA makes polluters pay for the
contamination they helped create.) The NPL
now numbers 1,275 sites, with 50 to 100
added each year. By the end of the century,
the NPL may reach as many as 2,100 sites.
Superfund faces some of the most complex
pollution problems ever encountered by an
environmental program. Improperly stored or
disposed chemicals and the soil they contami-
nate are one concern. More difficult to correct
are the wetlands and bays, and the groundwa-
ter, lakes, and rivers often used for drinking
water that are contaminated by chemicals
spreading through the soil or mixing with
storm water runoff. Toxic vapors contaminate
the air at some sites, threatening the health of
people living and working near by.
Superfund aims to control immediate public
health and environmental threats by tackling
the worst problems at the worst sites first.
Wherever possible, Superfund officials use
innovative treatment techniques—many de-
veloped or refined by the EPA—to correct
hazardous materials problems once and for
all. Many of the treatment techniques they use
did not exist when the program was created.
The EPA Administrator had challenged Su-
perfund to complete construction necessary
for cleanup work at 130 NPL sites by the end
of the 1992 federal fiscal year. By September
30, 1992, the end of fiscal year 1992, con-
struction had been completed at a total of 149
NPL sites. Superfund is well on its way of
meeting the Administrator's goal of complet-
ing construction at 200 NPL sites by the end
of fiscal year 1993, and 650 sites by the end
of fiscal year 2000.
Quick Cleanup at
Non-NPL Sites
Long-standing hazardous waste sites are not
Superfund's only concern. The EPA also re-
sponds to hazardous spills and other emergen-
cies, hauling away chemicals for proper treat-
ment or disposal. Superfund teams perform or
supervise responses at rail and motor vehicle
accidents, fires, and other emergencies in-
volving hazardous substances. They also
evacuate people living and working near by,
if necessary, and provide clean drinking water
to people whose own water is contaminated.
Removal crews also post warning signs and
take other precautions to keep people and ani-
mals away from hazardous substances.
Superfund employee prepares equipment for 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
problem they helped create. This "enforce-
ment first" policy saves Superfund Trust Fund
monies for use in cleanups where the respon-
sible parties cannot be identified, or where
they are unable to fund cleanup work.
-------
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book
I he site fact sheets presented in this book
A are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
STATE
EPA ID# ABCOOOOOOO
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
Site Facts:
xxxxxxxxxxxx xx:
Environmental Progress
Site Repository
SITE REPOSITORY
Lists the location of the primary site repository. The site
repository may include community relations plans, public
meeting announcements and minutes, fact sheets, press
releases, and other site-related documents.
XII
-------
THE VOLUME
SITE DESCRIPTION
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes descrip-
tions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have con-
tributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
THREATS AND CONTAMINANTS
The major chemical categories of site contamination are noted, as well as
which environmental resources are affected. Icons representing each of the
affected resources (may include air, groundwater, surface water, soil, and
contamination to environmentally sensitive areas) are included in the margins
of this section. Potential threats to residents and the surrounding environ-
ments arising from the site contamination also are described.
CLEANUP APPROACH
This section contains a brief overview of how the site is being cleaned up.
RESPONSE ACTION STATUS
Specific actions that have been accomplished or will be undertaken to clean
up the site are described here. Cleanup activities at NPL sites are divided
into separate phases, depending on the complexity and required actions at the
site. Two major types of cleanup activities often are described: initial,
immediate, or emergency actions to quickly remove or reduce imminent
threats to the community and surrounding areas; and long-term remedial
phases directed at final cleanup at the site. Each stage of the cleanup strategy
is presented in this section of the summary. Icons representing the stage of
the cleanup process (initial actions, site investigations, EPA selection of the
cleanup remedy, engineering design phase, cleanup activities underway, and
completed cleanup) are located in the margin next to each activity descrip-
tion.
SITE FACTS
Additional information on activities and events at the site are included in this
section. Often details on legal or administrative actions taken by the EPA to
achieve site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with
the site cleanup process are reported here.
xiii
-------
THE VOLUME
The "icons," or symbols, accompanying the text allow the reader to see at a glance which envi-
ronmental resources are affected and the status of cleanup activities at the site.
Icons in the Threats
and Contaminants
Section
Contaminated 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
-------
* Major C*.s
• NPL&tas
Superfund
Activities in
South
Carolina
The State of South Carolina is located
within EPA Region 4, which includes the eight south-
eastern States. The State covers 31,113 square miles.
According to the 1990 Census, South Carolina experienced a
12 percent increase in population between 1980 and 1990, and is ranked twenty-fifth in U.S.
population with approximately 3,487,000 residents.
The Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1980 provides for a site priority list, enforce-
ment authority, and State funding from the Hazardous Waste Contingency Fund. In practice, the
State issues a notice to the polluter with deadlines for voluntary action and informs the EPA
simultaneously. The statute requires the State to exhaust polluter and Federal funds before using
its Hazardous Waste Contingency Fund. In addition to the 10 percent contribution from the State
required by the Federal Superfund program, State funding is used for emergency response and
removals, studies and design, long-term cleanup actions, and operation and maintenance activi-
ties. Currently, 23 sites in the State of South Carolina have been listed as final on the NPL. One
new site was proposed for listing in 1992.
The Department of Health and Environmental Control
implements the Superfund Program in the State of South Carolina
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
South Carolina include:
Recycling
Operations
Storage and
Federal Disposal
Facilities Facilities/
Landfills/Waste
Processing
Facilities
Wood
Production
and
Treatment
Facilities
Other
Manufacturing
Operations
Facts about the 24 NPL sites
in South Carolina:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at 16
sites.
Six sites endanger sensitive environ-
ments.
Nineteen sites are located near resi-
dential areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Sediments
Soil
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCs
PCBs
Pesticides/Herbicides
Creosotes
Other*
Radiation
83%
67%
21%
21%
17%
8%
4%
'Other contaminants include chloroform and
cyanide.
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of South Carolina, potentially
responsible parties are paying for or conducting
cleanup activities at 18 sites.
For Further Information on NPL Sites and
Hazardous Waste Programs in the State of South
Carolina Please Contact:
EPA Region 4 Public Affairs
Office
National Response Center
Department of Health and
Environmental Control:
Environmental Quality Control,
Bureau of Solid and Hazardous
Waste Management
EPA Region 4 Waste
Management Division
EPA Superfund Hotline
For information concerning
community involvement
To report a hazardous
waste emergency
For information about the State's
responsibility in the Superfund
Program
For information about the
Regional Superfund Program
For information about the
Federal Superfund program
(404) 347-3004
(800) 424-8802
(803) 734-5200
(404) 347-5065
(800) 424-9068
March 1992
XVIII
-------
THE NPL REPORT
PROGRESS TO DATE
The following Progress Report lists all
sites currently on, or deleted from, the
NPL and briefly summarizes the status of ac-
tivities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup
process are arrayed across the top of the chart,
and each site's progress through these steps is
represented by an arrow (£>) indicating the
current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are organized
into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to
address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and
surface water pollution, or to clean up differ-
ent areas of a large site. In such cases, the
chart portrays cleanup progress at the site's
most advanced stage, reflecting the status of
site activities rather than administrative ac-
complishments.
^> 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.
^> 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.
O A final arrow in the "Construction Com-
plete" category is used only when all
phases of the site cleanup plan have
been performed, and the EPA has deter-
mined that no additional construction
actions are required at the site. Some
sites in this category currently may be
undergoing long-term operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure
that the cleanup actions continue to pro-
tect human health and the environment.
/ A check in the "Deleted" category indi-
cates that the site cleanup has met all
human health and environmental goals
and that the EPA has deleted the site
from the NPL.
Further information on the activities and
progress at each site is given in the site "Fact
Sheets" published in this volume.
XIX
-------
•o
2
£
at
O
§5
O
a. o>
oo
>> _
JIB
p
D)
O
S. .5
o
O
0)
re
0)
(7)
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft ftftftftftftftftft ft
R Q R R ~
S S S B S
11111
pu E E E E
O
U O
oo H
March 1992
xx
-------
3
1
O
g,
CO
I
CO
O
£
3
O
CO
o
0)
*••
c/>
0)
CO
£
en
CO
Q.
3
CO
jO)
o
•E
CO
l I
3U
O.M
-Mil
uo
<".-•
co
I
"§.
.5
C
.
§
I
CO
CO
0>
p
XXI
March 1992
-------
RFAIJNIT PORP s~"~\ EPA REGION 4
DEIAUIMII ^^^^J^f-^~^r^\ Greenville County
(CIRCULAR "*^X^r'^ ^ Fountain Inn
AND DYEING PI
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD000447268
Site Description
The Beaunit Corporation (Circular Knit and Dyeing Plant) site is a 70-foot abandoned
unlined lagoon located in a commercial district of Fountain Inn. From 1952 to 1977, the site
was used to treat dye waste generated from the Circular Knit and Dyeing Plant. The old
textile facility currently is used for the manufacture of tennis balls. There is no present
discharge of wastewater to the lagoon, however, 6 feet of sludge discharged from the
previous facility are located on the bottom of the lagoon. Because a barrier was not placed
along the site's perimeter, the lagoon discharged into an unnamed stream that flows
northwest to join Howard Branch. Testing in 1985 by the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control found a variety of contaminants in the lagoon, the nearby
stream, soil, and sediment at the site. Approximately 1,000 people live within 3 miles of the
site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/16/90
Threats and Contaminants
[mi
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and heavy metals including chromium and lead
have been found in on-site sediments and soil. Volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) are contaminating the lagoon and the unnamed stream that flows
northwest to join Howard Branch. Because the soils in the area are permeable and
groundwater is shallow, contaminants could easily migrate into the groundwater.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An intensive investigation into the nature and extent of
contamination at the site is scheduled to begin in early 1992. This investigation is
expected to be completed in 1994, at which time the EPA will select an
appropriate remedy for cleanup of the site.
Site Facts: The EPA issued General and Special Notice Letters to the parties potentially
responsible for site contamination, requesting their participation in site cleanup activities. An
Administrative Order on Consent was signed by five potentially responsible parties on March
12, 1992 to perform a site study.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were needed at the Beaunit Corp. (Circular Knit and
Dyeing Plant) site while further studies and cleanup activities are taking place.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 2 BEAUNIT CORP. (CIRCULAR KNIT
AND DYEING PLANT)
-------
CAROLAWN, I
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPAID#SCD980558316
EPA REGION 4
Chester County
Fort Lawn
Site Description
The Carolawn, Inc. site is an abandoned 3-acre waste storage and disposal facility that was
owned by various companies until the Carolawn Company bought the site in 1977. Several
hundred drums of chemical wastes, including acids, bases, organic solvents, and contaminated
soil, were stored both outside and inside the fenced site. Some drums were damaged in a fire,
and others were corroded and leaking. Four 2,000-gallon tanks of solvents were located on
site. A lagoon was used for disposal of waste sludges. Carolawn constructed two incinerators;
however, they never were used to dispose of wastes. State inspections in 1979 revealed
improper storage of wastes and a lack of progress toward disposal of waste materials. The
company was not able to obtain a permit for incineration and went bankrupt in 1980. During
the same year, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
(SCDHEC) sampled three private wells and found them to be contaminated. Approximately
100 people live within a 1-mile radius of the site; 2,000 people live within 4 miles. Significant
amounts of contaminated runoff from the site have migrated into a tributary of the Catawba
River, which supplies drinking water to the town of Lugaff.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
The groundwater is contaminated with lead, chloroform, and various volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Stream sediments are contaminated with arsenic,
lead, and methylene chloride. The soil contains lead, and the surface water is
contaminated with chloroform. People who accidentally come into direct contact
with or ingest contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil, or sediments may be
at risk.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of the entire site and the former drum storage areas.
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1981 and 1982, the EPA removed contaminated sludge
and solid waste from the lagoon. The liquid wastes were recycled, and the solid
wastes were disposed of in a federally approved facility. In 1985, alternate
drinking water was provided by Carolawn to nearby homes. In 1986, the EPA extended the
municipal water lines to the affected residences, and the EPA removed approximately 1,000
drums, 220,000 gallons of liquid wastes, 5,000 gallons of contaminated water, and the tanks
stored outside the fence to a federally approved facility.
Entire Site: In 1989, the EPA chose a remedy to clean up the site which
included: (1) installing a groundwater extraction system; (2) removing pollutants
by various techniques including filtering the groundwater through an activated
carbon filter, contact with air to evaporate contaminants, or biological treating; (3)
monitoring the groundwater; and (4) further sampling of soil north of the fenced area. The
EPA is sampling the soil and is conducting studies on the type and extent of its
contamination. The potentially responsible parties have begun preparing the technical
specifications and design for cleaning up the groundwater. The cleanup will begin once the
design phase is completed in 1993.
Former Drum Storage Areas: The EPA conducted preliminary studies of the
former drum storage areas located to the west and north of the Carolawn site in
1990. These studies indicated the presence of organic chemicals and heavy metals.
An intensive investigation into the nature and extent of contamination at this area will begin
in 1992.
Site Facts: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination have signed an
Administrative Order, which specifies how design and construction activities will be
completed. In December 1991, a Consent Decree was entered by the court triggering the
Carolawn Steering Committee contractors to begin the cleanup designs and activities.
Environmental Progress
The removal of sludge and solid and liquid wastes has reduced the potential for exposure to
contaminated materials at the Carolawn, Inc. site. These actions and the extension of
municipal water lines have reduced risks to the public health and the environment, while
investigations, remedy designs, and further cleanup activities take place.
Site Repository
Lancaster County Public Library, 313 South White Street, Lancaster, SC 29720
March 1992 4 CAROLAWN, INC.
-------
Fl MORF WAQTF r~, EPA REGION 4
tLMUKt WA5>M^^^% spartanburg County
DISPOSAL ^ *^ v Greer
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980839542
Site Description
The Elmore Waste Disposal site is a grassy field covering approximately 1/2 acre in a
primarily residential area. Drums containing unknown liquid wastes were deposited there
between 1975 and 1977. In response to citizens' complaints of odors coming from the site, the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) inspected the
site and found numerous 55-gallon drums, some of which were leaking, and a 6,000-gallon
buried tank. In 1977, the owner of the Elmore site signed a Consent Order with the State of
South Carolina and conducted a partial cleanup of the site. After this action, 25 drums and
the bulk tank remained. In 1980, the owner was instructed to stop cleanup actions until
sampling was performed to verify the adequacy of earlier efforts. Investigations of site
conditions by SCDHEC in 1986 and 1987 confirmed that the soil, sediments, and surface
waters remain contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and chromium. Wards
Creek, a small tributary to the South Tyger River, flows about 700 feet to the north of the
site.
D —-~:u:i-* TU- v • u • AA A^ u NPL LISTING HISTORY
Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a Proposed Date: 06/24/88
combination of Federal and State Final Date- 03/31/89
actions.
Threats and Contaminants
On-site monitoring wells have detected contamination from heavy metals including
cadmium, lead, zinc, and barium and from various VOCs from former drum
storage activities. The soil also is contaminated with heavy metals. Monitoring
wells at the site have shown groundwater contamination since 1987. There is no
evidence to date that groundwater contamination has migrated into private wells.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The owner of the Elmore site attempted a partial cleanup in
1977 by surrounding some of the leaking drums with wood shavings, removing
some of the deteriorated drums, and excavating and drumming some of the
contaminated surface soil. The State completed this phase of the cleanup in 1986 by
removing approximately 5,500 tons of contaminated soil and debris and 16,800 pounds of
contaminated liquids to a hazardous waste facility. This action removed the source of
contamination and eliminated immediate threats to neighboring residents.
Entire Site: In early 1991, the EPA began field work to investigate the nature
and extent of contamination and to develop and select alternative cleanup
strategies for the remaining site contamination. Upon completion of the study,
scheduled for late 1992, the EPA will select a final remedy for site cleanup. After a 1991
groundwater investigation within a 1-mile radius of the Elmore site, it was concluded that
private wells were not contaminated
Site Facts: In 1977, the owner of Elmore Waste Disposal entered into a Consent Order
with the State to clean up and properly dispose of the waste. No viable responsible party has
been identified as yet.
Environmental Progress
The removal of soil and drums has greatly reduced the potential for people to be exposed to
hazardous substances at the Elmore Waste Disposal site while studies and cleanup activities
are taking place.
Site Repository
Greer Branch Library, 113 School Street, Greer, SC 29651
March 1992 6 ELMORE WASTE DISPOSAL
-------
GEIGER EPA REGION 4
^**~ •V^fc-Il xT^N I Vj1 ^ Charleston County
/^ fa |U| Qll \ C xH /sit I A W 1 mile northeast of Rantowles
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980711279 ^^^STW^T^ f United Pollution Control
Site Description
The Geiger (C & M Oil) site occupies about 5 acres. In 1969, Adams Run Services, Inc. was
permitted to incinerate waste oil at the site. In 1971, eight unlined lagoons were constructed
to hold the waste oil. In response to complaints from area residents, the South Carolina
Pollution Control Authority ordered all incineration and waste disposal activities at the site
stopped; also, the owner was required to take action to prevent spillage, leakage, or seepage
of oil from the site. In 1974, the Charleston County Health Department ordered the site
closed, citing evidence of recent oil dumping and overflowing. In 1982, the site was purchased
by the present owner who, in 1983, filled the lagoons with local soils, since his requests to
excavate and dispose of contaminated soil were denied. The site since has been used for the
storage of equipment by his company, Pile Drivers, Inc. Crops, pasture lands, and sand
borrow pits are scattered within 1 mile of the site. Approximately 40 people live within 1/4
mile of the site. The closest population center is the town of Rantowles, located a mile
northeast; the town of Hollywood is 4 miles west.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions. Final Date. 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
m
The groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals and various volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from former activities at the site. The sediments are
contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The soil and surface water
are contaminated with all contaminants listed above. Workers or residents may be
exposed to health hazards if direct contact is made with contaminated sediments,
soils, surface water, or groundwater from the shallow aquifer wells. Runoff from
the site flows through hardwood swamps and marshes.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of
groundwater and soil.
Response Action Status
Groundwater: A groundwater investigation was conducted at the site after initial
cleanup decisions were made. The work involved the inspection of existing
monitoring wells, installation of additional monitoring wells, and the installation of
off-site residential drinking water wells. The cleanup technology selected involves removing
and treating the contaminated groundwater, which then will flow to an off-site stream. Design
of technologies to be used for the cleanup is underway.
Soil: The cleanup process that the EPA will perform includes solidifying the soil
to ensure that the contaminants cannot leave the soil, followed by grading and
covering. Soil cleanup criteria for lead, chromium and various organics have been
established. The engineering design of the technologies to be used for the cleanup was
completed in November 1991.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Geiger (C&M Oil) site while
further design activities and cleanup actions are continuing.
Site Repository
Hollywood Town Hall, 6316 Highway 162, Hollywood, SC 29449
March 1992
GEIGER (C&M OIL)
-------
GOLDEN STRIP
SEPTIC TANK
SERVICE
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980799456
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Greenville County
Greenville
The Golden Strip Septic Tank Service site consists of five abandoned lagoons covering 3
acres on a farm. From 1960 to 1975, the company deposited septic tank discharge, plating
wastes, and other liquids from nearby industries into the lagoons. The lagoons were unlined
and had no structures to prevent rainfall runoff from leaving them. In 1978, three lagoons
that had dried up were filled with dirt, but two still contain liquids. Tests conducted by the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control and the EPA indicated
contamination of groundwater and sediments near Rice Spring, which is about 500 feet from
the lagoons, as well as heavy metals contamination in the lagoons. Approximately 1,600
people live within 3 miles of the site and use private wells for drinking water. Cows graze on
the site. The site is in the drainage basin of Gilder Creek, which is not used for recreational
activities.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/07/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains heavy metals including chromium, cadmium, lead, and zinc,
which have leached from the lagoons. The sediments, soil, and surface water also
are contaminated with heavy metals. People who use contaminated spring or well
water for drinking water supplies may be at risk. Contaminated fish from Gilder
Creek may pose a health risk to those who eat them. Children who trespass on the
fenced site and accidentally come into direct contact with or ingest contaminated
soil or groundwater may suffer health threats.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination completed a
study of the type and extent of groundwater and other contamination at the site in
1991. Subsequently, the EPA chose a remedy to clean up the site which included
the following: 1) excavation and treatment of approximately 28,000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and lagoon sludge by solidification/fixation, with backfill of treated material
into on-site excavations; 2) discharge of approximately 1 1/2 million gallons of surface water
impounded in on-site lagoons into local public water treatment systems; 3) long-term
monitoring of site groundwater; and 4) implementation of institutional controls and an
easement to prohibit future development of property. The design of the selected remedy is
scheduled to begin in mid-1992 and the actual cleanup is scheduled to begin in early 1993.
Site Facts: The potentially responsible parties have signed an Administrative Order with the
EPA to conduct a study of the type and extent of contamination.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were needed at the Golden Strip Septic Tank Service
site while studies leading to final cleanup actions are taking place.
Site Repository
Greenville Public Library, South Carolina Room, 300 College Street, Greenville, SC 29601
March 1992 10 GOLDEN STRIP SEPTIC TANK SERVICE
-------
HELENA CHEMICAL
COMPANY U
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD058753971
Site Description
From 1971 to 1978, the Helena Chemical Company formulated pesticides in Fairfax; previous
operations date from the early 1960s. The company disposed of pesticides and empty pesticide
containers in an unlined landfill. In 1985, the South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control detected contaminants in the on-site shallow monitoring wells.
Sediments also were found to be contaminated. The shallow aquifer is connected to the lower
aquifer, potentially permitting contaminated water to move into it. The lower aquifer provides
water to Fairfax municipal wells within 3 miles of the site. These wells serve approximately
2,200 people. The nearest municipal well is about 500 feet away from the site.
... _ ...... _ . v . , . .. . . , NPL LISTING HISTORY
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/16/90
Threats and Contaminants
m
Groundwater, soil, and sediments are contaminated with various pesticides from
the former disposal of pesticide wastes. People who come in direct contact with or
accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater or sediments may be at risk.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
11 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1984, under State supervision, the company removed some of
the waste, transported it to an approved hazardous waste facility, and covered the
site with clay.
Entire Site: Helena Chemical is studying the type and extent of contamination
from pesticide disposal activities on the site. Once the study is finished in 1992, the
EPA will select the most appropriate remedies and will begin cleanup activities
soon thereafter.
Site Facts: In 1981, the State and Helena Chemical signed a Consent Order, requiring the
company to study the contamination and then clean up the site. In 1984, another agreement
was signed to cover the landfill and monitor the groundwater for 30 years.
Environmental Progress
The initial actions to remove wastes and to cover the area have reduced risks to the public
health at the Helena Chemical Company Landfill site while further studies and cleanup
activities are taking place.
Site Repository
City Hall, Town of Fairfax, Highway 278 & Laurens Avenue, Fairfax, SC 29827
March 1992
12
HELENA CHEMICAL COMPANY LANDFILL
-------
EPA REGION 4
Beaufort County
M All COMPAW^^*"1 ^ ^"^ 3 miles northwest of Beaufort
SOUTH CAROLINA
,n,
EPA ID# SCD004773644 _
Site Description
The Independent Nail Company currently operates a paneling nail coating process on this
site. The previous owners of the site, the D. Blake and Johnson Co., manufactured metallic
screws and fasteners. As a part of the manufacturing process, the company discharged
approximately 33,000 to 75,000 gallons per day of plating wastewater containing heavy metals
into an unlined infiltration lagoon. The lagoon was in use from 1969 to 1980, when Blake and
Johnson ceased operations. That same year, the Independent Nail Company purchased the
plant. As part of the process of selling the property, Blake and Johnson installed monitoring
wells that showed some effect from the lagoon on the groundwater. Further studies by the
State also noted movement of contaminants to groundwater. The surrounding area is a
combination of fields, woodlands, and wetlands. Approximately 25 people live within 1/4 mile
of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
213
The sediments and soil were contaminated with cyanide and heavy metals including
chromium, zinc, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury from the former disposal
activities. The groundwater contains these same compounds. Coming into direct
contact with the contaminated sediments or soil was the primary means of
potential human exposure, however, site access was resticted by a fence in 1988.
13 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on groundwater assessment and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA fenced the area around the lagoon in 1988 to
restrict access to the wastes on site.
Groundwater: After a thorough field investigation conducted by the EPA, it was
concluded that there was no risk to human health or the environment from the
low level of contaminants in the groundwater. Thus, no action was required to
clean up the groundwater.
Entire Site: The EPA chose the following methods to clean up the site:
excavation of contaminated soils and lagoon sediments; solidification and
stabilization of excavated soils and sediments; placement of treated soils and
sediments back into the lagoon with 6 inches of topsoil, followed by covering and seeding.
The EPA completed these cleanup actions in 1988 and is working with the State to ensure
proper operation and maintenance at the site. With the completion of these actions, the EPA
is planning to delete the site from the NPL.
Environmental Progress
All activities have been completed at the Independent Nail Company site, and all surface
contamination has been cleaned up. Additionally, the EPA has determined that groundwater
resources do not pose a threat to the public and that no cleanup actions are required to
address low levels of contamination. Extensive evaluations of the completed remedies and site
sampling have determined that the Independent Nail Company site now is safe to nearby
residents and the environment, and the EPA has begun the process to delete the site from
the NPL.
Site Repository
Information is no longer available.
March 1992
14
INDEPENDENT NAIL COMPANY
-------
KALAMA ^crvn, EP£S™4
QPFCIALTY ^^J^*t—-iJ\ J*,X 5 miles northwest of Beaufort
CHEMICALS
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD094995503
Site Description
Two specialty chemical companies operated at the Kalama Specialty Chemicals site, which
covers 66 acres. From 1973 to 1977, the first firm, Vega Chemical, produced a wide range of
chemicals in small, special-order batches for manufacturers and larger chemical producers.
Kalama bought the property in 1977 to manufacture fosamine ammonium, an herbicide and
plant-growth regulator. The facility closed in 1979, after one of the reactors exploded. This
event caused large-scale spillage of various organic chemicals. Afterwards, the company
bought 50 acres which are part of the site, including a trailer park located just above its
northern boundary. The trailers were removed, but several abandoned, dilapidated houses
remain. In 1988, the EPA reported that a construction company operated on Kalama
property at the eastern edge of the site, but it made plans to relocate that same year. The
site once contained a wastewater lagoon that at one time overflowed into a tile drainage field
and a separate holding lagoon. This, as well as the explosion, are suspected of contaminating
shallow groundwater. Both impoundments have been decommissioned. The site is in the
recharge zone of an important source of groundwater. The site is adjacent to a Marine Corps
Air Station, a vacant trailer park, and a cement plant. The closest home is less than 100 yards
away, and a day care center lies less than 1/4 mile south of the site. Approximately 16,000
people live within a 4-mile radius of the property; 2,500 reside within a mile. Independent
Nail Company and Wamchem, Inc. are two other NPL sites located within 4 miles of this site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Final Date: 09/01/84
15 March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater, surface water, and soil contain lead and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including benzene and toluene. Trespassers on the site may be
exposed to harmful materials by coining in direct contact with contaminated soil,
surface water, or groundwater or accidentally ingesting any of the contaminated
materials. The property is fenced, but fencing has been torn as the result of
periodic vandalism. Signs of trespassing have been evident at the site. This site lies
in a coastal area, threatening wildlife and aquatic life.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1988, the parties potentially responsible for site contamination
began an intensive study of its pollution problems. This investigation, conducted
under EPA monitoring, will measure the type and extent of soil and water
pollution around the property. The study is scheduled for completion in mid-1992, at which
time the EPA will select the most appropriate remedies for cleanup of this site.
Site Facts: A Consent Order was signed in 1988 for the parties potentially responsible to
conduct site studies. These parties and the EPA currently are conducting discussions on
specific issues related to the site studies.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Kalama Specialty Chemicals site
while further studies leading to final cleanup activities are taking place.
Site Repository
Beaufort County Library, 710 Craven Street, Beaufort, SC 29902
16 March 1992
-------
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980310239
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Charleston County
Charleston
This 127-acre site is located in an industrial and residential area and is bordered on the west
by the Ashley River and on the north and south by industrial facilities. Koppers Co., Inc.
operated a milling, wood-preserving, and pole storage facility in the Charleston Heights
District of Charleston, South Carolina from 1925 to 1978. After wood-preserving operations
stopped in 1978, Southern Dredging Co. leased part of the site from Koppers. In 1984,
Southern Dredging dredged a canal from the Ashley River through a waste disposal area.
Dredged materials were placed in a bermed area near the canal. In 1988, the EPA detected
numerous creosote constituents in the soil from three sources: a pit where timbers were
soaked in wood preservative; the drip pad area where timbers were stored; and the bermed
area that received contaminated sediment from the canal dredging. Runoff from all three
sources enters the Ashley River. Approximately 94,000 people live within 4 miles of the site.
Wetlands adjacent to the site are a State wildlife sanctuary. The Ashley River and Charleston
Harbor support recreational and commercial fishing and serve as an important breeding and
nursery habitat for a variety of marine finfish and shellfish.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
Threats and Contaminants
ZGJ
Soil at the site is contaminated with numerous polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), a constituent of creosote. The sediments of the canal and the Ashley
River are contaminated with PAHs, and heavy metals such as chromium, copper,
and zinc.
17 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in one long-term remedial phase focused on cleanup of the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: the potentially responsible party, under EPA supervision, will initiate
an investigations into the nature and extent of contamination at the site. This
study, planned for late 1992, will help determine cleanup options for the site.
Environmental Progress
Initial investigation indicate the Koppers Co., Inc. (Charleston Plant) site does not pose an
immediate threat to the health and safety of the nearby population while further studies are
being conducted.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 18 KOPPERS CO., INC.
(CHARLESTON PLANT)
-------
KOPPERS CO
INC.
(FLORENCE
PLANT)
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD003353026
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Florence County
1/2 mile east of Florence
The 145-acre Koppers Company, Inc. site is an active wood-treating and preserving plant that
still generates hazardous wood preserving chemicals. The company currently uses three
preservatives in its operations: creosote, pentachlorophenol (PCP), and chromated copper
arsenate (CCA). State and Federal permits for wastewater discharges required the owner to
upgrade operating practices on several occasions, starting in 1971. The State required the
plant's liquid wastes to be sprayed over a field and allowed to evaporate. In addition, the
company pumped "penta-oil" wastes into four unlined lagoons, where it was released through
evaporation and seepage. In 1974, the operation violated the limits of its Federal discharge
permit, and the EPA ordered the owner to study and control runoff. The study recommended
closing the penta-oil lagoons, the creosote lagoon, and the spray field and replacing them with
three concrete-lined solar oxidation ponds. Liquid from the final pond would be sprayed over
land. The State approved the new system in 1977, and the EPA focused its concerns on
stormwater discharge only. In 1979, the plant's drinking water supply became contaminated
with naphthalene, and by the next year, nearby residents reported a creosote odor and foul
taste in their wells. The State ordered the company to study the groundwater problem. In
response, the company supplied public water to homes that were affected, and installed
recovery wells to retrieve and slow the movement of contaminants in the groundwater. The
recovered groundwater and process wastewater now are sent to the pre-treatment facility on
site and then discharged to the water treatment facility. The site is located adjacent to a
growing area of Rorence. Homes and apartments, hospitals, schools, and a day care center
are all located with a 1-mile radius, as are mobile homes, agricultural lands, an airport,
businesses, and light industries. Access to the site is unrestricted. The residential areas are 1/4
mile away from the site and contain gardens, livestock, and private wells. At least 1,200
people use the shallow aquifer for drinking water.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potential^ responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
19
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater, surface water, and soil are contaminated with polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), PCP, heavy metals including arsenic and mercury,
and oil and grease from wood-treatment activities. PAHs and other organic
chemicals were detected in off-site private wells in 1985. People may experience
adverse health effects through coming into direct contact with, inhaling, or
accidentally ingesting contaminated groundwater and soil. Contamination was
detected in some private wells downslope from the plant in 1985. The plant also is
located in an area where water may recharge directly to the Black
Creek/Middendorf Aquifer. This aquifer is the only source of potable water for the
city of Florence.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination
studied the groundwater problem, furnished an alternate water supply to affected
residents, and installed recovery wells and a treatment system around the
boundary of the site.
Entire Site: Under EPA monitoring, the owner of the site began a study of the
site's pollution problems in 1988. This study will define the nature and extent of
contamination. The study is scheduled for completion in 1992. Once the study is
completed, alternatives for site cleanup will be evaluated, and EPA will select the most
appropriate remedies for cleanup of this site. The site currently is being addressed under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Environmental Progress
The alternate water supply has eliminated the potential for exposure to hazardous materials
from the Koppers Company, Inc. (Florence Plant) site through the groundwater. Further
studies and cleanup activities are being completed to address contaminated waters and soils.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 20 KOPPERS COMPANY, INC. (FLORENCE PLANT)
-------
LEONARD
CHEMICAL
COMPANY, IN
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD991279324
EPA REGION 4
York County
9 miles southeast of Rock Hill
Other Names:
Leonard Chemical
Site Description
The 7-acre Leonard Chemical Company site began operating in the late 1960s as a hazardous
waste treatment facility. Its primary treatment method was distillation. Recovery residues
were placed in various locations on the site. Plant operations ceased in 1982, under orders of
the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. Approximately 3,400
drums and 11,500 gallons of various chemicals were left on the site. Materials included
solvents, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), printing inks, polyester solids, stillbottoms, and
filters for paint, water, and fiberglass. Numerous spills and leaks occurred, threatening
groundwater, and the State ordered the owner to install three monitoring wells. By 1988, the
site was overgrown with scrub and covered with abandoned equipment and machines.
Numerous sludges lay on the ground, and vegetation was spotty where chemical wastes and
stillbottoms had been used as fill. The gate and fence had been breached, and signs of
trespassing were evident. Approximately 5,900 people live within a 4-mile radius of the site;
240 people live within a mile.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater and soil are contaminated with heavy metals including
barium, lead, and manganese, as well as various VOCs from the former disposal
activities. Individuals could be harmed if they use contaminated water for drinking,
bathing, cooking, or irrigation or if they accidentally ingest contaminated soils.
21
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, a group of generators responsible for the chemical
wastes found on the site formed a committee and retained a contractor to remove
wastes from the site. Workers removed drums and some of the contaminated soil
that same year.
Entire Site: Under State supervision, the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination are undertaking an intensive study, which will explore the nature
and extent of pollution problems at the site. In 1991, initial investigation activities
included monitoring well installations, subsurface soil sampling, stream and sediment sampling,
and monitoring well sampling. Additional field work will be conducted to provide data to
document the presence and extent of groundwater contamination both on and off site.
Finally, monitoring wells will be installed on properties east and south of the site for soil gas
sampling purposes, site locations will be established for potential soil gas monitoring stations,
and a soil gas survey will be performed. The study is scheduled for completion in 1993, at
which time the EPA will select the most appropriate remedies for cleanup of the site.
Site Facts: Under a 1983 court order, Leonard Chemical Company cannot resume operation
without prior approval of the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control. The parties potentially responsible for site contamination will sign an Administrative
Order on Consent to conduct a study to determine the nature and extent of contamination
and to identify alternatives for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated drums and soils has reduced the potential for exposure to
hazardous substances while investigations and cleanup activities take place at the Leonard
Chemical Company site.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 22 LEONARD CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC.
-------
LEXINGTON COUN^^ EPAREQJON4
LANDFILL ARBP£ctir^
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980558043
Site Description
The Lexington County Landfill Area site is a 75-acre sand pit that was licensed as a county
landfill in 1971. Before 1980, local industries were allowed to dispose of their wastes, which
included asbestos, at the site. Two other dumps lie next to this site: the Cayce Dump,
operational in the 1960s, and the unlicensed Bray Park Dump, used prior to 1972. Between
1975 and 1990, groundwater monitoring results were gathered by the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), the EPA, and Lexington
County. Additional data continues to be collected by SCDHEC and Lexington County. In
1987, the EPA found heavy metals and pesticides in on-site monitoring wells. Approximately
6,200 people get their drinking water from public and private wells within a 3-mile radius of
the site. The contaminated shallow aquifer is hydraulically connected to deeper aquifers
providing a potential pathway for the spread of contamination. About 250 acres of farmland
are irrigated by a well within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
Final Date: 10/04/89
In 1987, the EPA found heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, mercury,
selenium, as well as pesticides from former disposal practices in on-site monitoring
wells. Drinking contaminated groundwater is a possible health threat, as is eating
foods that are irrigated by potentially contaminated waters.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
23 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination are
planning to undertake an intensive study of its problems. This investigation, which
is scheduled to begin in 1992, will explore the nature and extent of groundwater
contamination and will recommend the best strategies for final cleanup. Local authorities
currently are monitoring the groundwater.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Lexington County Landfill Area
site while studies and cleanup activities are continuing.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
24
LEXINGTON COUNTY
LANDFILL AREA
-------
MEDLEY FAR
DRUM DUMP
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980558142
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Cherokee County
6 miles south of Gaffney
The 7-acre Medley Farm Drum Dump site was used as a chemical depository from 1973 to 1978.
An anonymous caller informed the State of potential contamination at the site in 1983. When the
State visited the site, approximately 5,300 55-gallon drums and 15-gallon pails in various
conditions and six unlined lagoons were found. At the State's request, the EPA investigated and
found that all the drums were rusted, and some had leaked or were leaking. EPA analyses
indicated that the drums contained numerous flammable organic liquids and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs). The lagoons held 70,000 gallons of contaminated rainwater and tons of
sludges. Approximately 3,300 people reside within a 4-mile radius of the site. Approximately 300
people live within a mile, and 120 people obtain drinking water from private wells within 3 miles
of the site. Thickety Creek, a tributary of Jones Creek, is about 300 feet downgradient of the
site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/01/86
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from
former site operations. The surface soil also is contaminated with VOCs as well as
pesticides. Potential risks may exist for individuals who drink contaminated
groundwater. Direct contact with contaminated surface soil and accidental ingestion of
soil may pose risks to individuals; however, since the majority of contaminated soil
has been removed, the threat of exposure has been reduced.
25
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the EPA removed 2,100 cubic yards of contaminated
soil and refuse, 5,300 55-gallon drums and 15-gallon pails of waste, and 70,000
gallons of water and sludges from the six lagoons were transported to a federally
regulated hazardous waste facility. The liquids in the lagoons were treated on site and discharged.
The lagoons then were filled with clean soils.
Entire Site: In 1991, the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination
completed a study on the contamination at the site and in the local groundwater. The
study included recommendations for alternative technologies available for the
cleanup. The EPA selected the cleanup remedy in mid-1991, which includes pumping
groundwater and treating it using air stripping to remove VOCs, and soil vapor extraction to
remove VOCs from the soil. Additionally, the remedy calls for continuous monitoring of the site
groundwater conditions. The design of the remedy began in late 1991 and is expected to be
completed mid-1993.
Site Facts: An Administrative Order on Consent, signed in 1988, outlined the conditions under
which the potentially responsible parties were to conduct a study to determine the type and extent
of contamination on and off site. In late 1991, the EPA and the potentially responsible parties
signed a Consent Decree, in which the parties agreed to design, construct, and implement the
remedy selected by the EPA.
Environmental Progress
The removal of soil and sludge and the treatment of liquid waste in 1983 greatly reduced the
potential for people to be exposed to hazardous substances at the Medley Farm Drum Dump site
while cleanup design activities are underway to address the final cleanup of the site.
Site Repository
Cherokee County Public Library, 300 East Rutledge Street, Gaffney, SC 29340
March 1992 26 MEDLEY FARM DRUM DUMP
-------
PALMETTO ^HXcaVTv EPA REGION 4
l-AALIVIt I I W X\>O"tKk>^ Richland County
RECYCLING M/^^^XTT^Xmiles north of Columbia
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID#SCD037398120
Site Description
The 2-acre Palmetto Recycling, Inc. site reclaimed lead, primarily from lead acid batteries, from
1979 to 1982. In 1981, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
(SCDHEC) denied applications by Palmetto Recycling for permits to operate a hazardous waste
facility and to transport hazardous wastes. SCDHEC determined that wastes remaining at the site
included 1,800 gallons of acid wastes in an unlined S-foot deep pit, 100 drums of liquid caustic
wastes, and an unstabilized 260-cubic-foot pile of battery casing scraps. Approximately 4,200
people draw drinking water from an aquifer within 3 miles of the site. Approximately 200 people
live within a 1-mile radius of the site; the closest residence is 100 yards away. The site is
surrounded by numerous lakes, streams, and rivers. The nearest surface water, the North Branch
of Crane Creek, is about 100 yards east of the site and eventually flows into the Broad River.
The creek is used for recreation.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/07/87
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
Heavy metals including lead, cadmium, chromium, and barium have contaminated the
soil surrounding the pit and the disposal areas. Direct contact with the contaminated
soil posed a potential threat to the public. The contaminants may have entered the
food chain through plants and animals that may have bioaccumulated toxic levels of
heavy metal contamination. Nearby streams also may be at risk from the migration of
site contaminants.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
27 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Between 1984 and 1985, the trustee of the property removed
10,800 gallons of contaminated water from the pit and 365 tons of contaminated soil.
Entire Site: The EPA plans to investigate the site in 1992 to determine the impact of
the contamination on and off the site and to determine whether contaminants have
migrated from the site. The investigation will recommend the best remedies to clean
up the site.
Site Facts: In 1983, a U.S. bankruptcy judge issued a court order requiring the trustee of the
property to clean up waste and contaminated soil. The judge authorized cleanup of non-hazardous
waste in 1984 and hazardous waste in 1985. Cleanup activities were completed by 1986.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal of wastes has eliminated the surface contamination and has greatly
reduced the potential for people to be exposed to hazardous materials at the Palmetto Recycling,
Inc. site while further studies are taking place. All direct contact threats from contaminated soils
have been removed.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
28
PALMETTO RECYCLING, INC.
-------
PALMETTO WQOffPK^ EPLtRST
miles northwest of Columbia
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD003362217
Site Description
The 5-acre Palmetto Wood Preserving (PWP) site is a decommissioned wood preserving
facility that operated between 1963 and 1985. In 1963, PWP used two processes for its
operation: fluoride-chromate-arsenate-phenol and an acid-copper-chromate process. In 1980,
Eastern Forest Products took over the facility and switched to a chromated copper arsenate
(CCA) process. Operations consisted of treating wood with a CCA solution under high
pressure and allowing the wood to dry under normal conditions. The plant consisted of a
pressure vessel, a narrow-gauge rail line, solution storage tanks, a drip shed, and storage and
office buildings. All equipment was moved from the site in 1985. The rural area that
surrounds the site has a population of approximately 2,000. The shallow aquifer, which
supplies drinking water to 2,000 people, is contaminated. The State determined that high
levels of chromium have contaminated nearby private wells.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through NPL LISTING HISTORY
Federal and municipal actions.
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic. On site soil
was also contaminated with heavy metals. Off-site soil was contaminated with
chromium and pentachlorophenol (PCP) from former process wastes. The State
detected high levels of chromium in private wells near the site. People who come
in direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated water or soils may be at
risk.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of the soil and the groundwater.
29 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1985, the EPA provided a temporary alternative
drinking water supply to a residence until a permanent water supply could be
provided to the property. In 1990, a municipal water line to the residence was
installed. Also in 1990, a fence was installed around the site.
Soil: Soil cleanup began in 1988. Approximately 12,700 cubic yards of
contaminated soil were excavated, treated, solidified, and stored to eliminate off-
site contaminant migration. The soil cleanup was completed in 1989. In 1990, a
sewer line was constructed connecting the city of Cayce's sewage to the city's waste water
treatment plant. Construction of the sewer line was completed in 1992.
Groundwater: In 1989, the EPA began developing the designs for a full-scale
treatment plant to address the contaminated groundwater at the site. To date, 30
percent of the groundwater engineering design has been completed. However,
field investigations discovered that the groundwater contaminant plume has migrated over
1,000 feet from the site property. The groundwater extraction system was therefore
redesigned resulting in a larger treatment plant. An early 1992 on-site pilot test of the
treatment plants was successful. Based on current data, construction of the groundwater
extraction system and the groundwater treatment system should be completed in late 1992.
Site Facts: The EPA and the City of Cayce entered into a Cooperative Agreement in 1990
to construct the sewer line.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply has eliminated the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials from the Palmetto Wood Preserving site through the groundwater. The
cleanup of contaminated soils has been completed and further cleanup design activities
continue to address contamination in the groundwater.
Site Repository
Lexington County Administration Building, 212 South Lake Drive, Lexington, SC 29072
March 1992 30 PALMETTO WOOD PRESERVING
-------
PARA-CHEM
SOUTHERN, I
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD002601656
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Greenville County
Near Simpsonville
Para-Chem Southern, Inc., has manufactured organic solvents and adhesives on this 100-acre
site near Simpsonville since 1965. From 1975 to 1979, approximately 800 to 1,600 drums of
organic and inorganic wastes were buried in unlined trenches in three parts of the site.
Wastewater from the plant was processed in two unlined lagoons until 1984, when the South
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) issued Para-Chem a
permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for the
discharge of non-contact cooling wash to a tributary of Big Durban Creek. In 1985, SCDHEC
found significant contamination in on-site groundwater and surface water, issued a Consent
Order, and fined Para-Chem. Under the Order, in 1987, Para-Chem excavated soil from the
drum burial areas and filled in one of the two lagoons; the second lagoon is no longer in use.
The contaminated soil was moved to an approved hazardous waste facility. During the
excavation and fill activities, groundwater contamination was detected. The area is rural and
sparsely populated. An estimated 1,500 people obtain drinking water from private wells within
three miles of the site. The nearest well is within one mile.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/26/89
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
m
Groundwater and soil are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Sediments and surface water contain heavy metals such as arsenic, barium, and
zinc. People who come in direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated
groundwater, soil, surface water, or sediments may be at risk.
31
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1987, Para-Chem completed excavating approximately 2,921
tons of drums, plastic containers, wastes, associated soils, and miscellaneous debris
from the drum burial areas and filled in one of the two on-site lagoons. The
contaminated soil was removed to an approved hazardous waste facility. Para-Chem has
installed a groundwater pump and treat system utilizing 14 recovery wells as an interim
measure to address the groundwater contamination.
Entire Site: In 1991, Para-Chem is expected to conduct an investigation into the
extent and nature of contamination at the site and identify cleanup alternatives.
Once the study is completed, the EPA will select a cleanup approach.
Site Facts: The SCDHEC placed the company under a joint wastewater/hazardous waste
Consent Order in February 1985, and in January 1986 fined the company for violating its
NPDES permit. The Order also addressed the buried drums and a 1985 spill of 3,500 gallons
of ethyl acrylate. Since 1986, the company has been fined twice for failure to meet its
NPDES permit.
Environmental Progress
The removal of drums and other contaminated debris from the Para-Chem Southern, Inc. site
has reduced the threat of exposure to contaminants while investigations are being planned
leading to the selection of a final cleanup remedy.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 32 PARA-CHEM SOUTHERN, INC.
-------
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Greenville County
P R O P E RTY V^5N-O^r'"Oj^ -' >7\3 miles from the town of Travelers
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980840698
The Rochester Property site is composed of 15 acres in a rural area. Colonial Heights
Packaging, Inc. disposed of wastes, possibly consisting of wood glue and print binder residues,
at this site in 1971 and 1972. Initially, the wastes were trucked to the site in metal drums,
which later were placed in four trenches. Three of the trenches were unlined; however, a
plastic sheath may have been present in at least one. In 1982, the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) discovered the site when one
of its employees noticed that waste was oozing from the ground during a routine septic tank
investigation on an adjacent property. SCDHEC did not license the site to receive hazardous
waste. The State's investigation report estimates that the total amount of waste present on
site is about 175 cubic yards. The site is fenced and is located approximately 200 feet
upgradient from a small stream. Approximately 1,000 people live within 3 miles of the site,
and about 12,500 people live within a 4-mile radius of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through NPL USTING HISTORY
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Proposed Date: 06/01/86
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
On-site sediments and soil in and around the four trenches are contaminated by
various heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from former disposal
activities. Site contaminants have possibly leached into the groundwater that is
located about 10 feet below the ground. If contamination exists in the aquifer,
residents could be exposed to the contaminants through direct contact with
contaminated soils or sediments or by drinking groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
33 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1990, the potentially responsible parties removed
approximately 1,610 tons of materials from the contaminated trenches and the
area surrounding the trench, excavating to just above the groundwater. Drums in
various stages of decomposition were discovered during the excavation and were moved to an
off-site area. The trenches were backfilled with clean soil.
Entire Site: In 1992, the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination
will begin field work to determine the nature and extent of contamination and to
develop cleanup strategies for the remaining contaminants. Upon completion of
the study, the EPA will select a final remedy for site cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal of contaminated soil and drums has reduced the potential for people
to be exposed to hazardous materials at the Rochester Property site while investigations into
a permanent cleanup remedy continue.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
34
ROCHESTER PROPERTY
-------
HII I ^-r*rrr^s EPA REGION 4
HILL H3S:-SV York County
CHEMICAL RockHi"
COMPANY
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980844005
Site Description
The Rock Hill Chemical Company operated a solvent distillation facility in the 1960s on this
4 1/2-acre site located in a light commercial and residential area. The company distilled paint
solvents and may have recovered textile dye products. Some of the residue from the bottoms
of the storage tanks and drums was placed in piles on the ground and was later covered with
dirt and construction debris. The facility was abandoned after it burned in 1965. In 1985, the
EPA discovered several aboveground tanks, an underground tank, a sludge pile, and an area
of discolored soil. An unnamed tributary to the Catawba River drains the site. Approximately
1,100 people obtain drinking water from wells within 3 miles of the site. The South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control advised a nearby business to stop using its
well. Fort Mills draws drinking water for an estimated 5,500 people from an intake into the
Catawba River, approximately 2 miles downstream of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions. Final Date: 02/16/90
Threats and Contaminants
An on-site well and possibly a nearby trailer park well are contaminated with
various volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from former disposal practices. Wastes
and soil samples were contaminated with lead, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
chromium, and VOCs. A possible health threat may occur if people drink
contaminated water from the unnamed tributary to the Catawba River or from the
contaminated on-site well.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
35 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1986, First Federal Savings and Loan, one of two
present owners of the site, transported approximately 41 cubic yards of paint
sludges and stillbottoms to a federally regulated hazardous waste facility. Disposal
of tank sludges and visibly contaminated soil, as well as the removal of the tanks from the
Rutledge portion of the site, were completed in 1989.
Entire Site: The EPA is about to begin field work to investigate the nature and
extent of contamination and to develop and select alternative cleanup strategies
for the remaining site contamination. Upon completion of the study the EPA will
select a final remedy for site cleanup.
Site Facts: In 1987, under an EPA Administrative Order, Rutledge Enterprises discharged
approximately 2,000 gallons of wastewater contaminated with solvents, in limited amounts
every day, into the city sewer system for treatment in the municipal sewage treatment plant.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal and disposal of waste have reduced the potential for people to be
exposed to hazardous materials at the Rock Hill Chemical Company. These actions help to
protect the public health and the environment while further investigations are taking place.
All direct contact threats from contaminated soils have been eliminated.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
36
ROCK HILL CHEMICAL COMPANY
-------
SANGAMO
WESTON, INC:
TWELVE-MILE
CREEK/LAKE
HARTWELL PCB
CONTAMINATION
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD003354412
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Pickens County
Pickens
.Other Names:
aygood Reservoir
Cross Roads Church
gamo Weston-Pickens Plant
Breazeale Property
Nix Site
This 224-acre site encompasses the Sangamo Weston plant itself, at least six former dumps
used by the company, and the Twelve-Mile Creek watershed, which includes Lake Hartwell.
Sangamo Weston, Inc. manufactured electric capacitors that, from 1955 to 1976, used
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) for a non-conducting fluid. Solid waste, sludges, and liquid
wastes were stored or disposed of in piles, landfills, and impoundments. The EPA is
continuing to search for any additional sources of contamination, and may expand the site if
contamination is found to extend further than site boundaries. PCBs have been found in the
runoff leaving the plant, downstream tributaries of Twelve-Mile Creek, Lake Hartwell, and
the distribution system of the Easley-Central Water plan, which provides drinking water to
14,500 people. A Clemson University intake in the Twelve-Mile Creek arm of Lake Hartwell
serves approximately 16,000 students and employees. Swimming in the Six-Mile and the
Twelve-Mile Creeks has been banned. A fish advisory for Lake Hartwell remains in effect,
and the State may extend the advisory to the nearby Tugaloo River.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 02/16/90
37
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater and soil are contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and PCBs from the former site activities. Private wells are in use within
the area of contamination. PCB levels detected in the fish of Lake Hartwell and
the tributary system vary with each sampling but tend to be well above an
acceptable limit. People may be harmed if they fail to heed warning signs and
come in direct contact with or ingest contaminated fish, soil, or water.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on the Twelve-Mile Creek watershed and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The State and the Federal government periodically have sampled
the area. Sangamo removed some soil at two disposal sites in 1975 and placed the
soil in a landfill on the plant property. In 1986, Sangamo placed a fence around
the site and installed a temporary cap on contaminated portions of the site.
Twelve-Mile Creek Watershed: The EPA will investigate the nature and extent
of contamination in the Twelve-Mile Creek watershed, including portions of Lake
Hartwell, and will take into account the data derived from fish studies performed
by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. Revised work plans
have been received and field work for the investigation is scheduled to begin in 1991.
Sediment and biological investigations of Twelve-Mile Creek watershed are on-going. Phase
II of sediment investigations and continuing biological investigations are scheduled for 1992.
Entire Site: In 1987, Sangamo conducted soil and groundwater investigations on
and around the site properties. Based on these investigations, a remedy was
selected for cleanup of the site in 1990. Soil will be treated using a low
temperature thermal separation method. Groundwater will be extracted and treated.
Engineering designs are scheduled to begin in 1992.
Site Facts: In 1986, the EPA negotiated a Consent Order with Sangamo-Weston to study
the contamination at one of the dumps. Under an additional Consent Order signed in 1987,
Sangamo-Weston will study six dumps and the Pickens Plant.
March 1992 38 SANGAMO WESTON, INC.yTWELVE-MILE CREEK/
LAKE HARTWELL PCB CONTAMINATION
-------
Environmental Progress
The soil removal, capping, and site security measures have reduced the potential for people
to be exposed to hazardous substances at the Sangamo/Twelve-Mile Creek/Lake Hartwell site
while further studies are taking place and cleanup activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Pickins County Public Library, Easley Branch, 110 West First Avenue, Easley, SC 29640
SANGAMO WESTON, INC./TWELVE-MILE CREEK/
LAKE HARTWELL PCB CONTAMINATION
39
March 1992
-------
SAVANNAH R
SITE (USDO
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SC1890008989
EPA REGION 4
Aiken County
Aiken
Other Names:
USDOE Savannah River Plant
Savannah River Plant
Site Description
Since 1953, the Savannah River Site (USDOE) has produced nuclear materials for national
defense on a 198,737-acre site. Tritium is currently the primary product of the Savannah
River Site. First operated by the Atomic Energy Commission, it is now operated by the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE). The Savannah River Site operations include five reactors, two
chemical separation areas, a target and fuel fabrication facility, a defense waste processing
facility, and various support facilities. The operations at the site generate a variety of
radioactive, chemical, and mixed wastes, some of which have been released into the
environment. Past and present disposal practices include seepage basins for liquids, pits, and
piles for solid wastes and landfills for low-level radioactive wastes. In 1987, the DOE reported
that shallow groundwater on various parts of the site had been contaminated. One of these
areas, the A-Area Burning/Rubble Pit, received degreasers and solvents from 1953 through
1973. Another area that received drums of waste solvents has contaminated the soil. A small
quantity of depleted uranium was released in 1984 into Upper Three Runs Creek. The creek
and all other surface water from the plant flow into the Savannah River. The area around
the Savannah River is heavily wooded and ranges from dry hilltops to swampland. The 3,200
residents of Jackson receive drinking water from wells within 3 miles of hazardous substances
at the site. The 17,000 employees at the facility also use these wells.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
40
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
ZJAJ
The groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from degreasing
solvents; heavy metals including lead, chromium, mercury, and cadmium; and
radionuclides including tritium, uranium, fission products, and plutonium. The soil
is contaminated with VOCs including trichloroethylene (TCE). Heavy metals,
organics, and radionuclides have been detected in the air at the site. The health
of people could be threatened if they drink or come in direct contact with
contaminated well water at the Savannah River Site. The Upper Three Runs
Creek and all other surface water from the site flows into the Savannah River,
which is a major navigable river that forms the southern border between South
Carolina and Georgia. Along this bank of the river is a 10,000-acre wetland known
as the Savannah River Swamp, an environmentally sensitive area. The swamp is
contaminated with chromium, mercury, radium, thorium, and uranium.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in numerous long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of 64
discrete areas of the site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Cleanup of groundwater contamination with VOCs was initiated
in 1985. Source control measures have been performed at a number of old
disposal areas at the Savannah River Site. DOE has constructed the Defense
Waste Processing Facility which will be used to treat high-level radioactive wastes currently
stored in tanks onsite. Nine hazardous waste land disposal units have been closed under the
Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) program.
M-Area: In 1989, the DOE began studies into the nature and extent of
contamination at M-Area. These studies will focus on the shallow and deep
groundwater and a settling basin at the site. Studies are expected to be completed
by 1992. Cleanup actions are expected to be separated into three phases.
Metallurgic Laboratory: The DOE began an investigation into the nature and
extent of contamination at the metallurgic laboratory in late 1989. This study is
expected to be completed in mid-1992, at which time remedies for cleanup of the
laboratory will be evaluated.
SAVANNAH RIVER SITE (USDOE) 41 March 1992
-------
Gunsites: In early 1990, the DOE began studies of the contamination at
gunsites 720 and 113. These studies are expected to be completed in late 1992, at
which time remedies for cleanup of the gunsites will be evaluated.
Central Shops: In 1991, the DOE began investigations into the nature and
extent of contamination at the Central Shops. These studies also are evaluating
sludge in this area. The investigations are expected to be completed in early 1995.
Old TNX Seepage Basin: The DOE began to study the nature and extent of
contamination at the old TNX seepage basin in late 1991. This study is expected
to be completed in mid-1995, at which time remedies for cleanup will be assessed.
PAR Pond: In mid-1991, the DOE began studies of the nature and extent of
contamination of the PAR pond sludge area. Remedies for cleanup will be
evaluated upon completion of this study, slated for early 1995.
Inactive Ponds: The DOE began an extensive investigation of the nature and
extent of contamination of the F- and H-Area inactive ponds in early 1992.
Upon completion of this study, slated for late 1995, remedies for cleanup of these
D-Area: The DOE began an investigation of the contamination of the D-Area
ash basin in mid-1991. This study is expected to be completed in early 1995, at
which time remedies for cleanup will be assessed.
F-Area: In mid-1990, the DOE began investigations into the nature and extent.
of contamination in the F-Area. These studies are evaluating both the seepage
basin and the groundwater in this area and are expected to be completed in late
H-Area: In mid-1990, the DOE began investigations of the contamination at the
H-Area. These studies are evaluating impacts at both the seepage basin and the
groundwater in this area and is expected to be completed in early 1993.
G-Area: The DOE began an investigation into the nature and extent of oil
seepage at the G-Area in mid-1991. This study is expected to be completed in
late 1995, at which time remedies for cleanup of the G-Area will be evaluated.
K-Area: The DOE began an extensive study of the contamination of the K-Area
sludge pond in mid-1991. This study is expected to be completed in early 1995, at
which time remedies for cleanup of the sludge pond will be reviewed.
L-Area: The DOE began an investigation into the nature and extent of the
contamination of the I^Area rubble pit 13 in mid-1991. This study is expected to
be completed in late 1994, at which time remedies for cleanup will be assessed.
March 1992 42 SAVANNAH RIVER SITE (USDOE)
-------
Rubble Piles: The DOE began investigations into the nature and extent of
contamination of the A-Area rubble pile 7 and the K-Area rubble pile 6 in mid-
1991. These studies are expected to be completed in 1995, at which time
remedies for cleanup will be assessed.
Other Areas: Studies are planned to begin in 1992 in 50 other site areas where
contaminants have been identified. The focus of these investigations will be
described in future editions.
Site Facts: In 1989, the DOE and the EPA signed a Federal Facilities Agreement, which
will govern the site studies and cleanup activities. In March 1991, the EPA and the DOE
entered into a RCRA Federal Facility Compliance Agreement. In addition to the Federal
Facilities Agreements, site studies and cleanup activities will be overseen by the EPA through
the settlement agreements and the RCRA permit.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA and the DOE performed preliminary
investigations and have performed several initial actions at the Savannah River Site
(USDOE) to reduce site threats while investigations leading to final cleanup activities are
taking place.
Site Repository
Thomas Cooper Library, Government Documents Department, University of South Carolina,
Columbia, SC 29208
SAVANNAH RIVER SITE (USDOE)
43
March 1992
-------
SCRDI BLUFF
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD000622787
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Richland County
10 miles from Columbia
The South Carolina Recycling and Disposal, Inc. (SCRDI) Bluff Road site covers 4 acres, 2
of which were used for waste storage. Approximately 7,500 drums of toxic, flammable, and
reactive wastes were removed in 1982 by a group of hazardous waste generators; numerous
smaller containers also were removed. Two small ponds at the northern end of the site are
remnants of lime slurry disposal ponds used by the acetylene manufacturer that once
occupied the property. Surface water and sediment may run into a tributary of Myers Creek,
which discharges into the Congaree Swamp National Monument. The site is in a rural and
remote area. The nearest residence is 1 mile away, with approximately 3,500 people living
within 4 miles of the site. Recreational facilities, which include a community center with a
swimming pool, are a mile east of the site. Approximately 1,200 people work at the
Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Facility less than 1/8 mile away.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The site contamination is limited to on-site soil and groundwater in a shallow
aquifer. Soils contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and low levels of
pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and heavy metals. Groundwater in
the surficial aquifer also is contaminated with VOCs. There have been no signs of
contaminant migration to Myers Creek, located 3,200 feet from the contaminated
aquifer. Ingestion of the contaminated groundwater poses a threat to human
health, though contact with the soil presents no serious health risks.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
44
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1982, the parties potentially responsible for the site
contamination removed about 7,500 drums containing a wide variety of toxic,
flammable, and reactive wastes.
Entire Site: The State initiated a study on the extent and nature of
contamination at the site in 1984. This study, however, was not completed. A new
study was conducted by the potentially responsible parties, and a method for
cleaning up the site was selected by the EPA in 1990. Treatment of the contaminated
groundwater includes extracting, air stripping, and reinjecting the groundwater until cleanup
goals are met. Vapor extraction will be used to treat the contaminated soil. The engineering
design of the selected remedy was scheduled to begin in 1991, with actual cleanup expected
to start the following year. However, site access problems have delayed implementation of
the engineering design work.
Site Facts: A group of the parties potentially responsible for contamination at the site
conducted studies to determine the extent of the contamination at the site under an
Administrative Order entered into with the EPA in 1988.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal of drums reduced the potential for people to be exposed to
hazardous substances at the SCRDI Bluff Road site while cleanup activities are being
planned.
Site Repository
Richland County Library, Landmark Sq. Branch, Landmark Sq. Shopping Center, 6864
Garners Ferry Road, Columbia, SC 29209
SCRDI BLUFF ROAD 45 March 1992
-------
SCRDI DIXIA
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID#SCD980711394
EPA REGION 4
Lexington County
Near Cayce
Site Description
At one time, the 2-acre South Carolina Recycling and Disposal, Inc. (SCRDI) Dixiana site
contained over 1,100 drums of materials such as paints, solvents, acids, waste oils, phenols,
and dyes. In 1978, SCRDI leased the site for drum storage of industrial wastes. Instances of
poor handling practices, leaky drums, and exposure to the weather created a number of
discharges to the environment prior to drum removal. In 1978, the State filed a suit against
the site owners. The resulting court order specified that the site no longer receive wastes and
that the wastes on site be contained. In 1980, as a result of SCRDI's failure to contain the
wastes, a State court found SCRDI in contempt, which resulted in the company being placed
in receivership. Shortly thereafter, SCRDI removed all drums and visibly contaminated soil.
Spilled dye, a suspected carcinogen, contaminated the shallow groundwater. Approximately
1,200 people use water supply wells within 3 miles of the site. The State has advised two
nearby families not to use their well water.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, and heavy metals from former site activities.
Even though the groundwater is known to be contaminated, there is no one
presently at risk as a result of the current site contamination. Groundwater
contamination is moving off site in response to hydraulic gradients in various
interconnected aquifers.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on groundwater
cleanup.
46
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Groundwater: The remedies selected by the EPA included extracting
contaminated groundwater, treating it to acceptable concentration levels, and
discharging the treated water to the sewer system of a neighboring city.
Construction of the extraction well, piping system, and treatment system building has been
completed. Groundwater treatment began in 1992 after the receiving sewer line was
constructed. Cleanup of the site is expected to be completed in 1995.
Site Facts: The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control denied a
waste management permit and filed a suit against SCRDI in 1978. A family of five people,
whose home is located above the plume, was temporarily relocated while the extraction
system was constructed and installed in 1990.
Environmental Progress
The groundwater cleanup activities and removal of drums have reduced the potential for
exposure to hazardous materials at the SCRDI Dixiana site while the groundwater treatment
and monitoring actions are continuing.
Site Repository
R.M. Smith Library, 1006 12th Street, Cayce, SC 29033
SCRDI DIXIANA
47
March 1992
-------
TOWNSEND SA
CHAIN CO.
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD980558050
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Richland County
Pontiac
The Townsend Saw Chain Co. covers approximately 50 acres in Pontiac, near Columbia. The
previous owner was Dictaphone Co., which sold out to Townsend in 1971. Since 1972, the
small manufacturing facility on site has been used for the manufacture of saw chains.
Between 1966 and 1981, waste rinsewaters were disposed of by direct discharge to the ground
surface in a low-lying area adjacent to the facility. Although public water has recently
become available in the area, private wells within 3 miles of the site still serve an estimated
1,400 people. The nearest well is less than a mile from the site. A private well near the site
was closed in 1981 to 1982, and the residence was connected to the public water system. Two
creeks and two ponds are within 2 miles of the site; one, Woodcreek Lake, is used for
recreational activities. Freshwater wetlands are within 1 mile of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/16/90
Threats and Contaminants
A 1985 South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
(SCDHEC) study showed high levels of cadmium and chromium in groundwater at
the site. A surface water sample taken at a spring near the site contained several
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including dichloroethane and
trichloroethylene (TCE). A residence near the site was hooked up to the city water
supply in 1981 and 1982. Potential risks may exist for those individuals who drink
or come in direct contact with the contaminated surface water and groundwater.
Creeks, ponds, and wetlands within 1 mile of the site may be threatened with
runoff from the site.
48
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
directed at cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The company has been pumping contaminated groundwater to
the surface, treating it to remove the chromium, and spraying the treated water
into a wooded area since 1982. A private well near the site was closed in 1982
and those residents using the well were hooked up to the public water system. Presently, this
system is being redesigned and upgraded to address deficiencies found by the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) in 1988.
Entire Site: In 1991, a potentially responsible party signed an agreement to
perform a study of the nature and extent of site contamination and to evaluate
possible remedies for cleanup. The potential for release of contaminants into a
nearby tributary of Spears Creek will also be investigated. These studies will continue during
1992. Upon completion of these studies, the EPA will evaluate recommended alternatives
and select the most appropriate remedies for cleanup of the site.
Site Facts: In 1988, the State issued an Administrative Order requesting Townsend to install
additional recovery and monitoring wells. The wells were installed in 1989.
Environmental Progress
Pumping and treating the contaminated groundwater have significantly reduced the potential
for exposure to contamination and reduced migration of contaminants in the groundwater
while the studies into a final remedy are being planned.
Site Repository
Not established.
TOWNSEND SAW CHAIN CO. 49 March 1992
-------
WAMCHEM, INC.
SOUTH CAROLINA
EPA ID# SCD037405362
Site Description
EPA REGION 4
Beaufort County
Burton
Other Names:
ufort Chemical and
Research Company
The 21-acre Wamchem, Inc. site is located on a small island in the midst of a salt marsh near
McCalleys Creek, a tidal stream. From 1959 to 1972, the Beaufort Chemical and Research
Company owned and operated the site, producing dyes for the textile industry. In 1972, the
M. Lowenstein Company purchased the facility and continued operations until 1981. Liquid
wastes generated at the site were discharged to a drainage ditch leading to two unlined
ponds. A ditch later was extended from one of the ponds, discharging wastes directly into
McCalleys Creek. Waste treatment methods changed, and the ponds and ditches were
replaced by an unlined holding pond and a waste lagoon in 1972; however, these were soon
replaced by two spray fields and a concrete-lined holding pond in 1975. In 1977, the South
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) required the
company to use a spray-irrigation technique to improve its wastewater process. The wastes
discharged onto the spray fields consisted of neutralized sulfuric acid and process water. The
surface water is contaminated, but it does not constitute a major threat to water supplies at
this time. Approximately 2,000 people within a 3-mile radius depend on drinking water from
the shallow aquifer that lies below the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
m
The contaminants in the groundwater and soil include volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) such as benzene, toluene, xylenes, and acetone from former site
operations. The site is considered to be a habitat for the loggerhead turtle, a
federally listed threatened species, and a probable habitat for the short-nosed
sturgeon, a federally listed endangered species. Also, the site is located in an
environmentally sensitive area composed of salt marshes, tidal streams, and fragile
estuary habitats supporting abundant natural resources.
50
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Based upon a comprehensive site investigation performed by the
parties potentially responsible for site contamination, the EPA has selected the
final cleanup actions to be used at the site. These actions include: (1) installing a
groundwater pump and treatment system using carbon adsorption and air stripping of VOCs
and releasing the decontaminated water into a nearby stream; and (2) excavating and treating
2,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil to remove contaminants, followed by on-site disposal
of the soil and groundwater monitoring. The responsible party is currently completing the
engineering designs of the soil and groundwater treatment activities, and cleanup of the
contamination is scheduled to begin in mid-1992.
Site Facts: The EPA and the potentially responsible parties have signed a Consent Decree,
which describes the cleanup actions that they are required to perform.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that no immediate actions were required at the Wamchem, Inc. site prior to
initiation of the pending soil and groundwater cleanup actions.
Site Repository
Beaufort County Library 710 Craven Street Beaufort, SC 29902
WAMCHEM, INC. 51 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 Super/and program in the context of hazardous waste management. These
terms may have other meanings when used in a different context. A table of common
toxic chemicals found at NPL sites, their sources, and their potential threats is located
on page G-15
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds or release
heavy metal contaminants that remain in the
environment long after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A
legal and enforceable agreement between the
EPA and the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally, the
EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for site
studies). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized vessel. The contaminants are evaporated
into the air stream. The air may be further
treated before it is released into the atmosphere.
Ambient Air: Any unconfmed part of the
atmosphere. Refers to the air that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity of
contaminated air sources.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand,
or gravel capable of storing water within cracks
and pore spaces, or between grains. When
water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient
quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used
for drinking or other purposes. The water
contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
A "sole source aquifer" supplies 50 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in
removing particulates from the air by passing it
through cloth bags in an enclosure.
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH
(greater than 7.0), which tend to be corrosive in
chemical reactions. When bases are mixed with
acids, they neutralize each other, forming salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used
to prevent the migration of contaminants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some
contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living
tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people, as they
breathe contaminated air, drink contaminated
water, or eat contaminated food.
Biological Treatment: The use of bacteria
or other microbial organisms to break down
toxic organic materials into carbon dioxide and
water.
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using
naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants and
break them down into non-hazardous compo-
nents.
Bog: A type of wetland that is covered with
peat moss deposits. Bogs depend primarily on
moisture from the air for their water source, are
usually acidic, and are rich in plant residue [see
Wetland].
Boom: A floating device used to contain oil
floating on a body of water or to restrict the
potential overflow of waste liquids from
containment structures.
Borehole: A hole that is drilled into the
ground and used to sample soil or ground-water.
Borrow Pit: An excavated area where soil,
sand, or gravel has been dug up for use else-
where.
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a
synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated
materials. The surface of the cap generally is
mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in
which contaminants are removed from ground-
water and surface water by forcing water
through tanks containing activated carbon, a
specially treated material that attracts and holds
or retains contaminants.
Carbon Disulfide: A degreasing agent
formerly used extensively for parts washing.
This compound has both inorganic and organic
G-2
-------
GLOSSARY
properties, which increase cleaning efficiency.
However, these properties also cause chemical
reactions that increase the hazard to human
health and the environment.
Carbon Treatment: [see Carbon Adsorp-
tion].
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of
holes in a landfill where waste is dumped,
compacted, and covered with layers of dirt.
CERCLA: [see Comprehensive Environmen-
tal Response, Compensation, and Liability Act].
Characterization: The sampling, monitoring,
and analysis of a site to determine the extent and
nature of toxic releases. Characterization
provides the basis for acquiring the necessary
technical information to develop, screen, ana-
lyze, and select appropriate cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the poten-
tial for leaching or other movement.
Chromated Copper Arsenate: An insecti-
cide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This
salt is used extensively as a wood preservative
in pressure-treating operations. It is highly toxic
and water-soluble, making it a relatively mobile
contaminant in the environment
Cleanup: Actions taken to eliminate a release
or threat of release of a hazardous substance.
The term "cleanup" sometimes is used inter-
changeably with the terms remedial action,
removal action, response action, or corrective
action.
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops
accepting wastes and is shut down under Federal
guidelines that ensure the protection of the
public and the environment.
Comment Period: A specific interval during
which the public can review and comment on
various documents and EPA actions related to
site cleanup. For example, a comment period is
provided when the EPA proposes to add sites to
the NPL. Also, there is minimum 3-week
comment period for community members to
review and comment on the remedy proposed to
clean up a site.
Community Relations: The EPA effort to
establish and maintain two-way communication
with the public. The goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related actions,
assuring public input into decision-making
processes related to affected communities, and
making certain that the Agency is aware of, and
responsive to, public concerns. Specific com-
munity relations activities are required in
relation to Superfund cleanup actions [see
Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA): Congress enacted the
CERCLA, known as Superfund, in 1980 to
respond directly to hazardous waste problems
that may pose a threat to the public health and
the environment. The EPA administers the
Superfund program.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of
water, such as streams or rivers, come together.
Confined Aquifer: An aquifer in which
groundwater is confined under pressure that is
significantly greater than atmospheric pressure.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
Consent Decree: A legal document, ap-
proved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between the EPA and the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the
potentially responsible parties are required to
perform, or the costs incurred by the govern-
ment that the parties will reimburse, and the
roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. If a settlement between the EPA and a
potentially responsible party includes cleanup
actions, it must be in the form of a Consent
Decree. A Consent Decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order
on Consent].
Containment: The process of enclosing or
containing hazardous substances in a structure,
typically in a pond or a lagoon, to prevent the
migration of contaminants into the environment.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or substance
whose quantity, location, or nature produces
undesirable health or environmental effects.
Contingency Plan: A document setting
out an organized, planned, and coordinated
course of action to be followed in case of a
fire, explosion, or other accident that releases
toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, or radioac-
tive materials into the environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract
between the EPA and the States, wherein a State
agrees to manage or monitor certain site cleanup
responsibilities and other activities on a cost-
sharing basis.
Cost Recovery: A legal process by which
potentially responsible parties can be required
to pay back the Superfund program for money
it spends on any cleanup actions [see Poten-
tially Responsible Parties].
Cover: Vegetation or other material placed
over a landfill or other waste material. It can
be designed to reduce movement of water into
the waste and to prevent erosion that could
cause the movement of contaminants.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood pre-
serving operations and produced by distilla-
tion of tar, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Con-
taminating sediments, soils, and surface
water, creosotes may cause skin ulcerations
and cancer through prolonged exposure.
Culvert: A pipe used for drainage under a
road, railroad track, path, or through an embank-
ment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a chemi-
cal is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deletion: A site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL when Superfund response actions at the
site are complete. A site is deleted from the
NPL when a notice is published in the Federal
Register.
De minimis: This legal phrase pertains to
settlements with parties who contributed small
amounts of hazardous waste to a site. This
process allows the EPA to settle with small, or
de minimis contributors, as a single group rather
than as individuals, saving time, money, and
effort.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes, soils,
or chemicals.
G-4
-------
GLOSSARY
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Dioxin: An organic chemical by-product of
pesticide manufacture which is known to be one
of the most toxic man-made chemicals.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materials.
Disposal may be accomplished through the use
of approved secure landfills, surface impound-
ments, land farming, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgradi-
ent of a contaminated groundwater source are
prone to receiving pollutants.
Ecological Assessment: A study of the
impact of man-made or natural activity on living
creatures and their environment
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated,
that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or
industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes
discharged into surface waters.
Emission: Pollution discharged into the
atmosphere from smokestacks, other vents, and
surface areas of commercial or industrial facili-
ties.
Emulsifiers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil and
water.
Endangerment Assessment: A study
conducted to determine the risks posed to public
health or the environment by contamination at
NPL sites. The EPA or the State conducts the
study when a legal action is to be taken to direct
the potentially responsible parties to clean up a
site or pay for the cleanup. An endangerment
assessment supplements an investigation of the
site hazards.
Enforcement: EPA, State, or local legal
actions taken against parties to facilitate
settlements; to compel compliance with laws,
rules, regulations, or agreements; or to obtain
penalties or criminal sanctions for violations.
Enforcement procedures may vary, depending
on the specific requirements of different
environmental laws and related regulatory
requirements. Under CERCLA, for example,
the EPA will seek to require potentially
responsible parties to clean up a Superfund
site or pay for the cleanup [see Cost Recov-
ery].
Erosion: The wearing away of land surface
by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally
from weather or surface runoff, but can be
intensified by such land-related practices as
farming, residential or industrial develop-
ment, road building, or timber-cutting. Ero-
sion may spread surface contamination to off-
site locations.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh
water from rivers and salt water from
nearshore ocean waters are mixed. These
areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt
marshes, and lagoons. These water ecosys-
tems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and
wildlife.
Evaporation Ponds: Areas where sewage
sludge or other watery wastes are dumped and
allowed to dry out.
Feasibility Study: The analysis of the
potential cleanup alternatives for a site. The
feasibility study usually starts as soon as the
remedial investigation is underway. In this
volume, the feasibility study is referred to as a
site study [see also Remedial Investigation].
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
Filtration: A treatment process for remov-
ing solid (particulate) matter from water by
passing the water through sand, activated
carbon, or a man-made filter. The process is
often used to remove particles that contain
contaminants.
Flood Plain: An area along a river, formed
from sediment deposited by floods. Flood
plains periodically are innundated by natural
floods, which can spread contamination.
Flue Gas: The air that is emitted from a
chimney after combustion in the burner
occurs. The gas can include nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides,
particles, and many chemical pollutants.
Fly Ash: Non-combustible residue that results
from the combustion of flue gases. It can
include nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, water
vapor, sulfur oxides, as well as many other
chemical pollutants.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain
system constructed of perforated pipes, which is
used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft
coal into gas for use as a fuel.
General Notice Letter: [See Notice Letter].
Generator: A facility that emits pollutants
into the air or releases hazardous wastes into
water or soil.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, gener-
ally in response to a Special Notice letter, made
by a potentially responsible party, consisting of
a written proposal demonstrating a potentially
responsible party's qualifications and willing-
ness to perform a site study or cleanup.
Groundwater: Water that fills pores in soils
or openings in rocks to the point of saturation.
In aquifers, groundwater occurs in sufficient
quantities for use as drinking and irrigation
water and other purposes.
Groundwater Quality Assessment: The
process of analyzing the chemical characteris-
tics of groundwater to determine whether any
hazardous materials exist.
Halogens: Reactive non-metals, such as
chlorine and bromine. Halogens are very
good oxidizing agents and, therefore, have
many industrial uses. They are rarely found
by themselves; however, many chemicals
such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
some volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
and dioxin are reactive because of the pres-
ence of halogens.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The
principal screening tool used by the EPA to
evaluate relative risks to public health and the
environment associated with abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS
calculates a score based on the potential of
hazardous substances spreading from the site
through the air, surface water, or groundwater
and on other factors such as nearby popula-
tion. The HRS score is the primary factor in
deciding if the site should be on the NPL.
Hazardous Waste: By-products of society
that can pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment
when improperly managed. Hazardous waste
possesses at least one of four characteristics
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxic-
ity), or appears on special EPA lists.
Heavy Metals: Metallic elements with high
atomic weights, such as arsenic, lead, mercury,
and cadmium. Heavy metals are very hazardous
even at low concentrations and tend to accumu-
late in the food chain.
Herbicide: A chemical pesticide designed to
control or destroy plants, weeds, or grasses.
G-6
-------
GLOSSARY
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site contain-
ing exceptionally high levels of contamination.
Hydrocarbons: Chemical compounds that
consist entirely of hydrogen and carbon.
Hydrology: The properties, distribution, and
circulation of water.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater,
with particular emphasis on the chemistry and
movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge
confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Incineration: A group of treatment technolo-
gies involving destruction of waste by controlled
burning at high temperatures, e.g., burning
sludge to reduce the remaining residues to a
non-burnable ash that can be disposed of safely
on land, in some waters, or in underground
locations.
Infiltration: The movement of water or
other liquid down through soil from precipita-
tion (rain or snow) or from application of
wastewater to the land surface.
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid
flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treatment
plant.
Injection Well: A well into which waste
fluids are placed, under pressure, for purposes
of disposal.
Inorganic Chemicals: Chemical sub-
stances of mineral origin, not of basic carbon
structure.
Installation Restoration Program: The
specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its hazardous
waste sites and controlling the migration of
hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Intake: The source from where a water supply
is drawn, such as from a river or water body.
Interagency Agreement: A written agree-
ment between the EPA and a Federal agency
that has the lead for site cleanup activities,
setting forth the roles and responsibilities of the
agencies for performing and overseeing the
activities. States often are parties to interagency
agreements.
Interim (Permit) Status: Conditions under
which hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities, that were operating
when regulations under the RCRA became
final in 1980, are temporarily allowed by the
EPA to continue to operate while awaiting
denial or issuance of a permanent permit. The
facility must comply with certain regulations
to maintain interim status.
Lagoon: A shallow pond or liquid waste
containment structure. Lagoons typically are
used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges,
liquid wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfarm: To apply waste to land or incor-
porate waste into the surface soil, such as
fertilizer or soil conditioner. This practice
commonly is used for disposal of composted
wastes and sludges.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is
placed in or on land. Sanitary landfills are
disposal sites for non-hazardous solid wastes.
The waste is spread in layers, compacted to the
smallest practical volume, and covered with soil
at the end of each operating day. Secure chemi-
cal landfills are disposal sites for hazardous
waste. They are designed to minimize the
chance of release of hazardous substances into
the environment [see Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act].
Leach, Leaching [v.t.J: The process by
which soluble chemical components are dis-
solved and carried through soil by water or
some other percolating liquid.
G-7
-------
GLOSSARY
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through
or drains from waste, carrying soluble compo-
nents from the waste.
Leachate Collection System: A system
that gathers liquid that has leaked into a landfill
or other waste disposal area and pumps it to the
surface for treatment.
Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier
designed to prevent leachate (waste residue)
from leaking from a landfill. Liner materials
include plastic and dense clay.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct,
often incremental, steps that are taken to solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the
complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into several of these phases.
Long-term Response Action: An action
which requires a continuous period of on-site
activity before cleanup goals are achieved.
These actions typically include the extraction
and treatment of groundwater and monitoring
actions.
Marsh: A type of wetland that does not
contain peat moss deposits and is dominated by
vegetation. Marshes may be either fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetland].
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, con-
taminants, water, or other liquids through porous
and permeable soils or rock.
Mill Tailings: [See Mine Tailings].
Mine Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left from
mining operations. Tailings often contain high
concentrations of lead, uranium, and arsenic or
other heavy metals.
Mitigation: Actions taken to improve site
conditions by limiting, reducing, or controlling
toxicity and contamination sources.
Modeling: A technique using a mathematical
or physical representation of a system or theory
that tests the effects that changes on system
components have on the overall performance of
the system.
Monitoring Wells: Special wells drilled at
specific locations within, or surrounding, a
hazardous waste site where groundwater can be
sampled at selected depths and studied to obtain
such information as the direction in which
groundwater flows and the types and amounts of
contaminates present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The
EPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified
for possible long-term cleanup under Super-
fund. The EPA is required to update the NPL
at least once a year.
Natural Attenuation: [See Attenuation].
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Water is the most
commonly known neutral, however, naphtha-
lene, pyrene, and trichlorobenzene also are
examples of neutrals.
NitroaromatiCS: Common components of
explosive materials, which will explode if
activated by very high temperatures or pres-
sures; 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) is a
nitroaromatic.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter
notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A
Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day formal
period of negotiation during which the EPA is
not allowed to start work at a site or initiate
enforcement actions against potentially respon-
sible parties, although the EPA may undertake
certain investigatory and planning activities.
G-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The 60-day period may be extended if the EPA
receives a good faith offer from the PRPs
within that period. [See also Good Faith Offer].
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC): The
predesignated EPA, Coast Guard, or Depart-
ment of Defense official who coordinates and
directs Superfund removal actions or Clean
Water Act oil- or hazardous-spill corrective
actions.
Operation and Maintenance: Activities
conducted at a site after a cleanup action is
completed to ensure that the cleanup or
containment system is functioning properly.
Organic Chemicals/Compounds:
Chemical substances containing mainly
carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is
discharged into receiving waters.
Over packing: Process used for isolating
large volumes of waste by jacketing or encap-
sulating waste to prevent further spread or
leakage of contaminating materials. Leaking
drums may be contained within oversized
barrels as an interim measure prior to removal
and final disposal.
Pentachlorophenol (PCP): A synthetic,
modified petrochemical that may be used as a
wood preservative because of its toxicity to
termites and fungi. It is a common component
of creosotes and can cause cancer.
Perched (groundwater): Groundwater
separated from another underlying body of
groundwater by a confining layer, often clay or
rock.
Percolation: The downward flow or filtering
of water or other liquids through subsurface
rock or soil layers, usually continuing down-
ward to groundwater.
Pesticide: A substance or mixture of sub-
stances intended to prevent, destroy, or repel any
pest. If misused, pesticides can accumulate in
the foodchain and contaminate the environment.
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances
produced from petroleum in refinery operations
and as fuel oil residues. These include
fluoranthene, chrysene, mineral spirits, and
refined oils. Petrochemicals are the bases from
which volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
plastics, and many pesticides are made. These
chemical substances often are toxic to humans
and the environment.
Phenols: Organic compounds that are used in
plastics manufacturing and are by-products of
petroleum refining, tanning, textile, dye, and
resin manufacturing. Phenols are highly poison-
ous.
Physical Chemical Separation: The
treatment process of adding a chemical to a
substance to separate the compounds for further
treatment or disposal.
Pilot Testing: A small-scale test of a pro-
posed treatment system in the field to determine
its ability to clean up specific contaminants.
Plugging: The process of stopping the flow of
water, oil, or gas into or out of the ground
through a borehole or well penetrating the
ground.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater
flowing from a specific source. The movement
of the groundwater is influenced by such factors
as local groundwater flow patterns, the character
of the aquifer in which groundwater is con-
tained, and the density of contaminants [see
Migration].
Pollution: Generally, the presence of matter
or energy whose nature, location, or quantity
produces undesired health or environmental
effects.
G-9
-------
GLOSSARY
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.
Poly vinyl Chloride (PVC): A plastic made
from the gaseous substance vinyl chloride. PVC
is used to make pipes, records, raincoats, and
floor tiles. Health risks from high 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 ground water cleanup
technique involving the extracting of contami-
nated groundwater from the subsurface and the
removal of contaminants, using one of several
treatment technologies.
Radionuclides: Elements, including radium
and uranium-235 and -238, which break down
and produce radioactive substances due to their
unstable atomic structure. Some are man-made,
and others are naturally occurring in the envi-
ronment. Radon, the gaseous form of radium,
decays to form alpha particle radiation, which
cannot be absorbed through skin. However, it
can be inhaled, which allows alpha particles to
affect unprotected tissues directly and thus cause
cancer. Radiation also occurs naturally through
the breakdown of granite.
RCRA: [See Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act].
Recharge Area: A land area where rainwater
saturates the ground and soaks through the earth
to reach an aquifer.
G-10
-------
GLOSSARY
Record of Decision (ROD): A public
document that explains which cleanup
alternative(s) will be used to clean up sites
listed on the NPL. It is based on information
generated during the remedial investigation
and feasibility study and consideration of
public comments and community concerns.
Recovery Wells: Wells used to withdraw
contaminants or contaminated groundwater.
Recycle: The process of minimizing waste
generation by recovering usable products that
might otherwise become waste.
Remedial Action (RA): The actual con-
struction or implementation phase of a
Superfund site cleanup following the remedial
design [see Cleanup].
Remedial Design: A phase of site cleanup
where engineers design the technical specifi-
cations for cleanup remedies and technolo-
gies.
Remedial Investigation: An in-depth
study designed to gather the data necessary to
determine the nature and extent of contamina-
tion at a Superfund site, establish the criteria
for cleaning up the site, identify the prelimi-
nary alternatives for cleanup actions, and
support the technical and cost analyses of the
alternatives. The remedial investigation is
usually done with the feasibility study. In this
volume, the remedial investigation is referred
to as a site study [see also Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at the site.
Remedy Selection: The selection of the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few
sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site
contamination, or that any remaining con-
tamination will be naturally dispersed without
further cleanup activities, a "No Action"
remedy is selected [see Record of Decision].
Removal Action: Short-term immediate
actions taken to address releases of hazardous
substances [see Cleanup].
Residual: The amount of a pollutant re-
maining in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or the particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubber.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA): A Federal law that established
a regulatory system to track hazardous sub-
stances from the time of generation to dis-
posal. The law requires safe and secure
procedures to be used in treating, transport-
ing, storing, and disposing of hazardous
substances. RCRA is designed to prevent
new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Retention Pond: A small body of liquid
used for disposing of wastes and containing
overflow from production facilities. Some-
times retention ponds are used to expand the
capacity of such structures as lagoons the
store waste.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contaminants
from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution control device
that uses a spray of water or reactant or a dry
process to trap pollutants in emissions.
Sediment: The layer of soil, sand, and
minerals at the bottom of surface waters such
as streams, lakes, and rivers, that absorbs
contaminants.
G-11
-------
GLOSSARY
Seeps: Specific points where releases of
liquid, usually leachate, form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower
edges of landfills.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in
the ground used for the storage of liquids,
usually in the form of leachate, from waste
disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves
the pit by moving through the surrounding
soil.
Septage: Residue remaining in a septic tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is neces-
sary for choosing and designing cleanup mea-
sures and monitoring their effectiveness.
Site Inspection: The collection of informa-
tion from a hazardous waste site to determine
the extent and severity of hazards posed by the
site. It follows, and is more extensive than, a
preliminary assessment. The purpose is to
gather information necessary to score the site,
using the Hazard Ranking System, and to
determine if the site presents an immediate
threat that requires a prompt removal action.
Slag: The fused refuse or dross separated
from a metal in the process of smelting.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial
or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Slurry Wall: Barriers used to contain the flow
of contaminated groundwater or subsurface
liquids. Slurry walls are constructed by digging
a trench around a contaminated area and filling
the trench with an impermeable material that
prevents water from passing through it. The
groundwater or contaminated liquids trapped
within the area surrounded by the slurry wall
can be extracted and treated.
Smelter: A facility that melts or fuses ore,
often with an accompanying chemical change,
to separate the metal. Emissions from smelters
are known to cause pollution.
Soil Gas: Gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between par-
ticles of soil. Such gases can move through
or leave the soil or rock, depending on
changes in pressure.
Soil Vapor Extraction: A treatment
process that uses vacuum wells to remove
hazardous gases from soil.
Soil Washing: A water-based process for
mechanically scrubbing soils in-place to remove
undesirable materials. There are two ap-
proaches: dissolving or suspending them in the
wash solution for later treatment by conven-
tional methods, and concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through simple particle
size separation techniques [see Solvent Extrac-
tion].
Stabilization: The process of changing an
active substance into inert, harmless material,
or physical activities at a site that act to limit
the further spread of contamination without
actual reduction of toxicity.
Solidification/Stabilization: A chemical
or physical reduction of the mobility of
hazardous constituents. Mobility is reduced
through the binding of hazardous constituents
into a solid mass with low permeability and
resistance to leaching.
G-12
-------
GLOSSARY
Solvent: A substance capable of dissolving
another substance to form a solution. The
primary uses of industrial solvents are as
cleaners for degreasing, in paints, and in
Pharmaceuticals. Many solvents are flam-
mable and toxic to varying degrees.
Solvent Extraction: A means of separating
hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges,
and sediment, thereby reducing the volume of
the hazardous waste that must be treated. It
generally is used as one in a series of unit
operations. An organic chemical is used to
dissolve contaminants as opposed to water-
based compounds, which usually are used in
soil washing.
Sorption: The action of soaking up or
attracting substances. It is used in many
pollution control systems.
Special Notice Letter: [See Notice Let-
ter].
Still bottom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air Strip-
ping].
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
Superfund: The program operated under the
legislative authority of the CERCLA and
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) to update and improve environ-
mental laws. The program has the authority to
respond directly to releases or threatened re-
leases of hazardous substances that may endan-
ger public health, welfare, or the environment
The "Superfund" is a trust fund that finances
cleanup actions at hazardous waste sites.
Surge Tanks: A holding structure used to
absorb irregularities in flow of liquids, including
liquid waste materials.
Swamp: A type of wetland that is dominated
by woody vegetation and does not accumulate
peat moss deposits. Swamps may be fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetlands].
Thermal Treatment: The use of heat to
remove or destroy contaminants from soil.
Treatability Studies: Testing a treatment
method on contaminated groundwater, soil, etc.,
to determine whether and how well the method
will work.
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, color-
less liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as
a solvent and as a metal degreasing agent.
TCE may be toxic to people when inhaled,
ingested, or through skin contact and can
damage vital organs, especially the liver [see
Volatile Organic Compounds].
Unilateral [Administrative] Order: [see
Administrative Order].
Upgradient: An upward hydrologic slope;
demarks areas that are higher than contaminated
areas and, therefore, are not prone to contamina-
tion by the movement of polluted groundwater.
Vacuum Extraction: A technology used to
remove volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from soils. Vacuum pumps are connected to a
series of wells drilled to just above the water
table. The wells are sealed tightly at the soil
surface, and the vacuum established in the soil
draws VOC-contaminated air from the soil
pores into the well, as fresh air is drawn down
from the surface of the soil.
G-13
-------
GLOSSARY
Vegetated Soil Cap: A cap constructed with
graded soils and seed for vegetative growth, to
prevent erosion [see Cap].
Vitrification: The process of electrically
melting wastes and soils or sludges to bind the
waste in a glassy, solid material more durable
than granite or marble and resistant to leaching.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs):
VOCs are manufactured as secondary petro-
chemicals. They include light alcohols, acetone,
trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene,
dichloroethylene, benzene, vinyl chloride,
toluene, and methylene chloride. These poten-
tially toxic chemicals are used as solvents,
degreasers, paints, thinners, and fuels. Because
of their volatile nature, they readily evaporate
into the air, increasing the potential exposure to
humans. Due to their low water solubility,
environmental persistence, and widespread
industrial use, they are commonly found in soil
and groundwater.
Waste Treatment Plant: A facility that
uses a series of tanks, screens, filters, and
other treatment processes to remove pollut-
ants from water.
Wastewater: The spent or used water from
individual homes or industries.
Watershed: The land area that drains into a
stream or other water body.
Water Table: The upper surface of the
groundwater.
Weir: A barrier to divert water or other liquids.
Wetland: An area that is regularly saturated
by surface or groundwater and, under normal
circumstances, is capable of supporting
vegetation typically adapted for life in satu-
rated soil conditions. Wetlands are critical to
sustaining many species of fish and wildlife.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes,
and bogs. Wetlands may be either coastal or
inland. Coastal wetlands have salt or brackish
(a mixture of salt and fresh) water, and most
have tides, while inland wetlands are non-
tidal and freshwater. Coastal wetlands are an
integral component of estuaries.
Wildlife Refuge: An area designated for
the protection of wild animals, within which
hunting and fishing are either prohibited or
strictly controlled.
G-14
-------
GLOSSARY
Some Common Contaminants at NPL Sites
Contaminant
Category
Example
Chemical Types
Sources
Potential Health
Threats*
Heavy Metafe
Volatile Organic
Compounds
(VQCs)
Herbicides
P<%cfttorinated
(Pegs)
Creosotes
Radiation
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.:1993-341-835:81021
G-15
------- |