EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/041
December 1992
PB93-963243
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
UTAH
1992 UPDATE
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Publication #9200.5-7436
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Utah
-k
778West Jackson Boulevard, 12th FtaK
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
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-I
-------
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
19X0 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 she.
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.
VHI
-------
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
M. are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID# ABCOOOOOOO
Site Description
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Other Names:
: xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxx:
LXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX X XXX :
XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXX:
xxxxxxxxxxxx innnr—rrfTnnnii n n i xx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx:
:xxxxxxx xxxx xxxi^hft^^ xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxx xxx xxxxxx
XXXXXXXXXXXX XX
Site Responsibility:
:x xxxxxx xx xxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xx:
XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
NPL Listing History
Proposad XX/XX/XX
Fmal XX/XX/XX
Threats and Contaminants
XXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX:
XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxx x:
XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX-
XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX X XXX XX XX
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx:
Cleanup Approach
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx:
xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxxxx:
XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX X XXX XXXXXXXX
Response Action Status
XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX
xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx x xxx xx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxx:
XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX
XXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXX
Site Facts:
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx:
xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xx x:
xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx x xxx xx:
xxxxxx
^^^pcxxx
Environmental Progress
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XX XXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXX
XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX
xxxxxx xxxxxx xxx :
xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx
Site Repository
:xx xxxxxxxx:
:xxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
\
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 Cities
• NPL Sites
Superfund
Activities in Utah
The State of Utah is located within EPA Region 8,
which includes the six northern central States extend-
ing from the mid-western plains to the Rocky Moun-
tains. The State covers 84,899 square miles. Accord-
ing to the 1990 Census, Utah experienced an 18
percent increase in population between 1980 and
1990, and is ranked thirty-fifth in U.S. population with
approximately 1,722,800 residents.
The Utah Hazardous Substances Mitigation Act of
1989, most recently amended in 1991, authorizes the
State to compel cleanup activities at Superfund sites.
This statute grants the State the authority to make
polluters liable for cleanup activities regardless of
fault. In practice, the State strongly encourages
polluters to conduct cleanup activities themselves with
State oversight, since State funding is limited. In
those cases where polluters refuse to participate, the State conducts investigations using moneys from
the Hazardous Substances Mitigation Fund; actual cleanup activities are either conducted under State
enforcement authorities or through the Federal Superfund program. In addition to funding the 10
percent contribution required from the State by the Federal Superfund program, the Hazardous
Substances Mitigation Fund can be used for emergency responses, removals, and investigations. The
Fund may not be used if the site can be cleaned up under any other State statute. Currently, 11 sites in
the State of Utah have been listed as final on the NPL. Two new sites have been proposed for listing
in 1992.
The Department of Environmental Quality
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Utah
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Utah include:
Recycling
Facilities
Petroleum and
Refining
Operations
Mining
Operations
Storage and
Disposal
Facilities
Federal
Facilities
Chemical and Metal
Production Facilities
Facts about the 13 NPL sites
in Utah:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at eight
sites.
Three sites endanger sensitive envi-
ronments.
Eleven sites are located near residen-
tial areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
UTAH
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Sediments
Soil
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of Utah, potentially responsible
parties are paying for or conducting cleanup
activities at seven sites.
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCs
Creosotes
Pesticides/Herbicides
Radiation
Dioxin
Plastics
Petrochemicals/Explosives
PCBs
77%
46%
23%
23%
15%
15%
15%
8%
8%
For Further Information on NPL Sites and Hazardous
Waste Programs in the State of Utah Please Contact:
® EPA Region 8 Public Affairs
Branch
°" National Response Center
w The Department of Environmental
Quality: Division of Environmental
Health, Division of Environmental
Response and Remediation
* EPA Region 8 Hazardous Waste
Management Division
® EPA Superf und 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
(303)294-1120
(800) 424-8802
(801)536-4100
(303) 294-7630
(800) 424-9068
March 1992
XVIII
-------
THE NPL REPORT
PROGRESS TO DATE
The following Progress Report lists all
sites currently on, or deleted from, the
NPL and briefly summarizes the status of ac-
tivities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup
process are arrayed across the top of the chart,
and each site's progress through these steps is
represented by an arrow (O) indicating the
current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are organized
into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to
address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and
surface water pollution, or to clean up differ-
ent areas of a large site. In such cases, the
chart portrays cleanup progress at the site's
most advanced stage, reflecting the status of
site activities rather than administrative ac-
complishments.
^> An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
O A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been selected. In these cases,
the arrows are discontinued at the
"Remedy Selection" step and resume in
the "Construction Complete" category.
^> A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently
are designing the technical specifica-
tions for the selected cleanup remedies
and technologies.
^> A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and cur-
rently are underway.
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
0)
^^
OJ
^
*o
fl)
CO
c75
CD
•i-*
_C
ti\
vt
**
0)
^j
Q_
Z
•H-
CO
CL
3
^
| Progress Toward Clear
*
0)
Q
C
.2 o>
*- +*
o
3 C
<= '5
— C
00
>» i-
"o
1 s
>.TJ
TJ «
J
> H
Q oo
HILL AIR FORCE BASE
MIDVALE SLAG
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ft ft
ON VO
§• §
S- ^
1 1
E E
Zj ?
D P
i—, i—.
^ ^
OO OO
MONTICELLO MILL TAILINGS (DOE)
MONTICELLO RADIOACTIVELY
ft
ft
ft ft
ft ft
t-~ ~
S- ^
R 5.
0 0
•o
1 s.
^1 ( p) t
2
i^
W -j
Ld *~2
^>- "^
!> co
CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT
PETROCHEM RECYCLING CORP./
ft
ft
ft
ft
VO
I
cB
1
E
S
_i
H
3
00
£
EKOTEK INC.
PORTLANDCEMENT (KILN DUST #2&
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft ft
ft
04 r
-------
HILL AIR
FORCE BAS
UTAH
EPA ID#UT0571724350
EPA REGION 8
Davis and Weber Counties
5 miles south of Ogden
Site Description
The 6,665-acre Hill Air Force Base site is used by the Air Force for the overhaul and
maintenance of aircraft. Several areas on base have been identified by the Air Force as being
contaminated, including four landfills, three chemical disposal pits, Berman Pond, the
Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (IWTP) Sludge Drying Beds, Fire Training Area One,
Bamberger Pond, the Refueling Vehicle Maintenance Facility, and the Toole Army Rail
Shop. Industrial and municipal wastes were dumped on base, including volatile organic
chemicals (VOCs), electroplating wastes, sludges from the IWTP, waste oils, and petroleum
fuel products. Approximately 20,000 people work on Hill Air Force Base; about 15,000 are
civilian employees. Most of the residences in the area surrounding the site are connected to
the municipal water supply system; however, some private wells and springs are used for
drinking water and irrigation.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater in the disposal and pit areas is contaminated with various VOCs and
heavy metals. Jet fuels and oils contaminate groundwater near Chemical Disposal
Pits #1 and #2. Groundwater located near Chemical Disposal Pit #3 contains high
concentrations of VOCs. Surface water located in springs downgradient from
Chemical Disposal Pit #3 is contaminated by VOCs. The Toole Army Rail Shop
and Bamberger Pond areas are contaminated with VOCs. Potential health threats
include drinking or coming in contact with contaminated groundwater or surface
water.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in five long-term remedial phases including cleanup of: Landfills
#3 and #4, Chemical Disposal Pits #1 and #2, and the Fire Training Area; Chemical
Disposal Pit #3; the IWTP Sludge Drying Beds, the Sodium Hydroxide Tank Leak Area,
Berman Pond, and the Refueling Vehicle Maintenance Facility (Building 514); Landfills #1
and #2; and the Toole Army Rail Shop and Bamberger Pond.
Response Action Status
Landfills #3 and #4, Chemical Disposal Pits #1 and #2, and the Fire
Training Area: In 1984, a clay cap was placed over Landfill #4, installation began
on a slurry wall around the upgradient areas of contamination, and a series of
extraction wells were installed. The slurry wall was completed in 1985. In 1986, clay caps were
constructed over Landfill #3 and a portion of the chemical disposal pits. A parking lot was
installed over the Fire Training Area and the rest of the chemical disposal pits. A total of
about 70 acres have been covered. Over 50 million gallons of contaminated groundwater
subsequently have been extracted and treated by the Air Force. Off-base migration of
contaminants has been significantly reduced. Continued studies into contamination at these
areas and the most effective ways to address it underway and are scheduled to be completed
in 1994.
Chemical Disposal Pit #3: In 1991, the Air Force began a study to determine
the nature and extent of contamination and to identify alternatives for cleanup.
Extraction and treatment were chosen as interim measures identified to address a
subsurface accumulation of a dense, non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL). Final cleanup
remedies for the disposal pit area are expected in 1993.
The IWTP Sludge Drying Beds, the Sodium Hydroxide Tank Leak Area,
Berman Pond, and the Refueling Vehicle Maintenance Facility (Building
514): Berman Pond has been filled with construction rubble and regraded, and a
clay cap was installed over the area. The unlined IWTP Sludge Drying Beds were lined with
asphalt and then concrete. The investigation into site contamination and methods to
effectively address these areas is being conducted; interim measures for sludges and the
leaking tank are expected to be recommended in 1992. Final cleanup remedies are expected
in 1994.
Landfills #1 and #2: Investigative work into site contamination and the most
effective methods to address Landfills #1 and #2 is underway. Studies of cleanup
alternatives are scheduled to be completed in 1993.
The Toole Army Rail Shop and Bamberger Pond: The investigation into site
contamination and the most effective methods to address these areas was initiated
by the Air Force in 1989. This investigation is scheduled for completion in 1995.
March 1992 2 HILL AIR FORCE BASE
-------
Site Facts: Hill Air Force Base is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a
specially funded program established by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1978 to
identify, investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and
other DOD facilities. In 1991, the EPA and Hill Air Force Base signed a Federal Facilities
Agreement, requiring the Air Force to conduct investigations at the site. Ongoing site
characterization work may identify additional areas of the site that require cleanup.
Environmental Progress
Initial actions have been performed at several of the investigation areas; the installation of a
cap, a slurry wall, and extraction wells have significantly reduced the migration of
contaminants from the Hill Air Force Base site while further studies and cleanup activities
are taking place. In addition, the Air Force has provided alternate water supplies to affected
residences while the nature of groundwater contamination is being characterized.
Site Repository
Davis County Library, 155 North Wasatch Drive, Layton, UT 84041
HILL AIR FORCE BASE
March 1992
-------
MIDVALE SLAG
UTAH
EPAID#UTD081834277<
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Midvale
Site Description
The 330-acre Midvale Slag site is a former copper and lead smelting facility. The Midvale
Smelter originally was constructed on this site in 1902 as a copper plant. Over the years, the
plant was changed to a lead facility, producing gold-lead-silver bullion. From 1918 to 1928,
approximately 400,000 tons of lead were produced. The smelter is no longer in operation;
however, large piles of slag and other smelter wastes remain on site. The current operators of
the site process the slag for use as sandblasting and railroad bed material. Two million tons of
slag containing lead, arsenic, and cadmium were present on site until 1991. A substantial
amount of slag has been removed and used for road bases, fill, and sandblasting. Access to
the site currently is restricted by fences. A clay berm has been constructed to prevent the
erosion of slag into the bordering Jordan River. There are approximately 1,500 people within
1/4 mile of the site. The contaminated shallow aquifer on site has been reported to discharge
into the Jordan River at some locations. Public and municipal wells located near the site are
used for domestic purposes. The Sharon Steel Site, which also is on the NPL, is adjacent to
the Midvale Slag site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 02/11/91
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and sediments are contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic,
cadmium, lead, and chromium. On-site soils are contaminated with heavy metals,
including cadmium, lead, arsenic and chromium. Explosives found on site posed a
potential threat to on-site workers until they were removed in 1991. The Jordan
River is potentially contaminated from runoff from the site and groundwater
discharge. Potential health threats include drinking contaminated groundwater and
surface water; coming in direct contact with groundwater, surface water, or slag; or
ingesting of contaminated soil.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being address in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1991, the EPA completed initial site cleanup actions to
address immediate threats at the site. Abandoned chemicals found in an assay lab
were overpacked and removed, and approximately 20 pounds of explosives were
detonated. Additionally, the site was fenced to prevent public access.
Northern Zone: The EPA began a study into the nature and extent of
contamination of the northern part of the site in mid-1989. This investigation,
which is scheduled for completion in mid-1993, will recommend alternatives for
Southern Zone: In late 1991, the EPA began an investigation of the
contamination of the southern area of the site. This investigation will help to
define contaminants of concern and recommend final cleanup alternatives.
Environmental Progress
Immediate actions to remove explosives and abandoned chemicals at the Midvale Slag site
were completed early in 1991. This removal, as well as fencing the site, protects residents
and the environment while further investigations are underway and cleanup activities are
being planned.
Site Repository
Ruth V. Tyler Public Library, 315 Wood Street, Midvale, UT 84047
MIDVALE SLAG 5 March 1992
-------
MONTICELLO
TAILINGS (USD
UTAH
EPA ID# UT3890090035
Site Description
EPA REGION 8
San Juan County
City of Monticello
Other Names:
AEC Mill Site
Monticello Remedial Action Project
The Monticello Mill Tailings (USDOE) site lies in the Montezuma Creek Valley, east of the
Abajo Mountains. The inactive ore milling facility, on 78 acres of land, is bordered by the
City of Monticello and Bureau of Land Management lands. Approximately 11 acres of the
site was the former processing mill and administrative area, and the other 67 acres
constituted the mill tailings impoundment area containing an estimated 2 million tons of
tailings and contaminated soil. The former ore buying stations and areas contaminated by
wind and waterborne particulate material and tailings cover another 300 acres. These areas,
known as the Peripheral Properties, contain an estimated 300,000 tons of contaminated
materials. The mill was constructed by the Vanadium Corporation of America in 1942 with
funds from the Defense Plant Corporation. Initially, vanadium was produced, but in 1943 the
mill began production of a uranium/vanadium sludge for the Manhattan Engineer District. In
1948, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) bought the site. Uranium milling continued until
1960, when the mill was permanently closed. It is estimated that approximately 900,000 tons
of ore were processed at the site. Mill operations were terminated in 1960 and in 1961 the
AEC stabilized the tailings piles. In 1964, the mill was dismantled. The population of the City
of Monticello is estimated to be 1,900. The City of Monticello has its own water system,
supplied by water from springs located on the flanks of the Abajo Mountains. The domestic
water source for those people living outside the city limits is groundwater drawn chiefly from
wells completed in the Burro Canyon Formation. There is no known contamination of the
domestic water supplies attributable to contamination from the mill site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed by Federal
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
\L
The groundwater and soil are contaminated with uranium; its radioactive decay
products, thorium-230, radium-226, radon-222; and heavy metals from tailings
deposited on the site. Exposure to uranium through contact with contaminated soil,
groundwater, and airborne contaminated dust may be a potential threat to the
health of individuals in the area of the site.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the
tailings piles and former mill site, the peripheral properties, and surface water and
groundwater.
Response Action Status
Tailings Piles and Former Mill Site: In 1990, the Department of Energy
(DOE) completed an investigation of contamination in the tailings piles and the
former mill site. The selected remedy includes removing approximately 1.5 million
cubic yards of tailings, ore, and process-related material from their present location, where
they are within the flood plain of Montezuma Creek or where they are in contact with the
groundwater, to a repository 1 mile south of the present mill tailings site. Once this is
accomplished, the repository will be capped to protect the groundwater, isolate the waste
from the environment, and control the escape of radon gas. Contaminated runoff will be
collected and treated through evaporation of contaminants or reverse osmosis. When cleanup
activities are completed, the mill site and the repository area will be revegetated. The design
of the repository is currently underway and expected to be completed in 1994. Actual
cleanup activities were initiated in 1991.
Peripheral Properties: In 1990, an investigation of the contamination at the
peripheral properties was completed. The selected remedy involves excavating
approximately 300,000 cubic yards of tailings and removing them to the repository,
revegetating the area after the tailings are removed, and limiting access and the potential for
future use. Design of this portion of the site remedy is underway. Actual cleanup activities
are planned to begin in 1992.
Surface Water and Groundwater: The DOE has begun an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of contamination in the surface water and
groundwater. Completion of this investigation is not anticipated until the cleanup
of the contaminated source materials at the tailing piles is underway. Following completion
of the study, a remedy will be selected which will address surface water and groundwater
contamination.
Site Facts: The cleanup of the Monticello Mill Tailings site and the Monticello
Radioactively Contaminated Properties site is being conducted pursuant to a Federal Facility
Agreement (FFA) signed in December 1988.
MONTICELLO MILL TAILINGS (USDOE) 7 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
Cleanup activities at the Monticello Mill Tailings (USDOE) site were initiated in August
1991. The DOE, the EPA and the State of Utah are conducting investigations to limit
further surface water and groundwater contamination activities to address mill tailing sites,
the former mill site, and peripheral properties. The EPA has determined that the site does
not pose an immediate threat to the surrounding community or the environment while
cleanup activities and further studies are taking place.
Site Repository
Utah State Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation,
Cannon Health Building, 2nd Floor, 288 North 1460, West Salt Lake City, UT 84116
March 1992
MONTICELLO MILL TAILINGS (USDOE)
-------
MONTICELLO
RADIOACTIVEL
CONTAMINATE
PROPERTIE
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD980667208
EPA REGION 8
San Juan County
Monticello
Other Names:
Monticello Remedial Action Project
Monticello Vicinity Properties
Site Description
The Monticello Radioactively Contaminated Properties consist of private and commercial
properties in the town of Monticello, covering approximately 4 square miles. An estimated
400 residences have been contaminated with radioactive mill wastes from ore processing
operations near the town. During World War II, the Federal government established an ore
processing mill to produce vanadium, a steel hardener, for the war effort. Vanadium is not
radioactive itself, but it is found in the same ore with uranium and radium; thus, the
processing wastes contain significant radioactivity. Soon after its construction, the mill began
production of a uranium/vanadium sludge for the Manhattan Engineer District. Uranium
production continued until 1960, when the plant was closed and dismantled. Contaminated
dust from the mill tailings piles has blown into the city. Tailings from the mill site have been
used as construction material and backfill, and as sand mix in concrete. These uses have
resulted in the radioactive contamination of numerous properties within Monticello.
Approximately 1,900 people live in the town of Monticello. The mill site is located
immediately south of the city on the flood plain of Montezuma Creek.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Soil is contaminated with uranium. Inhalation of radon-222, direct contact with
radionuclides in the tailings and other pathways of exposure to radioactive materials
may be harmful to the health of the nearby population. There is currently no
contamination of the domestic water supply.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1984, the EPA cleaned up two of the most heavily contaminated
homes. Since 1984, the Department of Energy (DOE) has been systematically
cleaning up the remaining properties. Three families were temporarily relocated
during cleanup activities. Cleanup actions have been completed at 90 properties. An
additional 300 or more properties are expected to be cleaned up by 1996. In 1990, the EPA
selected a remedy to clean up the radioactive properties by excavating the mill tailings around
the residences and temporarily disposing of the material at the Monticello Mill Tailings site.
A repository will be built to contain the material. The DOE presently is completing the
technical specifications for the repository, and construction is scheduled to begin in 1994.
Relocation of the contaminated materials is expected to begin in 1995 and to be completed
by 1997.
Site Facts: In 1988, the EPA, the DOE, and the State signed an Interagency Agreement.
Under this Agreement, the DOE will clean up the contaminated properties. Some property
owners will not allow investigations or cleanup of their property.
Environmental Progress
The DOE has finished cleaning 100 properties at the Monticello Radioactivity Contaminated
Properties site, reducing the potential for exposure to hazardous substances. The DOE
currently is completing the technical design for further cleanup activities, including the
repository for the mill tailings.
Site Repository
San Jaun County Public Library, 81 North Main Street, Monticello, UT 84535
March 1992 10 MONTICELLO RADIOACTIVELY
CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES
-------
OGDEN DEFEN
DEPOT
UTAH
EPA ID#UT9210020922
EPA REGION 8
Weber County
3 1/2 miles northwest of Ogden
Other Names:
'ense Depot Ogden Utah (DDOU)
Site Description
Defense Depot Ogden, Utah (DDOU) is located in Weber County and covers approximately
1,139 acres. DDOU is one of seven warehousing and distribution depots operated
nationwide by the Defense Logistics Agency. It provides logistics support to the military
services, including procurement and supply support, contract administration, and other
services. Since DDOU was activated in 1941, it has stored and distributed food, clothing,
petroleum products, and general medical, industrial, construction, and electronic supplies to
military installations, other DOD agencies, and other Federal agencies. In the past, unknown
quantities of both liquid and solid materials (including methyl bromide and mustard gas) have
been disposed of at DDOU in burning pits, burial pits, or off-site disposal facilities. The
population center of Ogden is located approximately 3 miles southeast from the site. The
distance from the site to the nearest residence is about 1,000 feet. The site is located above
the Weber Delta Aquifer, which consists of shallow and deep zones. There are no municipal
wells in use within the vicinity of DDOU. Pineview Reservoir supplies the City of Ogden
with drinking water and is located 10 miles east of the site. DDOU is drained by Mill and
Four-mile Creeks, both of which traverse the installation from east to west.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater sampling results have identified various volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), including trichloroethane (TCE), vinyl chloride (VCL), and
dichloroethane in the shallow aquifer. Soil is contaminated with semi-volatile
compounds of metals, including arsenic, lead, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and barium;
and low concentrations of pesticides. Access to the site is restricted. The site does
not currently pose any significant health risk. However, if the contaminated shallow
groundwater is used for domestic purposes in the future, there would be a
significant potential for health risks.
11
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in five stages: an immediate action and four long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of the french drain at the herbicide/pesticide mixing area and the
three waste burial sites.
Response Action Status
Immediate Action: During soil excavations in 1988, a team from the Escort and
Disposal Detachment at Dugway Proving Ground excavated Burial Site #3.
During the soil excavation, vials were recovered and identified as items from both
the chemical agent identification and training sets. Defused riot control grenades also were
recovered and safely disposed of.
Burial Site #1: Investigations to determine the nature and extent of the
contamination and to identify alternative technologies for cleanup of Burial Site
#\ were initiated in 1989 and are expected to be completed in mid-1992.
French Drain: The EPA selected a remedy for cleaning up groundwater at the
french drain area which includes: extracting contaminated groundwater, treating
the extracted groundwater, and reinjecting the treated groundwater. In addition,
contaminated soils will be excavated and incinerated off site. Work on the engineering design
has been completed. Soil excavation and treatment are underway. Construction of
groundwater extraction, treatment, and injection facilities is underway.
Burial Site #3: Investigations to determine the nature and extent of the
contamination and to identify methods for cleanup of Burial Site #3 were started
in 1990 and are scheduled to be completed in late 1992.
Burial Site #4: Investigations to determine the nature and extent of the
contamination and to identify alternative methods for cleanup of Burial Site #4
were begun in 1989 and are slated for completion in late 1992.
Site Facts: In June 1986, DDOU entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with the
State of Utah and the EPA to study and evaluate past hazardous wastes and disposal
practices at the facility. In 1989, a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) was signed by DDOU,
the EPA and the State of Utah to group the six principal waste disposal areas at DDOU into
four cleanup areas.
March 1992 12 OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT
-------
Environmental Progress
Due to the excavation and removal of contaminated soil, vials, and the defused grenades
from Burial Site #3 and excavating and disposing of contaminated soils at the French Drain
Area, the potential for exposure to hazardous materials has been significantly reduced.
Investigations into the extent of contamination at the other identified areas and appropriate
cleanup alternatives are being conducted.
Site Repository
Weber County Library, 2646 Jefferson Avenue, Ogden, UT 84401
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT
13
March 1992
-------
PETROCHEM
RECYCLING
CORP./EKOTEK IN
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD093119196
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Site Description
The 6 1/2 acre Petrochem Recycling Corp./Ekotek Inc. site is bordered on the north by a
junkyard, on the east and west by industrial and commercial properties, and on the south by
a residential community of approximately 50 homes. The facility was initially operated as an
oil refinery from 1953 to 1978. In 1978, it was converted into a hazardous waste
storage/treatment and petroleum recycling facility which operated until February 1988.
Sources of contamination at the site include approximately 60 above-ground tanks, 1,200
drums and smaller containers, three surface impoundments, an underground drain field,
numerous piles and pits of waste material, underground tanks, incineration furnaces, and
contaminated soil. Groundwater below the facility is unconfined and hydraulically connected
to aquifers underlying the Salt Lake Valley. Public wells within 4 miles of the site draw water
from these aquifers and serve an estimated 28,000 people. Additional wells within 4 miles of
the site are used by commercial food producers. In November 1990, contaminants were
detected in the air, threatening an estimated 11,400 people who live and work within a mile
of the site. The habitat of the two endangered species, the pelegrine falcon and the bald
eagle, and wetlands are located within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/29/91
Observed releases of chlorinated solvents to the shallow unconfined aquifer and
volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to the air migration pathway
have been documented. Other on-site contaminants include polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), phthalates, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
dioxin, furans, and heavy metals such as arsenic, chromium, lead and mercury.
On-site workers, urban residents and trespassers could be adversely affected
through direct contact with the soils or sediment, by drinking contaminated
groundwater, or inhaling contaminated air.
14
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 1988, the EPA initiated an emergency removal action to
address the release of hazardous substances from the site. The EPA's activities
included the stabilization and containment of hazardous wastes at the site and
maintenance of site security. Since that time, the EPA has been involved in the investigation
and assessment of site conditions and negotiations with a potentially responsibly parties'
committee. The EPA has provided oversight of the emergency surface removal actions
conducted by the committee. These actions have included extensive sampling and evaluation
of the extent of contamination at the site including samples taken from neighborhood yards,
construction of a perimeter fence, and 24-hour site security. Also, extensive sampling was
conducted to categorize the types of wastes found at the site and to delineate the extent of
contamination, treatment, and subsequent disposal of over 500,000 gallons of hazardous
liquids and contaminated storm water, disposal of all drums, and removal of debris and
sludges found at the site.
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination are
expected to initiate an extensive investigation into the nature and extent of
hazardous materials present at the site in late 1992. This study, scheduled to be
completed in 1995, also will result in the selection of remedies to cleanup the site.
Site Facts: A Notice of Violation was filed by the Utah Bureau of Solid and Hazardous
Waste and the Bureau of Air Quality to Petrochem Recycling in 1988. Operations were shut
down as a result of this notice. General and Special Notice letters were mailed individually to
470 potentially responsible parties in preparation for negotiations. A committee of potentially
responsible parties, which was formed during the removal action, has developed one of the
first potentially responsible party-generated early de minimus offers for settlement with
smaller contributors at the site.
Environmental Progress
Removal of tanks, drums, and chemicals along with prevention of contaminated surface water
run-off and security provisions have greatly reduced the potential for exposure to
contaminated materials at the Petrochem Recycling Corp./Ekotek Inc. Site, while further
investigations and cleanup activities are taking place.
PETROCHEM RECYCLING CORP./ 15 March 1992
EKOTEK INC.
-------
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
16
PETROCHEM RECYCLING CORP./
EKOTEK INC.
-------
PORTLAND CEMEN
(KILN DUST #2 &
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD980718670
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Salt Lake City
Other Names:
Lone Star Industries
Site Description
The Portland Cement (Kiln Dust #2 & #3) site consists of three disposal sites located on 71
acres that were used for the disposal of spent cement kiln dust and old kiln chromate bricks.
The cement kiln dust and bricks are stored in piles on the surface, exposing them to transport
by wind and water. The company disposed of the cement kiln dust and old kiln chromate
bricks in the greater Salt Lake City area until 1983, including disposal since the mid-1960s at
areas #2 and #3 and the west area. The dust, an alkaline by-product of cement
manufacturing collected in baghouses from the kiln stacks, contains concentrations of lead
and arsenic. The old kiln bricks contain elevated levels of heavy metals. Commercial and
industrialized areas are located around the site. Four homes are located on the western side
of the site. The Jordan River Surplus Canal and City Drain are surface water bodies adjacent
to the site. A large residential area east of the site contains two elementary schools. An
estimated 12,000 people live within a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and the nearby surface water are contaminated with heavy metals
including arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and molybdenum. Both also have high
pH levels. Inhalation of the extremely fine dust particles may cause potential health
threats to area residents and workers cleaning up the site. Potential health risks
may exist for individuals touching or drinking the contaminated groundwater.
Wildlife in the area also may be threatened by the contaminants. Other nearby
surface waters, including the Surplus Canal and City Drain, and the upper aquifer
may be threatened by the site contamination.
17
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on the cement kiln dust, and the soils and residual contamination.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The site was fenced by the potentially responsible parties to
prevent access to contaminated materials. A dust suppressant is applied on an
as-needed basis to prevent dust from blowing off the site.
Cement Kiln Dust: The EPA selected a remedy for cleanup of the cement kiln
dust in mid-1990. The selected remedy includes removing and shipping the cement
kiln dust off site for disposal at an EPA-approved landfill. Groundwater will be
monitored and, if necessary, the EPA will select a separate remedy for its cleanup. The EPA
and the State began the design of the remedy in 1991. Cleanup activities are scheduled to
begin in 1994.
Soils and Residual Contamination: In 1991, the State, under an agreement
with the EPA, undertook a study of soil contamination and any residual
contamination from the kiln dust. A remedy was selected in 1992 consisting of
removal of contaminated soil and kiln dust residual, and solidification and off-site disposal of
the soil. Design activities are scheduled to begin in late 1992.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was signed in March 1991 by the EPA, the Utah Department
of Health, and Lone Star Industries for design and cleanup actions associated with the
cement kiln dust. However, the U.S. Department of Justice did not accept the Decree and
subsequent negotiations with Lonestar failed to produce a settlement. The EPA and the
Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) are proceeding with a federally
sponsored design and cleanup.
Environmental Progress
Actions taken to fence the site and apply a dust suppressant to the site surface help prevent
possible contact with contamination both on site and off site at the Portland Cement (Kiln
Dust #2 & #3) site. These actions also removed any immediate threat to the surrounding
community and the environment while cleanup and design activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Salt Lake City Public Library, Chapman Branch Library, 577 South Ninth Street,
West Salt Lake City, UT 84104
March 1992 18 PORTLAND CEMENT (KILN DUST #2 & #3)
-------
RICHARDSON F
TAILINGS
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD980952840
EPA REGION 8
Summit County
1.5 miles north of Park City
Site Description
Contamination at the Richardson Flat Tailings site, approximately 160 acres in size, can be
traced back to two disposal areas. The first of these areas is a dam at which tailings from the
Keetley Ontario Mine and other metal mining operations owned by United Park City Mines
(UPCM) were deposited. Disposal of mine tailings most recently occurred from 1975 to 1981
by Park City Ventures and Noranda Mining, Inc. These two companies constructed and
operated mining facilities on property they leased from UPCM. The second disposal area is a
6-acre "flood plains tailings pile" that has existed at the site since 1953. This pile of tailings,
located immediately west of a tailings pond on the bank of Silver Creek, was observed
slumping into an on-site diversion ditch and Silver Creek from 1989 to 1990. Approximately
300 acres of pastureland are irrigated by water diverted from this creek. Silver Creek has
been classified as a cold water fishery by the State and is bordered by wetlands. An
estimated 4,500 people live within 4 miles of the site. The Richardson Flat Tailing site was
originally proposed to the NPL in 1989. Although the site did not become final at that time,
it was again proposed, in 1992 for two reasons. First the site definition has changed somewhat
to include the floodplain tailings as a source of contamination. Second, the site was re-scored
using the revised Hazard Ranking System model.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 02/07/92
Threats and Contaminants
Air, soils, surface water, groundwater and on-site tailings have been found to be
contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead,
selenium, silver, and zinc. An estimate of between 2 and 7 million tons of tailings
are contained by a dam at the tailings disposal area. Individuals could be at risk of
inhaling contaminated air or ingesting or touching contaminated soils, surface
water or groundwater.
19
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: One of the parties potentially responsible for the contamination
at the site, United Park City mines, has voluntarily covered the tailings deposit
areas with clean topsoil. In addition, they have erected a fence around the entire
site to provide security.
Entire Site: In 1992, the EPA began preliminary sampling of the air, surface
water, groundwater, and Silver Creek sediments at the site to determine the
nature and extent of site contamination. A more intensive study is scheduled to
begin in 1993.
Environmental Progress
Fencing of the site and covering the tailings with topsoil has reduced the risk at the
Richardson Flat Tailings site while additional investigations are conducted and activities are
planned for permanent cleanup of the site.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992
20
RICHARDSON FLAT TAILINGS
-------
ROSE PARK
SLUDGE PIT
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD980635452
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Salt Lake City
Site Description
The Rose Park Sludge Pit site is approximately 2 acres in size and is located in a Salt Lake
City park which also includes a baseball field, tennis courts, soccer fields, and a golf course.
The area was used by predecessors of Amoco Oil Co. for the disposal of petroleum wastes
from the early 1920s until 1957. Refinery sludges were placed into unlined storage pits. The
City bought the property in 1957 and covered the site. During park development grading
operations, site contamination was discovered when a bulldozer broke through the cover and
re-exposed the sludge. The area surrounding the site consists of residential, recreational, and
industrial areas.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, municipal, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/23/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Refinery sludges were contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
and sulfur dioxide. Physical contact with the highly acidic refinery sludges was a
potential health threat. Groundwater contamination from migration of the sludge
was possible. However, the area is now capped and the sludges do not pose a
threat to the public or the environment. A five year review will be prepared in
1992 to evaluate the continuing effectiveness of the remedy.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on containment of
the contaminants on site.
21
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: Construction of a lined clay cap and slurry wall over and around the
site was completed in 1983. Revegetation was completed in spring 1984. The site
cleanup was completed as of 1985. However, groundwater monitoring is being
continued by the Salt Lake City and County Health Departments for a period of 30 years. At
an annual monitoring meeting held in 1989, it was concluded that the present groundwater
operation and maintenance criteria were not adequate to determine the effectiveness of the
remedy. The plan was subsequently resubmitted and approved. In January 1990, Amoco
submitted a plan to monitor groundwater flow around the containment area. The first phase
of the monitoring was completed. The second phase, completed in 1992, included the
installation of new groundwater quality monitoring wells. A five year review was prepared in
1992 and confirmed the effectiveness of the site cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The cap and slurry wall have contained the sludges and have prevented contamination of
groundwater resources. All planned cleanup activities for the Rose Park Sludge Pit site have
been completed. The State will continue to monitor groundwater to ensure that no
contamination is released into the groundwater and that the site will not pose a threat to
human health or the environment.
Site Repository
Utah State Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation,
Cannon Health Building, 2nd Floor, 288 North 1460, West Salt Lake City UT 84116
March 1992 22 ROSE PARK SLUDGE PIT
-------
SHARON STEEL
CORP. (MIDVAL
TAILINGS)
UTAH
EPAID#UTD980951388
Site Description
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Midvale
Other Names:
harfrn Steel Corp. (Midvale Smelter)
The Sharon Steel Corp. (Midvale Tailings) site is a former milling and smelting operation
covering 268 acres in Midvale. Operations began in 1905, with the smelter closing in 1958 and
the milling operations closing in 1971. Sulfide concentrates of lead, copper, zinc, and other
metals were extracted from ore during the milling operations. Wastes from this process
resulted in an estimated accumulation of 10 million tons of mine tailings piles on the site,
which are 40 to 50 feet deep. The State first became involved at the mill in 1982, when it
learned that nearby residents were gathering the windblown tailings for use in gardens and
children's sandboxes. The State tested the "sand" from the gardens and sandboxes and found
high levels of lead. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) found arsenic in groundwater
underneath the site. Approximately 1,400 people live within 1/4 mile of the site; roughly 8,000
people live within 1 mile. The Jordan River supplies water to 160 acres of farm land through
10 irrigation intakes within 3 miles of the site. Two smaller drainage ditches, the North
Jordan Canal and Galena Canal, are nearby. A 22-acre wetland and several small ponds also
are on the mill site. The deep aquifer underlying the site is a source of drinking water for the
metropolitan Salt Lake City area. Municipal wells that draw from this aquifer are within 3
miles of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
The shallow groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals such as arsenic, iron,
manganese, and zinc from the mill site. Sediments from the Jordan River, which is
classified by the State for cold-water game fishing and recreation other than
swimming, are contaminated with heavy metals. The wetlands on the site contain
heavy metals and zinc tailings. Soil is contaminated with heavy metals including
lead, arsenic, cadmium, and zinc. The greatest potential health threat to the nearby
population is exposure to lead and arsenic through direct contact with or inhalation
of contaminated soils, including dust; children playing in nearby neighborhood soils
or sandboxes are especially at risk.
23
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of the mill site and grounds, and the vicinity property.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1989, the party potentially responsible for the site
contamination installed a fence around the site.
Mill Site and Grounds: The EPA has completed studies to determine the
nature and extent of groundwater and soil contamination at the mill site. The
EPA, with the assistance of the Bureau of Mines, currently is evaluating the
selected treatment methods prior to final remedy selection in late 1992.
Vicinity Property: The remedy selected by the EPA in late 1990 to address soil
contamination in the vicinity of the site includes excavating contaminated soil and
storing the soil on site until final disposal. The excavated soil will be replaced with
clean fill and revegetated. The State is managing the design of the remedy, which is expected
to be completed in 1992. Cleanup activities are expected to begin in 1992.
Environmental Progress
By constructing a fence to restrict access to the mill site and grounds, the potentially
responsible parties and the EPA have reduced the possibility of direct exposure to the
contaminants on the Sharon Steel Corp. (Midvale Tailings) site. Investigations leading to
permanent solutions for cleaning up the soil and groundwater at the site and the surrounding
affected areas are being completed, with design of cleanup actions underway.
Site Repository
Ruth V. Tyler Public Library, 315 Wood Street, Midvale, UT 84047
March 1992
24
SHARON STEEL CORP. (MIDVALE TAILINGS)
-------
TOOELE ARM
DEPOT
(NORTH AREA)
UTAH
EPA ID# UT3213820894
EPA REGION 8
Tooele County
Tooele Valley, 2 miles south of Tooele
Site Description
The 24,732-acre Tooele Army Depot site, established in 1942, is one of the major
ammunition storage and equipment maintenance installations in the United States. Disposal
practices at the site have included discharge of waste to unlined evaporation or percolation
ponds, neutralization and thermal destruction of chemical agents and munitions, detonation
and burning, and burial of these materials at the demilitarization range. A Post-closure permit
for the Industrial Waste Lagoon (IWL) addresses 47 Solid Waste Management Units
(SWMU). Thirty of these units are being addressed under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) and are divided into three areas: the Industrial Waste Lagoon, Known
Release SWMUs, and Suspected Release SWMUs. The remaining 17 units are grouped into
seven areas which are being addressed by Superfund. The City of Tooele has a population of
15,000. The deep regional aquifer, used as a drinking water source by area communities, is
contaminated beneath the area of the Depot and several hundred yards beyond the north
property boundary.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including trichloroethylene (TCE). On-site contamination of
the Industrial Waste Lagoon and wastewater ditches includes some low-level
organic contamination and relatively high levels of the heavy metals cadmium,
chromium, lead, and selenium. A release of TCE and TNT-related compounds also
was identified on the site. The potential health threat to people includes drinking
contaminated groundwater and direct contact with the groundwater and stream
sediments. Because the site is a secured military installation, public access is
restricted.
25
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in several long-term remedial phases focusing on groundwater
cleanup and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Groundwater: The Army has completed a Groundwater Quality Assessment and
Corrective Action Plan for groundwater cleanup at the Industrial Waste Lagoon.
The Army, the EPA, and the Utah Department of Environmental Quality
(UDEQ) began extraction and treatment of groundwater in early 1992.
Entire Site: The Army has begun investigations to identify releases of hazardous
chemicals and cleanup alternatives at 10 areas of contamination on the site.
Three of these are being addressed under RCRA and the remaining areas are
being addressed by Superfund. Investigations will determine the nature and extent of the
contamination and will identify alternatives for final cleanup at these areas.
Site Facts: The Tooele Army Depot-North Area (TEAD-N), Utah Department of
Environmental Quality (UDEQ), and the EPA signed a Federal Facility Agreement in 1991.
TEAD-N is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially funded program
developed in 1978 by the Department of Defense (DOD) to identify, control, and investigate
hazardous wastes on military or other DOD installations.
Environmental Progress
Extraction and treatment of the groundwater performed by the Army, in conjunction with the
EPA and the UDEQ, has reduced threats to public health while studies leading to site
cleanup are ongoing.
Site Repository
Utah State Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental Response and Remediation,
Cannon Health Building, 2nd Floor, 288 North 1460, West Salt Lake City, UT 84116
March 1992 26 TOOELE ARMY DEPOT (NORTH AREA)
-------
UTAH POWER &
LIGHT/AMERIC
BARREL CO.
UTAH
EPA ID# UTD980667240
Site Description
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Salt Lake City
The 2 1/2-acre Utah Power & Light/American Barrel Co. site was used as a barrel storage,
recycling, and reconditioning facility. Empty barrels at one time contained various volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), degreasers, and solvents. Prior to the barrel operation, the site
was used by Utah Power and Light as a creosote pole treating facility and as a coal
gasification plant in the late 1800s. Approximately 39,700 people live within 2 miles of the
site. Four schools are located within 1 mile. The nearest residence is 225 feet away. One
municipal well and one private well are located within 1 mile of the site. A drainage ditch
runs along the eastern fence of the site. Water conveyed by the ditch is believed to percolate
into the ground within several yards of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 05/05/89
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
Soils contain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from wood treating and
coal gasification operations, phthalates, VOCs, and heavy metals including
chromium, copper, lead, and zinc. Groundwater contains VOCs including benzene,
styrene, toluene, and xylene. Potential health risks may exist for individuals who
accidentally ingest or come into direct contact with contaminated soil and
groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: an immediate action and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on soil and groundwater cleanup.
27
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Action: In 1988, under EPA monitoring, the parties potentially
responsible for the site contamination removed 50,000 barrels containing VOCs,
solvents, and herbicide residues to a federally approved facility.
Soil and Groundwater: The potentially responsible parties initiated an
investigation in 1990 to determine the type and extent of groundwater and soil
contamination and to identify possible cleanup alternatives. Sampling and site
characterization were completed in 1991. A study to evaluate options for cleaning up the
contaminants at the site is proceeding and will be completed in 1992. Once this investigation
phase is completed, the EPA will review the study findings and will select the final cleanup
remedies for contaminated soils and groundwater resources.
Site Facts: The EPA and the potentially responsible parties signed an Administrative Order
on Consent in August 1990, under which the parties agreed to conduct the soil and
groundwater investigation.
Environmental Progress
The removal of waste barrels containing VOCs, solvents, and herbicide residues has greatly
reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the Utah Power &
Light/American Barrel site while investigations continue and cleanup activities are being
planned.
Site Repository
Salt Lake City Public Library, Chapman Branch Library, 577 South Ninth Street,
West Salt Lake City, UT 84104
March 1992
28
UTAH POWER & LIGHT/AMERICAN BARREL CO.
-------
WASATCH CHEMldA
COMPANY (LOT 6
UTAH
EPA ID#UTD000716399
Site Description
EPA REGION 8
Salt Lake County
Salt Lake City
The 15-acre Wasatch Chemical Company (Lot 6) site was used for the formulation of various
pesticides, herbicides, and industrial chemical products in the early 1960s. Approximately
2,300 cubic yards of waste were disposed of in a concrete pond and drums on the site. During
an inspection in 1985, the State found 48 drums holding ignitable and reactive liquids and 13
pressurized gas cylinders in deteriorated condition. Additional wastes from the operation are
believed to have been discharged into a street ditch, which eventually drains into the Great
Salt Lake. Approximately 85,000 people live within a 3-mile radius of the site. The closest
residence is 1/4 mile away. Although previously accessible to trespassers, the site is now
secured.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 02/11/91
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater underlying the site contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
herbicides. Soils and sludges contain VOCs, pesticides, herbicides, and dioxin. Low
levels of pesticides were detected in surface water; however, these may have
resulted from an off-site source. Potential health risks may exist for individuals who
accidentally ingest or touch contaminated surface water, groundwater, sludges, or
soils.
29
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: The EPA removed abandoned gas cylinders from the site
in 1986 and detonated them at a State-owned site. The parties potentially
responsible for the contamination constructed a dioxin storage facility. Abandoned
drums were repackaged and stored in the facility along with certain surface soils removed
from Lot 6. Dioxin-contaminated soils have been temporarily capped, awaiting final remedial
action.
Entire Site: In early 1991, the potentially responsible parties completed an
investigation, under State monitoring, to determine the type and extent of soil,
surface water, and groundwater contamination. The remedy selected in early 1991
includes the consolidation of contaminated soils, sludges, and other wastes in an evaporation
pond formerly used at the site and in-place vitrification of these materials. Contaminated
groundwater will be removed through extraction wells and trenches, treated by air stripping
and carbon absorption, and discharged to a sewer system. Additionally, institutional controls
will prevent the use of contaminated groundwater. Design of the selected remedy began in
late 1991 and is expected to be completed in late 1993.
Site Facts: In 1986, the State of Utah and the EPA negotiated a Consent Order for
removal of the drums. A Consent Decree was signed in 1988 with one of the potentially
responsible parties agreeing to complete a site investigation. A Consent Decree was signed in
September 1991 with certain potentially responsible parties to complete design and cleanup
activities.
Environmental Progress
The removal of gas cylinders and safe storage of abandoned drums have greatly reduced the
potential for exposure to contaminated materials at the Wasatch Chemical Company (Lot 6)
site while the remedy is being designed.
Site Repository
Salt Lake City Public Library, Chapman Branch Library, 577 South Ninth Street,
West Salt Lake City, 84104
March 1992 30 WASATCH CHEMICAL COMPANY (LOT 6)
-------
GLOSSARY
Terms Used in the NPL Book
This glossary defines terms used throughout the NPL Volumes. The terms and
abbreviations contained in this glossary apply specifically to work performed
under the Superfund program in the context of hazardous waste management. These
terms may have other meanings when used in a different context. A table of common
toxic chemicals found at NPL sites, their sources, and their potential threats is located
on page G-15
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds or release
heavy metal contaminants that remain in the
environment long after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A
legal and enforceable agreement between the
EPA and the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally, the
EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for site
studies). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized vessel. The contaminants are evaporated
into the air stream. The air may be further
treated before it is released into the atmosphere.
Ambient Air: Any unconfined part of the
atmosphere. Refers to the air that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity of
contaminated air sources.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand,
or gravel capable of storing water within cracks
and pore spaces, or between grains. When
water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient
quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used
for drinking or other purposes. The water
contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
A "sole source aquifer" supplies 50 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in
removing particulates from the air by passing it
through cloth bags in an enclosure.
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH
(greater than 7.0), which tend to be corrosive in
chemical reactions. When bases are mixed with
acids, they neutralize each other, forming salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used
to prevent the migration of contaminants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some
contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living
tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people, as they
breathe contaminated air, drink contaminated
water, or eat contaminated food.
Biological Treatment: The use of bacteria
or other microbial organisms to break down
toxic organic materials into carbon dioxide and
water.
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using
naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants and
break them down into non-hazardous compo-
nents.
Bog: A type of wetland that is covered with
peat moss deposits. Bogs depend primarily on
moisture from the air for their water source, are
usually acidic, and are rich in plant residue [see
Wetland].
Boom: A floating device used to contain oil
floating on a body of water or to restrict the
potential overflow of waste liquids from
containment structures.
Borehole: A hole that is drilled into the
ground and used to sample soil or ground-water.
Borrow Pit: An excavated area where soil,
sand, or gravel has been dug up for use else-
where.
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a
synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated
materials. The surface of the cap generally is
mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in
which contaminants are removed from ground-
water and surface water by forcing water
through tanks containing activated carbon, a
specially treated material that attracts and holds
or retains contaminants.
Carbon Disulfide: A degreasing agent
formerly used extensively for parts washing.
This compound has both inorganic and organic
G-2
-------
GLOSSARY
properties, which increase cleaning efficiency.
However, these properties also cause chemical
reactions that increase the hazard to human
health and the environment.
Carbon Treatment: [see Carbon Adsorp-
tion].
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of
holes in a landfill where waste is dumped,
compacted, and covered with layers of dirt.
CERCLA: [see Comprehensive Environmen-
tal Response, Compensation, and Liability Act].
Characterization: The sampling, monitoring,
and analysis of a site to determine the extent and
nature of toxic releases. Characterization
provides the basis for acquiring the necessary
technical information to develop, screen, ana-
lyze, and select appropriate cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the poten-
tial for leaching or other movement.
Chromated Copper Arsenate: An insecti-
cide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This
salt is used extensively as a wood preservative
in pressure-treating operations. It is highly toxic
and water-soluble, making it a relatively mobile
contaminant in the environment
*
Cleanup: Actions taken to eliminate a release
or threat of release of a hazardous substance.
The term "cleanup" sometimes is used inter-
changeably with the terms remedial action,
removal action, response action, or corrective
action.
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops
accepting wastes and is shut down under Federal
guidelines that ensure the protection of the
public and the environment.
Comment Period: A specific interval during
which the public can review and comment on
various documents and EPA actions related to
site cleanup. For example, a comment period is
provided when the EPA proposes to add sites to
the NPL. Also, there is minimum 3-week
comment period for community members to
review and comment on the remedy proposed to
clean up a site.
Community Relations: The EPA effort to
establish and maintain two-way communication
with the public. The goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related actions,
assuring public input into decision-making
processes related to affected communities, and
making certain that the Agency is aware of, and
responsive to, public concerns. Specific com-
munity relations activities are required in
relation to Superfund cleanup actions [see
Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA): Congress enacted the
CERCLA, known as Superfund, in 19X0 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 lagoon-s. 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.
Overpacking: Process used for isolating
large volumes of waste by jacketing or encap-
sulating waste to prevent further spread or
leakage of contaminating materials. Leaking
drums may be contained within oversized
barrels as an interim measure prior to removal
and final disposal.
Pentachlorophenol (PCP): A synthetic,
modified petrochemical that may be used as a
wood preservative because of its toxicity to
termites and fungi. It is a common component
of creosotes and can cause cancer.
Perched (groundwater): Groundwater
separated from another underlying body of
groundwater by a confining layer, often clay or
rock.
Percolation: The downward flow or filtering
of water or other liquids through subsurface
rock or soil layers, usually continuing down-
ward to groundwater.
Pesticide: A substance or mixture of sub-
stances intended to prevent, destroy, or repel any
pest. If misused, pesticides can accumulate in
the foodchain and contaminate the environment.
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances
produced from petroleum in refinery operations
and as fuel oil residues. These include
fluoranthene, chrysene, mineral spirits, and
refined oils. Petrochemicals are the bases from
which volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
plastics, and many pesticides are made. These
chemical substances often are toxic to humans
and the environment.
Phenols: Organic compounds that are used in
plastics manufacturing and are by-products of
petroleum refining, tanning, textile, dye, and
resin manufacturing. Phenols are highly poison-
ous.
Physical Chemical Separation: The
treatment process of adding a chemical to a
substance to separate the compounds for further
treatment or disposal.
Pilot Testing: A small-scale test of a pro-
posed treatment system in the field to determine
its ability to clean up specific contaminants.
Plugging: The process of stopping the flow of
water, oil, or gas into or out of the ground
through a borehole or well penetrating the
ground.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater
flowing from a specific source. The movement
of the groundwater is influenced by such factors
as local groundwater flow patterns, the character
of the aquifer in which groundwater is con-
tained, and the density of contaminants [see
Migration].
Pollution: Generally, the presence of matter
or energy whose nature, location, or quantity
produces undesired health or environmental
effects.
G-9
-------
GLOSSARY
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs):
PAHs, such as pyrene, are a group of highly
reactive organic compounds found in motor oil.
They are a common component of creosotes and
can cause cancer.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A
group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications,
carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope immersion oils, and caulking
compounds. PCBs also are produced in certain
combustion processes. PCBs are extremely
persistent in the environment because they are
very stable, non-reactive, and highly heat
resistant. Chronic exposure to PCBs is believed
to cause liver damage. It also is known to
bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. PCB use and
sale was banned in 1979 with the passage of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and
biphenyls, are a group of highly reactive organic
compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC): A plastic made
from the gaseous substance vinyl chloride. PVC
is used to make pipes, records, raincoats, and
floor tiles. Health risks from high concentra-
tions of vinyl chloride include liver cancer and
lung cancer, as well as cancer of the lymphatic
and nervous systems.
Potable Water: Water that is safe for drink-
ing and cooking.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs):
Parties associated with a Superfund site who
may be liable for the cost of remedying the
release of hazardous substances. This may
include owners or operators of the site or trans-
porters who disposed of materials at the site.
PRPs may admit liability, or liability may be
determined by a court of law. PRPs may sign a
Consent Decree or Administrative Order on
Consent to participate in the site cleanup without
admitting liability.
Precipitation: The removal of solids from
liquid waste so that the solid and liquid portions
can be disposed of safely; the removal of
particles from airborne emissions. Electro-
chemical precipitation is the use of an anode or
cathode to remove the hazardous chemicals.
Chemical precipitation involves the addition of
some substance to cause the solid portion to
separate.
Preliminary Assessment: The process of
collecting and reviewing available information
about a known or suspected waste site or release
to determine if a threat or potential threat exists.
Pump and Treat: A groundwater cleanup
technique involving the extracting of contami-
nated groundwater from the subsurface and the
removal of contaminants, using one of several
treatment technologies.
Radionuclides: Elements, including radium
and uranium-235 and -238, which break down
and produce radioactive substances due to their
unstable atomic structure. Some are man-made,
and others are naturally occurring in the envi-
ronment. Radon, the gaseous form of radium,
decays to form alpha particle radiation, which
cannot be absorbed through skin. However, it
can be inhaled, which allows alpha particles to
affect unprotected tissues directly and thus cause
cancer. Radiation also occurs naturally through
the breakdown of granite.
RCRA: [See Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act].
Recharge Area: A land area where rainwater
saturates the ground and soaks through the earth
to reach an aquifer.
G-10
-------
GLOSSARY
Record of Decision (ROD): A public
document that explains which cleanup
alternative(s) will be used to clean up sites
listed on the NPL. It is based on information
generated during the remedial investigation
and feasibility study and consideration of
public comments and community concerns.
Recovery Wells: Wells used to withdraw
contaminants or contaminated groundwater.
Recycle: The process of minimizing waste
generation by recovering usable products that
might otherwise become waste.
Remedial Action (RA): The actual con-
struction or implementation phase of a
Superfund site cleanup following the remedial
design [see Cleanup].
Remedial Design: A phase of site cleanup
where engineers design the technical specifi-
cations for cleanup remedies and technolo-
gies.
Remedial Investigation: An in-depth
study designed to gather the data necessary to
determine the nature and extent of contamina-
tion at a Superfund site, establish the criteria
for cleaning up the site, identify the prelimi-
nary alternatives for cleanup actions, and
support the technical and cost analyses of the
alternatives. The remedial investigation is
usually done with the feasibility study. In this
volume, the remedial investigation is referred
to as a site study [see also Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at the site.
Remedy Selection: The selection of the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few
sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site
contamination, or that any remaining con-
tamination will be naturally dispersed without
further cleanup activities, a "No Action"
remedy is selected [see Record of Decision].
Removal Action: Short-term immediate
actions taken to address releases of hazardous
substances [see Cleanup].
Residual: The amount of a pollutant re-
maining in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or the particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubber.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA): A Federal law that established
a regulatory system to track hazardous sub-
stances from the time of generation to dis-
posal. The law requires safe and secure
procedures to be used in treating, transport-
ing, storing, and disposing of hazardous
substances. RCRA is designed to prevent
new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Retention Pond: A small body of liquid
used for disposing of wastes and containing
overflow from production facilities. Some-
times retention ponds are used to expand the
capacity of such structures as lagoons the
store waste.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contaminants
from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution control device
that uses a spray of water or reactant or a dry
process to trap pollutants in emissions.
Sediment: The layer of soil, sand, and
minerals at the bottom of surface waters such
as streams, lakes, and rivers, that absorbs
contaminants.
G-11
-------
GLOSSARY
Seeps: Specific points where releases of
liquid, usually leachate, form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower
edges of landfills.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in
the ground used for the storage of liquids,
usually in the form of leachate, from waste
disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves
the pit by moving through the surrounding
soil.
Septage: Residue remaining in a septic tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is neces-
sary for choosing and designing cleanup mea-
sures and monitoring their effectiveness.
Site Inspection: The collection of informa-
tion from a hazardous waste site to determine
the extent and severity of hazards posed by the
site. It follows, and is more extensive than, a
preliminary assessment. The purpose is to
gather information necessary to score the site,
using the Hazard Ranking System, and to
determine if the site presents an immediate
threat that requires a prompt removal action.
Slag: The fused refuse or dross separated
from a metal in the process of smelting.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial
or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Slurry Wall: Barriers used to contain the flow
of contaminated groundwater or subsurface
liquids. Slurry walls are constructed by digging
a trench around a contaminated area and filling
the trench with an impermeable material that
prevents water from passing through it. The
groundwater or contaminated liquids trapped
within the area surrounded by the slurry wall
can be extracted and treated.
Smelter: A facility that melts or fuses ore,
often with an accompanying chemical change,
to separate the metal. Emissions from smelters
are known to cause pollution.
Soil Gas: Gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between par-
ticles of soil. Such gases can move through
or leave the soil or rock, depending on
changes in pressure.
Soil Vapor Extraction: A treatment
process that uses vacuum wells to remove
hazardous gases from soil.
Soil Washing: A water-based process for
mechanically scrubbing soils in-place to remove
undesirable materials. There are two ap-
proaches: dissolving or suspending them in the
wash solution for later treatment by conven-
tional methods, and concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through simple particle
size separation techniques [see Solvent Extrac-
tion].
Stabilization: The process of changing an
active substance into inert, harmless material,
or physical activities at a site that act to limit
the further spread of contamination without
actual reduction of toxicity.
Solidification/Stabilization: A chemical
or physical reduction of the mobility of
hazardous constituents. Mobility is reduced
through the binding of hazardous constituents
into a solid mass with low permeability and
resistance to leaching.
G-12
-------
GLOSSARY
Solvent: A substance capable of dissolving
another substance to form a solution. The
primary uses of industrial solvents are as
cleaners for degreasing, in paints, and in
Pharmaceuticals. Many solvents are flam-
mable and toxic to varying degrees.
Solvent Extraction: A means of separating
hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges,
and sediment, thereby reducing the volume of
the hazardous waste that must be treated. It
generally is used as one in a series of unit
operations. An organic chemical is used to
dissolve contaminants as opposed to water-
based compounds, which usually are used in
soil washing.
Sorption: The action of soaking up or
attracting substances. It is used in many
pollution control systems.
Special Notice Letter: [See Notice Let-
ter].
StillbOttom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air Strip-
ping]-
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
Superfund: The program operated under the
legislative authority of the CERCLA and
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) to update and improve environ-
mental laws. The program has the authority to
respond directly to releases or threatened re-
leases of hazardous substances that may endan-
ger public health, welfare, or the environment
The "Superfund" is a trust fund that finances
cleanup actions at hazardous waste sites.
Surge Tanks: A holding structure used to
absorb irregularities in flow of liquids, including
liquid waste materials.
Swamp: A type of wetland that is dominated
by woody vegetation and does not accumulate
peat moss deposits. Swamps may be fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetlands].
Thermal Treatment: The use of heat to
remove or destroy contaminants from soil.
Treatability Studies: Testing a treatment
method on contaminated 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
Sources
Potential Health
Ife&vy Ivtetefs
Volatils Organic
Compounds
Creosotes
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Lead, Manga-
nese, Mercury, Nickel,
Silver, Selenium, Zinc
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
Perchloroethylene (PCE),
Acetone, Benzene,
Ketone, Methyl chloride,
Toluene, Vinyl Chloride,
Dichlorethylene
Chlordane, DDT 4-4, DDE,
Heptachlor, Aldrin, Endrin,
Atrazine, Dieldrin, Toxa-
phene
Polyaromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs), Polynuclear
aromatics (PNAs),
Phenolic Tars, Pentachlo-
rophenol (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.
G-15
* U.S. G.P.O.:1993-341-835:81045
------- |