&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102 G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/043
December 1992
PB93-963245
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
VIRGINIA
1992 UPDATE
J "ii Ki'< y l.d I
-------
Publication #9200.5-7456
December 1992
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Virginia
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard. 12th FJnnr
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-l
-------
INTRODUCTION
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SUPERFUND
During the second half of the Twentieth
Century, the environmental conse-
quences of more than 100 years of industrial-
ization in the United States became increas-
ingly clear. Authors such as Rachel Carson
wrote passionately about the often-hidden en-
vironmental effects of our modern society's
widespread use of chemicals and other haz-
ardous materials. Their audience was small at
first, but gradually their message spread.
Growing concern turned to action, as people
learned more about the environment and be-
gan to act on their knowledge
The 1970s saw environmental issues burst
onto the national scene and take hold in the
national consciousness. The first Earth Day
was observed in 1970, the year that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was
founded. By the end of the 1970s, Love Canal
in New York and the Valley of the Drums in
Kentucky had entered the popular lexicon as
synonyms for pollution and environmental
degradation.
Superfund Is Established
The industrialization that gave Americans the
world's highest standard of living also created
problems that only a national program could
address. By 1980, the U.S. Congress had
passed numerous environmental laws, imple-
mented by the EPA, but many serious hazard-
ous waste problems were slipping through the
cracks.
Responding to growing concern about public
health and environmental threats from uncon-
trolled releases of hazardous materials, the
U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA). Popularly known as
Superfund, CERCLA had one seemingly
simple job—to uncover and clean up hazard-
ous materials spills and contaminated sites.
A Big Job
Few in Congress, the EPA, the environmen-
tal community, or the general public knew in
1980 just how big the nation's hazardous ma-
terials problem is. Almost everyone thought
that Superfund would be a short-lived pro-
gram requiring relatively few resources to
clean up at most a few hundred sites. They
were quite mistaken.
As the EPA set to work finding sites and
gauging their potential to harm people and
the environment, the number of sites grew.
Each discovery seemed to lead to another,
and today almost 36,000 hazardous waste
sites have been investigated as potential haz-
ardous waste sites. They are catalogued in
the EPA's computerized database, CERCLIS
(for the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
-------
INTRODUCTION
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Informa-
tion System).
The damage to public health and the environ-
ment that each site in CERCLIS might cause
is evaluated; many sites have been referred to
State and local governments for cleanup. The
EPA lists the nation's most serious hazardous
waste sites on the National Priorities List, or
NPL. (These Superfund sites are eligible for
federally-funded cleanup, but whenever pos-
sible the EPA makes polluters pay for the
contamination they helped create.) The NPL
now numbers 1,275 sites, with 50 to 100
added each year. By the end of the century,
the NPL may reach as many as 2,100 sites.
Superfund faces some of the most complex
pollution problems ever encountered by an
environmental program. Improperly stored or
disposed chemicals and the soil they contami-
nate are one concern. More difficult to correct
are the wetlands and bays, and the groundwa-
ter, lakes, and rivers often used for drinking
water that are contaminated by chemicals
spreading through the soil or mixing with
storm water runoff. Toxic vapors contaminate
the air at some sites, threatening the health of
people living and working near by.
Superfund aims to control immediate public
health and environmental threats by tackling
the worst problems at the worst sites first.
Wherever possible, Superfund officials use
innovative treatment techniques—many de-
veloped or refined by the EPA—to correct
hazardous materials problems once and for
all. Many of the treatment techniques they use
did not exist when the program was created.
The EPA Administrator had challenged Su-
perfund to complete construction necessary
for cleanup work at 130 NPL sites by the end
of the 1992 federal fiscal year. By September
30, 1992, the end of fiscal year 1992, con-
struction had been completed at a total of 149
NPL sites. Superfund is well on its way of
meeting the Administrator's goal of complet-
ing construction at 200 NPL sites by the end
of fiscal year 1993, and 650 sites by the end
of fiscal year 2000.
Quick Cleanup at
Non-NPL Sites
Long-standing hazardous waste sites are not
Superfund's only concern. The EPA also re-
sponds to hazardous spills and other emergen-
cies, hauling away chemicals for proper treat-
ment or disposal. Superfund teams perform or
supervise responses at rail and motor vehicle
accidents, fires, and other emergencies in-
volving hazardous substances. They also
evacuate people living and working near by,
if necessary, and provide clean drinking water
to people whose own water is contaminated.
Removal crews also post warning signs and
take other precautions to keep people and ani-
mals away from hazardous substances.
Superfund employee prepares equipment for ground-water
treatment.
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
Quick Cleanups, or Removals, are not limited
to emergencies. When cleanup crews at con-
taminated sites find hazardous substances that
immediately threaten people or the environ-
ment, they act right away to reduce the threat
or to remove the chemicals outright. As the
EPA implements the Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model (SACM), more and more sites
will undergo quick cleanups, and many of
these will be cleaned up completely without
ever being included on the NPL. (See
"Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Ac-
celerated Cleanup Model.")
Some of Superfund's most significant gains in
public health and environmental protection
have been won by the removal program. As of
March 31, 1992, the Emergency Response
Superfund employee removing drums from a Superfund site.
Program had logged more than 2,300 removal
completions since Superfund was established.
The Public's Role
Superfund is unique among federal programs
in its commitment to citizen participation. Al-
though the EPA is responsible for determin-
ing how dangerous a site is and how best to
clean it up, the Agency relies on citizen input
as it makes these decisions.
Community residents are often invaluable
sources of information about a hazardous
waste site, its current and previous owners,
and the activities that took place there. Such
information can be crucial to experts evaluat-
ing a site and its potential dangers.
Residents also comment on EPA cleanup
plans by stating their concerns and prefer-
ences at public meetings and other forums and
in formal, written comments to Agency pro-
posals. The EPA takes these comments and
concerns seriously, and has modified many
proposals in response to local concerns. For,
ultimately, it is the community and its citizens
that will live with the results of the EPA's de-
cisions and actions; it is only fair that citizens
participate in the process.
A Commitment to
Communication
The Superfund program is very serious about
public outreach and communication. Com-
munity relations coordinators are assigned to
each NPL site to help the public understand
the potential hazards present, as well as the
cleanup alternatives. Local information re-
positories, such as libraries or other public
buildings, have been established near each
NPL site to ensure that the public has an op-
portunity to review all relevant information
and the proposed cleanup plans.
The individual State volumes contain sum-
mary fact sheets on NPL sites in each State
and territory. Together, the fact sheets provide
a concise report on site conditions and the
progress made toward site cleanups as of
March 1992. The EPA revises these volumes
periodically to provide an up-to-date record of
program activities. A glossary of key terms
relating to hazardous waste management and
Superfund site cleanup is provided at the back
of this book.
VII
-------
INTRODUCTION
Superfund is, of course, a public program, and
as such it belongs to everyone of us. This vol-
ume, along with other State volumes, com-
prises the EPA's report on Superfund
progress to the program's owners for the year
1992.
VIM
-------
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
The site fact sheets presented in this book
are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
^HjtXXXXX XXX XXXXXX
Environmental Progress
Site Repository
xxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx x>
xxxxxxxx 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
-------
* Ma/c. CHI.S
• NPLS«»S
Superfund
Activities
in Virginia
The Commonwealth of Vir-
ginia is located within EPA
Region 3, which includes the five mid-Atlantic States and the District of Columbia. The Common-
wealth covers 39,704 square miles. According to the 1990 Census, Virginia experienced a 16 percent
increase in population between 1980 and 1990, and is ranked twelfth in U.S. population with approxi-
mately 6,187,000 residents.
The Virginia Waste Management Act of 1986, most recently amended in 1990, estab-
lishes the Solid and Hazardous Waste Contingency Fund and provides for State enforcement
authority. The statute authorizes the Commonwealth to issue orders compelling polluter
participation in site cleanup activities, recover costs, pursue civil and criminal penalties, and
place a lien on property as a means of payment. In practice, the Commonwealth has been
successful in encouraging voluntary polluter participation and, to date, has not initiated any
enforcement or cost recovery activities. In addition to the 10 percent contribution from the
Commonwealth required under the Federal Superfund program, the Fund provides for
emergency response and removals, studies and design, site investigation, long-term cleanup
actions, and operation and maintenance activities. Currently, 20 sites in the Commonwealth
of Virginia have been listed as final on the NPL; one has been deleted. Two new sites have
been proposed for Listing in 1992.
The Department of Waste Management
implements the Superfund Program in tne Commonwealth of Virginia
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the Common-
wealth of Virginia include:
Other
Chemical and
Metal
Production
Facilities
Landfills and
Recycljng
Operations
Storage and
Disposal
Facilities
Federal Facilities
Wood
Production
and
Treatment
Facilities
Facts about the 23 NPL sites
in Virginia:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at 18
sites.
Eleven sites endanger sensitive
environments.
Fifteen sites are located near residen-
tial areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
VIRGINIA
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the Commonwealth of Virginia, potentially
responsible parties are paying for or conducting
cleanup activities at 15 sites.
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCs
Creosotes
PCBs
Pesticides/Herbicides
Other*
Dioxin
Acids
Cyanide
Petrochemicals/Explosives
Plastics
87%
43%
30%
22%
17%
17%
9%
9%
9%
9%
4%
"Other contaminants include disulfides,
aluminum and sulfate.
For Further Information on NPL Sites and
Hazardous Waste Programs in the Commonwealth
of Virginia Please Contact:
EPA Region 3 Environmental
Education and Outreach Branch
National Response Center
The Department of Waste
Management: Division of Special
Programs
EPA Region 3 Site Assessment
Branch
Superfund Hotline
For information concerning
community involvement
To report a hazardous
waste emergency
For information about the
State's responsibility in the
Superfund Program
For information about the
Regional Superfund Program
For information about the
Federal Superfund Program
(215) 597-9370
(800) 424-8802
(804) 786-3063
(215) 597-8229
(800) 424-9068
March 1992
XVIII
-------
THE NPL REPORT
PROGRESS TO DATE
The following Progress Report lists all
sites currently on, or deleted from, the
NPL and briefly summarizes the status of ac-
tivities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup
process are arrayed across the top of the chart,
and each site's progress through these steps is
represented by an arrow (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.
O An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
^ A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been selected. In these cases,
the arrows are discontinued at the
"Remedy Selection" step and resume in
the "Construction Complete" category.
O A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently
are designing the technical specifica-
tions for the selected cleanup remedies
and technologies.
O A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and cur-
rently are underway.
^ 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
-------
.2
'5>
>
"o
tfVV
CO
^rf
CO
Q>
+•*
C
ii\
VI
*•*
cn
_j
Q.
Z
+•*
CO
Q.
^
Progress Toward Cleani
Remedy Cleanup Construction
Design Ongoing Complete Deleted
•o* »
Q) t\
E «
£<£
M
.•K =5
V)
8
5 o
? a
C (0
— a)
cc
2
(Q
Q
_l
Q.
Z
t
3
Q)
re
55
ft
ft ft
ft ft
s s
§> £
oo cs
(~~5 ^2
TO Cy
PU P-,
- e
PORTSMOUTH
WESTMORELAI
ABEX CORPORATION
ARROWHEAD ASSOCIATES/SCOVILL
ft
ft
$
M-l
T— i
i
Fj3
5
tin
i
£
1
CORP.
ATLANTIC WOOD INDUSTRIES, INC.
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
i
SD
8
*c9
S
PH
WARREN
^;
X
<;
ft
ft
ft ft
ft
o\ r^
go go
2 ^
*c9 *c9
c c
UH U-
^ Q
BUCKINGHAN
CHESTERFffiL
BUCKINGHAM COUNTY LANDFILL
C & R BATTERY COMPANY, INC.
ft
ft
ft
ft ft
ft ft
§ ^
8 2
*c9 *c9
S S
UU UH
YORK
CULPEPER
CfflSMAN CREEK
CULPEPER WOOD PRESERVERS, INC.
ft ft
ft ft
ft
§ ^
f*""l ^H
CO 2
UH U.
Q
CHESTERFffiL
ROANOKE
DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER
DIXIE CAVERNS COUNTY LANDFILL
ft
ft
§
o
F3
C
E
O
gogogc£hq\go gogogo^
i-^ ^^ f*- r~^ r^- -r-4 i-* *-^ •^ *^
CiQ.ci5.5.cci 5.Q.S.ci
CO»Ocslr^r^cri ^£S£O>-oS y wEHH
3n (XI Di 2 r*- S E OO OO CO
S
H & H, INC., BURN PIT
L. A. CLARKE & SON
MATTHEWS ELECTRIC PLATING
NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER
NAVAL WEAPONS STATION-YORKTOV
RENTOKIL, INC. (VIRGINIA WOOD
PRESERVING DIVISION)
RHINEHART TIRE FIRE DUMP
SALTVILLE WASTE DISPOSAL
SAUNDERS SUPPLY CO.
SUFFOLK CITY LANDFILL
ft
ft
ft
CO
S
R
8
*c9
c
PU
NELSON
U.S. TITANIUM
March 1992
xx
-------
0)
3
_c
"+*
o
g,
CO
2
C/>
0)
(0
0)
±r
CO
_l
Q_
to
Q.
D
(0
JD
O
•a
(5
c
a. ec
uo
*s -s a
"Sil
>
& &
-111!
03 C
_J
&
I
s
1
K
a
3
.2
V)
V)
2
o>
o
March 1992
-------
ABEX
CORPORATION
VIRGINIA
EPAID#VAD980551683
PA REGION 3
ity of Portsmouth
Portsmouth
Site Description
The Abex Corporation site covers 2 acres in Portsmouth. The company operated a brass and
bronze foundry from 1928 to 1978. Abex produced parts such as brake shoes and ball
bearings for railroad cars. The EPA estimates that lead was released into the air at a rate of
10 pounds per day from a 1-acre process area and that 3,500 cubic yards of lead-laden
furnace sands were dumped into an adjoining 1-acre area. In 1984, the EPA identified
elevated levels of lead in the fill area and in residential lots next to the fill area. Abex has
found significant soil contamination around both the landfill and the old process areas.
Approximately 10,000 people live or work within a mile of the site. A number of those
residents liv either on or immediately adjacent to the lead-contaminated soils. The site also
is adjacent to an elementary school.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/16/88
Final Date: 08/30/90
Threats and Contaminants
The air has been contaminated with heavy metals including lead, copper, and tin.
Soils exhibit high pH levels and are contaminated with lead. Public health threats
include direct contact with soil, surface water, and air. Groundwater is not used as
a drinking water source within 3 miles of the site. In 1986, the EPA sampled home
surfaces that demonstrated the presence of contaminated air.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1988, Abex graded the site and surrounded it with
fencing topped with barbed wire. The company also covered much of the old
landfill with asphalt, excavated some areas adjacent to the landfill, filled them in
and revegetated. Due to results of samples collected from the excavated areas, additional soil
contaminated with lead was excavated in mid-1992 and will be disposed of at a federally
approved landfill. A second removal action for 1992 currently is being assessed. The site is
secured against direct contact with contaminated areas while additional cleanup actions are
pending.
Entire Site: Abex initiated site investigations in 1989 to determine the extent of
the contamination and to recommend cleanup technologies. Investigations were
completed in 1992. The EPA and the State are evaluating the study findings and
are scheduled to select final cleanup remedies to address contamination at the Abex
Corporation site 1993.
Site Facts: On August 11, 1986, the EPA and Abex signed a Removal Consent Agreement
and Order, which requires Abex to reduce lead contamination to levels that do not constitute
an imminent threat to public health.
Environmental Progress
While the investigations leading to a final solution to address site contamination are being
conducted, the Abex Corporation site has been securely fenced and most exposed sources of
contamination have been excavated or covered to eliminate the threat of exposure to
hazardous materials or air at the site.
Site Repository
Portsmouth Public Library, 601 Court Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704
March 1992
ABEX CORPORATION
-------
ARROWHEAD
ASSOCIATES/
SCOVILL CORP
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VAD042916361
EPA REGION 3
Westmoreland County
Near Montross
Site Description
The Arrowhead Associates/Scovill Corp. site is located on 25 acres in a rural area near
Montross. The Scovill Corp. electroplated cosmetic cases from 1966 to 1972, when
Arrowhead, Inc. of Delaware acquired the business and its assets. Arrowhead continued the
electroplating operations until 1979. During 1979 to 1981, Arrowhead also filled the cases
with cosmetics. From 1981 to the present, several other firms have assembled and filled
cosmetic cases on the site, and from 1975 to the present, wiring harnesses for automobiles
have been manufactured on the site. Plating wastes were treated in a surface impoundment
system and discharged to Scales Branch under a permit issued through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). After the plating operations ended in 1979, process
equipment and materials were abandoned at the site. An estimated 1,100 people obtain
drinking water from shallow private wells within 3 miles of the site. A coastal wetland is about
1 mile from the site, and local surface water is used for recreational activities.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/16/88
Final Date: 02/15/90
Threats and Contaminants
Many drums of cyanide-containing wastes, heavy metals, and other plating wastes
and raw materials including solvents such as benzene and trichloroethylene (TCE)
from the former electroplating operations remain on the soil at the site. Five
sludge beds contain elevated levels of copper, zinc, cyanide, and other hazardous
substances. The Virginia State Water Control Board detected cyanide, copper, and
zinc in the discharge from the settling pond to Scales Branch. Elevated levels of
cyanide and other hazardous substances were detecled in a sellling pond on sile.
People currently working al Ihe manufacturing facility are not reslricted from
entering the abandoned electroplaling process hazardous wasle area; Iherefore, the
potential risk for coming in direct contact with hazardous materials exists.
Accidental ingestion of conlaminated water and soil also is a threat.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The 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: To date, the Scovill Corp. has removed 300 drums
containing benzene, paints, lacquers, thinners, metal plating wastes, and cyanide,
in addition to approximately 395 cubic yards of contaminated soil from the drum
disposal area. Contaminated surface water and soils were removed from six lagoons on site.
All wastes and waste residuals have also been removed from inside the building. Final closure
of the six lagoons was completed in 1990.
Entire Site: In 1991, an investigation at this site was completed and remedies
were selected to address contaminated groundwater and soils. The major
components of the selected remedy for contaminated groundwater include
construction of a groundwater extraction system to remove contaminated groundwater from
the aquifer for treatment, with inorganic contaminants treated through precipitation and
organic contaminants treated through air stripping and carbon adsorption. The treated water
will be discharged to the Scales Branch Stream. Contaminated soils will be treated through
vapor extraction, using carbon adsorption to capture and treat gas from the extraction
process prior to discharge to the atmosphere. Technical design of the selected remedies is
expected to begin in 1993.
Site Facts: In 1986, Scovill Corp. signed a Consent Order with the EPA, requiring Scovill to
develop and undertake a cleanup plan. In 1989, Scovill and the Virginia Department of
Waste Management signed a Consent Order and Agreement, requiring Scovill to conduct an
investigation to determine the extent of contamination and the alternative technologies for
cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The immediate removal of the contaminated drums, soils, and surface water, as well as
sludges and contaminated soils from the six lagoons at the Arrowhead Associates/Scovill
Corp. site, has reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials while it awaits
further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Assistant County Administrator, Westmoreland County, Social Services Building,
Peachgrove Lane, Montross, VA 22520
March 1992 4 ARROWHEAD ASSOCIATES/ SCOVILL CORP.
-------
ATLANTIC WOOD
INDUSTRIES, INC.
VIRGINIA
EPAID#VAD990710410
EPA REGION 3
Portsmouth
iles from the Chesapeake Bay
on the South Branch
of the Elizabeth River
er Names:
ntic Creosote
Site Description
The 47 1/2-acre Atlantic Wood Industries, Inc. site houses an active wood-treating facility
that has been in operation since 1926. Contaminants from the wood preservatives used by the
facility are present in the soil and water. Sediments and 20,000 cubic feet of landfilled wood
chips are contaminated with creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP). According to the State,
wastes on site have entered the groundwater and are infiltrating a city storm sewer that
discharges into an intertidal drainage ditch, which is part of the South Branch of the
Elizabeth River. In 1982, 350,000 gallons of contaminated water in leaking aboveground
storage tanks were removed. The site is on the Elizabeth River, about 7 miles from the
Chesapeake Bay. Approximately 14,000 people work within a 1/2-mile radius of the site. The
water supply for a 3-mile radius area is provided by public utilities. Groundwater within the
3-mile radius is not used as a water source.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/01/86
Final Date: 02/15/90
Threats and Contaminants
Benzene, toluene, xylenes, and naphthalenes have been measured in the air.
Creosote, PCP, and other contaminants from former wood-treating processes have
been detected in the groundwater and soils. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) are in on- and off-site sediments. Off-site sediments also contain phenol
and PCP. PCP, arsenic, and chromium have been detected in surface water near
the site. Direct contact with and accidental ingestion of soil on site could harm
people. Coming in direct contact with materials that have moved off site or
inhaling dust from the site also poses a threat to health. Oyster beds are located
within 3 miles downstream. Studies by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science
have shown that oysters within this reach have accumulated significant levels of
creosotes.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the on-site soils, sediments, and non-aqueous product and cleanup of
groundwater and Elizabeth River sediments.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination
agreed to remove the creosote-contaminated drainage ditch. Currently, they are
designing the technical specifications for the ditch cleanup, which is planned for
completion in 1993. Removal of the ditch will end the migration of creosote into the
Elizabeth River.
On-Site Soils, Sediments, and Non-Aqueous Product: A study to determine
the nature and extent of contamination of on-site soils, sediments, and
non-aqueous product is underway. The investigation also will address techniques
for site cleanup and is planned for completion in late 1992. Once the study is completed, the
EPA will evaluate and select the most timely and effective remedies for final cleanup of the
site.
Groundwater and Elizabeth River Sediments: An additional investigation is
being planned to address the extent of contamination of groundwater and of the
Elizabeth River adjacent to the site. This investigation is expected to begin in 1993
and will include groundwater studies and sampling and analysis of Elizabeth River sediments.
Site Facts: A Consent Order to conduct a removal on site and to initiate site studies was
signed by the potentially responsible parties in 1987. The EPA and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have entered into an Interagency Agreement to
conduct an Ecological Risk Assessment of the Elizabeth River.
Environmental Progress
Once the removal is completed the migration of creosote into the Elizabeth River will
discontinue, rendering the Atlantic Wood Industries, Inc. site safer while investigation actions
are underway and cleanup activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Portsmouth Public Library, 601 Court Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704
March 1992 6 ATLANTIC WOOD INDUSTRIES, INC.
-------
AVTEX FIBERS, INC
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD070358684
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Warren County
Front Royal
A rayon manufacturing plant has operated at this 440-acre site since 1940 under various
owners, including American Viscose from 1940 to 1963, the FMC Corporation from 1963 to
1976, and its present owner Avtex Fibers, Inc. The plant also produced polyester and
polypropylene for short periods. Rayon manufacturing wastes and by-products, as well as fly
ash and boiler room solids, were placed in 23 land-disposal impoundments on site. In 1983,
land disposal of the liquid waste material was discontinued, and treatment at the on-site
wastewater treatment plant was initiated. State studies have detected groundwater
contamination under and across the river from the site. In 1982, the State found carbon
disulfide in wells in a residential area near the site. Avtex Fibers purchased the properties
with contaminated wells in 1983 and 1984. A groundwater pumping system to keep
contaminated groundwater from migrating was installed by Avtex Fibers in 1984. The plant
held a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to discharge its
effluent into the Shenandoah River. From 1987 to 1988, a significant number of violations of
the NPDES permit occurred. In 1989, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination in the
Shenandoah River was linked to the Avtex Fibers plant, and the plant's NPDES permit was
revoked. Shutdown of the Avtex Fibers plant followed this action. Approximately 1,300
people live within a 3-mile radius of the site and depend on groundwater as a drinking water
supply. The site is situated within the 100-year flood plain of the Shenandoah River.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with carbon disulfide, phenol, sodium, and heavy
metals including lead, arsenic, and cadmium from wastes deposited in the viscose
disposal basins. The soil is contaminated with carbon disulfide, phenol, arsenic,
lead, and PCBs. The Shenandoah River contains PCBs from the plant. Public
health may be threatened by ingesting or coming in contact with contaminated
water or soil and inhaling dust from the site.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on groundwater cleanup; buildings, soils, and drums cleanup; and cleanup of
remaining contaminated areas.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1984, Avtex Fibers supplied bottled drinking water for
four families and assisted one family in building a cistern. After the plant was
shutdown in 1989, the EPA conducted site stabilization activities including: an
imminent hazard evaluation; establishment of site security, control, and maintenance of
critical systems; design and implementation of a low-flow wastewater treatment system to
maintain freeboard in the industrial basins; transfer and transport of raw chemicals such as
carbon disulfide and sulfuric acid to suppliers; denotation of explosive labpack chemicals;
labpacking, off-site transport, and disposal of all flammables, peroxide formers, and short-life
chemicals; completion of a three-phase decommissioning of 22 carbon disulfide impoundments
using an innovative on-site treatment system; and draining, flushing, and on site treatment of
various process line, tank, and vessel fluids from areas of the plant.
Groundwater: In 1988, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the groundwater,
which includes: pumping and treating the groundwater and surface water;
dewatering viscose basins; monitoring the groundwater; and placing deed
restrictions prohibiting the use of groundwater on the properties affected by contamination.
Avtex Fibers pumped and treated the groundwater under the direction of the State. The
FMC Corporation currently is performing the treatment design for the selected remedy and is
scheduled to finish in 1993. Additional data will be collected during an upcoming
investigation which will aid in the design of the remedy.
Buildings, Soils, and Drums: Based on findings at other areas of the site, a
cleanup remedy was selected to address several thousand drums of waste staged on
site, PCB-contaminated soil, and an unstable acid reclamation facility. To date,
approximately 8,000 tons of PCB contaminated soil and debris have been excavated,
transported, and disposed of off site in an approved chemical waste landfill. This action was
completed in early 1992. Also in 1992, the dismantling and demolition of the acid reclaim
facility was completed. Over 750 tons of chemical debris removed from pipes, tanks, and
building structures were disposed of in approved solid waste and hazardous waste landfills.
Activities to identify, transport, and dispose of approximately 2,879 drums of wastes on site
are expected to begin in 1992. Site security measures will be instituted as well. The cleanup is
expected to be completed by late 1994.
Remaining Contaminated Areas: The EPA has initiated a study to determine
the nature and extent of contamination and to identify alternatives for cleanup of
the plant, the remaining disposal areas, and the south fork of the Shenandoah
River. The cleanup may be divided into several phases as the study progresses.
March 1992 8 AVTEX FIBERS, INC.
-------
Site Facts: Avtex Fibers entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with the EPA in
1986 to perform site studies. The Order was expanded in 1988 to include the FMC
Corporation. The EPA issued an Administrative Order to the FMC Corporation and Avtex
Fibers on June 30, 1989, requiring implementation of groundwater cleanup actions. In
February 1990, Avtex Fibers filed for bankruptcy, and the EPA filed a Superfund lien against
the property. Original negotiations for Avtex Fibers and the FMC Corporation to perform
site studies failed; however, at their request the FMC Corporation will likely implement a
portion of the site-wide investigation being developed by the EPA.
Environmental Progress
Providing bottled water to affected residents and completing most of the site stabilization
activities have eliminated immediate threats at the Avtex Fibers, Inc. site while the EPA
continues investigations and site cleanup activities. In addition, concepts to redevelop the
Avtex Fibers property are being planned by the FMC Corporation in conjunction with the
Front Royal Industrial Development Authority and state and local officials.
Site Repository
Samuels Public Library, 538 Villa Avenue, Front Royal, VA 22630
AVTEX FIBERS, INC.
March 1992
-------
BUCKINGHAM
Virginia Route 640 near
the Town of Buckingham
_ ^^^^ fc. j i ~N- ^ x ij' 'i *\«« r~ i
LANDFILL .jj^^^vv/ws^s? x?7
... n ^..... ^^^^W^^mr^y^^ovA'iCotA&lMt Service Landfill
VIRGINIA _x^JIH^ ^'» Hazardou»WMte Slte
EPA ID# »'*^«°«i^-i™'?:^^""'^^^^^
Site Description
The Buckingham County Landfill encompasses approximately 8 acres, including a 1-acre
hazardous waste site and a 7-acre solid waste landfill. The site is situated on 175 acres of
wooded land. Love's Container Service operated as an unlicensed landfill from 1962 until
early 1972. In November 1972, the Virginia State Board of Health (VSBH) issued a permit to
the facility to dispose of municipal waste. In 1977, the permit was modified to allow the
disposal of chemical wastes that a local furniture-making industry generated. In 1979, the
solid waste landfill operation was closed and covered to the satisfaction of the VSBH;
however, the facility received Interim Status as a hazardous waste disposal facility.
Subsequently, the facility accepted approximately 1,250 drums of used organic solvents and
flammable liquids and solids. These wastes were poured into a clay-lined evaporation trench.
After the liquids were poured into the trench, the empty barrels were buried in a separate
trench. The solid residue remaining after the liquids had evaporated was then dug out and
emptied into hazardous waste trenches. Buckingham County purchased the site and retained
its hazardous waste disposal permit in 1982; however, the site was never operated by the
County. In 1983, the County closed the hazardous waste portion of the site in accordance
with State regulations, but not within EPA requirements. An estimated 1,100 people depend
on wells within 3 miles of the site as a source of drinking water. Approximately 40 people live
within 1/2 mile of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The EPA sampled the site in September 1983 and found that on-site groundwater
and some off-site residential wells were contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from former disposal practices. Soils were contaminated with
heavy metals and solvents. Potential risks exist if individuals ingest or make direct
contact with contaminated groundwater or contaminated soil.
10 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination began
an investigation in 1991 to determine the extent of soil and groundwater
contamination. The investigation is expected to be completed in 1993 at which
time alterative cleanup options will be identified for final remedy selection for the site.
Site Facts: On November 8, 1985, the EPA terminated the landfill's interim approval for
hazardous waste management and closed the non-hazardous waste disposal portion of the
landfill, which had remained open after the partial landfill closure in 1983.
Environmental Progress
The EPA has performed preliminary investigations at the Buckingham County Landfill site
and determined that there are no immediate threats to nearby residents or the environment.
Once the investigations into cleanup technologies are completed, they will be reviewed by the
EPA, and the permanent cleanup of the site will be selected.
Site Repository
Not established.
BUCKINGHAM COUNTY LANDFILL 11 March 1992
-------
C & R BATTERY
COMPANY, INC.
VIRGINIA
EPAID#VAD049957913
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Chesterfield County
Richmond
feet from the James River
The 4 1/2-acre C & R Battery Company site is located in a rural and industrial area. Between
1969 and 1985, the company recovered lead and lead oxide from old automobile and truck
batteries. In 1982, the company detected high levels of lead in an on-site monitoring well, in
soils, and in drainage ditches leading to the James River. Approximately 300 people live
within a mile of the site. An estimated 1,200 people, living within 3 miles of the site, draw
drinking water from private wells that tap the contaminated aquifer. The nearest well is about
1,250 feet from the site.
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: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
Monitoring of the air at several work stations during battery breaking operations
indicated lead contamination levels well above the Federal standards. The company
detected high levels of lead in an on-site monitoring well and in soils to a depth of
15 feet. Surface water was found to be contaminated with heavy metals and acids.
Ingesting or coming in direct contact with contaminated soil, surface water, or
groundwater may pose health risks to the nearby population. Inhalation of
contaminated particles in the air also may pose a health risk to individuals. Prior to
1986, during routine health screenings, some company employees were found to
have elevated levels of lead in their blood. Portions of the James River,
approximately 3 miles downstream, are designated wetlands and are used for
recreational purposes. The river currently shows no sign of contamination from the
site.
12
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: emergency actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: The EPA took emergency action at the site in 1986. Soils
and pools of acid on the site were treated with lime to reduce acidity. Some
contaminated soils were excavated and stored pending final disposal. Drainage
controls were installed, and the site was graded, capped, and fenced. Direct access to
contaminated areas of the site was restricted by fencing.
Entire Site: The EPA completed an investigation into contamination at the site
in early 1990. Based on the results of this investigation, the EPA selected a
cleanup remedy that includes on-site stabilization or solidification of
lead-contaminated soils and sediments; disposal of the solidified product in a nearby landfill;
clean closure of an on-site acid pond area; and covering of the area outside the pond with
clean soil before revegetating the area. The design of these technologies was completed in
1992 and cleanup activities are expected to begin in late 1992.
Site Facts: The Commonwealth of Virginia took numerous enforcement actions at the site
between 1979 and 1984. Actions resulted in a court order requiring development of a cleanup
plan, construction of a treatment plant, and reclamation of the site. During site inspections in
1983, the Virginia Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noted numerous
violations of current OSHA standards. In 1985, Chesterfield County forbade the C & R
Battery Company from further operation due to OSHA violations.
Environmental Progress
The emergency actions performed by the EPA, including removing acids and contaminated
soils and capping and fencing the site, have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous
materials at the C & R Battery Company, Inc. site while further investigations and cleanup
activities are taking place.
Site Repository
Chesterfield Public Library, 9501 Lori Road, Chesterfield, VA 23832
C & R BATTERY COMPANY, INC. 13 March 1992
-------
CHISMAN CREEK
VIRGINIA
EPA REGION 3
York County
Suburban York County
EPAID# VAD980712913
X/"7 Other Names:
Kn\sman Creek Disposal
Site Description
The 27-acre Chisman Creek site consists of four fly ash pits in a watershed of the Chisman
Creek Coastal Basin. These pits were originally sand and gravel borrow areas, but were filled
with fly ash from the Yorktown Power Generating Station between 1957 and 1980. In 1980,
and in subsequent studies, evidence of trace metals was found in groundwater near the pits.
In 1980, off-site shallow residential wells became contaminated with vanadium and no longer
could be used. These homes later were connected to public water supplies. Approximately 500
to 1,000 people live within a 1-mile radius of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Vanadium, nickel, selenium, and sulfate have been found in groundwater near the
four fly ash pits. Surface water in Chisman Creek was shown to be contaminated
with vanadium, nickel, and sulfate. Drinking contaminated groundwater posed a
risk to the public; however, potential risks have been reduced because residences
with contaminated wells were connected to the public water supply and long-term
groundwater treatment measures are underway. The subsurface fly ash and pond
sediment materials do not pose a public health threat in their present, covered
location. Nearby estuaries were potentially threatened by site contamination.
14
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the pond areas and surface water and cleanup of the groundwater and
soils.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Virginia Power Co., the party potentially responsible for
site contamination, connected public water lines to affected residences, placed
covers over pits, and conducted groundwater diversion in selected areas, under
EPA monitoring.
Pond Areas and Surface Water: Surface drainage modifications have been
made to divert runoff. This included water quality monitoring and sediment
monitoring of ponds, tributaries, and estuaries. Cleanup actions were completed in
1989.
Groundwater and Soils: Construction of the remedies was completed and
included: installing temporary erosion and sedimentation control facilities;
relocating the creek adjacent to one of the pits; installing horizontal groundwater
drains to collect groundwater and dewater one of the pits; installing discharge pipes and a tie-
in to a discharge; constructing flow and water quality monitoring stations and outlet channels;
capping the fly ash pits using a low permeability cap and soil cover; revegetating the disturbed
areas; and installing an on-site treatment system to treat collected groundwater from the pit
area to remove nickel and vanadium. Groundwater treatment and monitoring of surrounding
areas will continue until established cleanup goals have been met. The need for continued
treatment will be evaluated during 5 year reviews.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was signed with Virginia Power Co. to conduct site cleanup.
Environmental Progress
All construction of cleanup actions has been completed as planned at the Chisman Creek
site, making the surroundings safe again for nearby residents and the environment while
treatment of the groundwater continues to reduce contamination levels at the site.
Site Repository
York County Public Library, 8500 George Washington Highway, Yorktown, VA 23692
CHISMAN CREEK 15 March 1992
-------
CULPEPER WOOD
PRESERVERS, INC
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD059165282
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Culpeper County
atalpa District on the
outskirts of Culpeper
Culpeper Wood Preservers, Inc. is an active wood treatment facility that uses a chromated
copper arsenate (CCA) waterborne treating process on a 20-acre site. The two-part wood
treatment process begins by pressure-treating dimensional lumber in an enclosed processing
plant. The wood then is moved to a dripping pad and left to dry for 3 days. Early on in the
plant's history, the dripping pad was uncovered, and CCA-contaminated drippings were
allowed to drop directly to the ground. In early 1981, approximately 100,000 gallons of
CCA-contaminated wastewater escaped from an unlined, on-site waste impoundment,
contaminating neighboring surface waters. The drip pad presently is covered, and the
surrounding area is paved. An estimated 8,750 people live within a 3-mile radius of the site.
Approximately 1,750 persons draw drinking water from private wells within that distance; the
remaining population uses the Culpeper municipal system, which draws water -upgradient of
the contaminated area. Over 40 residences located within 2,000 feet of the site rely on
groundwater for their drinking water supplies.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with arsenic and chromium from the
wood-treatment processes, according to analyses conducted by the Virginia State
Water Control Board (SWCB). Contaminated soil containing chromium, copper,
and arsenic was removed from the site in 1983; however, some remaining soil
contamination might still be present. Wastewater containing CCA has
contaminated neighboring surface waters. Potential risks exist for individuals who
drink contaminated groundwater or surface water. The SWCB determined in 1986
that homeowner wells were not contaminated. An unnamed tributary that lies 750
yards northeast of the site and extends approximately 3 miles before entering
Jonas Run potentially could be contaminated. Contaminated groundwater or
surface water also may affect recreation and fishing.
16
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In response to enforcement actions in 1981, the site owner
removed a quantity of contaminated soil, constructed new drip pads to ensure
return of drips and runoff to appropriately contained treatment facilities, built a
roof over the drip pads, and reconstructed the waste impoundment. In addition, 20-foot
trenches were dug downgradient from the impoundments to catch leachate, and barrier walls
were constructed to prevent further migration of contaminants.
Entire Site: A study to determine the extent of contamination and to identify
alternative technologies for the cleanup is expected to begin in 1992. The work
plan for the site study was finalized in mid-1992. The study is expected to be
completed in 1994. Once the investigations are completed, the EPA will select a final cleanup
remedy for the site, with design of the selected remedy and final cleanup actions slated to
start soon thereafter.
Site Facts: One of the potentially responsible parties signed a Consent Agreement and
Consent Order, requiring certain cleanup actions and a surface water and groundwater
monitoring plan. In April 1985, the EPA issued a Notice Letter informing another potentially
responsible party of its responsibility for operations at the site.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions performed at the Culpeper Wood Preservers, Inc. site have reduced
the potential for contact with hazardous materials and have limited further contamination at
the site. These actions have stabilized conditions at the site while final site investigations are
being planned and cleanup remedies are being sought.
Site Repository
Not established.
CULPEPER WOOD PRESERVERS, INC. 17 March 1992
-------
DEFENSE GENERAL ,1
/ >/> Chesterfield County
SUPPLY CENTER ^-^^^ 2 miles south of Richmond
VI rival IMIA jmmm*/\-s\ A. •*. AV<\ s~~, other Names:
EPA ID# VA397152075J IfiHiKX/^^SW™'"' Defense General Supply
Defense General Supply Center
^g?^fT[Y^^m\
Site Description
The Defense General Supply Center manages and furnishes general military supplies to the
Armed Forces and several Federal civilian agencies. The one-square-mile site includes a
hazardous waste landfill, a fire training pit, an acid neutralization pit, and storage areas where
hazardous substances were spilled. Beginning in 1942, the site was used as a storage and
recovery area for chemicals and as a reclamation area for drums. The pits were used for
training and for the disposal of chemical waste from the mid-1960s to the late 1970s. In 1983,
the pits were filled in with soil and covered with sparse vegetation. Groundwater on and off
the site has been shown to be contaminated from past waste disposal practices and hazardous
waste spills. Groundwater and surface water flow from the site toward Kingsland Creek, a
tributary of the James River. There are 119 permanent residences on the site. About 3,500
people live within a mile of the area in a residential and suburban setting. Residential areas
downgradient of the site rely on private wells and the municipal water system for drinking
water. Kingsland Creek is used for recreational fishing.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions. Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as
chloroform, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and chromium from former
chemical wastes disposal practices. Sediments are contaminated with pesticides.
The soil contains VOCs and pesticides, and the surface water on site is
contaminated with metals and pesticides. Those who accidentally ingest or come in
direct contact with contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil, or sediments
may be at risk. In addition, recreational use of contaminated streams and water
may pose a threat.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four long-term remedial phases concentrating on cleanup of the
open storage area, acid neutralization pit, area 50/source area, other source areas, and
groundwater plumes.
18 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Open Storage Area: In 1987, an investigation began to determine the nature
and extent of contamination at the open storage area. The investigation is
expected to be completed in 1992, at which time a final cleanup remedy will be
selected.
Acid Neutralization Pit: An investigation was completed in early 1992 focusing
on cleanup of the soil and removal of the old treatment tank concrete structure.
The remedy selected for this area is a vacuum extraction technology. The
technical design phase is expected to begin in mid-1992.
Area 50/Source Area: A focused study began in 1990 and is scheduled for
completion in 1994. The study will concentrate on identifying the nature and
extent of contamination at the area 50/source area. Upon completion of the
investigation, the EPA will determine the remedy to be used for final cleanup.
Other Source Areas: An investigation began in 1990 to determine the nature
and extent of contamination at other source areas, including the Fire Training
area and the National Guard area. The study is expected to be completed in late
Groundwater Plumes: An investigation began in late 1991 to address three
groundwater plumes identified at the site and to conduct sampling of additional
wells and the deeper aquifer. The study is scheduled for completion in 1994.
Site Facts: The Defense General Supply Center 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. A Federal Facility Agreement was negotiated in 1990
and became effective in 1991, governing site cleanup activities.
Environmental Progress
The Defense General Supply Center site does not pose an immediate threat to public health
or the environment. As individual units at the site are identified and studied, cleanup actions
will be separated out and conducted in an accelerated manner under the Federal Facility
Agreement that was negotiated for the site.
Site Repository
Not established.
DEFENSE GENERAL SUPPLY CENTER 19 March 1992
-------
DIXIE CAVERNS
COUNTY LANDFILL
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD980552095
EPA REGION 3
Roanoke County
Site Description
This 27-acre site, known as the Dixie Caverns County Landfill, is located on a 62-acre
property and was operated as an unlicensed landfill from 1965 to 1976. The landfill officially
was closed in 1976, although it was never capped. The landfill had been used for disposal of
municipal refuse, scrap metal, sludge, fly ash (emission control dust) from an electric arc
furnace, and other unidentified industrial wastes. An intermittent stream on the site flowed
through a large drum pile and fly ash pile and then emptied into the Roanoke River
approximately 2 miles southeast of the landfill. The river is the main water supply source for
the City of Salem. The nearest water intake is located in Glenvar, 4 1/2 miles downstream of
the landfill. Within 3 miles of the site, an estimated 1,990 people reside in 525 dwellings
which are served by private water supply wells. The closest residence is located approximately
1/2 mile south of the site. The Dixie Caverns, a local tourist attraction, is located a mile
downstream of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and County actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site sludge pit soil was found to be contaminated primarily with aromatic
and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from former disposal practices.
Organic chemical contamination also was found in the soils in the drum disposal
area. Runoff water from the fly ash pile has contaminated the drainage area with
metals. Contamination also has been found in stream sediments immediately
downstream of the fly ash pile. Conditions at the site threaten groundwater and
surface water. Those who accidentally ingest or come in direct contact with
contaminated soil or sediments may be at risk.
20
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 fly ash disposal area and the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA conducted a site inspection in 1983 and observed
four potential sources of hazardous waste contamination: a drum disposal area, a
sludge pit, a fly ash pile, and uncontrolled leachate from the site entering local
streams. The County of Roanoke has cleaned two areas of the site. Drums and contaminated
soils have been removed from the drum debris area and sludge and contaminated soils have
been removed from the sludge pit. The County of Roanoke is also complying with an order
from the Virginia State Water Control Board (SWCB) to eliminate leachate discharge from
the site to the nearby intermittent stream.
Fly Ash Disposal Area: In 1991, a remedy was selected to address the 9,000
cubic yards of fly ash waste. The selected remedy is off-site treatment using a
method known as high temperature metals recovery. Plans for cleanup of the fly
ash pile area of the site were reviewed to assess compliance with Land Disposal Restrictions
since this material is a waste listed under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). The technical design phase of the remedy is scheduled to begin in late 1992.
Entire Site: The EPA currently is investigating the nature and extent of the
remaining contamination at the site. The study will define the contaminants and
will recommend alternatives for the final cleanup. Field work has been completed
and the remedy is scheduled to be selected in 1992.
Site Facts: The EPA reached an agreement with the County of Roanoke to conduct
removal actions at the site. The County agreed to clean up the sludge pit, the drum disposal
area, and the fly ash pile.
Environmental Progress
The County of Roanoke cleaned up two areas of the site, and contaminated soil was
removed from the drum debris area and the sludge pit. These immediate actions have
reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous materials while the cleanup alternatives for
the fly ash pile and remainder of the site are being planned.
Site Repository
Roanoke County Public Library, Glenvar Branch Library, 8917 Daugherty Road,
Salem, VA 24153
DIXIE CAVERNS COUNTY LANDFILL 21 March 1992
-------
FIRST PIEDMONT
CORP. ROCK QUARR
(ROUTE 719)
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD980554984
EPA REGION 3
Pittsylvania County
Near Beaver Park
Other Names:
Compton Farm
Site Description
The 4-acre First Piedmont Corp. Rock Quarry (Route 719), part of a 182-acre farm, was
leased by First Piedmont Corp. in 1970. Between 1970 and 1972, First Piedmont Corp.
disposed of 65,000 cubic yards of waste material into the quarry, including 15,000 gallons of
liquid waste generated by Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. The Virginia State Health
Department ordered the site closed-after a fire, possibly caused by spontaneous combustion
of waste materials buried in the quarry. First Piedmont Corp. subsequently capped the site
with 2 feet of local soil. The site is adjacent to a residential development of approximately
260 people. Approximately 380 people live within 1 mile of the site and an estimated 1,800
people are within 2 miles of the site. Contaminants in soils on site have the potential of
migrating into surface water which drains the area.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 04/01/85
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
HAJ
Early sampling has shown elevated levels of heavy metals including arsenic,
chromium, lead, and zinc from former disposal practices in the soils on the site.
Elevated levels of lead and zinc have been found in surface water. Iron and
manganese were detected at low levels in two of the residential wells, both of
which are located upgradient of the site. An initial investigation showed no
immediate threats to residents. Potential risks to individuals exist through direct
contact with or accidental ingestion of contaminated leachate, surface water, or
soils. Nearby Lawless and Fall Creeks could potentially be affected by site
contamination.
22
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An investigation to determine the extent of contamination from a
landfill in groundwater, domestic/residential wells, surface water, soils, and
sediments was started in late 1987 by the parties potentially responsible for the site
contamination. Based on the results of this investigation in 1991, a cleanup remedy was
selected which includes capping a landfill on the site; collecting and treating leachate from
the quarry; excavating and disposing of contaminated soils off site; and excavating, solidifying,
and disposing of soils and sediments from the Northern Drainage Area, the Waste Pile, and
the Carbon Black Pile off site. Design of these remedies is expected to begin in late 1992.
Site Facts: In December 1987, First Piedmont Corp., Corning Glass Works, and Goodyear
Tire & Rubber Company signed a Consent Order to conduct an investigation into the extent
of the contamination and to identify alternative technologies available for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
After adding the First Piedmont Corp. Rock Quarry (Route 719) site to the NPL, the EPA
performed preliminary investigations and determined that no immediate threats to nearby
residents or the environment exist while designs of the selected remedies are being planned.
Site Repository
Pittsylvania County Public Library, 24 Military Drive, Chatham, VA 24531
FIRST PIEDMONT ROCK
QUARRY (ROUTE 719)
23
March 1992
-------
GREENWOOD
CHEMICAL CO
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VAD003125374
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Albemarle County
Newton
The 15-acre Greenwood Chemical Co. site operated as a chemical manufacturing plant for 40
years. The now inactive facility manufactured specialty chemicals for the industrial, pesticide,
and pharmaceutical trades. The facility ceased operation in 1985 after a toluene explosion
and fire killed four workers. Waste disposal within the 10-acre site has included seven waste
treatment lagoons, approximately 500 buried drums, 100 drums on the surface, and an
unknown quantity of contaminated soil. Drums were broken, leaking, and uncapped; soils
were stained; and vegetation was stressed. There are approximately 1,600 people living within
3 miles of the site. The site is surrounded by homes, farms, and community buildings. Private
wells within 3 miles of the site are the sole source of drinking water for an estimated 1,600
people. The nearest well is within 600 feet of one of the site's lagoons. The site threatens an
unnamed tributary to Stockton Creek, about 3,200 feet downslope from one of the lagoons
and along the pathway of surface water migration. The tributary discharges into Stockton
Creek, which is 1 mile downstream.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 07/01/87
Threats and Contaminants
Specific contaminants detected in on-site groundwater include volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) such as toluene and chloroform from former plant operations.
On-site lagoon sludge contains VOCs, including toluene and benzene, as well as
cyanide. Potential health threats include accidental ingestion of or direct contact
with contaminated groundwater and sludges.
24
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in four stages: emergency actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on cleanup of soils, groundwater, and subsurface soils. Additional phases will
be added as the clean up process continues.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: Emergency actions performed by the EPA in 1987
included: excavation and disposal of an estimated 500 previously buried drums;
removal and disposal of an estimated 100 surface drums; drainage and treatment
of liquids from three lagoons; removal and stabilization of sludges and underlying soils from
three lagoons; and removal and disposal of all shock-sensitive, explosive, highly flammable, or
highly toxic materials. In 1992, the EPA began demolishing several existing structures and is
currently storing the debris on site while awaiting off-site disposal. Abandoned chemicals will
be properly contained and disposed of.
Soil: Based on the site investigations, the EPA selected a remedy to address
contaminated soils and chemicals in buildings at the site. The remedy selected
involves off-site incineration, stabilization/solidification, and/or disposal. The
technical specifications for the cleanup are expected to be completed by 1992.
Groundwater: Upon completion of a study of the site in 1990, the EPA decided
to treat contaminated groundwater and lagoon water through precipitation and
UV/oxidation. An engineering design is scheduled to begin in 1992.
Subsurface Soils: An investigation is scheduled to begin in 1992 to determine
the nature and extent of subsurface soil contamination. The study will identify
alternative cleanup options from which a final remedy will be selected.
Environmental Progress
The numerous emergency actions performed by the EPA have eliminated immediate threats
to nearby residents and the surroundings. After the design activities at Greenwood Chemical
Co. site are completed, the remedies selected by the EPA will commence while investigations
into the subsurface soil contamination are being planned.
Site Repository
Jefferson-Madison Regional Library, 201 East Market Street, Charlottesville, VA 22553
GREENWOOD CHEMICAL CO.
25
March 1992
-------
H & H INC.,
BURN PIT
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD98053987i
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Hanover County
1/2 mile south of Farrington
ypther Names:
U H & H, Inc.
(/
The 1-acre H & H Inc., Burn Pit site was used by Haskell Chemical Company for the
disposal of solvents containing printing inks and paint manufacturing wastes between 1960
and 1976. These materials were transported in drums from the Haskell Chemical Company in
Richmond to the site and were emptied into a shallow unlined pit and burned. EPA sampling
in 1984 indicated that polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were being discharged off site
through surface drainage. Approximately 600 people live within a mile of the site. The
nearest residence is 1/2 mile away, and the nearest well is about 1,000 feet from the site.
About 2,400 people draw drinking water from private wells within 3 miles of the site. Surface
waters within 3 miles downstream of the site are used for fishing.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 01/22/87
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with pesticides and low levels of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including benzene and toluene, as well as heavy metals
including chromium, barium, and beryllium from former site activities. Soil is
contaminated with PCBs, metals, and phthalates. Leachate is contaminated with
VOCs including phthalates, vinyl chloride, toluene, and xylenes. Sediments are
contaminated with PCBs and metals. Although the source of contamination has
been removed, there is a potential that a contaminant plume may still affect
private wells. The contaminated aquifer is the sole source of drinking water for
residents in the area. Those who accidentally ingest or come in direct contact with
contaminated groundwater, soil, leachate, or sediments may be at risk. The site
runoff drains into an area designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a
freshwater wetland within 3,000 feet of the pit.
26
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In response to a State order, H & H, Inc. and the Haskell
Chemical Company removed contaminated soil, installed monitoring wells, and
took measures to control erosion and sedimentation in 1982.
Entire Site: The EPA currently is studying the nature and extent of groundwater,
soil, and other contamination at the site. As a result of this study, the EPA will
recommend alternatives for cleanup. The study is planned to be completed in late
1992. Once the study has been completed, the EPA will select a final cleanup method for the
site.
Environmental Progress
Immediate actions performed at the site, including the removal of contaminated soil,
installation of monitoring wells, and erosion control, have greatly reduced the potential for
exposure to contaminants at the H & H Inc., Burn Pit site while further investigations are
being completed.
Site Repository
Farrington Fire Hall, Route 3, Glen Allen, VA 23060
H & H INC..BURN PIT 27 March 1992
-------
L A. CLARKE & SON
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD007972482
EPA REGION 3
Spotsylvania County
Fredericksburg
mile north of Massaponax Creek
kj Other Names:
(/ Clarke, LA. & Son
Site Description
L.A. Clarke & Son, a railroad tie and wood treatment plant, is located southeast of
Fredericksburg. Wood preserving operations began at the site in 1937 and continued through
1988, with one inactive period lasting approximately 1 year from 1979 to 1980. The facility no
longer is in operation. During the past 50 years, creosote contamination that resulted from
facility operation spills, waste streams entering the drainage ditches, and on-site disposal has
affected the soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediments. Historical aerial photography
indicates that from at least 1953 through 1975, wastewater was disposed of in two
concrete-lined pits. Also, an area north of the process facility received wastes. Overflow from
the concrete pits was stored in an earthen pit. Excess water also was discharged to drainage
ditches and was sprayed on the ground around the storage yard to control dust. Four
additional wastewater pits, which date back to 1937, were filled in by 1979. In 1975, L.A.
Clarke & Son was issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
for outfalls from two on-site drainage ditches; these permits are still in effect. Sixty-three
homes are located within a 4,000-foot radius of the site, and 1,500 people live within a mile
of the site. The population within 3 miles of the site is 4,500. The shallow contaminated
aquifer underlying the site only has limited use at the present time as a source of drinking
water, but has the potential for wider use in the future, due to increased development in the
area.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The shallow aquifer underlying the site is contaminated with creosote derivatives
from former site activities. Sediments, soils, and surface water are contaminated
with creosote compounds and by-products including polynuclear aromatics (PNAs)
and benzene. Potential health risks exist if people inhale contaminated vapors or
dust or accidentally ingest or come in direct contact with contaminated soil,
sediments, or surface water. Exposure to contaminants also could occur from
wading or swimming in Massaponax Creek, West Vaco Pond, or Ruffins Pond.
Fish and waterfowl may be contaminated and could pose health risks to individuals
who ingest them.
28
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases designed to clean up the soil
and the groundwater and sediment.
Response Action Status
Soil: The EPA completed an investigation into the extent of the site
contamination in 1988. Based on this study, cleanup plans for this phase will
include in-place soil flushing and on-site landfarming (soil biodegradation) of
contaminated soils and sediments. An estimated 118,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil will
require treatment. Excavation, dredging, and on-site consolidation of contaminated sediment,
subsurface soil, and buried pit materials also will be addressed in this phase of the site
cleanup. In 1990, the Richmond, Fredericksburg, and Potomac (RF & P) Railroad began
designing some of the technologies to be used in the cleanup. Cleanup work was completed
on site containment in 1990 and the demolition of the wood treating facility is expected to be
completed in 1992.
Groundwater and Sediment: In 1990, the parties potentially responsible for the
site contamination began a study to determine the extent of groundwater and
sediment contamination and to identify alternative technologies for cleaning up the
site. This investigation is planned to be completed in late 1992. Future plans include
monitoring the groundwater.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was signed with RF & P Railroad to conduct the first phase
of the cleanup work. The Decree became effective in 1989.
Environmental Progress
After placing the L.A. Clarke & Sons site on the NPL and fencing the site, the EPA
performed a thorough investigation of site conditions and determined that the site presently
does not pose an immediate threat to the public or the environment while the investigation to
select the final remedy takes place.
Site Repository
County Administrator's Office, 9104 Courthouse Road, Spotsylvania, VA 22553
L A. CLARKE & SON 29 March 1992
-------
MATTHEWS ELECTRIC , EPBA R*G|ON 3
Roanoke County
2 miles west of Salem
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD980712970
Site Description
From 1972 to 1977, the 1 3/4-acre Matthews Electric Plating site housed a facility that plated
automobile bumpers with a process using chromium and nickel. Beginning in 1975, surface
water and groundwater contamination associated with the electroplating operation was noted
by area residents. Liquid waste from the operation had been discharged directly onto the
ground and drained to a sinkhole beneath the property. The Virginia State Water Control
Board (VSWCB) began residential monitoring of 30 wells. Subsequent investigations were
performed by the VSWCB and the EPA to determine the extent of the contamination. In
1976, the VSWCB issued an Emergency Order that prohibited the further discharge of
electroplating waste from the plant. The facility went out of business in 1977 and was used as
a small-scale pig farming operation. The population within 3 miles of the site is approximately
3,000. One on-site well and ten local residential wells were contaminated.
Site Responsibility: This site was addressed through
Deleted Date: 12/27/88
Federal and State actions. Final Date. Q9/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
7V
Groundwater was contaminated with chromium residues from the former
electroplating operations. Soil was contaminated with chromium, nickel, and
cadmium. Those who accidentally ingested or came in direct contact with
contaminated groundwater or soil were at risk.
Cleanup Approach
This site was addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
30 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
sludges.
Immediate Actions: In 1979, the owner of the property removed waste
materials, constructed diversion ditches, and covered parts of the area with clay.
In 1988, the EPA removed approximately 1,500 gallons of waste solution and
Entire Site: The selected remedy included construction of an extension of the
municipal water supply from the water treatment plant in Salem. The EPA
constructed the water line, and 28 homes were connected in 1986. In 1987, the
EPA conducted sampling, and results showed no further cleanup actions were needed. This
site was deleted from the NPL in December 1988.
Site Facts: Potential public health and environmental hazards first were identified when
concerned residents notified the VSWCB of discolored drinking water in November 1975.
Environmental Progress
By removing waste materials, constructing diversion ditches, covering the site with clay, and
extending a municipal water supply to affected residences, the contamination at the Matthews
Electric Plating site has been eliminated. Following subsequent site evaluations, the EPA, in
conjunction with the Commonwealth of Virginia, determined that the site no longer posed a
threat to public health or the environment and deleted the site from the NPL in 1988.
Site Repository
Information is no longer available.
MATTHEWS ELECTRIC PLATING
31
March 1992
-------
NAVAL SURFACE EPAGREG!°N 3
King George County
WARFARE />so Dahlgen
CENTER-DAHLGREN
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VA71700224684
Site Description
The Naval Surface Warfare Center-Dahlgren (NSWC) is approximately 4,300 acres in size
and located 40 miles south of Washington, D.C. along the Potomac River. This naval facility,
established in 1918, conducts research, development, testing, and evaluation of surface ship
weaponry for the Navy. The first of two areas that make up NSWC is known as the Main
Site. Activities conducted at this 2,678-acre area include air operations and ordnance testing.
Laboratories, computer facilities, administrative offices, and residences also are located at the
Main Site. The Explosive Experimental Area (EEA), the second of the two areas, is an
isolated testing range located on 1,614 acres. These two areas are separated by the Upper
Machodoc Creek. In 1983, the Navy identified seven sources of contamination at the site,
and in 1986 confirmed the need for additional studies at ten areas of the site. Three of these
areas are identified as: the 1400 Area Landfill (Site 17), the Pesticide Rinse Area (Site 25),
and the Transformer Draining Area (Site 19). The 1400 Area Landfill, 5 to 10 acres in size,
received municipal waste for three years in the 1970s. Canisters of mercury also may have
been disposed of in this area. Pesticide containers were drained and rinsed at the Pesticide
Rinse Area while electrical transformer oil containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) was
drained at the Transformer Draining Area. Two aquifers underlying NSWC serve as the
drinking water source of the nearby population: the shallow Nanjemoy aquifer, which supplies
a small number of private residences, and the deeper Potomac Group aquifer, which supplies
the municipal and NSWC water systems. Wetlands along Gambo Creek, an unidentified
drainage area, and the Potomac River are potential areas of environmental impact. Municipal
and private wells within 4 miles of the site supply an estimated 6,900 people. There are 3,200
civilians and 100 military personnel on base as well as 154 housing units.
o-* o -u-i-» rr,. . . . . ., . , . NPL LISTING HISTORY
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through Proposed Date: 02/07/92
Federal actions.
32 March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
Low levels of mercury were detected in groundwater underlying the 1400 Area
Landfill and stream sediments in the vicinity of the landfill. Sediments and the fish
of Hideaway Pond, located downstream from the landfill, also are contaminated
with mercury. People could be at risk by accidentally ingesting or coming into
contact with contaminated groundwater, sediments, surface water or soils. The
Potomac River receives run-off from surface water in this area. PCBs were
discovered in the soil of the Transformer Area to a depth of 4 feet.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and one long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The Navy is considering taking initial cleanup actions at two
areas of the site to remove the potential sources of contamination.
Entire Site: In 1993, the Navy is expected to begin investigations at ten areas of
the NSWC site. These studies will explore the nature and extent of contamination
at the site and will identify alternative cleanup options for final remedy selection.
Additional areas will be evaluated once the initial investigations are underway.
Site Facts: The NSWC is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially
funded program established by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1978 to identify,
investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DOD
facilities.
Environmental Progress
The Navy is assessing the need for initial actions to remove potential sources of
contamination. Initial investigations indicate the Naval Surface Warfare Center-Dahlgren site
poses no immediate threat to the safety and health of the nearby population while additional
investigations and activities are being planned for permanent cleanup of the site.
NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER-DAHLGREN 33 March 1992
-------
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 34 NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER-DAHLGREN
-------
NAVAL WEAPONS EPAY5^?N 3
STATION-YORKTOWN ^ Yoktown
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VA8170024170
Site Description
The Naval Weapons Station-Yorktown site is 10,500 acres and located along the York River.
Administrative facilities, personnel housing, and other operational support buildings are
located on site. The Colonial National Historical Park, the Whiteman Swamp, and the Naval
Supply Center-Cheatham Annex surround the area. This facility was established in 1918 to
maintain, produce, and store ordnance for the Navy. Various explosives, including
trinitrotoluene (TNT), metals, and organics, were used in past and current operations.
Twenty-one sources of contamination were identified by a series of investigations conducted
from 1983 to 1989. One source, the Turkey Road Landfill (Site 2), is a 5-acre wetland area
reportedly used for disposal of mercury batteries, missile hardware, inert mines and bombs,
construction rubble, and electrical shop hardware. Batteries from weapons, burning pad
residues, fly ash from coal-fired boilers, mine casings, electrical equipment, and transformers
were disposed of at the Burning Pad Residue Landfill (Site 4), another source of
contamination. Wastewater containing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and residues from
explosives was discharged to the Explosive Contaminated Wastewater Impoundments (Site 6).
Plant 3-Explosive Contaminated Wastewater Discharge Area (Site 7) used to be the point
from which wastewater containing VOCs and explosives residues was discharged. These
contaminants have migrated to surface water and sediments downstream from the site. The
unlined drainage way used to transport wastewater from the impoundments to the discharge
point, known as Plant 1-Site 9 of the Explosive Contaminated Wastewater Discharge Area,
has led to contamination of surface soil. Contaminants from the explosives areas have been
detected in Lee Pond, a fishery downstream from the site. Soil below a conveyor belt used to
transport explosives is also contaminated. The York River receives surface water runoff from
all these sources of contamination. Its drainage basin includes wetlands, endangered species,
and fisheries. The York River joins the Chesapeake Bay 12 miles downstream from the site.
The on-base population includes 3,200 military personnel and civilians as well as 47 housing
units.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
35 March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater, surface water, and sediments in the Turkey Road Landfill area are
contaminated with organics and heavy metals including arsenic. VOCs, explosive
contaminants, and heavy metals have been detected in groundwater, surface water,
and sediments near the Burning Pad Residue Landfill. Surface water and
sediments downstream from the Explosive Contaminated Wastewater Discharge
Areas are contaminated with VOCs and explosives residues. On-site soil is
contaminated with TNT.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and one long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The Navy is planning to remove contaminants from the Site-21
Battery Dump in 1993.
Entire Site: An investigation is expected to begin in 1993 to determine the nature
and extent of contamination at the site. The study will identify alternative cleanup
options and will result in the selection of a final remedy for the site.
Site Facts: The Naval Weapons Station-Yorktown is participating in the Installation
Restoration Program, a specially funded program established by the Department of Defense
(DOD) in 1978 to identify, investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants
at military and other DOD facilities.
Environmental Progress
Once contaminants are removed from the Site-21 Battery Dump, the Naval Weapons
Station-Yorktown will no longer pose an immediate threat to the health and safety of the
nearby population while additional investigations and activities are being planned for
permanent cleanup of the site.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 36 NAVAL WEAPONS STATION-YORKTOWN
-------
RENTOKIL, INC.
(VIRGINIA
PRESERVING
DIVISION)
VIRGINIA
EPA I D#VAD071040752
Site Description
Northwest of Richmond near 1-95
The 10-acre Rentokil, Inc. (Virginia Wood Preserving Division) site was a wood preserving
plant and ceased operations in 1990. Virginia Properties, Inc. owns 5 acres and leases the
adjacent 5 acres from an affiliate of the RF&P Railroad. The original plant was built by the
Virginia Wood Preserving Company in 1956. Since 1982, the operation used only the
chromated copper arsenate (CCA) process to treat wood. In previous years,
pentachlorophenol (PCP), creosote, chromated zinc arsenate, xylene, ammonium phosphates,
and sulfates also were used. Preserving processes also required the plant to use mineral spirits
and fuel oil. Operators disposed of chemical wastes in an unlined lagoon until 1974. In 1976
or 1977, workers buried 1,100 to 1,400 pounds of CCA at the site. They also improperly
installed several wells, later abandoned, which may have spread groundwater contamination.
The area is mixed light industrial and residential and is located on the outskirts of Richmond.
The population within a 1-mile radius of the site is about 1,500. When the site was placed on
the NPL, approximately 350 people used drinking water from wells drilled into the aquifers of
concern. Runoff from the site enters nearby wetlands and an unnamed stream that flows into
North Run. Occasionally, stormwater flows off site into the municipal storm sewer and the
stream. North Run is used for swimming and is located within 1 1/2 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
Final Date: 03/31/89
The groundwater, soil, and surface water are contaminated with PCP, creosote,
copper, chromium, arsenic, and dioxin from former wood preserving operations.
Potential risks exist if individuals accidentally ingest or come in direct contact with
contaminated groundwater, surface water, or soil. Contaminated surface water may
have an effect on nearby livestock or crops if it is used for watering or irrigation.
Site runoff entering nearby wetlands may adversely affect them.
37 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1987, public water lines were extended to residents living
next to the site, at Rentokil's expense. Later that year, the owner removed some
contaminated organic sludge from an on-site, unlined surface impoundment and
had the sludge incinerated.
Entire Site: The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination began
an intensive study of the site in 1987. This investigation is exploring the nature and
extent of water and soil pollution and will recommend the best strategies for final
cleanup. A second phase of field work began in 1991. Once the investigations are completed,
the EPA will evaluate the findings, recommend actions, and select a final remedy to clean up
the contamination at the site, scheduled for late 1992.
Site Facts: In 1987, Rentokil and the EPA signed a Consent Order to conduct a study to
determine the nature and extent of contamination and to identify alternatives for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
By extending public water lines and removing and incinerating contaminated sludges,
immediate threats at the Rentokil Inc. (Virginia Wood Preserving Division) site have been
eliminated while further investigations are taking place and cleanup activities are being
planned.
Site Repository
Henrico County Public Library, 1001 North Laburnum Avenue, Richmond, VA 23223
March 1992 38 RENTOKIL, INC. (VIRGINIA
WOOD PRESERVING DIVISION)
-------
RHINEHART TIRE
FIRE DUMP
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#
EPA REGION 3
Frederick County
6 miles west of Winchester
^-.pther Names:
/Winchester Tire Fire
V
Site Description
The Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump site is located on Mt. Pleasant. It originally served as a
storage area for 5 to 7 million tires, until they caught fire in October 1983. The smoke plume
rose several thousand feet and spread a 50-mile long trail across four states. An EPA
emergency team controlled the fire within a few days, but the fire continued to smolder for 6
months. Hot oil from the burning, melting tires quickly entered nearby Massey Run. The
migrating oil and firefighting residues also have contaminated the site and local waters. The
site is located in an agricultural area. Approximately 75 people live within a 1-mile radius of
the site, and two people live on the site itself. Residences use private wells for drinking water.
The site drains into Massey Run, which flows 4,000 feet downstream of the site to Hogue
Creek, a trout stream that flows into the Potomac River. A municipal water supply intake is
22 miles downstream of the site. There are two ponds on site, the larger of which is unlined.
The smaller 50,000-gallon lined pond collects runoff from the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
On-site groundwater is contaminated with slightly elevated levels of heavy metals
including arsenic, cadmium, and lead, as well as volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including toluene and xylene. Sediments have been contaminated with oils
and residues from the tire fire, in addition to heavy metals such as arsenic,
cadmium, lead, and nickel. The soil is contaminated with metals and low levels of
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from tire burning. Massey Run and other
surface waters are contaminated with various heavy metals and VOCs. Test results
revealed these surface waters to be acutely and chronically toxic. Human exposure
to contaminants may occur by inhaling, coming in direct contact with, or
accidentally ingesting contaminated groundwater, surface water, sediments, and
soils. Eating trout with bioaccumulated contaminants from Hogue Creek is a
health threat.
39
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in four stages: emergency actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on surface water cleanup, cleanup of Dutchman's Pond, and cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: EPA emergency workers extinguished the tire fire and
removed more than 800,000 gallons of oily wastes released by the burning tires. A
lined catch basin was installed to trap the oil and to provide water for firefighting,
and a monitoring program was initiated to identify contaminant levels on and off site. The
oily wastes were recycled into fuel oil and then sold. Under orders from the EPA, the owner
was required to build dikes and ditches for drainage control and to collect and pump this
water to minimize migration of wastes from the site. The owner also has undertaken
extensive excavation and regrading activities and has restricted access to the site. These
emergency activities have successfully controlled the immediate threats to the public and the
environment.
Surface Water: The remedies selected for site cleanup in 1988 include: instituting
soil erosion controls; raising the existing dam on the unlined pond by 13 feet;
collecting and treating surface water runoff with gravity settling; collecting shallow
groundwater oily seeps; and separating water from oil and transporting it to a wastewater
treatment plant. The EPA completed the engineering designs for the selected remedies in
1989. Construction of the wastewater treatment plant was completed in 1990, and operation
began in early 1991. Construction of all remaining remedies was completed in early 1992 and
cleanup is underway. Operation and maintenance of the surface water treatment system are
currently underway.
Dutchman's Pond: In mid-1992, the EPA is expected to complete a study
exploring methods to remove another on-site pond, Duchman's Pond. The final
cleanup remedy is expected to be selected by late 1992.
Entire Site: The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers are conducting an
intensive study to investigate the potential adverse impacts to groundwater and
surface water and to select the actions needed to clean and restore the existing
collection ponds and other off-site areas affected by the tire fire. This study, which will
recommend the best strategies for final cleanup, is expected to be completed in late 1993.
Site Facts: The site owner agreed, under the terms of a 1984 Administrative Order, to
install surface runoff controls and to perform other activities to control contaminant
migration. In 1989, the EPA entered into an Administrative Consent Order with the site
owners, which prevents them from altering site conditions and provides for site access and use
of clean barrow material from the site to build the dam.
March 1992 40 RHINEHART TIRE FIRE DUMP
-------
Environmental Progress
The numerous emergency actions performed by the EPA and the potentially responsible
parties have reduced the potential for exposure to contaminated materials and for the further
migration of contaminants while final investigations and cleanup activities are taking place at
the Rhinehart Tire Fire Dump site.
Site Repository
Handley Library, 100 West Piccadilly Street, Winchester, VA 22601
RHINEHART TIRE FIRE DUMP
41
March 1992
-------
SALTVILLE WASTE
DISPOSAL
PONDS
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VAD00312757
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Smyth County
Next to North Fork of the
Holston River near Saltville
Other Names:
Ille Muck Pond #5
lin Corp. Saltville
:e Disposal Pond #5
Olln Corp. Saltville
aste Disposal Pond #6
The Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds site consists of two large ponds, 45 and 80 acres in size,
and an empty lot next to the North Fork of the Holston River (NFHR). The empty lot once
held a mercury cell chlor-alkali battery plant operated from 1951 to 1954 by Olin Mathieson
Alkali Works and from 1954 to 1972 by Olin Chemicals Corp., the current site owner. The
waste disposal practices at the plant resulted in as many as 100 pounds of mercury being lost
daily to nearby soil and rivers adjacent to the site. Workers placed mercury-contaminated
wastewater and process waste from soda ash manufacturing into the two large ponds, known
as ponds #5 and #6. Mercury escaping from the site contaminated 80 miles of the NFHR.
Approximately 1,140 people live within a mile of the site. The nearest residences are located
1,300 feet from the site. The community's drinking water is obtained from uncontaminated
surface springs. Since 1970, people have been advised not to eat fish from the contaminated
stretch of the river, although catch-and-release game fishing is permitted. Because the
Holston River flows through both Virginia and Tennessee, a task force of the EPA, Virginia,
Tennessee, and the Tennessee Valley Authority staff was organized to study the mercury
contamination problem.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Mercury from the plant's waste disposal ponds has contaminated soils and surface
water. Direct contact with or accidental ingestion of soil or surface water or eating
contaminated fish from the Holston River pose a health risk. The NFHR is a
habitat for two endangered species remaining in the river: the fine-rayed mussel
and the spotfin chub. Six other endangered species have been eliminated from the
river.
42
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control, cleanup of the groundwater, and biomonitoring.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1982, the Olin Chemicals Corp. dredged 1,000 feet of
the river to remove mercury-contaminated sediments and built a diversion ditch
along the western edge of pond #5. In late 1991, contaminated soil was removed
to facilitate construction of a new bridge.
Source Control: The results of an investigation of the site called for surface
water diversions, construction of a treatment plant for pond #5 outfall, and future
investigations. The cleanup activities selected for this site have been organized into
two phases to facilitate the work. Phase 1 focuses on cleaning up the source of contamination
and assessing its effects; Phase 2 focuses in more detail on groundwater and surface water
contamination. The selected remedy features: building a diversion ditch around the eastern
side of pond #5; building a facility that will treat pond #5's outfall to within the State levels
for mercury; conducting a bioassessment of the NFHR to determine the extent of site effects
on resident fauna and flora; and developing a groundwater monitoring system. The owner
began the engineering design for this remedy in 1988. Phase 1 design work was completed in
1991. Cleanup activities for Phase 1 were completed later that same year. Phase 2 design
work is expected to be completed in 1993.
Groundwater Cleanup: A study to determine the nature and extent of
groundwater contamination and to identify alternatives for cleanup is underway.
The owner will conduct an intensive study of the site that will assess groundwater
contamination and the biological impact of contaminated groundwater discharge into the
adjacent river systems. This investigation, started in 1988, will identify the best cleanup
strategies and is scheduled to be completed in late 1992.
Biomonitoring: A study to determine the nature and extent of contamination
and to identify alternatives for cleanup has begun. An extensive investigation will
be conducted to determine the past, current, and future effects of the site on the
NFHR. The study will focus on sediment and several species of biota. Selected cleanup
strategies will be based on the extent of the effects. Completion of the study is expected in
late 1992.
Site Facts: In 1982, the Olin Chemicals Corp. and the State signed a Special Order under
which the owner was to dredge 1,000 feet of the river to remove contaminated sediments and
to construct a diversion ditch along the edge of the western portion of pond #5. The order
also required monitoring of the outfall, fish, and sediments until 1988. Under the terms of a
1988 Consent Decree, the Olin Chemicals Corp. will implement the remedy and conduct a
site investigation that will assess groundwater contamination at the site and the effects on
biological resources in the NFHR.
SALWILLE WASTE DISPOSAL PONDS 43 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions of dredging contaminants from the sediment of the NFHR, building
the diversion ditch to prevent mercury-contaminated outfall from entering the river, and
cleaning up the source of contamination have reduced the potential for exposure to
contaminated materials at the Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds site while additional cleanup
activities are being planned.
Site Repository
Saltville Town Hall, Town Hall Square on Main Street, Saltville, VA 24370
March 1992
44
SALTVILLE WASTE DISPOSAL PONDS
-------
SUPPLY CO
VIRGINIA
EPAID#VAD003117389
Site Description
EPA REGION 3
Suffolk County
Chuckatuck
The 7 1/3-acre Saunders Supply Co. site was a wood-treating plant, but ceased wood-treating
operations in June 1991. The site, however, is still an active lumber yard. Between 1964 and
1984, workers used a mixture of pentachlorophenol (PCP) and fuel oil as a wood
preservative. In 1974, they added a chromated copper arsenate process, which is still in use.
Part of the spent PCP/oil mixture was disposed of by burning it in an unlined pit or in a
conical burner on site, which resulted in the generation of dioxin compounds. EPA tests in
1984 detected elevated levels of chromium in Godwin's Mill Pond Reservoir, a source of
drinking water for more than 30,000 people in Suffolk. The Suffolk water treatment plant,
however, reported that levels in treated drinking water were well within safety limits. The
tests also found PCP, chromium, and arsenic in the Columbia aquifer, which supplies private
wells within 3 miles of the site. Approximately 1,300 people live within 3 miles of the site, and
about 700 people are served by municipal water systems within a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with arsenic, chromium, and PCP from
wood-treating process wastes. The soil is contaminated with arsenic, chromium,
copper, PCP, and dioxins. Workers or trespassers may be at risk from inhalation of
contaminated dust and particles or through direct contact with contaminated soil.
The groundwater flow is reported to be toward the reservoir, a primary drinking
water source. A nearby freshwater wetland may be threatened by site
contamination.
45
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the Saunders Supply Co. excavated some
contaminated silt from the conical burn pit and transported it to a State-permitted
landfill. The owner also installed a recovery well and pumped contaminated
groundwater out of the well, recycling it back into the wood treatment system.
Entire Site: In mid-1991, the EPA completed an intensive study of contamination
at the site to identify the best cleanup strategies for the situation. The EPA
selected the final cleanup method in late 1991. The selected remedy includes
dechlorination and off-site disposal of sediments from the wastewater pond and the former
earthen separation pond; low temperature thermal desorption and off-site disposal of on-site
soils and sediments from the storm sewer; treatment of groundwater during dewatering;
stabilization, solidification, and off-site disposal of the top 1 inch of concrete pads and off-site
disposal of the remaining pads; cleaning and sliplining of the storm sewer; groundwater
monitoring; and deed use restrictions. The design phase for the remedy is expected to begin
in 1992.
Environmental Progress
By excavating contaminated silt, installing a recovery well, and pumping contaminated
groundwater out of the well, the potentially responsible parties at the Saunders Supply Co.
site have reduced the potential for exposure to contaminated resources while the EPA is
planning the remaining cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Suffolk Public Library, 443 West Washington Street, Suffolk, VA 23434
March 1992 46 SAUNDERS SUPPLY CO.
-------
SUFFOLK CITY
LANDFILL
VIRGINIA
EPA ID#VAD980917983
EPA REGION 3
Suffolk County
On Route 604 within the City of Suffolk
Site Description
The 67-acre Suffolk City Landfill is owned and managed by the City. The landfill, now closed,
operated from 1967 to 1984. The City covered, graded, and replanted the landfill in 1988.
The unlined landfill accepted primarily municipal solid wastes. On-site disposal of highly toxic
pesticides is the primary concern. Dixie Guano Company disposed of 27 tons of chemicals in
a portion of the landfill in 1970. The area is rural and agricultural. Approximately 2,500
people obtain drinking water from private wells within 3 miles of the site. Surface runoff from
the site discharges into two unnamed tributaries to the Great Dismal Swamp, a major
freshwater wetland.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/16/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, soil, and liquids in retention basins were contaminated with
various pesticides from former disposal practices. Potential health hazards included
accidentally ingesting or coming in direct contact with contaminated groundwater
and soil. The potential existed for the contamination of the Great Dismal Swamp
from the site runoff; however, contamination did not occur.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed through an initial action; further investigations showed that no
further actions are required.
47
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Action: As part of the Administrative Order on Consent, the City of
Suffolk installed a leachate collection and treatment system. Operations began in
1991.
Entire Site: Under orders from the State, the City of Suffolk agreed to conduct
an intensive study of soil and groundwater contamination at the site to determine
its nature and extent and to recommend strategies for its cleanup. The study,
completed in 1992, showed that pesticide contamination no longer exists at the site. Scientific
information on pesticides has shown that these substances are prone to degrading naturally
over time. Therefore, no other actions are required at the sites; it is safe for people and the
environment.
Site Facts: The City of Suffolk signed an Administrative Order of Consent with the State
that required the City to perform studies and any cleanup actions at the site.
Environmental Progress
The installation of a leachate collection and treatment system has ensured that there are no
threats to nearby residents or the surroundings at the Suffolk City Landfill site. Natural
degradation of the remaining pesticides has occurred, ensuring the long-term safety of the
site.
Site Repository
Suffolk Public Library, 443 West Washington Street, Suffolk, VA 23434
March 1992 48 SUFFOLK CITY LANDFILL
-------
U.S. TITANIUM
VIRGINIA
EPA ID# VAD980705404
EPA REGION 3
Nelson County
Near the town of Piney River
Other Names:
Plney River Disposal Site
Site Description
The 50-acre U.S. Titanium site covers the northeastern portion of a parcel formerly occupied
by an American Cyanamid Co. plant. Between 1931 and 1971, the company mined and
refined titanium ore and manufactured titanium dioxide for paint pigments. A titanium
processing plant, settling ponds, tailing ponds, lagoons, and a waste disposal area are located
on site. Ferrous sulfate, a by-product of titanium dioxide manufacture, and heavy metals are
the primary contaminants at the site. The site has been divided into seven separate
contamination areas that require cleanup. Ferrous sulfate is highly acidic, and storm runoff
from the site's waste piles contributed to six major fish kills in the Piney and Tye Rivers from
1977 to 1981. More than 200,000 fish died during these events. Although recent work has
greatly improved conditions at the site, acidic runoff still threatens the Piney River. The
closest residence is 1/4 mile from the site. Piney River, the town in which the site is located,
has a population of approximately 100, and approximately 200 people live within a 1-mile
radius of the site. Local residents use groundwater for their drinking water supply.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
2EJ
The groundwater is highly acidic as a result of former plant operations.
Aluminum, iron, copper, nickel, zinc, and cadmium from site soils have
contaminated the groundwater. These contaminants are found in both on-site
seeps and off-site surface water. Ingestion of or direct contact with contaminated
groundwater poses only a slight threat, since no well contamination has been
detected, and municipal wells are located upstream from the site. The acidity of
the water and waste seeps could be harmful, as well as increase the solubility of
metals, which could enter water. This stream has not supported a viable
recreational fishery due mainly to the impact from titanium operation over the last
40 years. The fishery has improved since plant operations were stopped in 1971,
but is still affected by discharges from the site.
49
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: American Cyanamid Co. agreed in 1986 to begin an intensive study
of site conditions and contamination. This work resulted in selection of final
remedies for the site and the signing of the EPA final decision in 1989. Seven
areas have been pinpointed for treatment. A passive system will collect and treat iron-bearing
acidic groundwater. French drains and trenches will bear the water to an oxidation and
settling pond, a constructed wetland, and a limestone treatment bed. The ferrous sulfate in
Area 1 will be dissolved and treated. Drainage controls and revegetation will be implemented
in Areas 2, 3, 4, and 5. Area 6 requires no action. Acidified soil in Area 7 will be neutralized
with lime. Other features include monitoring, road maintenance, and deed and access
restrictions. These strategies are deemed completely effective for reducing acidic and iron
discharges to acceptable standards. The engineering design for these remedies started in 1991
and cleanup activities are scheduled to begin in late 1993. Completion of all cleanup activities
is scheduled for 2001.
Site Facts: American Cyanamid Co. signed a Consent Agreement in April 1986, agreeing to
conduct an investigation at the site.
Environmental Progress
After adding this site to the NPL, the EPA performed preliminary investigations and
determined that there currently are no immediate threats to nearby residents or the
environment. The potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the U.S. Titanium site is
low while cleanup designs and activities take place.
Site Repository
Nelson County Memorial Library, Route 29, South Lovingston, VA 22949
March 1992 50 U.S. TITANIUM
-------
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 1980 to
respond directly to hazardous waste problems
that may pose a threat to the public health and
the environment. The EPA administers the
Superfund program.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of
water, such as streams or rivers, come together.
Confined Aquifer: An aquifer in which
groundwater is confined under pressure that is
significantly greater than atmospheric pressure.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
Consent Decree: A legal document, ap-
proved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between the EPA and the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the
potentially responsible parties are required to
perform, or the costs incurred by the govern-
ment that the parties will reimburse, and the
roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. If a settlement between the EPA and a
potentially responsible party includes cleanup
actions, it must be in the form of a Consent
Decree. A Consent Decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order
on Consent].
Containment: The process of enclosing or
containing hazardous substances in a structure,
typically in a pond or a lagoon, to prevent the
migration of contaminants into the environment.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or substance
whose quantity, location, or nature produces
undesirable health or environmental effects.
Contingency Plan: A document setting
out an organized, planned, and coordinated
course of action to be followed in case of a
fire, explosion, or other accident that releases
toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, or radioac-
tive materials into the environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract
between the EPA and the States, wherein a State
agrees to manage or monitor certain site cleanup
responsibilities and other activities on a cost-
sharing basis.
Cost Recovery: A legal process by which
potentially responsible parties can be required
to pay back the Superfund program for money
it spends on any cleanup actions [see Poten-
tially Responsible Parties].
Cover: Vegetation or other material placed
over a landfill or other waste material. It can
be designed to reduce movement of water into
the waste and to prevent erosion that could
cause the movement of contaminants.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood pre-
serving operations and produced by distilla-
tion of tar, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Con-
taminating sediments, soils, and surface
water, creosotes may cause skin ulcerations
and cancer through prolonged exposure.
Culvert: A pipe used for drainage under a
road, railroad track, path, or through an embank-
ment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a chemi-
cal is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deletion: A site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL when Superfund response actions at the
site are complete. A site is deleted from the
NPL when a notice is published in the Federal
Register.
De minimis: This legal phrase pertains to
settlements with parties who contributed small
amounts of hazardous waste to a site. This
process allows the EPA to settle with small, or
de minimis contributors, as a single group rather
than as individuals, saving time, money, and
effort.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes, soils,
or chemicals.
G-4
-------
GLOSSARY
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Dioxin: An organic chemical by-product of
pesticide manufacture which is known to be one
of the most toxic man-made chemicals.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materials.
Disposal may be accomplished through the use
of approved secure landfills, surface impound-
ments, land farming, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Down gradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgrade
ent of a contaminated groundwater source are
prone to receiving pollutants.
Ecological Assessment: A study of the
impact of man-made or natural activity on living
creatures and their environment
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated,
that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or
industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes
discharged into surface waters.
Emission: Pollution discharged into the
atmosphere from smokestacks, other vents, and
surface areas of commercial or industrial facili-
ties.
Emulsifiers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil and
water.
Endangerment Assessment: A study
conducted to determine the risks posed to public
health or the environment by contamination at
NPL sites. The EPA or the State conducts the
study when a legal action is to be taken to direct
the potentially responsible parties to clean up a
site or pay for the cleanup. An endangerment
assessment supplements an investigation of the
site hazards.
Enforcement: EPA, State, or local legal
actions taken against parties to facilitate
settlements; to compel compliance with laws,
rules, regulations, or agreements; or to obtain
penalties or criminal sanctions for violations.
Enforcement procedures may vary, depending
on the specific requirements of different
environmental laws and related regulatory
requirements. Under CERCLA, for example,
the EPA will seek to require potentially
responsible parties to clean up a Superfund
site or pay for the cleanup [see Cost Recov-
ery].
Erosion: The wearing away of land surface
by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally
from weather or surface runoff, but can be
intensified by such land-related practices as
farming, residential or industrial develop-
ment, road building, or timber-cutting. Ero-
sion may spread surface contamination to off-
site locations.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh
water from rivers and salt water from
nearshore ocean waters are mixed. These
areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt
marshes, and lagoons. These water ecosys-
tems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and
wildlife.
Evaporation Ponds: Areas where sewage
sludge or other watery wastes are dumped and
allowed to dry out.
Feasibility Study: The analysis of the
potential cleanup alternatives for a site. The
feasibility study usually starts as soon as the
remedial investigation is underway. In this
volume, the feasibility study is referred to as a
site study [see also Remedial Investigation].
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
Filtration: A treatment process for remov-
ing solid (particulate) matter from water by
passing the water through sand, activated
carbon, or a man-made filter. The process is
often used to remove particles that contain
contaminants.
Flood Plain: An area along a river, formed
from sediment deposited by floods. Flood
plains periodically are innundated by natural
floods, which can spread contamination.
Flue Gas: The air that is emitted from a
chimney after combustion in the burner
occurs. The gas can include nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides,
particles, and many chemical pollutants.
Fly Ash: Non-combustible residue that results
from the combustion of flue gases. It can
include nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, water
vapor, sulfur oxides, as well as many other
chemical pollutants.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain
system constructed of perforated pipes, which is
used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft
coal into gas for use as a fuel.
General Notice Letter: [See Notice Letter].
Generator: A facility that emits pollutants
into the air or releases hazardous wastes into
water or soil.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, gener-
ally in response to a Special Notice letter, made
by a potentially responsible party, consisting of
a written proposal demonstrating a potentially
responsible party's qualifications and willing-
ness to perform a site study or cleanup.
Groundwater: Water that fills pores in soils
or openings in rocks to the point of saturation.
In aquifers, groundwater occurs in sufficient
quantities for use as drinking and irrigation
water and other purposes.
Groundwater Quality Assessment: The
process of analyzing the chemical characteris-
tics of groundwater to determine whether any
hazardous materials exist.
Halogens: Reactive non-metals, such as
chlorine and bromine. Halogens are very
good oxidizing agents and, therefore, have
many industrial uses. They are rarely found
by themselves; however, many chemicals
such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
some volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
and dioxin are reactive because of the pres-
ence of halogens.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The
principal screening tool used by the EPA to
evaluate relative risks to public health and the
environment associated with abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS
calculates a score based on the potential of
hazardous substances spreading from the site
through the air, surface water, or groundwater
and on other factors such as nearby popula-
tion. The HRS score is the primary factor in
deciding if the site should be on the NPL.
Hazardous Waste: By-products of society
that can pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment
when improperly managed. Hazardous waste
possesses at least one of four characteristics
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxic-
ity), or appears on special EPA lists.
Heavy Metals: Metallic elements with high
atomic weights, such as arsenic, lead, mercury,
and cadmium. Heavy metals are very hazardous
even at low concentrations and tend to accumu-
late in the food chain.
Herbicide: A chemical pesticide designed to
control or destroy plants, weeds, or grasses.
G-6
-------
GLOSSARY
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site contain-
ing exceptionally high levels of contamination.
Hydrocarbons: Chemical compounds that
consist entirely of hydrogen and carbon.
Hydrology: The properties, distribution, and
circulation of water.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater,
with particular emphasis on the chemistry and
movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge
confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Incineration: A group of treatment technolo-
gies involving destruction of waste by controlled
burning at high temperatures, e.g., burning
sludge to reduce the remaining residues to a
non-burnable ash that can be disposed of safely
on land, in some waters, or in underground
locations.
Infiltration: The movement of water or
other liquid down through soil from precipita-
tion (rain or snow) or from application of
wastewater to the land surface.
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid
flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treatment
plant.
Injection Well: A well into which waste
fluids are placed, under pressure, for purposes
of disposal.
Inorganic Chemicals: Chemical sub-
stances of mineral origin, not of basic carbon
structure.
Installation Restoration Program: The
specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its hazardous
waste sites and controlling the migration of
hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Intake: The source from where a water supply
is drawn, such as from a river or water body.
Interagency Agreement: A written agree-
ment between the EPA and a Federal agency
that has the lead for site cleanup activities,
setting forth the roles and responsibilities of the
agencies for performing and overseeing the
activities. States often are parties to interagency
agreements.
Interim (Permit) Status: Conditions under
which hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities, that were operating
when regulations under the RCRA became
final in 1980, are temporarily allowed by the
EPA to continue to operate while awaiting
denial or issuance of a permanent permit. The
facility must comply with certain regulations
to maintain interim status.
Lagoon: A shallow pond or liquid waste
containment structure. Lagoons typically are
used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges,
liquid wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfarm: To apply waste to land or incor-
porate waste into the surface soil, such as
fertilizer or soil conditioner. This practice
commonly is used for disposal of composted
wastes and sludges.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is
placed in or on land. Sanitary landfills are
disposal sites for non-hazardous solid wastes.
The waste is spread in layers, compacted to the
smallest practical volume, and covered with soil
at the end of each operating day. Secure chemi-
cal landfills are disposal sites for hazardous
waste. They are designed to minimize the
chance of release of hazardous substances into
the environment [see Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act].
Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by
which soluble chemical components are dis-
solved and carried through soil by water or
some other percolating liquid.
G-7
-------
GLOSSARY
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through
or drains from waste, carrying soluble compo-
nents from the waste.
Leachate Collection System: A system
that gathers liquid that has leaked into a landfill
or other waste disposal area and pumps it to the
surface for treatment.
Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier
designed to prevent leachate (waste residue)
from leaking from a landfill. Liner materials
include plastic and dense clay.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct,
often incremental, steps that are taken to solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the
complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into several of these phases.
Long-term Response Action: An action
which requires a continuous period of on-site
activity before cleanup goals are achieved.
These actions typically include the extraction
and treatment of groundwater and monitoring
actions.
Marsh: A type of wetland that does not
contain peat moss deposits and is dominated by
vegetation. Marshes may be either fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetland].
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, con-
taminants, water, or other liquids through porous
and permeable soils or rock.
Mill Tailings: [See Mine Tailings].
Mine Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left from
mining operations. Tailings often contain high
concentrations of lead, uranium, and arsenic or
other heavy metals.
Mitigation: Actions taken to improve site
conditions by limiting, reducing, or controlling
toxicity and contamination sources.
Modeling: A technique using a mathematical
or physical representation of a system or theory
that tests the effects that changes on system
components have on the overall performance of
the system.
Monitoring Wells: Special wells drilled at
specific locations within, or surrounding, a
hazardous waste site where groundwater can be
sampled at selected depths and studied to obtain
such information as the direction in which
groundwater flows and the types and amounts of
contaminates present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The
EPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified
for possible long-term cleanup under Super-
fund. The EPA is required to update the NPL
at least once a year.
Natural Attenuation: [See Attenuation].
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Water is the most
commonly known neutral, however, naphtha-
lene, pyrene, and trichlorobenzene also are
examples of neutrals.
Nitroaromatics: Common components of
explosive materials, which will explode if
activated by very high temperatures or pres-
sures; 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) is a
nitroaromatic.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter
notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A
Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day formal
period of negotiation during which the EPA is
not allowed to start work at a site or initiate
enforcement actions against potentially respon-
sible parties, although the EPA may undertake
certain investigatory and planning activities.
G-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The 60-day period may be extended if the EPA
receives a good faith offer from the PRPs
within that period. [See also Good Faith Offer].
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC): The
predesignated EPA, Coast Guard, or Depart-
ment of Defense official who coordinates and
directs Superfund removal actions or Clean
Water Act oil- or hazardous-spill corrective
actions.
Operation and Maintenance: Activities
conducted at a site after a cleanup action is
completed to ensure that the cleanup or
containment system is functioning properly.
Organic Chemicals/Compounds:
Chemical substances containing mainly
carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is
discharged into receiving waters.
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].
Pol I Ution: 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
Chemical Types
Sources
Potential Health
Threats*
Heavy MetaSs
Volatile Organic
Compounds
(VOCs)
Herbiektes
Polyertlorinated
(RGBs)
Creosotes
RacJiatton
(Radionudicfes}
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Lead, Manga-
nese, Mercury, Nickel,
Silver, Selenium, Zinc
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
Perchloroethylene (PCE),
Acetone, Benzene,
Ketone, Methyl chloride,
Toluene, Vinyl Chloride,
Dichlorethylene
Chlordane, DDT 4-4, DDE,
Heptachlor, Aldrin, Endrin,
Atrazine, Dieldrin, Toxa-
phene
Polyaromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs), Polynuclear
aromatics (PNAs),
Phenolic Tars, Pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP)
Radium-226, Radon,
Uranium-235, Uranium-
238
Electroplating, batteries,
paint pigments, photogra-
phy, smelting, thermom-
eters, fluorescent lights,
solvent recovery
Solvents and degreasers,
gasoline octane enhanc-
ers, oils and paints, dry
cleaning fluids, chemical
manufacturing.
Agricultural applications,
pesticide and herbicide
production
Electric transformers and
capacitors, insulators and
coolants, adhesives,
caulking compounds,
carbonless copy paper,
hydraulic fluids.
Wood preserving, fossil
fuel combustion
Mine tailings, radium
products, natural decay of
granites
Tumors, cancers, and kidney,
brain, neurological, bone and
liver damage
Cancers, kidney and liver
damage, impairment of the
nervous system resulting in
sleepiness and headaches,
leukemia
Various effects ranging from
nausea to nervous disorders.
Dioxin is a common by-product
of the manufacture of pesti-
cides and is both highly toxic
and a suspected carcinogen.
Cancer and liver damage.
Cancers and skin ulcerations
with prolonged exposure
Cancer
Sources: Toxic Chemicals—What They Are, How They Affect You (EPA, Region 5)
Glossary of Environmental Terms (EPA, 1988)
'The potential for risk due to these contaminants is linked to a number of factors; for example, the length and level of exposure
and environmental and health factors such as age.
*U.S. G.P.O.:1993-341-835:81018
G-15
------- |