EPA Region 6

           Siiperfuiid

SITE STATUS SUMMARIES
          ** TEXAS **
          Site-Specific Fact Sheet*
          on Superf und Progress
              ^
                    \

-------

-------
                                To  Our Readers...
       The Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, has made every effort to ensure the
accuracy and timeliness of these Superfund Site Status Summaries.  However, if you feel that
we have made an error or you have information that you feel would be beneficial to
improving these public information documents,  we want to hear from you!  Please contact us
at 1-800-533-3508 (toll free) with your comments and suggestions.
                                    Thank You!

-------

-------
AIR  FORCE  PLA
(GENERAL DYN
TEXAS
EPA ID# TX7572024605
                                                    EPA REGION 6
                                              CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 12
                                                       Tan-ant County
Site Description

Location:     •
Population:

Setting:



Hydrology:
                 North Central Texas in Tarrant County, six miles northwest of Fort Worth,
                 Texas. The plant is near White Settlement which is a suburb of Fort
                 Worth.  Naval Air Station Fort Worth (formerly Carswell Air Force Base)
                 is adjacent to Air Force Plant 4.

                 Approximately 13,000 people reside in White Settlement.

                 The nearest drinking water well is approximately 1/4 mile from site.
                 Industrial plant constructing and testing military aircraft.
                 Landfills and pits used for disposal of solvents and plating.

                 Upper zone ground water is shallow and heavily contaminated with
                 trichloroethylene.
                 The Paluxy formation underlies the upper zone and is separated by the
                 Walnut formation.
                 Documented evidence of communication of the upper zone and the Upper
                 Paluxy.
                 The site is situated along the southern shore of Lake Worth.
Wastes and Volumes
      The principal pollutant at Air Force Plant #4 site is trichloroethylene (TCE) in the upper
      zone ground water.
 Site Assessment and  Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                               Site HRS Score: 39.92
                              Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                 Final Date: 8/30/90
                                 NPL Update: No. 2
                                                               December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                   Late Worth
         Air Fore* Plant No. 4
             Benbrook ResevGidr
                                                           Fort Worth
The Remediation Process	

Sit* History:

•      The site is owned by the U.S. Air Force and operated by Lockheed/Martin aircraft.
•      The plant has been operational since 1941.
•      In the past, the plant produced approximately 5,500 to 6,000 tons per year of spent
       process chemicals.
•      Past spills of TCE have reportedly occurred within the Chemical Process Facility
       (Building 181) of the Assembly Building/Parts Plant.  Trenches, sumps, floor drains,
       storage tanks, and buried pipelines are present throughout the facility. These are all
       potential source areas for soil and ground water contamination resulting from spills and
       leaks.
•      One major potential source of contaminants is the degreaser tanks located in Building
       181, where a documented TCE release was reported in June 1991. The exact amount of
       TCE released is not known.
•      Currently, through waste minimization techniques, the off site disposal of waste is less
       than 2,500 tons per year.
•      The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) Report was finalized and
       approved in September 1995.
December 5, 1995
AIR FORCE PLANT #4
(GENERAL DYNAMICS)

-------
Health Considerations:

•     Contamination has been detected in the Terrace Alluvial flow system and the Paluxy
      Upper Sand.
•     The Paluxy aquifer is used by the City of White Settlement as a drinking water source.
•     There is communication between the Terrace Alluvial flow system and the Paluxy
      formation.
Record of Decision	
• A Record of Decision for this site is anticipated in early 1996.

Community Involvement	
       Community Involvement at the Air Force Plan: #4 SI:c is the responsibility of the U.S
       Air Force.
       Number of citizens on EPA mailing list: 49
       Site Repositories:  EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202.
                             White Settlement Public Library, 8215 White Settlement Road,
                            White Settlement, TX 76108
                             TNRCC, Technical Park Center, Building D, 12118 North
                             IH-35, Austin, TX 78753.
       A Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) was established at Plant 4. A community co-chair
       has been elected a/id the RAB generally meets on a monthly basis.
 Technical Assistance Grant
       Availability Notice: None
       Grant Award: None
       Current Status: EPA and the Air Force have formed a Restoration Advisory Board
       (RAB).

                   I
 Fiscal and Program Management
 • Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Gary A. Baumgarten, 214-665-6749, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
 • State Contact:  Peter Waterreus, Lei Medford (TNRCC)
 • Military Contact: Jojia Doepker (USAF)
 • Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Olivia Balandrdn, 214-665-6584, Mail Sta. 6SF-P
 • Attorney (EPA): Michael Barra, 214-665-2143, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
 • State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code 6SF-AT
 Cost Recovery:  FedwmV Facility
        PRPs Identified: 1
        Viable PRP:|U.S. Air Force
        An Interagericy Agreement (IAG) was signed by EPA on August 31, 1990, that includes
        EPA, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (formerly Texas Water
        Commission), anithe Air Force.
  AIR FORCE PLANT #4
  (General Dynamics)
                                                                      December 5, 1995

-------
Present Status and Issues
       The removal of contaminated soil by the Air Force has reduced the possibility of
       exposure to hazardous materials at this site, making the Air Force Plant #4 site safer
       while it awaits further cleanup actions.
       The Remedial Investigation is complete and the RI/FS report was finalized in 9/95.
       The Proposed Plan of Action is scheduled for release and public comment in late fall
       1995.
       The Remedial Design is planned to begin following signature of the Record of Decision
       (ROD). The ROD is expected to be finalized in early 1996.
       Interim Actions are being carried out at the Window Area, Landfill #3 and Fuel
       Saturation Areas #1 and #3 and landfills #4 and #5 at Carswell.
Cleanup Measurements
      Cleanup of the Air Force Plant #4 site will protect the drinking water sources for 13,000
      people living within one mile of the site, as well as an important recreational area used by
      many Tarrant County residents.
December 5, 1995
AIR FORCE PLANT #4
(GENERAL DYNAMICS)

-------
ALCO A/LAVACA BAY
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD008123168
Site Description
Location:
Population:
Setting:
 Hydrology:
                               EPA REGION 6
                            NGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 14
                                   Calhoun County
The site is located in Calhoun county in southeast Texas along the
Gulf of Mexico.

Approximately  1,100 people live in Point Comfort, Texas and
10,000 people live in Port Lavaca, Texas.

The nearest residence is approximately 700 feet from the ALCOA
plant operations.
The Site consists of a section of Lavaca Bay surrounding the
Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA) Point Comfort Plant,
an associated dredge spoil island, and the ALCOA Point Comfort
Facility.
The ALCOA facility covers  approximately 3500 acres; the dredge
spoil island approximately 500 acres;  and potential

The Beaumont Formation underlies the site and generally consists
of a sequence of silty clays,  sandy clayey silts, clays, and silty sands.

The water table is generally within 14 and 20 feet below the
surface.
The Chicot Aquifer is the youngest aquifer in Calhoun County,
and is at a total depth of 1,200.
Potable water supplies in the area come from deep groundwater
wells. Water supply for ALCOA facility is provided by two
brackish water wells at the  site and six potable water wells in the
Midway Well Field, nine miles from  the plant.
No potable water wells are located a the ALCOA facility or in its
immediate vicinity.
 Wastes and Volumes
 • The wastes which are or have been managed at the facility include ignitable and corrosive
 wastes, chrome plating waste, tetra ethyl lead, mercury, spent halogenated solvents, spent cyanide
 plating bath, spent cyanide strip and clean baths, waste asbestos insulation, and PCBs.
 • A total of 52 solid waste management units have been identified at the ALCOA facility.
                                                                     December 5, 1995

-------
• The waste of greatest volume produced at the facility is bauxite residue fines from processing
of bauxite ore to produce alumina.
• In Lavaca Bay sediments, the contaminant of greatest volume is mercury.         ,
Site Assessment and Ranking
                          NPL LISTING HISTORY
                              Site HRS Score: 3O.67
                             Proposed Date: 6/23/93
                               Final Date: 2/23/94
                              NPL Update: No. 15
Site Map and Diagram
      ALCOA
      (Point
      Comfort)/
      Lavaca Bay
December 5.1995
ALCOA/LAVACA BAY

-------
The Remediation Process
Site History:

• The ALCOA facility was established an aluminum smeller in 1948.  Bauxite refining began I.-.
1958 and is still active.
• The smelter was shut down in November of 1980 and has been dismantled.
• A cryolite plant operated from around 1962 to 1980.
• A chlorine-alkali plant began operation in 1948.  Waste water containing mercury was
discharged into Lavaca Bay through outfalls located on an off-shore gypsum disposal lagoon.
Dredge spoil contaminated with Mercury were disposed of in several areas on the site. Bay
sediments are now contaminated with the waste mercury.
• The oil and gas refining and power generation at the Neumin Gas Plant was recently sold to
Formosa Plastics.
• Chrome plating was also operated but is now inactive.
• Current operations include bauxite refinery, the aluminum fluoride plant, the carbon paste
plant.

Health Considerations:

• In 1988, the Texas Department of Health issued a fishing  closure due to levels of mercury in
fish tissue above FDA standards (approximately one square  mile of Lavaca Bay surrounding the
ALCOA facility).
• Soils are exposed at the facility to potentially hazardous constituents from dust and spillage in
process areas, from contact with liquid and solid wastes in surface impoundments, and from
disposal of solid wastes in landfills. Soils in the old Chlor-alkali  area are known to be
contaminated with mercury.
• Groundwater is known to be contaminated  in the old Chlor-alkali and Witco areas at the site.
Record  of Decision
                                No ROD has been signed for tha
                          ALCOA/Lavaca Bay site to dat&:

Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  1/95
• Open houses and workshops: 8/93, 4/94, 9/94
• Milestone EPA Fact Sheets:  8/93, 4/94
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:
• ROD Fact Sheet:
• ALCOA (PRP) Community Involvement Plan:  Draft 6/94, Final pending.
• ALCOA (PRP) Milestone Fact Sheets:
• Citizens on EPA site mailing list: 364
• Constituency Interest: The site has an historically medium to low level of citizen interest.
       A Community Advisory Group established by the PRP, Alcoa, meets regularly.

• Site Repository:   Calhoun County Public Library, 200 West Mahan, Port Lavaca, TX 77979
 ALCOA/LAVACA BAY
December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  8/93, 4/94               -  •
• Letters of Intent Received: 5/29/95:  c-aihoun County Resource Watch
• Grant Award: Pending
• Current Status: Group is revising draft application
Fiscal and Program  Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Judith Black, 214-665-6739, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact: Glenda Champagne (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Melanie Lillard, 214-665-2294, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Courtney Johnson, 214-665-8055, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:
Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified: Approximately 7
• Viable PRP:  3

Present Status and Issues  -
• On March 31, 1994, EPA and ALCOA entered into a Superfund Administrative Order on
consent (AOC) to conduct a remedial investigation, risk assessment, and feasibility study (RI/FS)
and possibly perform expedited response/removal actions.
• On June 6,1994 EPA, NOAA and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
(TNRCC) entered into a Cooperative Management Agreement to facilitate coordination and
communication between parties during oversight of the RI/FS.
• ALCOA and the natural resource trustees are currently discussing the possibility of collecting
the appropriate data during the Superfund RI to support a natural resource damage assessment.
• EPA Region 6 is currently performing a PRP search and intends to request information and
notify other PRPs in the near future.
•  The Community Advisory Group is meeting regularly to review site activity and provide input
to the PRPs and EPA

Cleanup Measurements	
• Remediation of Lavaca Bay will address contamination of up to 50,000 acres of marine
estuary/bay environment and recreational/commercial fishery along the South Texas Gulf Coast.
December 5,1995
ALCOA/LAVACA BAY

-------
BAILEY WASTE
DISPOSAL
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD98086464
                                                     EPA REGION 6
                                                  NGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 02
                                                         Orange County
                                                         Othor Names:
                                                       Gulf States Utility
                                                   Baltey'a Sabln* L*k» Bridge
Site Description  	

Location:     • Three miles southwest Bridge City, Orange County, Texas.
            • North of Neches River near Highway 87.

Population:   • The immediate site area is sparsely populated.
            • Approximately 7,600 people within three miles of the site use wells for drinking
            water.

Sotting:      •"The nearest residence to the site is two miles.
            • Nearest drinking water well is 1,200 feet.
            • The site is situated in a, marsh area.
            • The site is characterized by a series of waste pits, a drainage channel, a drum
            disposal area, a waste channel,  and a large surface impoundment.
            • Waste has been documented on ten acres of the site.

Hydrology:   • Gulf Coast Aquifer.
            • Seasonal high level is about 5 ft.
            • Silty clay layer beneath the site.
            • Shallow ground water is contaminated with organic chemicals and heavy metals.
            • Area drinking water wells are located in deeper aquifers which show no
            contamination from the site.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the Bailey Waste Disposal site are metals, arsenic compounds,
benzene, phenols, pyridenes, naphthalenes, and chlorinated hydrocarbons in soil.
• Waste volume is approximately 156,000 cubic yards
Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 53.42
                               Proposed Date: 10/05/84
                                 Final Date: 5/20/86
                                 NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and  Diagram
                                     'IH.I. Bailey Wasta
                                          Disposal
The Remediation Process  	—

Site History.

• The site began receiving industrial and municipal wastes in 1950.
• Gulf State Utilities purchased the property in 1971.
• The site was identified in the 1979 Eckardt Report
• In November and December 1984, the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs), with EPA
oversight, fenced the site and posted warning signs.
• The Remedial  Investigation (RI) was conducted by the Texas Department of Water Resources
(TDWR), now the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), from 12/84 to
10/87.
• The PRPs conducted the Feasibility Study (FS) from 10/87 to 3/88, with EPA oversight.

Health Considerations:

• Analysis conducted by the state revealed chloroform, phthalates, trichloroethylene, and other
compounds in surface water, ground water, and soils on the site.

Other Environmental Risks:

• About 7600 people within three miles of the site use ground water as their primary source of
drinking water.
• Marsh is directly impacted from the waste which has migrated into it.
December 5, 1995
BAILEY WASTE DISPOSAL

-------
Record of Decision
                                    Signed: June 28,1988
  Soil Treatment:
• Contaminated marsh sediments and material from the drum disposal area and drainage
channel are to be moved (consolidated) to the waste channel.
• The consolidated material will then be stabilized by solidification to prevent movement off-site.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. No Action
2. Onsite landfill
3. Off-site landfill
4. Onsite Incineration
5. Onsite Incineration, and
  Off-site landfill
             Reason Not Chosen
Not protective of human health and the environment
Short term Impacts
Short term impacts
Short term impacts, Imolementabiltty
Short term impacts, Implementabllity
Remedial Timeline
• The Bailey Site Settlors Committee (PRPs) initiated the Remedial Design in 3/89.
• Construction of the remedy, or Remedial Action (RA) by the PRPs began in 2/92.
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 6/85, revised 3/89
• Open houses and workshops:  11/84, 2/85, 10/85, 8/92, 7/93
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  5/88
e ROD Fact Sheet:  7/88
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 10/85, 9/89, 10/89, 6/90, 2/92, 8/92, 7/93, 7/93, 9/95

• Citizens on site mailing list:  96

e Constituency Interest:  Citizen inteiest in the c.'>c •::-' ".^.

• Site Repository:  City of Orange Public Library, 220 North Fifth Street, West Orange, TX
77630
 BAILEY WASTE DISPOSAL
                                December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 2/89
• Letters of Intent Received: None
• Grant Award:  N/A

• Current Status:  No apparent citizen interest in the grant.
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Chris Villarreal, 214-665-6758, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact:  Trey Collins (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorneys (EPA): Anne Foster, 214-665-2169; Pam Travis, 214-665-8056, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor: Flour Daniel (EPA Oversight)
Coat Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

  PRPs Identified:  22
  Viable PRP: 22 - Bailey Site Settlors Committee
  The RD/RA Consent Decree (CD) was entered on April 30, 1990.
  The CD involves an 80/20 mixed funding.
  EPA is pursuing a second group of PRPs in an attempt to recover the government's share of a
previous 80/20 mixed funding settlement.  A second Consent Decree has gone to the judge for
entry. The Second Consent Decree recovers approximately 85% of monies not recovered by the
first Consent Decree.  Pending the entry of the second Consent Decree by the court, the PRPs
will be responsible for 97% of the total monies expended for the site's RD/RA
Present Status and  Issues
•Fencing the area and posting warning signs have limited access to the site, thereby reducing the
potential of exposure to hazardous substances at the Bailey Waste Disposal while planned
cleanup activities are underway.
• Remedy construction (Remedial Action) by the PRPs with EPA oversight is continuing.
• The onsite in-situ stabilization of wastes began in September  1993. The PRP's contractor has
had problems meeting the project stabilization requirements. Efforts to resolve this problem
have included conducting an independent in-situ stabilization field pilot.  The PRPs have reached
an agreement with their contractor whereby the contractor has left the project. The PRPs, as
directed by the EPA, are  currently reevaluating the current remedy and developing potential
remedy alternatives.

Cleanup Measurements   	
• Over 156,000 cubic yards of hazardous materials will be remedied to prevent off-site migration.
• Sensitive wetlands will be protected and made safe for wildlife and recreational activities.
December 5, 1995
BAILEY WASTE DISPOSAL

-------
BIO-ECOLOGY
SYSTEMS,  INC.
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980340889
  EPA REGION 6
Congressional District 24
      Dallas County
      Grand Prairie
      Other Names:
       Bloocotogy
Site  Description
Location:     • 4100 E. Jefferson Blvd., Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas.
            • The site is located in an industrial area.

Population:   • The nearest drinking water well is one mile north of site at 500 ft. depth.
            • The site is located within 100-year floodplain of Mountain Creek.

Setting:      • The site area is 11.2 acres.

Hydrology:   • Alluvial depositions overlaying the Eagle Ford shale which is the confining zone
             for the Woodbine aquifer.
            • Two minor ground water zones occur within the overlaying alluvium at 20 ft.
             and 50 ft. below the surface.
Wastes and Volumes —	—	

• The principal pollutants at the Bio-Ecology site are heavy metals and volatile organics, both
 present in soils at an approximate concentration of 1000 ppm.
• The approximate volume of soils contaminated with these waste materials is 85,300 cubic
 yards.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 35.06
                               Proposed Date: 12/30/82
                                 Final Date: 9/08/83
                                 NPL Update: No. t
   Bio-Ecology was one of the first sites proposed to the National Priorities List (NPL).
                                                                December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
              Dallas
             Naval Air
              Station
                *
BIO-ECOLOGYU
       SITE
                                              Grand Prairie
The Remediation  Process	

Stte History:

• The site was a Class I industrial solid waste management facility authorized by the State of
 Texas in April 1972 to incinerate, chemically treat, biologically oxidate, and landfill the waste.
• After numerous permit violations and court orders to improve operations, the site owners took
 bankruptcy in June 1978.
• The Texas Department of Water Resources (TDWR), now the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC), conducted the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study from April 1982 through June  1984.
• EPA conducted an Interim Remedial Measure (IRM) in August 1985 and removed 15 storage
tanks and surface contamination, constructed a fence, and posted warning signs to restrict access.
• The EPA Region 6 Acting Regional Administrator signed the Close Out Report on April 12,
1993.

Health Considerations:

• Slight ground water contamination detected to a depth of 50 feet.
• The City of Grand Prairie draws its domestic drinking water from wells within a three-mile
radius of the site.

Other Environmental  Risks:

• The site is located within the 100-year floodplain.
December 5,1995
                    BIO-ECOLOGY SYSTEMS, INC.

-------
Record of Decision
                                    Signed: June 6, 1984
• The remedy selected for the Bio-Ecology site was an onsite landfill designed to meet standards
 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

Ground Water

• Ground water in the site vicinity has not shown any significant contamination during the last
 several years of monitoring.

Soil Treatment:

• The contaminated soils are contained within an engineered cell designed to prevent migration
 of site wastes into ground water or offsite.
     Other Remedies Considered

I. Stabilize waste, slurry wall 30' deep
2. Stabilize waste, slurry wall 60' deep
3. Stabilize waste, place In clay lined
       cell
	Reason Not Chosen

Did not comply with RCRA
Did not comply with RCRA
Did not comply with RCRA
• TNRCC conducted the Remedial Design (RD) from September 1984 through May 1986, and
the Remedial Action (RA) from May 1986 through April 1993.
• The site was fenced in August 1985 to limit unautnorized access.
Community Involvement
• Community outreach at this site is the responsibility of the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC).
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 2/84
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  12/5/83
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 9/86 (RD Approval); Close-Out Report Fact Sheet 7/93
• Citizens on site mailing list:  27
• Constituency Interest:  Low interest by community
• Site Repositories:  1) EPA Region 6 Library, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202
                    2) Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 1700 Congress
                    Avenue, Austin, TX 78704
• Close Out Report Fact Sheet: 6/15/93
 BIO-ECOLOGY SYSTEMS. INC.
                   December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  None (Pre-SARA ROD)
• Letters of Intent Received: None
• Grant Award: N/A

Fiscal and Program Management
           Project Uanagw (EPA):  Ernest R. Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact Emmanuel Ndame
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandran, 214-665-6584, Mall Coda: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Mark Forcler, 214-665-2124, Mall Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mall Code:  6SF-AT
  Prim* Contractor Woodward-Clyde Consultants (RD)
                Rollins Environmental Services (RA)

Cost Recovery: State Lead

• PRPs Identified: 100
• Viable PRPs:  95
• Fund cleanup followed by 107 cost recovery.
• Anticipate deminimus settlement [SARA 122(g)] for more than 80 of the PRPs.

Referral filed with DOJ March 1987.
Present Status and Issues
• Remediation of the site is complete.
• The immediate removal of contaminated tanks, the construction of a fence, the security
measures, and subsequent long-term cleanup measures have achieved the surface and surface
water cleanup goals for this site.
• The site currently is fenced with a grass-covered landfill encapsulating the stabilized waste
material.
• The remedy is in the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) phase.
• Monitoring activities will be continued to ensure  the effectiveness of the site cleanup until final
deletion of the Bio-Ecology Systems, Inc. site from  the NPL.
• A Five-Year Review report was completed by the Region on 12/5/94.  The report concluded
that the remedy remains  protective of health and the environment and recommended continued
implementation of the O&M plan for the site.

Cleanup Measurements  	—
  85,300 yards of waste were solidified and placed in the onsite landfill.
December 5, 1995
BIO-ECOLOGY SYSTEMS, INC.

-------
BRiO
REFINING,  INC.
1EXAS
EPA ID# TXD980625453
    EPA REGION 6
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 22
         Harris County
        Otlwr Nanwa:
    JOC Oil Aromatic*, Inc.
   Low* Chemical Company
Site Description
Location:     • The Brio Refining, Inc. site is located at 2501 Dixie Farm Road in southern
             Harris County, Texas.
             • The site is about 1.5 miles southwest of Interstate Highway 45 south (Gulf
             Freeway) at the Ellington Field exit.
             • The City of Friendswood is approximately 1-2 miles to the south.

Population:   • Approximately 5,000 people within one mile of site.

Setting:       • Nearest residence is adjacent to the site (Southbend Subdivision).
             • Nearest drinking water well is within 0.5 mile radius of the site, but draws water
             from an uncontaminated aquifer,  however, it is currently not in use.
             • The site occupies approximately 58.1 acres;  Dixie Farm Road divides the site
             into two parcels, the northern tract of site, historically used  for storage purposes,
             and the southern was where processing activities occurred.

Hydrology:   • Mud Gulley (a stream) borders the site to the west.
             • Surface drainage from the site  is to the southwest into Mud Gulley.
             • Soils on the Brio site consist of surface clay ranging in thickness from twelve to
             twenty feet across the site. Below this zone is silty clay with interbedded sands.
             This zone is  approximately 25 feet thick.
             • Below the sand channel zone is a clay rich zone with an average thickness of
             ten feet.
             • Below the clay zone, a thick sand is found across the site  at about 50'-55' below
             the surface.  The sand thickness is approximately 40'.
             • Two water-bearing zones have  been identified in the immediate subsurface of
             the site.  The uppermost water-bearing zone is the stratum  referred to above as
             the sand channel zone, and is found at depths ranging from 14.5'-21.5' and
             extending to depths of 40'-45'. The direction of flow is toward Mud Gulley
             (southwest).
             • The second water-bearing zone is the stratum termed the "50-foot sand".  This
             aquifer is found at depths of between 52' and 61.5' to depths of between 92.5 and
             99' below the surface.  Additionally, there exists a positive vertical hydraulic
             gradient from the deeper water-bearing zone toward the shallow wate,-bearing
             zone in certain portions of the site.
                                                                       December 5, 1995

-------
Wastes and Volumes
• The principle pollutants are found in various on-site pits.
* Pollutant^ characteristic of the site include styrene tars, vinyl chloride, chlorinated solvent
residues, metallic catalyst, and fuel oil residues.
• Contaminants can be found at concentrations greater than 100K mg/kg.
• Soil contamination - 700,000 cubic yards of measurable amounts of contaminants.
• Soil contamination in excess of Endangerment Assessment action levels - 62,000 cubic yards.
• Sludges and liquids in soils may account for an additional 40,000 cubic yards.

Site Assessment and  Ranking	
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site HRS Score: 50.38
                                 Proposed Date: 10/5/84
                                   Final Date: 3/31/89
                                   NPL Update: No. 2
• The Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) erected a fence around the site in January 1985.

Site Map and  Diagram	
December 5, 1995
BRIO REFINING, INC.

-------
The Remediation Process
She history:

• Operations began at the Brio Refining site in 1957.
• The site operations included by-product recycling, copper catalyst regeneration, petrochemical
recovery, and jet fuel processing.  Styrene and vinyl chloride tars stored in open unlined
impoundment waiting for processing.
• The site was owned and operated under several different names  until Brio Refining, Inc.
declared bankruptcy in 1982.
• 2/85 - 3/85, EPA fenced the site and covered a pit with plastic fabric and sand to prevent
emissions.
• U.S. Geological Survey reviewed EPA's evaluations and recommendations in 5/90.

Health Considerations:

• On-site soil and ground water contamination by 1,2 dichloroethane, 1,1,2 trichloroethane, vinyl
chloride, fluorene, anthracene/phenanthrene, pyrene and other hydrocarbons and copper exists to
depths greater than 18 feet. Air releases have been documented for 1,1,2 trichloroethane, 1,2
dichloroethane, and vinyl chloride along with other organics.
• Contaminated groundwater discharges to Mud Gully which flows into Clear Creek.  Interim
groundwater recovery is  required  to prevent human exposure to contaminated fish. Texas
Department of Health has posted fish consumption advisory.

Other Environmental Risks:

• A housing development borders the site on the north.
• A municipal drinking water well located less than 0.5 mile from the site is 1200 feet deep.
• Shallow ground water contamination is evident (primarily 20'-45' aquifer, some reported in 50'-
100' aquifer).
 Record of Decision
                                     Signed: March 31,1988
 Ground Water
 • Treatment of shallow groundwater by barrier wciis anci pumping and treating the shallow
 aquifer; dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL) recovery.

 Soil Treatment:

 • Treatment of affected materials and soils using thermal destruction (incineration).

 Process Vessels and Equipment

 • Dismantling of process facility, impose deed restrictions and control site access.
 BRIO REFINING, INC.
                                                                          December 5, 1995

-------
  Other Remedies Considered

1. No Action

2. Cap and Cover
3. On-slte landfill Vault
4. Offstte Disposal
         Reasons Not Chosen
Fails to provide Song-term protection of
public health and tiv. environment
Does not achieve reduction of mobility,
toxlcity and volume to the extent provided
by incineration and blotreatment
Same ac  Cap, above.
EPA's least preferred alternative when
alternative treatment technologies are
available.
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed  12/84 , revised 8/85, 8/89, EPA revision 6/94.
• Open houses and workshops:  10/84, 5/85, 4/86, 12/88, 4/89, 1/90, 8/91, 11/93, 2/94, 7/94.
• Mayor's Community Leaders Meetings:  3/90, 4/90, 5/90, 6/90, 7/90, 8/90, 1/91.
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting: 1/88
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  5/88
• Fact Sheets:  9/85, 9/88, 10/88, 8/89, 2/90, 4/90 (2), 12/90, 1/91, 5/91, 8/91, 9/91, 12/92, 11/93,
7/94, 8/94, 6/95.
• Satellite Office:  Opened:  8/28/91, Total contacts to date:  Over 2,000 citizens and officials;
relocated 11/93.
• Citizens on site mailing list:  827
• Constituency Interest:  High level  of concern with ground water contamination, health,
property values.  Citizen serve on Community Advisory Group.
• Openly opposing incineration remedy. Southbend Municipal Utilities  District (MUD) Citizens
interceded 10/90 on the Consent Decree hearing set for 1/16/91.
• MUD and Homes, Environment and Lives in Peril (H.E.L.P.) filed addendum to intervention
claiming PRPs took over all CR functions and controlled the information repository.

• Site Repositories:

       1. San Jacinto College-South Campus, 13735 Beamer Rd., Houston, TX 77089
       2. EPA/Brio Satellite Office, 10904 Scarsdale Blvd. #295, Houston, Texas 77089

• Community Advisory Group (CAG) established 9/94.

       CAG meetings monthly, 1994-95
       CAG submitted application for new TAG, 2/95
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  6/22/89
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1. South Belt Superfund Coalition (SBSC) - 6/1/89
       2. Homes, Environment and Lives in Peril (HELP) - 7/28/89
• Final Application Received: HELP submitted final application on 12/90.
• Grant Award:  1/31/91
• Current Status: Grant funds expended; close-out completed 9/94.
• Technical Advisor: Joel Hirshhorn
December 5, 1995
                        BRIO REFINING, INC.

-------
Supplemental TAG;

  Supplemental TAG made available by EPA 12/94 (site complexity & community request).
  Availability Notices: 12/94 in area newspapers.
  CAG submitted application for Supp. TAG:  2/11/95
  CAG submitted intergovernmental review:  4/95
  Grant Award:  6/7/95
  CAG runs solicitation for Technical Advisor notice:  7/95
  Technical Advisor:  Joel Hirschhorn (selected 8/95)
Fiscal and  Program Management
                                                                     6SF-LL
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): John Meyer, 214-665-6742, Mail Code:
  State Contact:  Ashby McMullen (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Anne Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT ,
  Prime Contractor. GSI (for PRPs)

Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

e PRPs Identified:  Over 30
e Viable PRP: "Brio Site Task Force (BTSF)
e A Consent Order was entered into with PRPs in 6/85 for conduct of the RI/FS.
e Administrative  Order on Consent signed on 6/29/89, to cover dismantling of the process
facility.
e On 3/28/91, DOJ file a cost recovery claim against the non-settlers.
e Consent Decree lodged:  8/89, public comment period: 8/15/89 - 12/30/89
e Notice of CD Hearing: 12/90; CD Entered: 4/91
 Present Status and issues  	—	

 e The installation of a fence and the dismantling of the process equipment have reduced the
 potential for exposure to hazardous wastes at the Brio Refining, Inc. site, making it safer while it
 awaits further cleanup activities.
 e A buyout of South Bend subdivision by developer is underway and nearly complete (vis-a-vis
 court settlement of class-action lawsuit by citizens)
 e The incineration remedy is on hold pending completion of a focused feasibility study that will
 evaluate containment. This study is being done in conjunction with a community advisory group
 (CAG) and should be completed by the end of 1995.
 Cleanup Measurements	

 e Approximately 100,000 gallons of highly contaminated sludges and solids have been removed
 from the site through early actions.
 e Under terms of the remedy 62,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil will be treated and
 rendered safe.
 e Over two million gallons of groundwater have been treated and approximately 20,000 gallons
 of DNAPL has been removed from the site.  Additional DNAPL removal activities began in
 spring of 1995.
 BRIO REFINING, INC.
                                                                        December 5, 1995

-------

-------
CRYSTAL CHEMICAL
COMPANY
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD990707010
                                          EPA REGION 6
                                        Congressional District 09
                                              Harris County
Site  Description
Location:

Population:
Setting:
Hydrogoology.
• 3502 Rogerdale Road, near Alief in Houston, Harris County, Texas.
• Residential and light industry area.
• Approximately 20,000 people live within a one-mile radius of the site.
• The nearest residence is 2500 feet.
• The nearest drinking water well is 300 feet.
•-20 water wells exist within one-mile radius.
• The site covers approximately 5 acres.

• Soils at the site are mostly silty clay and sandy clay (poorly drained).
• The 35-foot sand aquifer is contaminated with less than 600 parts per million
(ppm) of arsenic.
• The 35-foot sand appears to be confined from the lower aquifers (100-foot
sand) by a 10-foot clay zone with a migration rate of 0.1 ft/year.
• Drinking water supply wells completed in the Chicot Aquifer.
• The site is located within the 100-yar flood plain.
Wastes and Volumes	

• The principal pollutant at the Crystal Chemical site is arsenic.
• The onsite subsurface (4 ft.) concentration is high, at approximately 27,000 ppm.
• The ground water (35-foot sand) arsenic concentration is less than 600 ppm.
• 3 onsite waste ponds, also highly contaminated, contain approximately 16,500 cu. yds.
• The total site quantity is approximately 156,000 cubic yards of soil, and 3 million gallons of
water.
• The approximate volume of contaminated soils off-site is 25,000 cubic yards.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site HRS Score: 60.90
                                Proposed Date: 7/23/82
                                  Final Date: 9/08/83
                                  NPL Update: No. t
                                                                  December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
          *.     I
        AJRPORT  i
                       Richmond
                        Avenue
                     Crystal Chemical
                           Sit*
                            Houston
 Pood No. 1
 Crystal
Chemical
   Site
                                                          Exclusion Zon«
                                                          Decontamination Zone
                                                          Support Zon*  •
The Remediation  Process	

Stt« History:

• The Crystal Chemical site was an active herbicide plant from 1968 until 1981, when bankruptcy
was declared.
• From September 1981 through February 1983, EPA de-watered the site, filled in contaminated
ponds, temporarily capped most of the plant site with 6 inches of clay, and added top soil and
seed.
• Hurricane damage to the site resulted in a restart of work.  Restart actions included repairing
the fence, removal of contaminated liquids from two buildings, capping building floor, and
installation of gravel  berms.
• In September/October 1983 and August through October 1988, EPA made repairs to the clay
cap and site fence.
• Removal actions by EPA resulted in 400 cubic yards of soils and 2 million gallons of
contaminated water being removed from this site.
• • The Remedial Investigation (RI) was completed in January 1984
• The Feasibility Study (FS) was completed in June 1984, with an Addendum Study completed
in December 1984, and a  Supplemental FS was completed in September 1990.
• From October 1990 through September 1991, the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP),
removed additional contaminated soils from the Westpark Drive easement and made repairs to
the cap and the Harris County Flood Control Ditch. The soils removed from the easement are
stockpiled adjacent to the site.
 December 5, 1995
         CRYSTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
      Consideration*:                    .

• Raw and finished materials from the manufacturer of arsenic-based pesticides were spread on
surface soils and have leached into the ground
• Potential chronic human exposure risks include the risk of skin and lung cancer from direct
contact with, and ingestion of, contaminated soils and ground water, and inhalation of
contaminated dust.
Other Environmental Risks:

• Shallow ground water is discharging into a Harris County flood control ditch, and the shallow
groundwater contamination has migrated north and south beyond the site boundary.
Record of Decision
                                                                      i
Signed: September 27, 1990
 Amended: June 16, 1332
• The remedy selected in 1990 was amended to select a new remedy for the soil contamination.
The original remedy called for the use of an innovative technology, in-situ vitrification, but the
technology was withdrawn from the commercial market by the vendor. In-situ vitrification is a
process which uses electricity to generate heat which will melt the contaminated soil and
permanently bonds the soil and contaminants into a glass like material as it cools.


Ground Water

• Extraction of arsenic-contaminated ground water.
• Treatment of extracted water to remove arsenic through an ion exchange process where
contaminants  are removed from water through the exchange of nontoxic materials (ions) from an
ion exchange material.
• The toxic materials are retained in the exchanged material, which is disposed.
• Treated water will be discharged to either a publicly-owned treatment works (POTW), the
flood control ditch, or will be re-injected into the subsurface at the site.
 Soil Treatment:

 • Excavation of all arsenic-contaminated soils from the off-site areas down to 30 ppm.
 • Consolidation of these excavated soils onsite.
 • Construction of a multi-layer cap over the entire site to contain the wastes.
 CRYSTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY
                                                                           December 5, 1995

-------
     Other Remedies Considored
                                -SOIL-
1. "No Action"
2. Limited Action
2. Excavation and Off-Site Disposal
3. Full or Partial In-Situ Vitrification
4. Full or Partial Solidification/Stabilization
5. Full or Partial Soil Washing
                         —GROUND WATER-
1. "No Action"
2. Limited Action
3, Slurry Wall Containment
4. Extraction and Discharge to POTW (not treated)
        Reason Not Chosen
Did not meet remedial objectives
Did not meet remedial objectives
Difficult to implement .
Technology not available
Poor treatment success
Difficult to implement
Did not meet remedial objectives
Did not meet remedial objectives
Did not meet remedial objectives
Did not meet remedial objectives
Community Involvement  	

• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 8/89 , revised 2/91
• Open houses and workshops: 4/90, 6/90, 2/92, 10/94
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  6/90.
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  10/90
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  4/85, 11/87 (by PRPs), 1/91, 9/94, by PRPs
• EPA Amended Proposed Plan and Public Meeting held : 2/92
• Citizens on site mailing list: 183
• Constituency Interest:
       - Community concerns about site aesthetics after the remedy is completed.
       - Political inquiries regarding the length of time required to effect the cleanup.
• Outreach activities with PRPs completed Fall 1994
• Site Repository: Jungman Public Library, 5830 Westheimer Road, Houston, TX 77057
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  4/89
• Letters of Intent Received:  1) LIFT Endowment, Inc. - 2/8/90 (later withdrawn) 2) Westohase
Business Council - 4/2/90
• Final Application Received: 6/11/91
• Grant Award:  8/16/91
• Current Status: The group is finalizing procurement of their Technical Advisor (was delayed
during ROD amendment)
- Grant being reviewed for possible annulment due to lack of activity, 4/95
December 5,1995
               CRYSTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
Fiscal and Program Management	

  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Lisa Marie Price, 214-665-6744, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact:  E.R. (Trey) Collins (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Ann Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  Industrial Compliance (for PRPs)

Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

  PRPs Identified: 13
  Viable PRP: Southern  Pacific Transportation Compaq
  PRPs committed to do the supplemental FS in a Consent Order signed April 28, 1987.
  An Administrative Order was issued in May 1991 to PRPs regarding excavation of
contaminated soils from the Westpark Drive easement.
  An Administrative Order was issued in March 1992 for the Ground Water RD.
  An Unilateral Administrative Order was issued in September 1992 for the Ground Water RA,
and the soil RD/RA.
Present Status and Issues	

• Emergency actions to remove or cap contaminated soils and liquid wastes, as well as repair
and upkeep activities, have reduced the actual exposure potential and the migration of
contaminated groundwater at the Crystal Chemical Company site, making it safer while cleanup
continues.
• The remedial design for the ground water remedy is underway, and should be completed by
fall 1996. Remedial Action for the ground water should begin shortly thereafter.
• The remedial design for the soil remedy was finalized in January 1995. Remedial Action
(construction) in currently underway, and should be completed by fall 1996.
 Cleanup Measurements
 • Removal actions by EPA resulted in 400 cubic yards of soils and almost 2 million gallons of
 contaminated water being removed from this site.
 • Site cleanup will reduce health risks for over 20,000 residents living within one mile of the site.
 CRYSTAL CHEMICAL COMPANY
                                                                      December 5, 1995

-------

-------
CRYSTAL CITY
AIRPORT
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980864763
                                         EPA REGION 6
                                                    DISTRICT 23
                                            Zavala County
                                            Other Name*:
                                      Frank's Cropdusting Service*
Site Description	

Location:     • Northeast side of Crystal City, east of US 83 and north of FM 582

Population: The approximate population of Crystal City is 8,000.
Setting:
Hydrogoology:
• Nearest residence is 300 ft.
•- Nearest drinking water well is 300 ft.
• Located at airport.
• Near local high school.
• Surface contamination of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides.


• 0-200 ft. clay layer with interbedded sandstone, claystone and lignite lenses.
• Principal aquifer at depth of approx. 800 ft.
Wastes and Volumes
 • The principal pollutants at the Crystal City Superfund site include arsenic compounds (1,450
 ppm) and pesticides, specifically DDT (2,400 ppm) and toxaphene (1,100 ppm).
 • The volume of these wastes is approximately 18,000 cubic yards of contaminated material, that
 is consolidated in an onsite vault.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 32.26
                               Proposed Date: 10/05/84
                                 Final Date: 5/20/86
                                 NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                          Runway
                      Crystal City Airport
                                               Carrizo
                                               Springs
                                                   Asherton
                                             Zavala County
The Remediation Process	

Stt« Htetory:

• Municipal Airport used for crop dusting properties until 1982.
• In October - November 1983, EPA repaired a dike and pumped most of the discharged
sludges back into an onsite pit.
• April 1984, EPA consslidated 40 cubic yards of waste and approximately 70 drums in 2 onsite
disposal cells.
• Airport is closed to the public in 1987.
• June 1988, EPA repaired the fence and posted warning signs.
• Use of airport facilities returned to Crystal City on 7/18/90 by the Texas Water Commission
(TWC), currently known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC),
after construction activities are completed.
December 5. 1995
CRYSTAL CITY AIRPORT

-------
Heafth Considerations:

• Elevated levels of various pesticides and arsenic exceeded the health-based cleanup criteria of
100 parts per million (PPM) total pesticides.

Other Environmental Risks:

• Location of nearest drinking water well is 300 ft.
• No ground water contamination observed.
Record of  Decision
                                   Signed: September 29,1987
Soil Treatment:

• Onsite consolidation of all materials which exceed health-based criteria of 100 ppm total
pesticides.
• Placement of RCRA cap over consolidation cell.
• Five year review of remedy.
  Other Remedies Considered

I. No Action
2. Asphalt Cap

3. On-sito Landfill with treatment
 4. Incineration
 5. Offslte Disposal
 6. Fluid Extraction Unit
           Reason Not Chosen
Exposure to hazardous waste Is not reduced.
Not considered as effective as consolidation and
capping with a RCRA cap.
Increase volume of material due to solidification
with effectiveness similar to non treatment
remedies.
Ineffective for metals (arsenic).
Considered the least favored remedy by SARA.
Unproven feasibility, Implementablllty and reliability.
 Removal Activity (Interim Remedial Measures):

 e In October - November 1983, EPA repaired a dike and pumped most of the discharged
 sludges back into an onsite pit.
 eln April 1984, EPA consolidated 40 cubic yards of waste and approximately 70 drums in 2
 onsite disposal cells.
 e June 1988, EPA repaired the fence and posted warning signs.
 e Access for construction was denied by City on June 14, 1989; city granted access on 11/22/89,
 pursuant to Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) for access signed by Regional Administrator
 on 11/1/89.
 e Onsite construction activities were complete July, 1990.
 e The Remedial Action (RA) phase was completed upon Regional approval of the closeout
 report on 12/27/91.
 CRYSTAL CITY AIRPORT
                                                                          Decembers, 1995

-------
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 11/86, revised 3/91
• Open houses and workshops: 10/84, 11/88, 1/90, weekly open house during Remedial Action.
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  11/88
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  7/88
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  2/89, 11/89, 1/90, 2/90, 3/90, 4/90, 9/90, 1/91.
• Citizens on site mailing list:  80
• Constituency Interest:  High interest; Congressional sub-committee hearings on remedy, 3/88.
• Citizen suit filed protesting selected remedy.
• Suit has been dismissed but may be refiled since remedy is complete.
• Outreach Activities are currently the responsibility of TNRCC.
  (site is in state-lead operation and maintenance  phase).
• Site Repository: Crystal City Public Library, 101 East Dimmit Road, Crystal City, TX 78839
• Notice of Intent to Delete the site from the NPL was published in the Federal Register on
1/4/95; Public Comment Period will end on 2/6/95.
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 3/88
• Letters of Intent Received: None
• Grant Award:  N/A
• Current Status:  No apparent citizen interest in grant.
Fiscal and  Program  Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact:  Gary McGill (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandran, 214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Paul Wendel, 214-665-2136, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  EBASCO (Remedial Design)
             Qualtech, Inc. (Remedial Action)
Cost Recovery: EPA (Fund)

• PRPs Identified: Six
• Viable PRP:  None
• Cost Recovery referral has been postponed due to a lack of viable PRPs.
December 5, 1995
                                                                   CRYSTAL CITY AIRPORT

-------
Present Status and  Issues	——	

• The emergency repairs and completion of the actions called for in the cleanup remedy have
eliminated the threat to nearby residents and the environment.
•The State of Texas (TNRCC) will continue to monitor the Crystal City Airport site for 30
years, with a review of the remedy's effectiveness every 5 years.  The first five-year review
inspection was signed 3/7/95.
Cleanup Measurements
• The airport has been deemed safe to use.
• Over 10,000 cubic yards of contaminated material have been effectively contained to protect
human health and the environment, and return use of the Crystal City Airport to citizens and
industry.
 CRYSTAL CITY AIRPORT
                                                                       December 5, 1995

-------

-------
DIXIE  OIL
PROCESSORS,
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD08979304
                                      EPA REGION 6
                                  CONGRESSIONAL DIST.
                                               09
                                           Harris County
                                        20 miles southeast of
                                      Houston near Friendswood
Site Description
Location:
Population:

Setting:
Hydrogeology:
• On Dixie Farm Road in southern Harris County, Texas.
• The site is about 1.5 miles southwest of Interstate Highway 45 South
(Gulf Freeway) at the Ellington Field exit.
• The City of Friendswood is approximately 2 miles to the south.

• Approximately 5,000 people live within one mile of the site.

• The neare'st residence is adjacent to the site, in the Southbend
subdivision.
• The nearest drinking water well is not currently used is within 0.5 mile
radius of the  site, but draws water from an uncontaminated aquifer.
• The site occupies approximately 26.6 acres and is currently owned by
Ralph Lowe,  a former operator of the site.
• Dixie Farm Road divides the site into two parcels, the northern tract of
about 19 acres, historically used for storage purposes, and the southern
tract of about 7.6 acres where processing activities occurred.

• Mud Gulley (a stream) borders the site to the west.
• Surface drainage from the site is to the southwest into Mud Gulley.
• Soils on the Dixie site consist of surface clay ranging in thickness from
twelve to twenty feet across the site.  Below this zone is a fairly uniform
zone of sandfilled channels. This zone is approximately 25 feet thick.
• Below the  sand channel zone is a clay rich zone of thickness with an
average thickness of five feet.
• Below the  clay zone, a thick sand is found across the site at about 50'-
55' below the surface.  The sand thickness is approximately 40'.
• Two water-bearing zones bOTic > .... identiH^d in the immediate
subsurface of the site.  The uppermost water-bearing zone is the stratum
referred to above as the sand channel zone, and is found at depths ranging
from  14.5'-21.5' and extending to depths of 40'-45'. The direction of flow is
toward Mud Gulley (south).
• The second water-bearing  zone is the stratum termed the "50-foot sand".
This aquifer is found at depths of    between 52' and 61.5' to depths of
between  92.5 and 99' below the surface.  Additionally, there exists a
positive vertical hydraulic gradient from the deeper water-bearing zone
toward the shallow water-bearing zone in certain portions of the site.
                                                                      December 5. 1995

-------
Wastes and Volumes
• Principal pollutants include ethylbenzene (o.4 parts per million, or ppm,, hexachlorobenzeiK
(674 ppm) and copper (72,860 ppm) in soils.
• Estimated waste volumes include 118,420 gallons in the storage vessels, and 107,351 cubic
yards of measurable amounts of contaminants in soils.

Site  Assessment and Ranking	
Site Map and Diagram
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site HRS Score: 34.21
                                Proposed Date: 6/24/86
                                  Final Date: 10/04/89
                                  NPL Update: No. 7
                           Frtendswood Road
                                                            N
       NOT TO SCALE

Friendswood
The Remediation Process	

Sit* History:

• Intercoastal Chemical Company operated a copper recovery and hydrocarbon washing facility
on the DOP North site from 1969 until 1978.
• In 1978, DOP began oil recovery at DOP South, including cuprous chloride catalyst;
hydrocarbon washing; oil washing; and blending distilling residues from local chemical plants.
• The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was completed in January 1988.
December 5, 1995
         DIXIE OIL PROCESSORS, INC.

-------
Health Cona/deraf forts:

• The site poses four major risks to human health and the environment:

                    o Ingestion of on-site soils;
                    o Direct contact with on-site soils;
                    o Inhalation  of dust from the site; and
                    o Ingestion of shallow ground water from the site.

e However, these risks are only possible should restrictions to site access and use be violated.

Other Environmental Risks:

• A housing development exists to  the east.
• A municipal drinking water well  is located less than 0.5 mile  from the site at a 1200 foot
depth.
e Shallow ground water contamination is evident, primarily in the 20 ft. - 45 ft. aquifer.
Record of Decision
                                    Signed:  March 31, 1988
 • The remedy selected was Limited Action and Monitoring
       Other Remedies Considered

 1. "No Action"
 2. Multi-Layer Cap
 3. Storage Vault
 4. Off-site Dlapoaal
           Reason Not Chosen
Did not meet remedial objective*
Doe* not achieve reduction of mobility,
toxlctty and volume to the extent provided
by incineration and blotreatment.
Same aa Cap, above.
EPA'a leaat preferred alternative when
alternative treatment technologies are
available.
 Community Involvement
 • Community Involvement Plan: Revised 8/89
 e Open houses and workshops:  12/88, 1/90, 8/91
 • Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  1/88
 • Original ROD Fact Sheet:  5/88
 • Milestone Fact Sheets:  Often combined with Brio Refining Updates
 e Citizens on site mailing list: 141
 e Constituency Interest:  High level of interest and openly hostile; concerned with health and
 property values.  Same concerns as at the Brio site.
 e Site Repository:  San Jacinto  College, South Campus, 13735 Beamer Road, Houston, TX
 77089
 DIXIE OIL PROCESSORS, INC.
                                                                         December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  6/22/89
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1) South Belt Superfund Coalition (SBSC) - 6/1/89
       2) Homes, Environment and Lives in Peril (HELP) - 7/28/89
• Final Application Received: HELP submitted final application on  12/90.
• Grant Award: 1/31/91
• Current Status: Grant funds 95% expended; close-out finalized
• Technical Advisor: Joel Hirshhorn
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): John Meyer, 214-665-6742, Mail Code:  6SF-LL
  State Contact: Ashby McMullen (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Anne Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  Roy F. Weston (EPA Oversight)
             Ganonie Environmental (PRP)

Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)
• PRPs Identified: 12
e Viable PRP:  DOP Task Force
• A Consent Order was entered into with PRPs in June 1986 to conduct the RI/FS.
e Administrative Order on Consent signed 6/29/89, to register RD start in Summer 1989.
• Letters mailed to PRPs on 9/11/89 requesting indication of intent to complete negotiations.
• PRPs responded on 9/28/89, indicating they were anxious to  resolve settlement.
• Meeting set for 11/14/89 to resume negotiations; PRPs declined to sign a Consent Decree.
• On 3/28/91, the Department of Justice filed a 10F Cost Recovery claim against the PRPs.
• EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order in July 1991 for implementation of the RD/RA.
Present Status and Issues
• The emergency removal of contaminated soils undertaken by DOP in 1984 and the ongoing;
cleanup activities have reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous substances, making the
Dixie Oil Processors, Inc. site safer to nearby residents and the environment.
• Remedy construction activities were concluded on the site in March 1993.
• A project Close-Out P^eport was completed in June 1993.
Cleanup Measurements
• Remediation of the Dixie Oil Processors site reduced environmental risks for over 5,000
people living within a one-mile radius of this Superfund site.
December 5, 1995
DIXIE OIL PROCESSORS, INC.

-------
FRENCH,  LTD.
TEXAS
EPAID#TXD980514814
      EPA REGION 6
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 09
          Harris County
Site Description
Location:     • The site is located in northeast Harris County, two miles southwest of Crosby,
             Texas, one mile east of the San Jacinto River, at US Highway 90 and Gulf Pump
             Road.

Population:    • Approximately 10,000 residents in Crosby and nearby communities.

Sotting:       • The nearest residence is within 300 feet of the main pit.
             • The nearest drinking water well is within 1,500 feet of the main pit.
             • The entire site encompasses approximately 22.5 acres, with one 7 acre waste pit
             of 10.5 ft. average depth.

Hydrology:    • The site is located within 100-year floodplain  of the San Jacinto River.
             • The Gulf Coastal Plain overlies the Chicot and Evangeline aquifers.
             • The main pit lies within alluvial deposits over the Beaumont Clay formation.
             • A shallow ground water system (20-50 feet deep) is in use by nearby residents.
Wastes and Volumes	

• The principal pollutants at the French Limited Superfund site include:

             • Volatile organic compounds in; ground water (10 ppm); sludges (6%).
             • Phenols; ground water (10 ppm), sludges (1%).
             • Heavy metals; sludges (2%).
             • PCB; sludges (0-320 ppm).

• The volumes of these wastes are approximately as follows:

             • Sludges; PCB 8,000 cubic yards; non-PCB 68,000 cu. yds.
             • Water, 25 million gallons.
             • Soil, 70,000 cu. yds.
                                                                      December 5, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and Ranking
                        NPL LISTING HISTORY
                           Site MRS Score: 69.83
                           Proposed Date: 10/81
                            Final Date: 9/08/83
                            NPL Update: No. 1
Site Map and Diagram
    French Limited
December 5, 1995
FRENCH, LTD.

-------
The Remediation Process
SIU History:

• The site was used for sand mining operations between 1950 and 1965.
• The site operated from 1966 until 1972 under permit from Texas Water Quality Board for
Petrochemical Waste Disposal.
• Approximately 3.4 million cubic feet of material were received, some burned; remainder placed
in pit.
• The facility's permit was revoked and the operation closed in 1973.
• During 2/80 through 6/83, EPA was involved in three (3) removal actions to stabilize the site,
which included maintaining site security, sampling and analysis,  migration control, and pumping
and containment of 992 cubic yards of contaminated sludge.
• May 1989 flood waters inundated  the site, creating concerns for drinking water supplies;  EPA
supplied bottled water during this time.
• May 1994 flood waters again inundated the site. The flood waters crested three inches from
the top of the flood control wall.  The wall functioned as designed.
Health Considerations:

• Ground water and surface water are for drinking and irrigation.
• Measurable levels of contamination in the air have been detected.
• Direct contact risk from contaminated sludges and soils.

Other Environmental Risks:

• The nearest drinking water well is 1,500 feet southwest of the waste lagoon.
• The site is in the floodplain of the San Jacinto River.
• Ground water is contaminated.
 Record of Decision
                                     Signed: March 24, 1988
 Water
 • Extract ground water from beneath the site, and treat to state discharge standards prior to
 discharge into San Jacinto River.
 • Contaminated site surface water treatment to standards and discharged into San Jacinto River.
 • Onsite water treatment plant utilizes Biological Remediation and Carbon Absorption to reach
 discharge standards.

 Soil Treatment:

 • Contaminated soils and sludges treatment onsite with in-situ biodegradation.
 FRENCH, LTD.
                                                                          December 5. 1995

-------
    Other Remedies Considered
           Reason Not Chosen
1. "No Action"
2. Thermal Destruction
3. Thermal Destruction of sludges
4.  Slurry Wall/Multi-Layered Cap
Community  Involvement
Did not meet remedial objectives
Not cost effective
Non-compliance of State and Federal environmental
regulations regarding long-term reliability and
continued protection of human health and the
environment.
Not cost effective; non-compliance of State and
Federal environmental regulations regarding long-
term reliability and continued protection of human
health and the environment.
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed  4/87, revised 4/89
• Open houses and workshops: 5/87, 8/90, 2/91, 8/91 (by PRPs), 5/93, 4/95
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  1/88.
e Original ROD Fact Sheet:  4/88
e Milestone Fact Sheets:  4/87, 7&S/87 (by PRPs), 10/88, 1/89, 8&9/S9, 3&4/90, 7&8/90, & 11/90
'93
e Commemorative event conducted with TNRCC, PRPs on 4/95
e Extensive media coverage
• Citizens on site mailing list: 558
e Constituency Interest:  Concerns have lessened, however, the PRPs and EPA continue to
conduct periodic open houses to keep citizens informed.

• Site Repository:  Crosby Public Library, 135 Hare Road, Crosby, TX 77532

Technical Assistance Grant	
e Availability Notice:  4/88, Re-advertised 8/17/90 and 8/31/90
e Letters of Intent Received: (1) French Limited/Sikes Disposal Environmental Relief
Committee - 4/25/88 (withdrawn) and (2) Barrett-Crosby Civic League - 8/21/90
e Final Application Received: 8/26/91
• Grant Award: 3/1/92
• Current Status: Group is actively soliciting for a Technical Advisor.
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Judith Black, 214-665-6739, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact:  Louis Rogers (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-8483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Anne Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor. CH2M HILL
December 5, 19S5
                                   FRENCH, LTD.

-------
Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified: Approximately 95
• Viable PRP:  Approximately 76

• Negotiation and settlement for RD/RA or fund cleanup followed by 107 cost recovery.
• PRPs conducted a biodegradation study to determine if biodegradation was a viable remedial
alternative; bioremediation was selected as the remedy. .
• Consent Decree entered into Federal District Court on 3/7/90; recovered past costs, and PRPs
will pay all future costs associated with the remedy.
• Consent Decree between same settling defendants and Natural Resource Trustees (NOAA,
DOI, and the State of Texas) recovered past costs and provided for establishment of 25  acres of
new wetlands by PRPs.
Present Status and  Issues  	—	

• The main waste lagoon at the site was divided into 2 parts for bio-remediation, and both sides
were completed in 1993.
• The 7.5 acre lagoon was backfilled with clean soil in October, 199^
• The contaminated plume has affected one residential well nearest the site. Vinyl Chloride was
detected in drinking water well at 7 ppb (MCL is 2 ppb). PRPs placed 2 residents on bottled
water as soon as""vinyl chloride was detected in the well. PRPs installed a deep potable water
well for the affected residence. Old well had cracked surface casing which was causing very high
fecal coliform. Old well was plugged.
• Additional extraction and injection wells have been installed to aggressively pull plume back to
site boundary.
• PRPs conducted DNAPL focused study to determine nature and extent, assess impacts to
groundwater and screen alternatives for possible treatment/containment.
• Study concluded that: Mobile DNAPL is contained within original sheet pile wall installed in
1989 around lagoon and DNAPL residue exists outside wall in small area on site outside of the
wall: and that containment was the preferred alternative (digging up was cost prohibitive).
• PRPs have installed sheet pile wall around small discreet area on site, part of which was
placed in the R.O.W. beside the Gulf Pump Road.
• The ground water in-situ bioremediation  and conventional pump and treat system has been
operational since 2/92.
• Active remediation of the aquifer is expected to continue until January 1996.
• Several Toxic Tort" lawsuits have  been settled by the PRPs for an un-disclosed amount. The
Judge has imposed a "gag" order until all funds have been distributed.
• The French Limited site has had national and international attention due to the successful
implementation of the innovative technology, bioremediation.
 Cleanup Measurements	

 • Remediation of the French Limited site will eliminate approximately 300,000 tons of lagoon
 sludge and soil, 800,000 tons of subsoil associated with the ground water cleanup, 11,000 tons of
 soil in shallow subsoil excavations around the perimeter, and the creation of 25 acres of new
 wetlands as per the Natural Resource Consent Decree, which was entered into Federal District
 Court on 3/10/93.
 FRENCH. LTD.
                                                                          December 5, 1995

-------

-------
GENEVA
INDUSTRIES/
FUHRMANN
ENERGY
TEXAS
EPA ID#  TXD980748453
                                         EPA REGION 6
                                    CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 29
                                             Harris County
Site  Description
Location:


Population:

Setting:
• 9334 Caniff Road, Houston, Harris County, Texas.
• Two miles east of Hobby Airport, in a residential and light industrial area.

• Approximately 35,000 people live within a one-mile radius.

• The nearest residence is less than 50 feet east and southwest of the site.
• The nearest drinking water well is 300 yards south of site, screened in the
100-foot sand.
• The site covers 13 acres, and includes several closed lagoons, a landfill, and a
landfarm area on the south portion of the site.
• The site is currently fenced, with a grass-covered cap over the removal area.
Hydrogeology:
            • Primarily day and silts in the soil with occasional sand zones are found onsite.
            • The first water bearing zone is 30 feet below surface, with the first water supply
            zone found 100 feet below surface.
Wastes and Volumes
 • The principal pollutants at the Geneva site include polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soils
 (up to 12,200 parts per million, or ppm) and shallow ground water (710 parts per billion, or ppb).
 • Polynuclear aromatic (PNA) compounds are also found in soil (165 ppm) and shallow ground
 water (to 1,500 ppb).
 • Drums were found in the landfill area.
 • Trichloroethylene (TCE) has been found in shallow ground water (420ppb) and in deep
 ground water (26-28ppb).
 • 62,000 tons (approx. 45,000 cubic yards)  of soil and debris contaminated with greater than 100
 ppm of PCBs, and 700 drums have been removed from site.
 • Approximately 35,000,000 gallons of ground water are estimated to be contaminated.
                                                                 December 5, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site HRS Score: 59.46
                                 Proposed Date: 9/08/83
                                   Final Date: 9/21/84
                                   NPL Update: No. 1
Site Map and  Diagram
                     Geneva
                    Industries
The Remediation Process
Stt» History:

• Prior to 1967, the area was used in petroleum exploration and production activities.
• From 1967 to 1974, Geneva Industries operated a petrochemical production facility,
manufacturing biphenyls with toluene and fuel as by products.
• From 1974 to 1984, Pilot Industries operated same type facility.
• In June 1983 through July 1984, the Geneva site was stabilized through EPA removal actions.
• From 1984 to 1985, Fuhrman Industries salvaged equipment from the Geneva site.

Health Considerations:

• High PCB concentrations in soil posed a significant health threat via direct contact or surface
runoff prior to remediation.

Other Environmental Risks:

• Soil contaminants migration via surface runoff into an adjacent flood control channel.
December 5. 1995
GENEVA INDUSTRIES/FUHRMANN ENERGY

-------
Record of Decision
                       r
                                 Signed: September 18,1986
Ground Water. --

• Contaminated ground water extraction from wells, and treatment using carbon adsorption.

Soils:

• Off-site landfill disposal of soils and drums.

      Other Remedies Considered          	Reason Not Chosen
1. "No Action"
2. On-site Landfill
3. On-slte Incineration
Did not meet remedial objectives
Not cost-effective
Not cost-effective, poor public acceptance
Community Involvement 	—	

• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 5/84, revised 3/87
• Open houses and workshops:  7/83, 10/83, 9/90
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet:  4/86
• Public Meeting: 5/22/86
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  9/86
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  6/83, 9/83, 2/84, 4/84, 6/84, 1/88, 5/88, 6/89, 5/90, 9/90, 10/94
• Citizens on site mailing list: 435
• Constituency Interest:  Low - State lead on Community Relations

• Site Repository:    M.D. Anderson Library, University of Houston, Main Campus, 4800
                    Calhoun Boulevard, Houston, TX 77204
Technical Assistance Grant
 • Availability Notice:  2/89, Re-advertised 12/89, Mailing 9/90
 • Letters of Intent Received:
       1. South Houston Vista for Senior Citizens - 2/24/89 (withdrew Letter of Intent)
       2. Geneva Coalition - 3/31/89 (failed to submit application)
       3. LULAC Council 90 - 4/10/89 (failed to submit application)
       4. LIFT Endowment Fund, Inc. - 2/8/90 (withdrew Letter of Intent on 8/90)
 • Final Application Received: None
 • Grant Award:   N/A
 • Current Status:  No current applicants; no apparent citizen interest in grant
 GENEVA INDUSTRIES/FUHRMANN ENERGY
                          December 5, 1995

-------
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521
  State Contact: James Sher (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Mike Barra, 214-665-2143, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor  IT Corporation (A&E)
Cost Recovery: EPA Lead (Fund)

• PRPs Identified: 5
• Viable PRP:  1
• Cost recovery activities are ongoing
Present Status and Issues
• The cleanup actions performed by the EPA and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission (TNRCC) have eliminated the potential for exposure to surface contamination while
long-term groundwater cleanup activities continue to reduce contamination at the Geneva
Industries/Fuhrmann Energy site.
• The ground water pump and treatment system is currently operating.
Cleanup Measurements
• Remediation of the Geneva Industries site will reduce site risks and hazards from a variety of
contaminants for over 35,000 residents living within one mile of the site.
• Approximately 20 million gallons of contaminated water will be treated
December 5, 1995
GENEVA INDUSTRIES/FUHRMANN ENERGY

-------
HIGHLANDS
 ACSDPIT
TEXAS
EPA ID#TXD980514996
                                            EPA REGION 6
                                         NGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 25
                                                Harris County
Site Description
Location:


Population:

Setting:
Hydrogeology:
• 15 miles east of Houston, north of 1-10.
• 1-1/2 miles west of Highlands, Harris County, Texas.

Approximately 5,000 people.

• The nearest residence and drinking water well is 2,000 feet from the site.
• The six-acre site is located on a peninsula in the San Jacinto River, surrounded
on three sides by water.
•-The site is currently fenced with a grass cover on replacement fill material.


• The site is prone to flooding, and is within 10-year river floodplain basin.
• Soils are sandy, approximately 25 ft. deep, with 30  ft. of clay below that.
• A shallow aquifer in the upper sand is contaminated, and connected to surface
water; the next lower aquifer is not contaminated.
Wastes and Volumes	
• The principal pollutants at the Highlands Acid Pits site fall into two categories:
             1) Organic compounds: Toluene, benzene, phenol, xylenes.
             2) Inorganic compounds: Sulfate, manganese, arsenic, cadmium, lead, beryllium.
• Waste sludge has mixed with soil and leached contaminants into the upper aquifer at
concentrations above Mean Concentration Level (MCL) values in aquifer.
• Approximately 22,200 cubic yards of waste and soil (33,000 tons) were removed during
cleanup.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site HRS Score: 37,77
                                  Proposed Date: 7/30/82
                                    Final Date: 9/08/83
                                    NPL Update:  No. t
                                                                     December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
The Remediation  Process
Site History:

• The lead for site cleanup has been delegated to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission (TNRCC).
• Industrial waste sludges were deposited in onsite pits in the early 1950s.
• In 1961, the site flooded due to Hurricane Carla, possibly causing a fish kill in Clear Lake.
• In May 1984, EPA constructed a fence around the pit to prevent further illegal dumping and
to protect monitoring wells from  vandalism.
• In July and August 1985, the site was vandalized.  EPA repaired the fence and posted
warnings.
Hoatth Considerations:

• The nearest drinking water well is within 2,000 feet of the site, creating a potential for human
ingestion of contaminated ground water.
December 5, 199.5
HIGHLANDS ACID PIT

-------
Cost Recovery:  EPA-Laad (Fund)

• PRPs Identified:  3
• Viable PRP:  None
Present Status and Issues	
• The construction of a fence to limit access to the site lessened the actual exposure potential
even though surface contamination cleanup goals were fuhy achieved.
'• Two years of initial O&M were  conducted to confirm protectiveness of human health and
environment through all routes of migration.
• Monitoring  of the groundwater will continue to ensure  that no further health threats exist at
the Highlands Acid Pit site.  The site is undergoing a five year review.
Cleanup Measurements
• Remedy construction and operation at the Highlands Acid Pits has effectively reduced risk
from 22,000 cubic yards (33,000 tons) of contaminated industrial sludge.
o The San Jacinto River  has been protected from offsite migration of wastes precluding fish kills
similar to prior events.
  HIGHLANDS ACID PIT
                                                                         December 5, 1995

-------

-------
Other Environmental Risks:

• Heavy metals and organics emitted strong odors during hot weather prior to remediation.
• Site contaminants have been discovered in runoff and ground water.
• The area is subsiding, and portions of the site are under water.
Record of Decision
                                 Signed: June 25, 1984 (Source)
                               Signed: June 26, 1987 (Groundwater)
                                                                    1
Source Control:
• Extensive excavation of waste and heavily contaminated soil (depth of excavation
approximately 8 feet).
• Off-site disposal of excavated material.
• Back-fill pit, then grade, seed, and fence the area.

Ground Water -

• "No Action" - no health threats  are anticipated once the Source Control remedy is complete.
Therefore, a "No Action" remedial alternative was appropriate for the Ground Water cleanup
phase.
• Despite its name, the "No Action" remedy includes installation of ground water monitoring
wells, and a 30 year monitoring program for both ground and surface water.
      Other Remedies Considered
                                                         Reason Not Chosen
                                    -Source Control-
                                  land uses.
                                               Did not meet statute
                                               Excessive costs, flood ways encroachment,
                                                            incompatible with desired

                                               Technical uncertainties due to cracking and

                                               Costs six times that of extensive Layer
                                               Excavation alternatives without providing
                                               many additional benefits.
5. Waste Encapsulation                          Technical uncertainties due to cracking and
       deterioration. Unreliability under site hydrogeologic conditions and type of waste
       materials.
6. RCRA Equivalent Landfill On-Slte               Excessive cost with few additional benefits.
1. "No Action"
2. Site Management
3. Infiltration Control
deterioration.
4. Excavation to Clay
 HIGHLANDS ACID PIT
                                                                         December 5, 1995

-------
      Other Remedies Considered
           Reason Not Chosen
1. Slurry Wall Containment

2. Recovery and Deep Well Disposal Off-site
3. Recovery, Biological Treatment, Partial
       Discharge, and Off-site Disposal

4. Carbon Treatment, Partial Discharge,
       and Off-site Disposal
                                     -Ground Water-
Unreliable under site geologic and
hydrogeologlc conditions.
       Noncompllanc* with Land Disposal
       Restrictions for treatment of
       contaminations in water and sludge.
On-sfte treatment would result In potential
       exposure risk due to site location
       characteristic*.
On-sfte treatment would result In potential
       Arposure risk due to site location
       characteristics.
Community Involvement	

• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 12/82, revised 5/84, and again in 12/87
• Open houses and workshops: 4/91; EPA and TNRCC conducted survey with nearby residents
6/94 to assess  interest.
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  5/84 (Source Control), 5/87 (Ground Water)
• ROD Fact Sheet:  6/84 (Source Control), 6/87 Ground Water
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  3/83, 3/87, 4/87, 7/87, 8/88 (TNRCC), 10/90, 4/91 (TNRCC), 5/94
e Citizens on site mailing list: 100
e Constituency Interest: Medium profile site, primarily due to close proximity of the Liberty
Waste Disposal site (not a Federal Superfund site, but still a concern to local citizens);
• Site Repository: Houston Central Library, Government Documents Area, 500 McKinney
Street,  Houston, TX 77002
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 4/89
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1. LIFT Endowment Fund, Inc. - 2/8/90 (withdrew Letter of Intent 8/20/90)
• Application received:  None
• Grant Award:  N/A
• Current Status: No applicants during site study, remedy selection/design or construction
phases.
Fiscal and  Program  Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Glen Celerier, 214-665-8523, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact: Carol Boucher (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Ann Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor.  Espey, Huston & Associates, Inc.
 December 5, 1995
                                                                    HIGHLANDS ACID PIT

-------
KOPPERS CO., INC.
(TEXARKANA P
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980623904
EPA REGION 6
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 01
Bowie County
Site Description  	—	

Location:     • West 3rd Street, one mile west of downtown, Texarkana, TX.

Population:   • This site is located in an area characterized by an 85% minority population
            (1990 Census data).
            • Approximately 25,000 people live within 4 miles of the site.

Sotting:      • 62-acre wood treatment facility operated by a succession of owners between
            1-903 and 1961, closed and sold in 1961, facilities demolished in 1962.
            • The Carver Terrace residential subdivision built in 1964, comprising 79 homes
            on the north 34 acres of the site.
            • Remaining south 28 acres, purchased by Bruce Kennedy, became a sand/gravel
            mining operation between the late 1970s and 1984.

Hydrology:   • Wagner Creek flows along southwest edge of site.
            • A shallow water table (that is not a drinking water source) is located 3 to 5 feet
            below surface and seeps into the sand and gravel pits located on the southern
            portion of the site.
            • Entire site is within the 100-year flood plain.
Wastes and Volumes
• An estimated 45 million gallons of shallow groundwater are contaminated, and approximately
7,000 cubic yards of soil are contaminated to a depth of one foot, creating a potential health risk.
• 160 cubic yards of contaminated soil generated during the Remedial Investigation is housed in
3 metal containers on the southern portion of the site.
• The primary contaminants of concern are polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which
are known carcinogens.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 31.31
                               Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                  Final Date: 6/10/86
                                  NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                 December 5, 1995

-------
• The Texas Department of Water Resources (TDWR), now the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC) became aware of this site through the Eckhardt Survey in
1979.
• TDWR and EPA collected samples at tv"> <-;*e in 1980-1981, and from these, TDWR referred
the site to EPA for proposal to the National Priorities List (NPL).
• TDWR ordered Bruce Kennedy to cease mining operations in Fall 1984.
• Local residents expressed concern about health risk from site.
• Administrative Order issued 12/84 for posting of warning signs  and fencing the gravel pit area,
and in 5/85 to Koppers Co. for placement of clean dirt and sod in the yards of 24 residences.

Site Map and Diagram	
                                                                    Koppars
                                                                   Company
                                                                      Sit*
                                         Sand and
                                         Gravel Pits
                                          HN-
                                    Koppers Company Site
The Remediation Process	

Sit* History.

• Wood treatment facility began in 1903; purchased by Koppers Co., Inc. in 1933 and operated it
until 1961, when the plant was removed and the land sold.
« Carver Terrace, Inc. eventually acquired the north half and built a subdivision; the southern
half was acquired by Bruce Kennedy who mined it for sand and gravel until the Texas
Department of Water Resources (TDWR) ordered the company in Fall 1984 to cease operation.
• December 1984 - January 1985, EPA constructed a fence.
• July 1985 - March 86, the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) placed clean dirt and sod in the
yards of some residences to prevent exposure to the contaminated soils while the site was being
studied. Approximately 24 homes were treated this way.
• Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study completed April 1988.
    December 5,1995
KOPPERS CO., INC. (TEXARKANA PLANT)

-------
• Feasibility Study completed June 1988.
• Remedial Design/Remedial Action negotiations with Koppers suspended in January 1990 due
to the need to revise the risk assessment and action levels to be reflective of continuous
residential use - completed and discussed with the community in April 1990.
• Congressman  Chapman attaches an amendment to EPA's Budget Bill allocating $5M to buy
out the Carver Terrace community in May 1990 - Approved by Congress on November 5, 1990,
signed by the President on October 6.1991.
• An Interagency Agreement was signed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) on
May 21, 1991, to implement the buyout.
• The Texas Department of Health conducted a Health Surveillance  Survey in the community
March 11-16, 1991. A follow-up health survey at  the Koppers site was performed March 30 -
April 4,  1992.

• The Amended Proposed Plan which outlined the 2 changes that would be included in the
existing  1988 ROD was sent to the public for public comment.  The changes were:  1) the
purchase of the  homes in Carver Terrace and provide relocation assistance, and 2) reclassifying
the future  use of the property from residential to  commercial.
• The public comment period for the Amended Proposed Plan started January 15,1991, and was
extended until April 1, 1991.
• A public meeting on the Amended Proposed Plan was conducted on January 22, 1991.
• TWC  (now Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC)) signs the State
Superfund Contract on March 2, 1992, enabling EPA to initiate  the buyout once the Amended
ROD is  signed.  "
• The Amended ROD is signed March 4, 1992. Relocation efforts commence.
• EPA issues a  UAO to  PRP 3/2/93, to conduct the RD/RA and demolition activities. The PRP
complies 3/31/93.
• Relocation of the residents is completed July 30, 1993.
• Demolition plans approved and demolition is completed 1/27/94.
• Close-out Demolition  Report approved 5/94.
• RD/RA activities on-going, currently a draft Pre-Design Soil and Groundwater Report is being
developed for comments.
• Former residents filed a Class Action Suit against EPA and the COE in May 1994, involving
the execution of the buyout  and relocation efforts.
• Field  investigations for the Pre-Design Soil & Ground Water phase were completed in August
1994 and draft reports were submitted to EPA for comments.
• EPA and TNRCC provided comments on the Pre-Design Soil and Ground Water
Reports to Beazer. Meetings were conducted to  clarify, discuss, and resolve issues associated
with these reports which are currently being finalized.
• The former residents of Carver Terrace are suing the Corps of Engineers and EPA involving
the buyout activities.

Health Considerations:

• Potential human exposure risks include direct contact with, and accidental ingestion of,
contaminated soils and inhalation of contaminated dust.
• Contamination has been found in the shallow water table, and extensively in surface soils to a
depth of one foot
• The nearest drinking water well is located 3 blocks from the site, but is not presently at risk.
     KOPPERS CO., INC. (TEXARKANA PLANT)
December 5, 1995

-------
Other Environmental Risks:

• Creosote seeps and discharges to Wagner Creek have been documented.

Record off Decision  	
                                   Signed: September 23, 1986
                                    Amended: March 4, 1992
• Soil washing of contaminated soils and oil water separation and either carbon adsorption or
fluidized carbon bed treatment of ground water.
• The 1988 selected remedy was amended to include 1) the buyout of the Carver Terrace
subdivision, 2) the demolition, removal and disposal of debris to an appropriate facility, and 3)
the reclassification of the property to "non-residential use."

Ground Water:

• Separation of oily phase  from ground water extracted through onsite wells.
• Removal of organic contaminants by either carbon adsorption or fluidized carbon bed
treatment, then return clean, treated water back to the aquifer.

Soli Treatment:

• Excavate one foot of contaminated soil from areas identified in the Remedial Investigation,
transport to the Kennedy Sand and Gravel property, treated using mechanical soil washing, arid
dispose in gravel pits provided it meets the remedial goal of 100 ppm carcinogenic PAHs and
show no leaching potential. Otherwise, the soils will be disposed of at an off-site hazardous
waste facility.
• Excavated areas will be backfilled with clean soil purchased from outside the site, graded to
prevent erosion and re-sodded.

Buyout and Relocation:

• The amended remedy includes  provisions for buyout and relocation of the Carver Terrace
subdivision residents, and a church.
• The USAGE executed the buyout and relocation effort on behalf of EPA and completed these
activities 7/93.
• Structures in the Carver  Terrace Subdivision were demolished and the debris was taken to an
appropriate facility.
     Other Remedies Considered

1. "No Action"
2. Capping
3. In-Sttu Biological Treatment
4. Onstte Incineration
5. Off-site Incineration
6. Off-sKe Landfill disposal
    Reason Not Chosen
Did not meet remedial objectives
Not as effective as selected remedy
Difficult to Implement effectively
Difficult to Implement effectively
Poor cost-effectiveness
Poor long-term effectiveness
     December 5, 1995
        KOPPERS CO., INC. (TEXARKANA PLANT)

-------
• This site is being addressed through Federal and potentially responsible parties' actions.
• Negotiations with potentially responsible parties (PRPs) to conduct the remedial design is on
hold as of 1/24/90 for risk assessment revision and completion of residential buyout.
• An Interagency Agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to conduct the
buyout was signed in May 1991.
• The State Superfund Contract was signed 3/2/92.
• The residential acquisition process began in 3/92, and the USAGE is in the final stages of
accomplishing a 100% buyout in Carver Terrace subdivision (projected completion: 4/30/93).
• The Texas Department of Health conducted a follow-up survey on the community from March
29 through April 4, 1992.
• In May 1992, ATSDR in conjunction with the Texas Department of Health  release their initial
findings from the investigation conducted in 1991 in the "Health Surveillance Survey Report".
• FY93 Appropriations Bill which allocated an addition $6i2K for the COE to complete the
buyout was approved and funded in November 1992.
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 10/84, revised 6/88 and again 6/92.
• Open houses and workshops: 1/85, 5/85, 4/90, 7/91, 4/92, and 1/93
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  6/88.
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  10/88
• Milestone Fact Sheets/Public Notices:  2/85, 6/88, 10/88, 1/89, 1, 3, & 8/91, 1, 3, & 4/92.
• EPA Amended Proposed Plan and Public Meeting:  1/92
       - Addressed the basis  for the buyout and reclassification of the residential property
       -Discussed how the revised action level would have impacted the original projections on
       volume, time and cost for excavating and treating the contaminated soil if a buyout did
       not occur.
• Citizens on site mailing list:  160

• Constituency Interest:

       - Health Study is being conducted by the Texas State Department of Health.
       - Relocation completed

• Site Repository:  Texarkana City Hall, 320 Texas Blvd., Texarkana, TX 75501
Technical Assistance Grant
   Availability Notice:  12/21/88; Re-advertised 8/17 & 31/90
   Letters of Intent Received:
       1) Coalition for a Clean Carver Terrace - Terminated for non-response.
       2) Texarkana Black Chamber of Commerce (TBCC) - Public Notice acknowledging
       receipt run 9/14/90.
   Final Application Received:  TBCC submitted  final application for TAG 1/91.
   Grant Award: 3/08/91
   Current Status:  Grant funds expended, close-out underway
     KOPPERS CO., INC. {TEXARKANA PLANT)
December 5, 1995

-------
Fiscal and  Program  Management
  ' RemodW Project Manager (EPA):  Ursula R. Lennox, 214-665-6743, Mail Code:  6SF-LL
  State Contact:  Mary E. Dunn, P.E. (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:  6SF-P
  Attormy (EPA): Paul Wendel, 214-665-2136, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prim* Contractor McLaren/Hart Environmental Engineering Corp. (by PRPs)
Cost Recovery:  PRP Lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified:  10
• Viable PRP: Beazer, Inc.
• Koppers, Inc., also known as Beazer, Inc., conducted the RI/FS under an Administrative Order
on Consent.
• Special Notice Letters issued on 11/27/89 to implement the 1988 ROD.
• Special Notice Letters issued on May 22, 1992, to discuss the design, implementation of the
selected remedies, ad actions involving Operable Unit (OU) Nbs. 2 and 3.
• UAO issued 3/2/93, to conduct OU2 and 3; Beazer responded  to the UAO on 3/31/93.
Present Status and  Issues
• The buyout and relocation effort started in 4/92 and ended 7/93.
• EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to Beazer Inc., to perform the demolition, and
soil and ground water remediation at the site.
• Coordination and planning with TNRCC on site  activities are on-going.
• The draft Pre-Design Groundwater & Soil Reports are being reviewed by EPA.
Cleanup Measurements
• Soil in areas identified in the Remedial Investigation where the sum of the carcinogenic
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons exceeds 100 ppm will be excavated to one foot.  Excavated
areas will be replaced with clean soil purchased from outside of the site.  Performing this activity
will significantly reduce environmental risks associated with the site.  Approximately 19,400 cubic
yards will need to be excavated.
• Non-aqueous phase liquids in the upper aquifer will be collected and treated to the maximum
e^^nt possible.  To accelerate the recovery of these liquids, collection trenches will be installed
around and across the industrial portion of the site. Though this aquifer is not a drinking water
source, treatment is necessary in order to avoid the potential of contaminating a lower aquifer.
The Confined Zone which exists between the two aquifers will be allowed to naturally attenuate
following remediation and will be monitored to ensure that it is being naturally cleansed.
    December 5, 1995
KOPPERS CO., INC. (TEXARKANA PLANT)

-------
LONE  STAR ARMY
AMMUNITION  PI
TEXAS
EPA ID#TX7213821831
                                     EPA REGION 6
                               CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 01
                                         Bowie County
Site Description

Location:
Population:

Setting:
Hydrogeology:
• The site is located in Bowie County, approximately 12 miles west of
Texarkana.

• The site is located in a sparsely populated, rural area.

• Old demolition grounds cover approximately 19 acres.
• The site was used for disposal of explosives by detonation.
• Elevated levels of explosives and heavy metals are found in soils and
groundwater.
• Heavy metals have been detected in ground water.
• Domestic water wells located outside northern and southern boundaries.

• The installation is situated on a ridge, causing drainage to the  north
and south.
• The ground water table is shallow, and drainage is to nearest creek.
• The old demolition grounds are 800 feet from East Fork Elliot Creek.
• Contamination has been indicated in creek.
Wastes and Volumes  —	

The principal pollutants at the plant are Tetryl (an explosive) in the soil at concentrations up to
6 parts per million (ppm), and mercury (7.4 parts per billion, or ppb), chromium (537 ppb), and
lead (770 ppb) in the ground water beneath the site.
• No  documentation exists for estimation of waste volumes.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site MRS Score: 31.85
                                 Proposed Data: 10/01/84
                                   Final Date: 7/22JQ7
                                   NPL Update: No. 2  	
                                                                    December 5, 1995

-------
• The U.S. Army contested the HRS score based on new sampling results indicating lower
concentrations of contaminants.  • The EPA noted that the MITRE (site assessment) model
does not reflect concentrations, and did not re-score the site.
Site Map and  Diagram
                     OKLAHOMA
               Lone Star Army
             Ammunition Plant
                                                       Texarkana
                                    "New   "• Red  1
                                    Boston«   Water!
                                        Maud

                                      TEXAS
               ARKANSAS
                                                      I LOUISIANA
                                                      I
The Remediation Process  	

Stte History:

• The site is owned by the U.S. Army and operated by Day and Zimmerman, Inc.
• The plant began operations in 1942.
• Industrial operations include loading, assembling, and packaging of munitions components.

Health Considerations:

• Several domestic wells located nearby. No formal accounting of wells has been taken.

Other Environmental Risks:

• The East Fork Elliot Creek drains into Wright Patman Lake, a major recreational lake.
December 5, 1995
2
LONE STAR ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT

-------
Record of Decision
                          A ROD for this site is anticipated in 1997
                                                                1
• The site is currently in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) phases leading up
to remedy selection.
Community Involvement
  Community Involvement for this Federal Facility site is the responsibility of the U.S. Army.
  Number of Citizens on EPA mailing list:  30
  Site Repository:  Texarkana Public Library
Technical Assistance Grant
• Letters of Intent Received: None
• Current Status: Discussions are underway with all Federal Facilities regarding formation of
Site Specific Advisory Boards (SSABs) in lieu of awarding Technical Assistance Grants.
Fiscal and Program  Management
                                                                           6SF-AT
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Mary Ann Abrahamson, 214-665-6754, Mail Code:
  State Contact: Mike Moore (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandr^n, 214-665-6584, Mail Cd: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Mike Barra, 214-665-2143, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Military Contact:  Roderick Sewell, LSAPP

Cost Recovery: Federal Facility
• PRPs Identified:  2
• Viable PRP:  U.S. Army, Day and Zimmerman
• An Inter-Agency Agreement has been signed by EPA, the U.S. Army, and the Texas Natural
Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) (formerly known as Texas Water Commission)
(TWC), effective September 20, 1990.
 Present Status and Issues  	—	

 • After adding the Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant site to the National Priorities List (NPL),
 the EPA assessed site conditions and determined that no other immediate actions currently are
 necessary to protect public health and the environment.
 •During 1993 and 1994 it was determined that there exists an additional lower aquifer.
 An additional investigation began in summer 1995  to determine the nature and extent of
 contamination, and is ongoing.
 Cleanup Measurements
 • Fencing of the site has reduced the potential for exposure, making the site safer while it awaits
 further cleanup action by the Army.
 LONE STAR ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
                                                                     December 5, 1995

-------

-------
LONGHORN ARMY
AMMUNITION
PLANT
TEXAS
EPA ID# TX6213820529
      EPA REGION 8
.CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 01
          Harrison County
             Karnack
Site Description
Location:     • The site is located between State Highway 43 and Caddo Lake in Karnack,
             Harrison County, Texas, which is approximately 14 miles northeast of Marshall,
             Texas, and approximately 40 miles northwest of Shreveport, Louisiana.

Population:   • The site is in a rural area with some residences in close  proximity.
             • Approximately 1,500 people live within a one-mile radius of the site.

Setting:      • The site area is residential, recreational, and industrial.
             • The facility is government-owned (Federal Facility), and contractor operated.
             The site is an 8,493-acre munitions loading and assembly facility that has operated
             since 1942.
             • Five areas that have observable  releases to surface and ground water: an active
             burning ground (includes unlined evaporation pond), old landfill, inert burning
             grounds, south test area, and former TNT production area.
             • 14 areas have been identified as contaminated or possibly contaminated with
             potential for off-site migration.

Hydrology:   All surface and storm water from the plant drains into Caddo Lake via four
             natural drainage systems, and the entire site lies within the 100-year floodplain.
             • The site lies on the Carrizo Sand and Wilcox Group formations, which are
             hydraulically interconnected and considered to be one aquifer.
             • 75% of the wells in Harrison County are less than 50 feet deep and are
             screened in the Wilcox-Carrizo Aquifer.
             • Area  public supply wells (Karnack and Caddo Lake water supply systems) are
             also located in the Wilcox-Carrizo Aquifer and range from 200 to 300 feet in
             depth
             • The nearest drinking water well is approximately 500 feet from the northern
             boundary of the plant, and serves  as one of the two Caddo Lake principal water
             supply wells.
             • No alternate water supply is available for public water supply systems in the
             area.
                                                                        December 5, 1995

-------
Wastes and Volumes 	—	

• The prip^'pal pollutants are methylene chloride and trichloroethylene (TCE)

• Other contaminants include trinitrobenzene, dichloromethane and barium in groundwater;
dinitrotoluene, trinitrotoluene (TNT) in sediments and soil.

• The total volume of contaminated soil, sediments  and water is unknown at this time.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                               Site HRS Score: 39.83
                               Proposed Date: 7/14/89
                                 Final Date: 8/30/90
                                 NPL Update: No. 9
Site Map and Diagram
       Longhom
         Army    \ <
      Ammunition \
         Plant
December 5, 1995
 LONGHORN ARMY
AMMUNITION PLANT

-------
The Remediation Process
Stt« History:

• The facility has been operating from 1942 to the present date, historically manufacturing TNT
and rocket motors.
• Recent site operations have included loading, assembling and packing pyrotechnic and signal
ammunition, manufacturing solid propellant rocket motors, and rocket demilitarization pursuant
to the INF treaty with the former Soviet Union; the facility is currently in "layaway" status.
• The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was initiated in August 1982.  Phase
I RI activities completed in 1993-1994. Phase II RI activities were initiated and completed in
1995.  Phase III RI activities are currently being planned.
• All  remedial activities are the responsibility of the U.S. Army, under EPA oversight.

Health Considerations:

• Public water supply wells are located near site, and no alternate supplies are available in the
event  these wells become contaminated.
Potential human exposure risks may include direct contact with, and ingestion of, contaminated
ground water.
Records of  Decision
                        Interim Remedial Action ROD at BG3 May 12, 1995
                    Interim Remedial Action ROD at Landfills September 27, 1995
• The Interim Remedial Action ROD for Burning Ground No. 3 (BG3) selected
interception and treatment of shallow contaminated ground water and excavation and
treatment via low temperature thermal desorption of sludges and process waste.
• The Interim Remedial Action ROD for Landfills 12 and 16 selected construction of a
multi-layer cap and cover system over the areal extent of the landfill contents.
Community Involvement
 • Proposed Plan and Public Meeting for Interim Remedial Action at Burning Ground No. 3:
 9/94
 • Proposed Plan and Public Meeting for Interim Remedial Action at Landfills:  3/95
 • Proposed Plan and Public Meeting for No Action ROD for Group #3 Sites: 7/95
 • Site Repository:  City of Marshall Public Library and Karnsck High School Library
Technical Assistance Grant
   Letters of Intent Received:  8/5/94 from the Uncertain Audubon Society (UAS)
   Final Application Received: 2/22/95
   Grant Award: 2/221/95 to UAS.
   Technical Advisor Selected: 6/1/95
   Current Status: The Technical Advisor is reviewing site-related documents and providing
 related information to the grantee as site cleanup proceeds.
 LONGHORN ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
December 5, 1995

-------
Fiscal and Program Management
• Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Lisa Marie Price, 214-665-6744, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
• State Contact:  Mike Moore (TNRCC)
• Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandran 214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-P
• Attorney (EPA): Michael C. Barra, 214-665-2143, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
• State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT


Cost Recovery: Federal Facility

• PRPs Identified: One
• Viable PRP:  U.S. Department of Defense (DOD-U.S. Army)
• The State of Texas, EPA and the DOD-U.S. Army entered into a Federal Facility Agreement in
12/91 to address the contamination at the facility.
Present Status and Issues
• Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant site currently does not present an immediate threat to Che
public or the environment.
• As studies are completed and viable cleanup alternatives are determined for the sites, final
remedies will be selected, and the cleanup activities will begin.
Cleanup Measurements
• Twenty areas are currently being investigated pursuant to the Federal Facilities Agreement.
• Fifty ground water monitoring wells have been installed to determine the extent of
contamination.
December 5,1995
  LONGHORN ARMY
AMMUNITION PLANT

-------
MOTCO,  INC
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980629851
   EPA REGION S
NGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 09
     Galveston County
Site Description

Location:     • 2 miles southeast of LaMarque, Galveston county.
            • 1-45 and State Highway 3.

Population:   • Nearest residence is 1700 feet.
            • Approximately 3,000 people live within a one mile radius.

Setting:      • 11.3 acres.
            • Originally seven pits with surface area of 4.6 acres, 15-20 feet deep.
            •.Interim Remedial Measures removed 9 tanks in 1984.

Hydrology:   • Gulf Coastal Plain at the edge of a coastal marsh system.
            • Located within 100-year floodplain.
            • Located outside of Hurricane levee.
            • Lies atop the Beaumont clay formation.
            • Significant ground water sand at 200' and Alta Loma sand at 600'.
Wastes and Volumes 	—	

• The principal pollutants at the MOTCO site include styrene tars in sludges and soils, volatile
organics in sludges, soils, oils and ground water, heavy metals in sludges and soils.
DNAPLs have been dected at concentrations of 380,000 ppm for Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether.

• Waste volumes at the site:

       • Pit water: 15 million gallons.     • Pit Organic liquids: 7 million gallons.
       • Pit Sludges and tars: 14,000 tons.       • Soils:  60,000 tons.
                 • DNAPLs in Suburface: 4 million gallons.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site MRS Score: 62.66
                                 Proposed Date: 7/23/82
                                   Final Date: 9/08/83
                                   NPL Update: No. 1
                                                                   December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and  Diagram
                                                            La Marque
The Remediation Process	—

Stte History:

• Site developed in 1958 for waste recycling, contaminated until 1966 when Hurricane Carla
forced the end of waste recycling and dumping.
• Approximately 500,000 gallons of material deposited, some removed during attempts at waste
recycling in 1970s.
• 1974 - MOTCO Corporation acquired ownership and established an operation to remove and
market styrene tars.
« 1974 - MOTCO abandoned site. Seven unlined pits remained with contamination migrating to
the subsurface. As a result, groundwater is heavily contaminated and has migrated off-site.
• Emergency actions took place in 1980,1981,1982, 1983, and 1985.
• December 1980  - April 1985, EPA conducted four (4) removal actions to stabilize the site.
Hundreds of gallons of contaminated water were pumped, treated and discharged from the site.
• December 1986, rains raised liquid levels to within four inches of overtopping the dike. An
additional removal action was initiated to repair the dike.

Health  Considerations:

• Nearest drinking water well is 2,200 ft. from site

Other Environmental Risks:

• Surface water, ground water, and soil are contaminated.
• Contamination has migrated 300 feet off-site.
• Contaminants found to a depth of 100 feet.
• If left unremediated, DNAPLs and contaminated groundwater will continue to migrate
vertically and laterally.
December 5. 1995
MOTCO. INC.

-------
Removal Action*:

3/80-.  Dump and tank removal, capping, soil removal arid diking, onsite disposal.
9/81:  Pit draw-down and disposal, site fencing.
2/83, 9/83, 4/85, 12/86:  Pit draw-down and disposal
Record of Decision
                              Signed: March 15, 1985 (Source Control)
                       Signed: September 27, 1989 (Management of Migration)
                       Explanation of Significant Differences: January 13,1993
Management of Migration (MOM) and Ground Water:

       •      Recovery and Treatment of contaminated ground water.
       •      Recovery and incineration of dense, non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs)
       •      Excavation, consolidation and capping slightly contaminated surface soils.

Source Control:

       •      Biological treatment and/or incineration of pit water.
       e      Incineration of organic liquids onsite or off-site.
       •      Off-site landfilling of sludges/tars/soils or on-site incineration.

Explanation of Significant Differences for Source Control ROD:
              Offsite incineration of liquids/sludges/tars.
              Onsite landfilling of soils.
         Other Remedies Considered
   Reasons Not Chosen
                                         -Source Control-
        1. On-site TSCA/RCRA closure
        2. Off-site TSCA/non-RCRA disposal
        1. Institutional controls
        2. Containment (slurry walls)

        3. Incineration of surface soils

        4. Bio-remediation of surface soils
                                            -MOM-
Cost
Non-compliance with RCRA
Non-compliance with ARAR's
Non-compliance with SARA for
treatment
Metal contaminants on surface
soils for treatment
Metal contaminants In surface soils
not bio-degradable
 MOTCO, INC.
                                                                          December 5. 1995

-------
Community Involvement
Revised 3/89
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed
• Open houses and workshops:  11/90, 10/93
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheets and Public Meetings:  1/86 (Source Control); 7/89 (MOM)
• Original ROD Fact Sheets:  11/89 (MOM)
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 4/89, 6/90, 7/90, 11/90, 4/91, 2/92, 3/93 (ESD), ongoing fact sheets by
Motco Trust Group (PRPs), most recent, 1/95

• Citizens on site mailing list: 270

• Constituency Interest: High level of organized interest; concerns regarding air emissions
during trial bums, litigation between PRPs and their previous contractor over specific
performance.

•Site Repository: College of the Mainland Library, 1200 Amburn Road, Texas City, TX 77591
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 9/30/88;  Re-advertised 1/3/90 and 1/7/90
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1) MOTCO Citizens Group - 11/1/88
       2) Lamarque MOTCO Group - 12/20/88
       3) Texans For A Healthy Environment - 12/20/91
       4) Environmental Protection Advisory Group - 12/28/91
• Final Application Received: No groups have as yet submitted applications
• Grant Award: None
• Current Status: No further interest.
Fiscal and Program Management
• Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Mary Ann Abrahamson, 214-665-6754, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
• State Contact:  Ashby McMullan (TNRCC)
• Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
• Attorney (EPA): Pam Travis, 214-665-8056, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
• State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT

Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified: 20

• Source Control Viable PRP: MOTCO Trust Group. EPA has settled with 20 parties for the
Source Control consent decree, entered October 20,1987.  As part of the First Mixed Funding
Agreement, EPA agreed to pay 21 % of the remediation costs.
• As part of the first Superfund Mixed Funding Agreement, EPA paid MOTCO $2.8 million in
June of 1991 for construction completion as part of the 1987 Source Control Consent Decree.
• EPA settled with the PRPs to conduct the Feasibility Study (FS) for Management of
Migration.
• The FS was conducted under an Administrative Order on Consent which was signed on March
17,1987.
• The Negotiation Moratorium for implementation of the Remedial Design/Remedial Action
(RD/RA) ended April 1990;  PRPs failed to make  acceptable good faith offer for MOM RD/RA.
December 5,1995
                            MOTCO, INC.

-------
• EPA issued an Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) for Remedial Design only to 7
Five companies in Trust Group and two additional ones;  new inforrrition gathered on the two
new companies.
• Remedial Design was performed by the PRPs under the UAO.
• EPA settled with Malone Trucking Company in October 1991 for $150,000
• Consent Decree entered in July 1992 for recovery of past MOM costs for approximately
$300,000.
• EPA issued an UAO October 22, 1992, for implementation of the MOM RA, and in
December 1992, reissued the UAO for pre-construction work on the MOM operable unit.
• Due to the BSD and the completion of the MOM Design, EPA has negotiated a combined
Consent Decree with the MOTCO Trust Group for implementation of the revised Source
Remedy and the MOM Remedy. Second Consent Decree was entered in July  1993. Consent
Decree did not include mixed funding.
Present Status and Issues  	—	

• The removal of contaminated tanks and soil described above and the installation of the fence
limiting access to the site have reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous materials at the
Motco, Inc. site, making the site safer while cleanup activities continue.
• Since February 1993, MOTCO has been conducting work under the 1993 UAO and the 1993
Consent Decree,. Off-site incineration is completed. EPA granted a three month extension in
June 1993. EPA granted a 15 month extension in 1195. Current Schedule call  for Construction
Completion by December 1996.
• Estimated cost to complete site cleanup - $80 million
Cleanup Measurements   —	

To date the following has been cleaned up at the MOTCO Superfund site:

• 7,568 tons of oil

• 8,000 tons of sludge/tar

• 4,699 tons of soil

• 10,471 tons of contaminated water

• 3.5 million gallons of contaminated pit water

The MOTCO clean up will ultimately mitigate risks from 22 million gallons of liquid waste, and
74,000 tons of contaminated soils, sludge, and tars for over 3,000 people with in one mile of the
site.
 MOTCO, INC.
                                                                        December 5, 1995

-------

-------
NORTH  CAVALCADE
STREET
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980873343
                                          EPA REGION 6
                                    CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 29
                                              Harris County
                                                Houston
Site Description
Location:



Population:

Setting:
Hydrogeology:
• Northeast of intersection of Cavalcade & Maury Streets, about one mile
southwest of the intersection of Loop 610 North & U.S. 59, Houston, Harris
County, Texas.

• Approximately 50,000 plus urban area.

• The nearest residence is 200 feet to west of the site.
•"The facility  is  situated in a commercial area, with two large warehouses onsite.
• Of the 23-acre site, the original wood preserving operation covered about nine
acres; all wood-treating facilities were removed in early 1960's.


• Subsurface geology consists of interbedded clays, silts and sands of the
Beaumont formation, with a piezometric level about four feet below surface.
Wastes and Volumes  	—	
• The principal pollutants at the North Cavalcade site include polynudear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PNAs) in soil (14394 parts per million,or ppm), and ground water (147,800 parts
per billion, or ppb), as well as benzene in water (79 ppb).
• Estimated volumes of contaminated soil are 10,000 cubic yards (above water table), 11.5
million gallons of contaminated ground water
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site MRS Score: 37.08
                                Proposed Date: 10/05/84
                                  Final Date: 6/10/86
                                  NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                  December 5, 1995

-------
            Site Map and Diagram
                                    North Cavalcade
            The Remediation  Process	

            SKe History:

            • In 1946, the site was developed for wood treating by Leon Aron (Houston Creosoting Co.,
            Inc.), and operated until a bank foreclosed in 1961.
            • The property was vacant until early 1970s, and two warehouses built by 1980.
            • The site is presently comprised of various land tracts currently separately owned by Coastal
            Casting Company, the Eichenhour family and the Dover family.

            Health Considerations:

            • Surface sediments, subsurface soil, and shallow ground water were all contaminated.  While
            groundwater remains contaminated, conaminated soil is currently stockpiled and covered securing
            it from exposure. Although groundwater is not a source of drinking water it could pose a
            pc* ii.tial threat if it is consumed.
            • The nearest water well  is located 1,500 ft. from the site. However, the principle water bearing
            unit  at the site is not currently being used as a water source within Houston because the water
            yield is low.
            Record of Decision
                                               Signed: June 28,1988
J
                                                                                  December 5, 1995
_

-------
The selected remedy includes biological degradation of soil contaminants, and extraction and
carbon adsorption treatment of ground water.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. "No Action"
2. On-SK0 Landfill
3. On-Slta Incineration
4. In-SItu Soil Flushing
                                   Reason Not Chosen
                          Human health not protected
                          Contaminants not destroyed
                          No Increased benefit and more costly
                          No Increased benefit and more costly
Community Involvement  	

• Community Involvement Plan: Developed  3/85, Revised 5/88, 2/89, and 12/92
• Open houses and workshops:  9/85, 12/92, 11/93, 4/94, 10/94
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet:  4/88
• Public Meeting:  5/88
• ROD Fact Sheet:  7/88
• Fact Sheets:  8/85, 4/87, 7/87, 4/88, 10/88, 4/90 (TWC), 12/90 (TWC), and 6/91 (TWC), 4/94
• Citizens on site mailing list:  80
• Constituency Interest:  No formal citizen groups or organizations, generally a low profile site.
• Some demand exists for Spanish translations of fact sheets and informational materials.
• Site Repository:
Houston Central Library, Government Documents Area, 500 McKinney
Street, Houston, TX 77002
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 4/89
• Letters of Intent Received: 1. LIFT Endowment Fund, Inc. - 2/8/90 (withdrawn 8/20/90)
• Final Application Received: North & South Cavalcade St. Group 12/93 and 9/94
• Grant Award:  Applications denied
• Current Status: Some organized citizens groups; grant application package mailed to 5th Ward
Community at Risk Coalition
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager. Glenn Celerier (EPA) 214-665-8523, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact: Lei Medford
  Community Involvement Coordinator. Olivia Balandran (EPA) 214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney: Paul Wendel (EPA) 214-665-2136, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator. Shirley Workman (EPA) 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:   Foster Wheeler (Groundwater Remedial Design)
                    ENSR (Groundwater Remedial Action/Construction)
                    IT Corp (Soil Remedial Design)
                    Eagle Const.  (Soil Remedial Action)
 NORTH CAVALCADE STREET
                                                      December 5, 1995

-------
Cost Recovery: EPA-Lead (Fund)

• PRPs Identified: 4
• Viable PRP: None
• Property owner died in 1985, leaving three non-contributing property owners.
• PRPs have shown no interest in funding the remedial work.
Present Status  and Issues
• The ground water pump and treat system is currently operating;
• Contaminated soil has been excavated and temporarily stockpiled for treatment.
• Soil remedial design is completed and construction began in fall 1995.
Cleanup Measurements
• 10,000 -12,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil will be treated.
• 11.5 million gallons of contaminated water will be treated.
• 23 acres will eventually be returned to potential industrial use.
December 5, 1995
NORTH CAVALCADE STREET

-------
CHROMIUM  #1
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD98086727a
     EPA REGION 6
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 19
          Ector County
           Odessa
Site Description  	

Location:     • The site is located in the vicinity of 44th St. and Brazos Ave., Odessa, Ector
             County, Texas.

Population:    • Approximately 3500 persons live outside the city limits within one mile of the
             site.

Sotting:       • The nearest residence is within the site boundaries.
             • "The nearest drinking water well is also onsite.
             • Approximately 200 water wells are within 1/2-mile of the site.
             • A municipal water well is within 1,250 feet of the site.
             • The sources of site contamination are within  a 10-acre industrial area.

Hydrology:    • The estimated surface projection  of the ground water plume is more than 20
             acres.
             • The Trinity-Edwards aquifer is sandstone and conglomerate rock, overlain by 20
             ft-60 ft. of soil and caliche (hard-pan).
             • The aquifer itself is  60'-100' thick and underlain by redbed days.
             • The depth to ground water at the site is 75 feet.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutant found during the Remedial Investigation is hexavalent chromium
ranging to 72 parts per million (ppm) in ground water.
• The volume of ground water to be treated for removal of chromium is approximately 30
million gallons.
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site HRS Score: 42.24
                                 Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                   Final Date: 5/20/86
                                   NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                    December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                                Odessa Chromium
                                           Odossa
                Odessa Chromium I
The Remediation  Process	

Site History:

• Contamination resulted from chrome plating operations from the late 1960s - 1970s.
« Site remediation has been addressed in two phases by the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (formerly known as Texas Water Commission (TWC)).
• The first phase, or operable unit, dealt with development of an alternate water supply (AWS)
for area residents and businesses.
• The second phase addressed the source and remediation of the chromium in the ground water.
• The Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) for the two phases were
completed in September 1986 (AWS) and March 1988 (Source/Ground Water).

Health Consideration*:

• More than a 20-acre portion of the area's sole source aquifer (Trinity) is contaminated.
• Ground water contamination has been documented in 16 of 200 existing wells sampled.
• 5 of 14 monitoring wells contained detectable levels of chromium.
• The affected wells are outside of the city water supply service area.
 Record  of Decision
                        Signed: September 8,1986 (Alternate Water Supply)
                       Signed: March 18,1988 (Source Control/Ground Water
 December 5, 1995
ODESSA CHROMIUM

-------
Alternate Water Supply Phase (AWS):

• For this phase, the Record of Decision (ROD) calls for an extension of the existing municipal
water supply system to those persons residing within the impacted area,

Sourca Control/Ground Water

• This ROD selected extraction and electrochemical treatment of contaminated ground water
from the Trinity Aquifer.
     Other Remedies Considered
           Reason Not Chosen
1. "No Action"


2. Development of surface water supply

3. Removal via treatment
                                  -Alternate Water Supply-
4. Development of new well field
Did not meet remedial objectives; not
protective of human health and the
environment
High monthly water bills for users, Water
Association must be formed
Stringent operational review required
to Insure contaminants are properly
removed
Long term supply of water questionable
                                -Source Control/Ground Water-
1. "No Action"
2. Containment Wall
3. Ion Exchange
4. Chemical Treatment
Did not meet remedial objectives; not
protective of human health or the
environment
Difficult to Implement; high cost to uses
System will generate a hazardous sludge
Treatment may Increase TDS of ground
water
Community Involvement  	—	

e Community Involvement Plan: Developed 6/85, revised 9/89, and again in 12/92.
• Open houses and workshops: 4/86, 12/87, 9/89, 1/91
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  7/86 (AWS),  1/88 (Source/Ground Water)

• ROD Fact Sheet: 9/86 (AWS), 3/88 (Source/Ground Water)
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  1/85, 8/85, 12/87, 3/90, 9/90 (TWC), 12/90 (TWC), 1/91 (TWC), 2/94
(TWC)

• Citizens on mailing list:  33
• Constituency Interest: Low to moderate concerns regarding site after alternate water supply
was brought on-line.
• Site Repository:    Ector County Library, 321 West Fifth Street, Odessa, TX 79761
 ODESSA CHROMIUM #1
                          December 5, 1995

-------
            Technics Assistance  Grant	

              Availability Notice: 4/11/89
              Letters of Intent Received:  Gerald Fugit, Chrom Sites, Inc. - 12/20/90
              Draft Application Received:  4/10/91
              Grant Award: None - application denied
              Current Status: Draft application submitted did not contain a work plan/budget, and further
            discussions with Mr. Fugit revealed that no citizens group existed, and that he desired to use the
            grant proceeds to enhance his business opportunities, a prohibited use of the grant.
            Fiscal and Program Management	

            • Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
            • State Contact:  Lei Medford (TNRCC)
            • Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandrin 214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-
            P
            • Attorney (EPA): Mike Barra,  214-665-2143, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
            • State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF- AT
            • Prime Contractor. IT Corp./Howell Eng., ERM Southwest (Oversight
                         Panhandle Construction Co. (AWS construction)

            Co*t Recovery: State-lead (Fund)

              PRPs Identified:  4
              Viable PRPs:  3
              No settlement was negotiated  after completion of RI/FS.
              PRP Bell Petroleum's liabilities passed to successor company, Regal International; received
            favorable liability ruling in District Court on 11/89.
              Cost recovery will be completed in phases (AWS & Source).
              Settlement reached with Regal/Bell and Leigh for past and future costs in 1990.
              The Unilateral Administrative Order for the Remedial Action issued 10/89 to the remaining
            PRP, Sequa, is still outstanding.
            Present Status and Issues
            • The provision of an alternate water supply eliminated the potential for exposure to
            contaminants at the Odessa Chromium #1 site while final groundwater cleanup activities
            proceed.
            • A ground water pump and treat system is operating to remove chromium contamination from
            the aquifer.
            Cleanup Measurements
            • A safe alternate drinking water supply has been provided for approximately 3,500 people living
            in the site area.
            • The remedy, once complete, will treat over 30 million gallons of contaminated ground water
            from the only source aquifer in the Odessa area.
            December 5, 1995
                                                                              ODESSA CHROMIUM #1
_

-------
ODESSA
CHROMIUM  #2
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980697114
Site Description
                                     EPA REGION 6
                                 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
                                          Ector County
                                         Other Names:
                                       Andrew* Highway
Location:


Population:


Setting:
Hydrology:
e The site is located in the vicinity of Andrews Highway between West
52nd st. and West 57th St., Odessa, Ector County, Texas.

• Approximately 3500 persons live outside the city limits within one mile
of the site.

• Nearest residence is within the site.
• Nearest drinking water well is on-site.
• Approximately 400 water wells are within 1/2-mile of the site.
• Several municipal supply wells are within 1/2-mile of the site.
• Sources of contamination are within a 15-acre  industrial area outside of
Odessa.
• The estimated surface projection of ground water plumes is more than
40 acres.

• Trinity-Edwards aquifer is sandstone and conglomerate rock overlain by
20 ft. to 60ft. of soil and caliche (hard-pan).
• The aquifer is 60ft. to 100 ft. thick, and underlain by redbed clays.
• The depth to ground water at the site is 75 ft.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutant at the Odessa II site is hexavalent chromium, ranging to 9.9 ppm in the
ground water.
• The estimated volume of contaminated ground water in the aquifer was approximated at 200
million gallons.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site HRS Score: 42.24
                                Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                   Final Date: 5/20/86
                                   NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                   December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and  Diagram
                           Odessa Chromium
                                        Odessa
    II


ft
fs.
•ft







<

Sountv

•
•ion
d
Lr
-41M-
W«Mt

t 'V
/ ^


••••I

















        Odessa Chromium E
The Record of Decision
                      Signed: September 8,1986 (Alternate Water Supply)
                      Signed: March 18,1988 (Sorce Control/Ground Water)

The Remediation Process  	—	

Sft* History:

• Contamination resulted from chrome plating operations from the late 1960s - 1970s.
• Cleanup at the site was divided into three phases, or operable units:  development of an
alternate water supply (AWS) for area residents, and cleanup of the contaminated ground water
(Source Control/Ground Water).  The latter phase deals with operable units two and three, a
north plume of contamination under an enforcement scenario with potentially responsible parties
(PRPs) funding the cleanup, and a south plume under a "Fund-lead" scenario (cost-recovery
only).
• The Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) for the AWS and remediation
phases were completed in September 1986 (AWS) and March 1988  (Source/Ground Water).
• The RI/FS and South Plume activities are being conducted by the Texas Natural Resource
Commission (TNRCC).
December 5, 1995
ODESSA CHROMIUM #2

-------
Health Considerations:
                                        £•          -'.   •"
• More than a 40-acre portion of the sole source aquifer (Trinity) showed contamination.
• 14 out of 318 wells sampled show total chromium at or above the drinking water standard
which was .05 milligrams/liter (mg/1).
• 4 of 8 monitoring wells within the zone, and 3 of 12 monitoring wells within the Trinity
Aquifer contained chromium at or above 0.05 mg/1.
• Affected wells are outside of city water supply service area.
Alternate Water Supply Phase (AWS):

• For this phase, the Record of Decision (ROD) calls for an extension of the existing municipal
water supply system to those persons residing within the impacted area.


Source Control/Ground Water

e This ROD selected extraction and electrochemical treatment of contaminated ground water
from the Trinity Aquifer.
     Other Remedies Considered
         Reason Not Chosen
                                  -Alternate Water Supply-
1.-No Action"
2. Development of surface water supply
3. Removal via treatment
4. Development of new well field
1. "No Action"

2. Containment Wall
3. Ion Exchange
4. Ch3mical Treatment
Did not meet remedial objectives; not protective of
human health and the environment
High monthly water bills for users, Water
Association must be formed
Stringent operational review required
to Insure contaminants are properly removed
Long term supply of water questionable
                                -Source Control/Ground Water-
Did not meet remedial objectives; not protective of
human health or the environment
Difficult to Implement; high cost to uses
System will generate a hazardous sludge
Treatment may increase TDS of ground water
 • The action level for chromium contamination in ground water was revised from 0.05 mg/1 to
 0.10 mg/1 to reflect the new drinking water standards promulgated in the Federal Register No.
 3528 on January 30, 1991.
 ODESSA CHROMIUM #2
                                 December 5, 1995

-------
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 6/85, revised 9/89, and again in 12/92.
• Open houses and workshops: 4/86, 12/87, 9/89, 1/91
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  7/86 (AWS), 1/88 (Source/Ground Water)
• ROD Fact Sheet: 9/86 (AWS), 3/88 (Source/Ground Water)
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 1/85, 8/85, 12/87, 3/90, 9/90 (TWC), 12/90 (TWC), 1/91 (TWC), 8/94
(TNRCC), Explanation of Significant Differences Notice 10/94.
• Citizens on mailing  list:  33
• Constituency Interest: Low to moderate concerns regarding site after alternate water supply
was brought on-line.
• Site Repository:     Ector County Library, 321 West Fifth Street, Odessa, TX 79761
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  4/11/89
• Letters of Intent Received:  1) Gerald Fugit, Chrom Sites, Inc. - 12/20/90
• Draft Application Received:  4/10/91
• Grant Award: "None - application denied
• Current Status: Draft application submitted did not contain a work plan/budget, and further
discussions with Mr. Fugit revealed that no citizens group existed, and that he desired to use the
grant proceeds  to enhance his business opportunities, a prohibited use of the grant.
Fiscal and Program Management
• Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code:  6SF-AT or
                             Mary Ann Abrahamson, 214-665-6754, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
• State Contact:  Lei Medford (TNRCC)
• Community Involvement Coordinator. Olivia Balandran, 214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-P
• Attorney (EPA):  Ann Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
• State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
• Prime Contractor: South Plume: IT Corp./Howell Eng.
                   Panhandle Construction Co. (AWS)
                   North Plume: ERM Southwest
                   Bureau of Reclamation  (Oversight)

Co»t Recovery:  State (TNRCC) and PRP-lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified:  4
• Viable PRP: 1
• No settlement was negotiated after the completion of RI/FS.
• A Consent Decree was signed in June 1990  with the PRPs to conduct the Remedial Design
and Remedial Action (RD/RA) for the north  plume at the site.
• Cost recovery will be evaluated following the completion of RD/RA for the south plume.
 December 5, 1995
ODESSA CHROMIUM #2

-------
Present Status and Issues
•The residents around the Odessa Chromium #2 site are now provided with safe drinking water,
eliminating possible health threats while groundwater cleanup activities continue to reduce
contamination at the site.
• The Remedial Design for the North Plume included both electrochemical treatment and ion
exchange with resin recycling (thus addressing waste sludge concerns). The Remedial Action is
proceeding for ion exchange.
• An Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) for the change from electrochemical
treatment to ion exchange for the North Plume was signed June 28,  1994. The public was
notified in October of 1994.
• The groundwater pump and treatment systems are  operating for the south plume and the
north plume. The wells at the North Plume have attained the cleanup standard and monitoring is
commencing to determine if all recovery wells can be shutoff.
Cleanup Measurements
• A safe alternate drinking water supply has been provided for approximately 3,500 people .living
in the site area.
• The remedy, once complete, will treat millions of gallons of contaminated ground water from
the only source aquifer in the Odessa area.
 ODESSA CHROMIUM #2
December 5, 1995

-------

-------
PANTEX PLANT
(USDOE)
TEXAS
EPA ID# TX4890110527
                                      E°A  REGION 6
                                 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 13
                                          Carson County
Site Description
Location:

Population:



Sotting:
Hydrology:
17 miles Northeast of Amarillo, Carson County, Texas.

Approximately 160,000 people reside in Amarillo.
36% of Amarillo's water supply received from well field 4 miles from site.
20 domestic wells within one mile of site.

Area surrounding plant is primarily agricultural.
Facility covers approximately 10,000 acres consisting of facility operations,
safety buffer and security zones, and farmland.
Currently, the main mission of the facility is the assembly, disassembly,
and maintenance of nuclear weapons.

The Ogallala Aquifer occurs at a depth of 390 to 420 feet beneath the site.
Aquifer serves as the primary source of domestic and municipal water
supply.
A perched aquifer  about 25 to 100 feet thick occurs at a depth of 350 feet.
Wastes and Volumes  	

•      Principal Pollutants at the Pantex site include acetone, toluene, tetrahydrofuran,
       trichloroethylene (TCE), bromoform, 1,2-dichloroethane, arsenic, barium, chromium,
       lead, mercury, and silver found in waste waters discharged to unlined ditches and surface
       impoundments.
•      Acetone, TCE, tetrahydrofuran, toluene, 1,2-dichloroethane, 2-butanone,
       tetrachloroethylene, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane are also found in underlying soil from bum
       pits.
•      Explosives, TCE, 1,2-dichloroethane and chromium are present in the perched aquifer.
•      The volume of site wastes and contaminated ground water have yet to be determired.
                                                                     December 5, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site HRS Score: 51.22
                                Proposed Date: 7/29/91
                                  Final Date: 5/31/94
                                 NPL Update: No. 12
Site  Map and Diagram
     Amarillo
The Remediation Process	

Slt» History:

•     Plant began in 1942 as an Army Ordnance Corps facility.  The plant is now owned by the
      U.S. Department of Energy and operated under contract by Mason and Hangar-Silas
      Mason Company.
•     DOE began nuclear operations in 1950. Current operations include fabrication of
      nuclear weapon ammunition and assembly, testing, and disassembly of nuclear weapons.
•     Past and present waste practices  include burning of chemical wastes in unlined pits, burial
      of wastes in unlined landfills, and discharging of plant waste water into unlined ditches
      and surface impoundments on-site.
 December 5, 1995
PANTEX PLANT (USDOE)

-------
Health Considerations:

•     Amarillo has blended water system that provides water to 160,000 people.
•     Ground water is pumped from Ogallala aquifer.
•     Explosives, TCE, 1,2-dichloroethane and chromium are present in the perched aquifer
      which is approximately  60 feet above the Ogallala aquifer.
•     City pumping has created a cone of depression, causing ground water in the Ogallala
      underlying Pantex to flow toward the city well field.

Other Environmental Risk*:

•     Surface water run-off from the facility is directed into onsite playas.
•     While some are used as surface impoundments, others not receiving plant waste water are
      considered fresh water wetlands.
•     Texas Tech University Agricultural Research Station uses surface water from Playa 4 for
      both irrigation of crops  and watering livestock.
Record of Decision
                               No ROD Has Been Signed For The Pantex
                               Site As Of This Date

Community Involvement
       Community involvement responsibilities for the Pantex Plant are the responsibility of the
       Department of Energy.
       Constituency Interest: Residents are primarily concerned with contamination of the
       Ogallala Aquifer, a rapidly depleting source of drinking and irrigation water, and with the
       possible economic impacts of Superfund status at Pantex.
       Site Repository:       EPA Region 6 Library, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202
Technical Assistance Grant
•      Availability Notice: N/A
•      Letters of Intent Received: None
•      Grant Award:  N/A
•      Current Status:  A Site Specific Advisory Board (Pantex Plant Citizens Advisory Board)
       has been formed and is meeting on a monthly basis. The advisory board will be providing
       advice to DOE and the regulating agencies.
PANTEX PLANT (USDOE)
December 5, 1995

-------
Fiscal and Program  Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Gary A. Baumgarten, 214 6tt>-6749, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact: Glenda Champagne (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia Balandrln  214-665-6584, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Michael Barra, 214-665-2143, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  None

Cost Recovery:  Federal Facility
Present Status and Issues
      The EPA and USDOE have assessed conditions at the Pantex Plant (USDOE) and
      determined that the site posed no immediate threat to public health or the environment
      while further studies are underway.
      The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is currently overseeing
      investigative work being conducted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
      (RCRA) corrective action program.
      Currently, workplans for 14 RCRA Facility Investigations (RFI) have been approved by
      TNRCC.
      EPA finalized a Memorandum of Agreement with TNRCC which will outline the roles and
      responsibilities  of EPA and TNRCC for the investigation and cleanup of the site.
      EPA, TNRCC,  and DOE are in the process of negotiating a  Federal Facility Agreement
      which will be the basis for the CERCLA activities.
Cleanup Measurements
      Cleanup of the Pantex will ensure the quality and safety of drinking water for
      approximately 50,000 Amarillo residents on city water wells near the site.
 December 5, 1995
PANTEX PLANT (USDOE)

-------
PESSES  CHEMICAL
COMPANY
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980699656
                                           EPA REGION 6
                                     CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 12
                                               Tarrant County
Site Description
Location:

Population:

Setting:
Hydrogoology:
• 2301 South Main Street, Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas.

• Approximately 19,500 people live or work within a one-mile radius of the site.

• The nearest residence is 1/2 mile east of the site.
•"The nearest drinking water well is 1.4 miles south of site.
• A hospital and five schools are located within one mile of the site.
• The site area is approximately 4.2 acres, and it is surrounded by light industry.
• The site was contaminated by cadmium sludge/powder (approx. 2 to 3 ft. deep).
• Site remediation construction is complete; wastes are stabilized and under
onsite concrete cap.
« Site was deleted from the NPL on September 28, 1995.


• The site is situated over the Paluxy Formation, a drinking water aquifer for the
City of Fort Worth.
• Area soils are a silty clay  and clay loam types.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the Pesses site are inorganic heavy metals, such as cadmium, lead,
copper, and nickel, in the form of sludge mixed with surface soil.
• Leaching of contaminants into ground water is unlikely due to the low permeability of area
soils and clay lenses over the Paluxy Aquifer.
• The maximum concentration of cadmium at the site was measured at 19,300 parts per million
(PPm)-
• The approximate volume of site wastes is 10,800 cubic yards of off-site and onsite soils.
                                                                    December 5, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL USTING HISTORY
                                Site MRS Score: 28.60
                               Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                 Final Date: 6/10/84
                                 NPL Update: No. 2
                                 Deletion: 9/28/95
Site Map and  Diagram
          I Corvcr«t» or Aiprtolt  	Pone

            P«ss«s Chemical
The Remediation Process  —	

Sit* History:

• The Pesses Chemical Co. of Solon, Ohio opened a cadmium reclamation plant in Ft. Worth,
Texas in 12/78.
• Pesses Chemical ceased operation of its Fort Worth plant on 1/16/81; material still received
and stored at the facility.
• A grass fire at the site on 3/1/83, released noxious fumes.
• In April through June 1983, EPA removed 3,400 cubic yards of contaminated topsoil, drums,
wastes, and debris.
• During July through September 1988, the  potentially responsible party (PRP) built a fence
around the northern portion of the site.
• In July 1990, EPA repaired the fence after the site had been vandalized.
 December 5, 1995
                                                           PESSES CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
Health Consideration*:

• Elevated levels of cadmium were detected up to 800 feet off-site.

Otter Environmental Risks:

• The nearest drinking water well is located 1.4 miles south of the site.
Record of Decision
                                  Signed: December 22, 1988
• The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Pesses site includes In-Situ Stabilization plus Capping,
and  decontamination of the old warehouse.
                                             Reason Not Chosen
                                 Inadequate protection of human health and the
                                 environment.
                                 If the caps are damaged or not maintained properly, risk
                                 from potential exposure to the untreated contaminants
                                 Short-term risks posed and reliability uncertain during
                                 Implementation.
                                 Difficulties and  substantial volume Increase during
                                 Implementation.
                                 Remedy merely moves the contaminants to a different
                                 location; high cost
 Other Remedies Considered

1. "No Action"

2. Capping

3. In-Sttu Vitrification

4. Stabilization & Consolidation

5. Off-site Disposal


Community Involvement —	

• Community outreach is the responsibility of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission (TNRCC).
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed  11/86, revised 7/89.
• Open houses and workshops:  2/85, 12/87, 6/90
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting: 11/88
• ROD Fact Sheet: 1/89
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  12/87 (TNRCC), 12/89 (TNRCC), 5/90 (TNRCC), 6/90, 11/93
• Citizens on mailing list: 53
• Constituency Interest:  Low - site remediation is  complete, Close-out Report has been
accepted and Site will be delisted from the NPL.
• Site Repository: Fort Worth Public Library, Seminary South Branch, 501 East Bolt Street,
Fort Worth, TX 76110, (817) 926-0215; Texas Natural Resource Conservation  Commission,
12118 North IH35, Building D,  Room  190, Austin,  TX 78753, (512) 239-2920
 PESSES CHEMICAL COMPANY
                                                                        December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 8/89
• Letters of Intent Received: None
• Grant Award:  N/A
• Current Status: City involvement high; citizens were concerned about direct or indirect
exposure to cadmium dust.
Fiscal and Program  Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Earl Hendrick, 214-665-8519, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact: Robert Conti (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator Olivia Balandr£n, 214-665-6584, Mail Cd: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Courtney Johnson, 214-665-8055, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  Arens Corp. (Contractor) Weston Environmental
                         Consultants (A&E)

Coat Recovery: State-lead (Fund)

• PRPs Identified:  54
• Viable PRP:  None identified
• Cost recovery negotiations are underway with PRPs.
Present Status and Issues
• Through the emergency actions to restrict site access, and the comprehensive actions taken to
cleanup the soil, sludges, equipment and surface water, the potential threats posed by the Pesses
Chemical Company have been eliminated. All cleanup actions were completed in 1992.
Cleanup  Measurements
• Over 12,359 cubic yards of soil contaminated with heavy metals were remediated, making the
area safe for over 19,000 people, a hospital, and five schools within a one-mile radius of the
Pesses site.
December 5, 1995
PESSES CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
PETRO-CHEM1CAL
SYSTEMS, INC.
(TURTLE BAYOU)
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980873350
                                         EPA REGION 6
                                   CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 02
                                             Liberty County
                                             Other Name*:
                                             Turtle Bayou
Site Description	

Location:     • The site is located on Frontier Park Road, south of Liberty (east of Houston
            and FM 563; 7 miles north of 1-10), Liberty County, Texas.
              Frontier Park Road transverses the site.
Population:     A small business and 21 residences are within a one-mile radius of the site
             long FM 563 and Frontier Park Road.
Setting:        The nearest residence and drinking water well are on-site.
              Of the 500+acre tract,  5 disposal areas have been identified.
              Contaminated waste oils were used as dust control along Frontier Park Road.
              Areas identified on the site include the main waste area, temporary office area,
            east power line  easement area, bayou disposal area,  and under a section of the
            road on the west end of the site.
Hydrology:   • The site is characterized by recent alluvial deposits which overlay Texas Coastal
            Plain  deposits.
            • The water table is at 20 to 25 feet below the surface of the site.
            • The east end of the site falls within the 100-year flood plain, along the Turtle
            Bayou tributary.
Wastes and Volumes
  The principal pollutants at the site, by areas of concern, are:
Road:
Surface Soil:
o Naphthalene
o Chrysene
o Fluorene
o Benzene

o Benzene
o Naphthalene
o Lead
 Ground water:  o Naphthalene
            o Styrene
            o Benzene
1100 ppm soil composite
8 ppm
200 ppm
2000 ppm

Up to 7,000 ppm
Up to 6,700 ppm
Up to 5,000 ppm

13,000 ppm
660 ppm
480 ppm
                                                                 December 5, 1995

-------
• Waste volumes at the site include approximately 5,900 cubic yards in the road area, and
300.0DO cubic vards in the. remainder of the site.
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 29.94
                               Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                  Final Date: 5/20/86
                                  NPL Update: No. 2
Site  Map and Diagram
      LIBERTY
          PETRO CHEIVIIOXL
           SUPERFUND SITE
                                                           Bayou
                                                          Dlspxosal
            Frontlor Park Rd.
                East Disposal Area
                                                 Retro Criemlcal
                                                 Systems, Inc. Site
              Potro Chemical
                                                     Turtle Bayou
The Remediation Process  	

Stt« History:

• Site operations commenced prior to 1970, and continued until the late 1970s. Waste oils were
dumped on Frontier Park Road and into unlined waste pits along road.
• A conditional commercial permit was issued 1971, but was revoked due to legal action and
withdrawn 1974.
 December 5, 1995
PETROCHEMICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
            (TURTLE BAYOU)

-------
• After 1974, the land was developed and subdivided into residential properties.
• In 1986, EPA installed a fence and conducted site sampling.
• In 1988, Frontier Park Road was excavated, back-filled, and re-built; residents were relocated
during this period.

• The Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) for both Frontier Park Road
(FPR) and Source Control phases  (or operable units), were initiated in April 1988.
• The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) is the lead agency on
cleanup of the FPR phase, while EPA has the lead on the Source Control.
• During the course of the original RI/FS, a supplemental RI/FS was conducted by ARCO
under an Administrative Order on Consent signed 3/6/91.
• After a failed attempt to negotiate a Consent Decree with site PRPs, a Unilateral
Administrative Order (UAO) was issued to PRPs in Decemoer 1993. PRPs are currently
implementing work required by UAO.

Health Considerations:

• Ground water contamination has been detected.

• The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)  has indicated that no
immediate health threat is posed.

• All areas of apparent waste disposal have been identified.

Other Environmental Risks:

• Numerous shallow wells, approximately 25 ft. deep, are the current source of drinking water
for the rural area.

• However, all wells currently used on the site are screened in the deeper aquifer at a depth of
approximately 100 feet.
Record of Decision
                                  Signed: March 27, 1987 (FPR/
                               Signed: September B, 1991 (Source)
J
Frontier Park Road (FPR):

• The Record of Decision (ROD) for Frontier Park Road called for excavation of soil on and
around the road, followed by placement of the contaminated soil within a temporary on-site
RCRA storage facility with temporary relocation of residents.

• This remedy includes mowing of the vault and road area, visual inspections, and disposal of
leachate.
PETROCHEMICAL SYSTEMS, INC. (TURTLE BAYOU)  3
    December 5, 1995

-------
Source Control (Soil Treatment):

• The Source Control ROD selected soil vapor extraction and catalytic oxidation of organic
contamination, and includes cap and slurry walls around waste disposal areas.
       Other Remedies  Considered
           Reason Not Chosen
                                          -FPR-
1.     "No Action"
2.     Onsite storage with
       temporary detours
3.     Off-site disposal with
       relocation of residents
4.     Off-site disposal with
       temporary detours
5.     Alternative access,
       Fence contaminated areas
6.     Removal to background levels,
       temporary detours
7.     Surface barrier,
       temporary detours
Road needs action, too great a threat
More costly than relocation

Not cost-^rctive; transportation risks

Not cost-effective; transportation risks

Does not eliminate threat from road

Not cost-effective

Does not alleviate threat from road
1.     "No Action"

2.     Cap and Slurry Wall
3.     Biological treatment
4.     Solvent extraction
5.     Thermal destruction
6.     Thermal stripping
7.     On-site landfill disposal
8.     Offsite landfill disposal
9.     Soil vapor extraction and
       catalytic oxidation
10.    Ground water extraction (wells),
       carbon  adsorption or direct disposal
11.    Ground water extraction by recovery
       trenches;  carbon adsorption or direct
       disposal.
12.    Combination of treatment technologies
       to address various areas of site.
                                     -SourceControl-
Not protective of human health and the
environment
Part of selected remedy
Short Term Impacts
Short Term Impacts
Not cost-effective
Short Term Impacts
Short Term Impacts
Short Term Impacts
Part of selected remedy

May be used, based on pilot study results

May be used, based on pilot study results


May be used, based on pilot study results
 • An Inter-agency agreement was signed with FEMA to relocate residents during work on FPR.
 December 5, 1995
              PETROCHEMICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
                            (TURTLE BAYOU)

-------
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 8/85, revised 11/89
• Open houses and workshops:  12/84, 11/85, 3/89, 4/91, 6/91
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  11/86 (FPR), 6/91 (Source)
• ROD Fact Sheet:  3/87 (FPR), 9/91 (Source)
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 10/86, 7/87, 12/87, 7/88, 1/89, 11/90 (TWC), 05/91, 08/95
• Fact Sheet and Open House are planned for late 1995, prior to the initiation of remedial
design field pilot study.

• Citizens on site mailing list: 80

• Constituency Interest:  Site-area residents are concerned about site contamination, property
values, and maintenance of Frontier Park Road.

• Site Repository:    Liberty Municipal Library, 1710 Sam Houston Avenue, Liberty, TX 77575
Technical Assistance Grant

• Letters of Intent Received: None

• Grant Award: N/A
• Current Status: No apparent citizen interest in applying for the grant.
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager:  Chris Villarreal (Source)
  State Contact:  Alvie Nichols
  Community Involvement Coordinator Donn Walters
  Attorney: Anne Foster
  State Coordinator: Shirley Workman
  Prime Contractors: Lockwood, Andrews & Newmann (Source RI/FS, FPR O&M)
                   CH2M HILL (Road RD/RA)
                   Ruor Daniel (Source - RD Technical Assistance)

Coat Recovery: Combination of State-lead (Fund) for FPR, and PRP-lead (Enforcement) for the

Source Control operable unit.

• PRPs Identified:  8

• Viable PRP: ARCO, ARCO Chemical, DuPont, Exxon, Lubrizol, Tenneco Polymers

• EPA and ARCO (Atlantic Richfield) signed an Administrative Order  on Consent 3/6/91 to
conduct a Supplemental Remedial Investigation and Focused Feasibility  Study.
RETRO-CHEMICAL SYSTEMS. INC. (TURTLE BAYOU)  5
December 5. 1995

-------
Present Status and Issues	—:	——

• With the cleanup actions described above, the EPA has greatly reduced the potential for
accidental contact or exposure to contaminated soil and dust along Frontier Park Road while
cleanup actions are being designed.
• The two families  temporarily relocated during the cleanup have returned to their homes, and
Turtle Bayou again flows freely across the area.
• A work plan and supporting plans have been developed for a soil vapor extraction pilot study
as part of the Source Control Remedial Design. ARCO, ARCO Chemical, and Lubrizol are
currently working under a Unilateral Order to perform this work.
• In November 1994, a §106/107 cost recovery action was taken to court by the Department of
Justice and EPA. A out-of-court settlement with ARCO was reached whereby ARCO has
agreed to pay $1.1 million and perform approximately $15.5 mi'Mcn of the estimated total $27
million worth or work at the site. The  details of the out-of-court settlement are currently being
negotiated in a Consent Decree.  Pending successful completion of Consent Decree negotiations
with ARCO, facts sheets will be generated by EPA to inform the  public of the 60-day Public
Comment Period on the Consent Decree.
Cleanup Measurements
• Residents in 21 homes and business clientele in the site area are now safe from direct contact
and dust inhalation of Frontier Park Road wastes.
 December 5, 1995
PETROCHEMICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
             (TURTLE a
-------
RSR CORP.
(MURPH  METAL^
TEXAS
EPA 1D# TXD079348397
Site Description
   EPA REGION 6
Congressional District 30
       Dallas County
        West Dallas

       Other Names:
Location:     • The RSR Corp. site is located in West Dal^?, Dallas County, Texas.
             • The abandoned smelter is located near the center of the site study area at the
             intersection of Westmoreland and Singleton Boulevard.  The site study area is
             bounded on the north and east by the Trinity River, on the south by Fort Worth
             Avenue, and on the west by Loop 12.
Population:    • Approximately 17,000 people live within the study area.

Setting:       • Urban mixed single and multi family residential areas, light industrial and
             commercial as well.
             •~ Multifamily public housing (1600 units, mostly black) is adjacent to the smelter.
             • Single family residential areas predominate to the East and West of the smelter
             (predominantly black to the East, predominantly hispanic to the West).
             • Commercial and industrial areas are generally to the South.
             • Surface contamination of metals (lead, arsenic, and cadmium) resulted from air
             deposition of smokestack emissions from lead smelting operations, and from
             disposal of battery material and slag.

Hydrology:    • Alluvium and terrace deposits of gravel, sand, and day for the top 13 feet,
             overlying Eagle Ford shale from 13 to 18 feet.
             • Drinking water in the area comes from surface reservoirs used by the City of
             Dallas system, not from local wells in the vicinity of the site.


Wastes and Volumes  	
      The site has been divided into 5 operable units to facilitate timely remediation:

      •     #1 Single Family Residential Area:  6,800 properties were surveyed by TNRCC in
             1993 to determine which might have waste slag or battery chips.  420 properties
             cleaned up concluding in 1994 under Removal Authorities.
      •     #2 Dallas Public Housing Authority: Under an Administrative Order on Consent
             with EPA, the Dallas  Housing Authority began in July, 1994, the demolition of
             167 multi-family buildings and Removal of lead contaminated materials
             equivalent to the single family residential efforts. The cleanup was completed in
             April 1995.
      •     #3 Former Landfills:  Under study.  Preparing remedial investigation and
             feasibility reports.
                                                                     December 5, 1995

-------
             #4 Former Smelter and #5 Other Industrial Properties: Initial field investigation
             results indicated: 500 drums of spent battery acid, slag, and dust; 55 containers of
             laboratory chemicals; 1,800 cubic yards of loose contaminated debris.  All were
             be shipped offsite for treatment/disposal under a removal action, completed in
             July 1995. The other portions of these operable units (i.e. buildings, structures,
             stack, soils, etc.) are being evaluated for final remedial/removal  action.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                  Site HRS Score: 50.00
                                 Proposed Date:  5/10/93
                                   Final Date: 9/29/95
                                   NPL Update: No. 14
Site Map and Diagram
                                                        DALLAS
            RSR Site
            Project
           Location
 The Remediation Process  —	

 Stt» History:

 •     The RSR Corporation Superfund Site Study Area encompasses approximately 13.6 square
       miles in the West Dallas.  Population within the site numbers approximately 17,000.

 •     On May 10, 1993, EPA proposed to add the RSR Corporation site to the Superfund
       National Priorities List (NPL).  The RSR site consists of five operable Units (OUs); OU1
       - Residential property, OU2 - DHA property, OUS - Slag piles, OU4 - Smelter property
       and OUS - Battery Breaking facility/Other Industrial property.
 December 5, 1995
RSR CORP. (MURPH METALS)

-------
       In consultation with the ATSDR, EPA established the removal action cleanup levels for
       residential areas at 500 ppra lead, 20 ppm arsenic, or 30 ppm cadmium.

       From September 1992 through February 1953, TIvK.CC visually inspected 6,800 properties
       in West Dallas and collected samples from battery chip fill areas.

       From 1991 to June 1994, EPA ERB conducted removals at 420 residential and high risk
       areas (schools, church playgrounds, parks) in west Dallas.  Thirty (30) residential owners
       refused access for collect of samples or removal activities.  From these  locations, 37,412
       cubic yards of non-hazardous soils and 8,973 cubic yards of hazardous soils were removed
       and disposed of at off-site permitted facilities.

       October-November 1993,  EPA conducted in-home sampling at 352 residential locations
       and City of Dallas and ATSDR collect blood samples from 558 children (40 above 10
             and personnel questionnaire at OU No. 1 and OU No. 2.
•      August 1993, EPA signed AOC with DHA (OU No. 2). DHA conducted a RI and
       demolition and removal action with EPA approval and oversight.  In March 1995, DHA
       completed demolition of 167 building and removal of approximately 24,000 cubic yards of
       contaminated soils from OU No. 2 to offsite disposal facilities.

•      May 9, 1995, EPA signed the Record of Decision for OU No. 1 and OU No. 2 stating
       that No Further Action is necessary for protection of human health and the environment
       at these OUs.

•      May 10, 1995, EPA began 30-day public comment period on the Proposed Plan for OU
       No. 4.  Public comment period ended July 12,  1995. Recommended alternative for OU
       No. 4 consists of; demolition and offsite disposal of all  buildings and structures (including
       the 300-foot stack) and containment of source materials.  ROD for OU No. 4 is under
       development, while other options to remediation are also being evaluated.

•      On May 31, 1995, EPA initiated a non-time critical removal on OU No. 4 (former
       smelter facility)  to address over 500 waste drums, 72 residual/waste piles and 50
       laboratories. All material was successfully disposed offsite  at permitted facilities and the
       action was completed in July 1995.

•      The RI and FS for OU No. 5 and OU No. 3 are scheduled  for completion in December
       1995.  Plans will be submitted for public  review and comments in early 1996.

Health Considerations:

  •    Blood-lead analyses conducted in 1983 concluded that approximately 10 percent of
       children under six years of age and living within a 1/2 mile  radius of the smelter had
       blood lead concentrations greater than the then current standard of 30 UG/DL; 90%
       exceeded the future standard of 10 UG/DL.

  •    Blood lead analyses conducted in 1993 as part of the RI/FS for OU #1 and #2 showed
       that 0% of children exceeded the old standard of 30 UG/DL while 8.0 % exceeded the
       new standard of 10 UG/DL. 86 percent  of households with children that have elevated
       lead level (above 10 UG/DL) were also found to have  soil lead concentrations of less
       than 250  ppm.
RSR CORP. (MURPH METALS)
December 5, 1995

-------
Record of Decision
                              Operable Units 1 & 2: May 9,1995
Community Involvement
      Community Relations Plan: 12/91
      Open houses and workshops:  12/91, 6/93, 7/93, 9/93, 11/93, 1/94, 3/94, 6/94, 11/94
      Public Meetings: Proposed Plan on OU 1 and OU 2 on 12/94; radio public mtg. on 1/95
      Bilingual Team appointed; photographs and responsibilities published 7/93; updated 11/94
      Milestone Fact Sheets:  12/91, 5/93, 6/93, 7/93, 10/93, 1/94, 3/94, 8/94, 9/94 & 10/94
      (EE/CA), 11/94 (Prop. Plans, OU #1 & #2), 6/95 (ROD, OU's 1 & 2), 9/95 (NPL-Final)
      Satellite office established 6/93.
      Citizens on site mailing list: 800

      Constituency Interest: Some very vocal and concerned citizen groups concerned about
      Environmental Justice issues, distrust of government (all levels), recompensation for past
      exposure, jobs and economic development.
       Site Repository:
Dallas Public Library
West Branch
2332 Singleton Blvd.
Dallas, TX 75212
Technical Assistance Grant
       Availability Notice: 5/92 - Re-advertised 12/92

       Letters of Intent Received: People's Environmental Action Coordinating Education
       (PEACE) - 6/92 (only response).

       Final Application Received:  5/3/93

       Grant Award: 5/20/93 (only 10 days after the site was proposed to the NPL, earliest
       Technical Assistance Grant award in program)

       Current Status:  PEACE is open to other groups in West Dallas by offering board of
       director seats to representatives of these groups. Technical Advisor selected 3/94.
 December 5, 1995
                                                               RSR CORP. (MURPH METALS)

-------
Fiscal and Program  Management
RSR Site T.am (EPA):

• Remedial Project Managers: Carlos Sanchez, 214-665-8507, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
                            Ann Schober, 214-665-8520, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
• On Scene Coordinators: Althea Foster, 214-665-2268, Mail Code: 6SF-R1
                        Ken Clark, 214-665-6774, Mail Code:  6SF-R2
• Community Involvement Coordinator Olivia Balandrln, 214-665-6584,  Mail Code: 6SF-P
• Attorney: Courtney Johnson, 214-665-8055, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
• Toxicologist (EPA): Jon Rauscher, 214-665-8513, Mail Code:  6SF-L

       RSR Support:

• State Contact:  Jeff Patterson (TNRCC)
• State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
• Prime Contractor CH2M HILL

Cost Recovery: Fund Lead

  •    PRPs Identified: RSR Corporation, Quemetco Metals Limited, Inc., Murmur Corp., City
       of Dallas,  others
  • Viable PRPs: yes

Present Status and  Issues  	
  •   Utilizing Lightning ROD techniques; decision making accelerated 3-5 years.

  •   This is one of Region 6's highest priority Environmental Justice Sites. Population
      affected is low income, and predominantly minority.  The RSR site is only one of a
      plethora of other environmental problems (e.g. parts of the city have nearly 50% of
      homes with leaded paint) and other social issues. Challenge for EPA is to bring all other
      responsible governmental entities to the 'table' to address societal problems.

Cleanup Measurements  	
       Residential Areas Removal Actions have cleaned up 420 single family residential
       properties and 167 multifamily buildings.  All residential aoils of West Dallas now have
       less than 500 ppm lead from RSR unless the owner did not grant access. Some 559
       children were tested for blood lead levels and 372 household were sampled (soils, paints,
       tap water, dust). Blood lead levels are now below rational averages. Twenty other
       metals were also analyzed (e.g., antimony, copper, zinc, silver, etc.) and all were found to
       be at safe or undetectable levels.

       Industrial Areas Studies and plans are underway. Removal action completed in July
       1995  to address over 500 waste drums, 72 residual/debris piles and 50 laboratory
       containers.  Future remedial plans to address remaining contamination are being
       evaluated.
RSR CORP. (MURPH METALS)
December 5, 1995

-------

-------
SHERIDAN DISPOSAL
SERVICES
TEXAS
EPAID#TXD062132147
                                    EPA REGION 6
                              CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 14
                                        Waller County
Site Description
Location:
Population:


Sotting:
Hydrology:
The site is located about nine miles northwest of Hempstead in Waller
County, at the border of Washington County, Texas.
The facility is bounded by the Brazos River (north) and Clark Road
(south).
Surrounding  area is primarily farm and grazing land.

The Town of Brown College, with approximately 60 residents, is about 1.5
miles north of the site.

The nearest residence and drinking water well are less than a mile from
the site.
The site area is predominantly agricultural.
The site covers 110 acres in a 695 acre tract of land, and includes a 15-
acre lagoon,  and a 40-acre evaporation land farm.

The shallow  aquifer (0-75 feet) is comprised of recent Brazos River
alluvial sediments, which include silty clays with sand and gravel stringers.
The Evangeline Aquifer appears to underlie the recent alluvium, and is a
thick unit of  alternating clay and sand layers
Wastes and Volumes
      The principal pollutants in sludges at the Sheridan site include approximately 5% volatile
      organics compounds such as benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene, and trichloroethylene
      (TCE); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) at approximately 100 parts per million (ppm);
      and roughly 30% inorganic compounds such as heavy metals.

      The volume of wastes at the site are estimated to be 44,000 cubic yards of sludge and
      contaminated soil, located primarily in a large waste lagoon.
                                                                December 6, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                             NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 30.67
                                Proposed Data: 6/10/86
                                  Final Date: 3/31/89
                                  NPL Update: No. 5
Site Map and Diagram
                     Evaporation
                       System
                   Exterior Dike
Sheridan
Disposal
                                                                <3rtmes_Co._
                                                                "Waller Co.
                                                                  eerwood
                                                                  Rolling
                                                                   Hills
                                     ""Austin Co
                                    Waller County
The Remediation Process  ——

SH» History:

•      Sheridan Disposal Services, owned by Mr. Duane Sheridan, collected waste oils and
       solvents from a variety of sources  for disposal in an on-site surface impoundment,
       landfarm, and incinerator. The surface impoundment was operated from 1963 to
•      In 1963, the Texas Water Quality Board issued a permit authorizing disposal of non-
       hazardous and industrial wastes. After permitting, the Texas Water Quality Board
       (TWQB) [now known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission] received
       complaints concerning odor, runoff, and oil in the Brazos River. The State also noted
       increased concentrations of contaminants in on-site monitoring wells.
 December 6, 1995
                                                        SHERIDAN DISPOSAL SERVICES

-------
•      In 1970, the TWQB and Waller County filed suit against the Sheridan facility. In 1975, a
       judgement was entered by the Court which prohibited fui iher discharge of wastes into the
       lagoon.  After numerous discussions with Sheridan Disposal Services, the TWQB
       determined that the facility  did not have the economic or technical resources necessary to
       close the lagoon properly.
•      After polychlorinated biphenyls were identified in the lagoon, EPA became involved in
       the site closure through the Toxic Substances Control Act. In 1986 the site was proposed
       for inclusion on the NPL.
•      In 1987 the PRPs entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with EPA to
       complete an RI/FS for the site.

Health Considerations:

•      Contaminants have been identified in the upper aquirer which is connected to the Brazos
       River.
•      The Brazos River and the shallow alluvial  aquifer and Evangeline Aquifer are utilized for
       drinking water supplies.
Record of  Decision
                               Signed: December 29, 1988 (Source)
                               September 27, 1989 (Ground Water)
Source Control:
       The remedy selected for the Sheridan site waste ponds, tanks and soils in the Record of
       Decision (ROD) was biotreatment, also known as biodegradation or bioremediation.
       Wastes to be treated included all those containing greater than 25 ppm PCBs, floating oil
       and emulsion in the waste pond and storage taiiks, affected soil beneath the waste lagoon,
       and dike surface soils.
       A flexible spur jetty river bank erosion control system was installed in the Brazos River.
       Treated sludges will be stabilized, returned to the lagoori and capped, or stabilized and
       landfilled onsite.  A RCRA-compliant cap will be installed over the entire lagoon and
       dike area.
Ground Water
       The ROD for ground water calls for natural attenuation of contamination.
       This remedy relies on naturala^rocesses such   sorption and biodegradation for in-place
       mitigation of contaminated ground water in the aquifer.
       Alternate Concentrations Limits (ACLs) established as site ground water protection
       limits.
       Ground water to be monitored to ensure that ACLs are not exceeded.
       Sampling and analysis of the Brazos River to be conducted immediately downgradient
       and upgradient of the point-of-entry of ground water from the site into the river.
       Development of a corrective action plan to ensure that protective levels are met at the
       point of potential exposure in the event that ACLs are exceeded.
 SHERIDAN DISPOSAL SERVICES
December 5, 1995

-------
       Other Remedies Considered
                                          Reason Not Chosen
                                   -Sourc* Conlr Jt-
1. Soil mixing

2. Stabilization.

3. Solvent Extraction


4. Incineration
                                       Resulted In great volume Increased water, little
                                       mobility or toxiclty reduction.
                                       High organic content of sludge made stabilization
                                       long-term effectiveness questionable.
                                       Potential Implementation problems and high costs
                                       were not justified by significantly greater
                                       pro teeth/ones*.
                                       Same as above.
                                    -Ground Water-
                                       Poses some risk to on-site workers, and results
                                       in significantly greater cost with negligible effect on
                                       cleanup time.
                                       Same as 1 above. Also, Implementation problems
                                       Installing the slurry wall.
1. Ground water recovery wells
and treatment

2. Slurry wall and ground
water recovery and treatment

Community Involvement	

       Community Involvement Plan: Developed 10/86
       Open houses and workshops:  5/91, 9/92
       Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  11/88 (Source), 7/89 (Ground Water)
       ROD Fact Sheet:  1/89 (Source), 10/89 (Ground Water)
       Milestone EPA Fact Sheets: 9/86, 12/89, 6/90
       Sheridan Site Trust (PRP) Fact Sheets:  8/87, 7/88, 4/90, 1/91, 4/91, 6/91, 4/92, 10/92, 1/93

       Citizens on EPA site mailing list:  96
       Constituency Interest:  The site has an historically low level of citizen interest.

•     Site Repository:      Waller County Library, 2331 llth Street, Hempstead, TX 77445

Technical Assistance Grant	
       Availability Notice:  4/9/89
       Letters of Intent Received: None
       Grant Award:  N/A
       Current Status: No apparent citizen interest in applying for grant
 Fiscal and  Program Management
 • Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Gary A. Baumgarten, 214-665-6749, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
 • State Contact: Ashby McMullan (TNRCC)
 • Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
 • Attorney (EPA):  Anne Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
 • State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
 • Prime Contractor  ERM Southwest (for PRPs)
 December 5. 1995
                                                            SHERIDAN DISPOSAL SERVICES

-------
Cost Recovery:  PRP Lead (Enforcement)

•      PKPs Identified:  150
s      Viable PRP: 38 PRPs make up the Sherid-r. Site Trust (SST).
•      There are also 70 de-minimus settlors vvho contributed funds to the SST
Present Status and Issues
•      A motion was filed by non-settling parties for intervention of the Consent Decrees, which
       was reviewed and granted by the court.
•      All RD/RA activities have stopped pending entry of the Consent Decrees in Federal
       District Court.
•      A biotreatment pilot study was conducted at the site in 1991, with favorable  results.
•      In order to prevent a possible overtopping of the waste lagoon, the PRPs started pumping
       rainwater from the waste lagoon into the evaporation system in June 1993 and again in
       1995.
Cleanup Measurements
       In 1986 a~ fence was installed around the site.
       Periodic maintenance of the levee system has occurred to prevent flooding of former
       disposal  areas and possible contamination of the Brazos River.
       In 1987,  the PRPs lowered the level of stormwater in the waste lagoon to prevent
       potential overflow of the pond. In June 1993 and July  1995, the PRPs again lowered the
       level of stormwater in the pond.
       In order to control the source contamination, the PRPs, under oversight by the EPA will
       use bioremediation to remediate site wastes. The treated sludges will then be stabilized,
       returned to the pond and capped or stabilized and returned to a RCRA-compliant
       landfill in the pond area.
       The ground water contamination will be treated by natural  attenuation.  This remedy
       relies on natural processes such as sorption and biodegradation to alleviate
       contamination.
       The remediation once completed will prevent contamination from migrating into ground
       water and also stop contaminated ground water from discharging into the Brazos River.
 SHERIDAN DISPOSAL SERVICES
December 5, 1995

-------

-------
 SOUTH
 CAVALCADE
 STREET
 TEXAS
 EPAID#TXD98081038
                                     EPA REGION 6
                                CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 29
                                          Harris County
                                         Othor Nam**:
                                        Koppors Co., Inc.
Site  Description
Location:



Population:

Sotting:
Hydrogoology:
» The site is located at the southeast intersection of Cavalcade & Maury
Streets, about two miles southwest of the intersection of Loop 610 North &
U.S. 59., Houston, Harris County, Texas.

• Approximately 4,500 people live within a one-mile radius of the site.

• The nearest residence to this site is 200 feet to the west, and the nearest
water well is about 1,500 feet from site. However, the aquifers to be
remediated are not being used as water supplies, nor are they likely to be
used because there are available water sources in the area.
• This 66-acre site was used as a wood treating facility from 1910 to 1962.
• All original facilities were removed about 1962, and the site was covered
with 1-2 feet of fill material.
• Two-thirds of the site were developed by three palletized trucking firms
with large warehouses; the center third of the property is vacant.

• The subsurface consists  of interbedded clays, silts and sands of the
Beaumont formation.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the site include creosote and wood treating metal salts.
• Soils & ground water contaminated with creosote related compounds.
• At some locations on the site, contaminants have been detected at 60 feet below the surface.
• The volume of contaminated soils at the site is approximately 30,000 cubic yards.
Site Assessment and  Ranking
                              NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                 Site HRS Score: 38.69
                                 Proposed Date:  10/5/84
                                   Final Date: 6/10/86
                                   NPL Update: No. 2
                                                                    December 5, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                           South
                      Cavalcade
                             Site
      I Unpcrvad Ar»o
                   CoHlnoswortfi
                      1
Houston
                                                              HOBBY
                                                             AIRPORT
The Remediation Process	

Stt* History:

• Wood treatment facility operated by National Lumber and Creosoting Company began
operation in 1910 and continued until 1938.
• Koppers Co., Inc., now Beazer East, Inc., purchased the facility in 1938 and continued wood
treating operations and opened a coal tar distillation facility.
• Operations ceased in 1962, and the site was cleared and sold in 1962.
• Presently, three trucking firms operate warehouse and terminal  operations at the site:
^"Hetized Trucking, Trucking Properties and Nations Way.
• The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for this site was completed in
September 1988, conducted by the potentially responsible parties (PRPs) under EPA oversight.
• The Remedial Design (RD) for this site was completed in January 1995.

Health Considerations:

• Primary risks from the site stem from the surface soil contamination, and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) detected in ground water (shallow water table exists at about five feet).
                                                                       December 5, 1995

-------
Record of Decision
                                  Signed: September 26,1988
Ground Water.

• The Record of Decision (ROD) called for ground water remediation using physical/chemical
separation of contaminants, followed by filtration and activated carbon adsorption to remove all
particulates and organic compounds.

Soil Treatment:

• The remedies selected in the ROD for soil remediation uses a combination of Soil Washing
and In-Situ Soil Flushing to treat creosote compounds in site soils.  In addition, bioremediation
can be used on site if the responsible party can demonstrate bioremediation is as effective as soil
washing.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. "No Action"
2. In Situ stabilization/capping
3. Offette landfill
4. On-*tte incineration
5. In Situ bloromedlatlon
6. Offette incineration
7. In SRu blotreatment of ground water
8. Carbon adsorption, air stripping
9. Aerated tank treatment-ground water
             Reason Not Chosen
Doe* not meet remedial objectives
Not as effective as selected remedy
Not as effective as selected remedy
Difficult to Implement, not accepted by community
Not as effective as selected remedy
Cost effectiveness
Not as effective as selected remedy
Implementation problems
Cost effectiveness
e The Remedial Design (RD) began in 7/90 and was completed 1/95.
e The Remedial Action (RA), construction of the site remedy, began in the summer of 1995.

Community Involvement 	
e Community Involvement Plan: Developed 3/85, revised 2/89 and again 7/91.
e Open houses and workshops:  9/85, 4/92, 1/93
e Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting: 8/88
e ROD Fact Sheet:  10/88
e Milestone Fact Sheets:  4/87, 7/87, 9/90, 5/91, 4/92

• Citizens on site mailing list:  56
• Constituency Interest:  Low -  no specific concerns, just desire for the site to be cleaned up.

e Site Repository:    Houston Central Library, Government Documents Area, 500 McKinney
                    Street, Houston, TX 77002
SOUTH CAVALCADE STREET
                                  December 5, 1995

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
  Availability Notice:  4/4/89 Re-advertised 9/90 (mailing)
  Letters of Intent Received:
       1) LIFT Endowment Fund, Inc. - 2/8/90 (withdrawn)
  Final Application Received: North & South Cavalcade St. Group 12/93 and 9/94.
  Grant Award:  Applications denied.
  Current Status: Some apparent organized citizen groups; grant application package mailed to
5th Ward Community at Risk Coalition.
Fiscal and Program Management
                                                                      6SF-AT
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Glenn Celerier, 214-665-6523, Mail Code:
  State Contact: Lei Medford (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Olivia BalandrSn, 214-665-6584, Mail Cd: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Jon Weisburg, 214-665-2180, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman. 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  Fluor Daniel Inc., (EPA Oversight)

Co»t Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)

• PRPs Identified: Four
• Viable PRP:  Koppers Co., Inc. (Successor Beazer East, Inc.) conducted RI/FS under terms of
an Administrative Order on  Consent, and is conducting RD/RA under a Consent Decree.
• Beazer signed the Consent Decree for RD/RA on June 11, 1990, which was entered by
Southern District Court of Texas on March 14, 1991.
• Under terms of the Consent Decree, Beazer East, Inc. paid EPA $500,000 reimbursement for
past costs.  Payment was received 4/91.
 Present Status and Issues  	—	
 • After conducting site investigations at the South Cavalcade Street site, the EPA determined
 that no immediate actions currently are needed to make the site safe while awaiting further
 design of cleanup activities.
 • PRPs finalized the RD for this site, and began remedy construction in summer 1995.
 • An Administrative Order on Consent  (AOC) with the remaining PRPs (current landowners -
 deminimus) was effective 7/27/92.                                                ...
 • The AOC secured payment of remaining past costs, guaranteed access for remedial activities,
 and established institutional controls on land use and grounJwater protection.
 • Construction of the remedy is ongoing.
 Cleanup  Measurements	

 • Upon completion of the remedy, 7,600 cubic yards of creosote-contaminated soil and
 contaminated ground water will have been treated.
 December 6, 1995
                                                                SOUTH CAVALCADE STREET

-------
S1KES DISPOSAL  PITS
TEXAS
EPA ID#TXD980513956
Site Description

Location:
                                            EPA REGION 6
                                      CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 09
                                                Harris County
• The site is located about two miles southwest of Crosby, immediately north of
U.S. Highway 90, and roughly 20 miles northeast of Houston, Harris County,
Texas
Population:    • Approximately 10,000 people reside in Crosby and the surrounding
             communities.

Sotting:       • The nearest residence and nearest drinking water well are 1,000 feet from the
             site.
             • The site is comprised of approximately 185 acres.
             • Evidence of uncontrolled waste dumping is found throughout the site.
             • The site is bordered by the San Jacinto River on the west, Jackson Bayou on
             the north, and U.S. Highway 90 on the south.

Hydrology:    • The site is characterized by river alluvium overlying Texas Coastal Plain
             deposits.
             • Shallow water-bearing zones occur in the alluvium.
             • A second water producing zone is found in a sandy silt zone of the Coastal
             Plain Deposits at about a 65 foot depth.
             • The Chicot and Evangeline Aquifers occur below this zone, beneath several
             hundred feet of clay.
             • The site lies within the 100-year floodplain of San Jacinto River.
Wastes and Volumes
• A wide variety of organic and inorganic wastes were deposited indiscriminately at the site.

• Waste volumes at the site were approximately as follows:

                         o 12.5 million gallons contaminated ground and surface water;
                         o 83,000 cubic yards of organic sludges;
                         o 285,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils; and
                         o 2000 drums of mixed waste.
                                                                    December 6, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and Ranking
                         NPL LISTING HISTORY
                            Site MRS Score: 61.62
                            Proposed Date: 10/23/81
                              Final Date: 9/08/83
                              NPL Update: No. 1
Site Map and Diagram
                        Sikes Disposal Pits
 December 5, 1995
                                                        SIKES DISPOSAL PITS

-------
Ths Remediation Process  —	

Site History:                          c

• In the early to late 1960's a variety of chemical wastes from the area petrochemical companies
were disposed in unlined sand pits onsite.

• Site operation conducted until early 1967, when the facility closed.

• Wastes contained organic chemicals and heavy metals (such as arsenic, mercury, cadmium,
chromium and lead).

• In June 1983, EPA removed approximately 40 cubic yards of phenolic tars and sand, and
landfilled the wastes to an off-site hazardous waste disposal site.  The pit was then backfilled and
covered with clean sand.

• In September, 1986, the Record of Decision for the site was signed that called for incineration
of site wastes.

• During March and April 1988, EPA fenced the site.

• In July 1989, EPA repaired fences due to flooding, and to deny access to children who were
apparently using the site as a playground.

• Remedial Action construction bids were first solicited by the State in September, 1989, but
EPA canceled them as being noncompetitive (only one contractor submitted a bid of $137
million; nearly 150% of the ROD).

• The second, revised, request for proposals resulted in 4 valid bids ranging from $91 to $99
million; IT-Davey's low bid was  accepted in June, 1990.

• Incineration of one billion  pounds of contaminated soils was completed in June, 1994.

Health Considerations:

• Possible human health problems could be caused by contact or ingestion of site contaminants.

• Fishing and hunting activities  occur routinely  around the site.

Other Environmental Risks:

• Surface water and ground water were contaminated.

• The site is in the floodplain and is frequently inundated.

• A large area of sludge overflow extended eastward from the main waste pit to the  San Jacinto
River.
SIKES DISPOSAL PITS
December 5, 1995

-------
Record  of Decision
                                  Signed: September 18, 1986
                             1
• The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Sikes Disposal Pit site called for onsite incineration of
sludges and soils, and treatment of contaminated water; this was accomplished in two phases.
• In the first phase (October 1990 through January 1992), the site was prepared for remediation,
including construction of flood control structures, installation of a temporary incinerator, and
construction of a water treatment facility.
• During the second phase, all wastes were incineration; removal of treatment facilities and site
restoration were completed in 1994.
  Other Remedies Considered

1.     "No Action"

2.     Offslte landfill for
       RCRA sludges

3.     On-sKe landfill

4.     Off-site Incineration

5.     Cap & slurry wall
  Reason Not Chosen	

Too great threat from site, needs action

Does not protect ground water


Does not protect ground water

Too costly

Flooding would cause cap Integrity problems
Communit  Irrtolnement	

• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed  8/83, revised 12/87.
• Open houses and workshops:  1/88,1/89,10/90 (TWC), 2/91, 1/92, 11/92
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  8/86
• ROD Fact Sheet: 9/86
• EPA Milestone Fact Sheets:  1/83, 7/86, 9/86,1/90, 4/90,
• TWC Milestone  Fact Sheets:  12/89, 5/90, 9/90, 12/90, 12/93
• Commemorative event in 1995 with TNRCC to announce completion of cleanup.
• Citizens on site mailing list:  287

• Constituency Interest:

       *  High profile site; moderate/mixed citizen interest. Sikes was included with French Ltd.
       in a $25 billion class action citizen suit.

       *  Community issues include air emissions from the incineration remedy, fear that the
       incinerator would become a permanent  installation and accept wastes from other sites.

 • Site Repository:    Crosby Public Library,  135 Hare Road, Crosby, TX 77532
 December 5, 1995
                                                                       SIKES DISPOSAL PITS

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: 4/88, re-advertised 8/17/90 and 8/31/90
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1) Environmental Relief Committee (ERC) - 4/25/88 (withdrawn)
       2) Barrett-Crosby Civic League (BCCL) - 8/21/90
• Final Application Received: BCCL - 8/26/91
• Grant Award:  3/4/91
• Current Status: The group has selected a Technical Advisor
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Earl G. Hendrick, 214-665-8519, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact:  Jim Sher (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Anne Foster, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator  (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  IT/Davy Joint Venture (Contractor)
                                      Lockwood, Andrews and Newnam (A&E)

Cost Recovery: 'State-lead  (Fund)

• PRPs Identified: 11
• Viable PRP: 10
• Cost recovery to be pursued during and after cleanup activities.
Present Status and  Issues
• A successful "trial burn" demonstrating the operational efficiency of the incinerator was
conducted in April 1992, full operations began in August 1992.
• "ESTER" ("Environmentally Safe, Temporary, Emissions Release" [contractor's term] events
occurred with diminishing frequency as engineering experience was gained.
• Extra quantities found during remedial action may increase cost of project by up to 30%
• Incineration is now finished, the incinerator  facilities have been removed and the site has been
planted with local grasses.
• The preliminary Close Out Rerx>rt documenting completion of construction activities was
signed in January 1995.
Cleanup Measurements
• Removal actions and fencing the site have reduced imminent threats from the site, and
discouraged access to the site by local children.
• 494,000 tons of contaminated soil and sludge, and 350 million gallons of contaminated water
were treated through the incineration remedy.
SIKES DISPOSAL PITS
December 5, 1995

-------

-------
 SOL  LYNN/
 INDUSTRIAL
 TRANSFORMERS
 TEXAS
 EPA ID#  TXD980873327
 EPA REGION 6
NGRESSIONAL DIST. 25
     Harris County
       Houston
     Other Mama*:
ndustrlal Transformer Site
istrlal Transformers (Sol Lynn)
Site Description  	

Location:     • The site is located at 1415, 1417, 1419 S. Loop 610 West in Houston, Harris
            County, Texas.

Population:   • Approximately 2,100 persons live within one mile of site.
            • The greater Houston metropolitan area is one of the 10 largest cities in the
            nation.

Sotting:      • The Houston Astrodqme/Astrodomain recreational facility is within 1/2 mile of
            site.

            • Four Houston city water wells and four private water wells which
            serve more than 10,000 persons are within three miles of this site.

            • These wells are screened at depths exceeding 700 feet.

            • The site is  a former wire and transformer reclamation facility

            • PCB's and  solvents were dumped onsite over a 1-acre area during these
            operations.

Hydrology:    • The site is  within Texas Gulf Coastal Plain, underlain by the Chicot and
            Evangeline Aquifers.
            • Shallow ground water is found at a depth of about 30 feet.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the Industrial Transformers/Sol Lynn site include trichloroethylene
(TCE)in ground water up to 790 parts per million (ppm) and in soils and up to 600 ppm, and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soils ranging to 357 ppm.

o Approximately 2,400 cubic yards of soil and 4.2 million gallons of ground water are
contaminated with site wastes; ground water contamination in the 90-foot zone have not been
determined.
                                                                December 6, 1995

-------
Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 39.65
                               Proposed Date: 10/15/84
                                  Final Date: 3/31/89
                                  NPL Update: No. 2
Site Map and Diagram
                                                  SITE LOCATION
 The Remediation Process	—	

 Stte History:

 • Metals reclamation operations (scrap metals and electrical transformers) were conducted at
 the site by the owner/operator, Sol Lynn, from 1965 to 1975.
 • The owner/operator of a chemical supply business, Ken James of Sila-King, leased the 1415
 property from Sol Lynn from 1975 until 1981.
 • During February through April 1989, the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) fenced the site
 to limit direct access to hazardous chemicals and subsequently removed contaminated surface
 soils.
 • During October 1993 groundwater remediation began.
 December 6, 1995
                                                   SOL LYNN/INDUSTRIAL TRANSFORMERS

-------
Health Considerations:

• Ingestion of TCE from groundwater pose a risk to human health.
• Site soils and drainage pathways are contaminated by PCBs and TCE.

Other Environmental Risks:

• The site is located within 1/2 mile of the Astrodome, Astroworld Amusement Park, several
industrial plants, and apartment complexes frequented by the local population and tourists.
However, there  are no known exposure pathways to any potential receptors.
Record of Decision
                                Signed: March 25,1988 (Source)
                                Amended: September 30, 1992
                              September 23, 1988 (Ground Water)
Ground Water

• The ground water Record of Decision (ROD) selected Air Stripping as the remedial
technology.
• The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (formerly the Texas Water
Commission (TWC)) is the lead agency on implementation of this remedy.

Soil Treatment:

• Chemical Dechlorinization was chosen as the Source Control remedy; a process whereby
contaminated soils are mixed with chemical reagents to remove halogenated organic compounds.
• During pilot/bench testing, the technology performed well; however, upon application in the
field, the process could not be effectively implemented at the Sol Lynn site.
• The Source Control remedy was thus revised in September 1992, and excavation and off-site
disposal was chosen as a final cleanup method for the site.
    Other Remedies Considered
          Reason Not Chosen
1. No Action
2. Collection and Off-site Disposal

3. Deep Well Injection
treatment
4. On-slte Carbon Adsorption
And Discharge
5. On-slte Catalytic Dehydro-
chlorinatlon and Discharge
                                      -Ground Water-
Does not meet statute, does not remedy problem
Does not meet SARA'S preference for treatment;
transportation Is expensive
       Does not meet SARA's preference for

Technical feasibility questioned

Expensive; technical feasibility
questioned.
SOL LYNN/INDUSTRIAL TRANSFORMERS
                                December 6, 1995

-------
    Other Remedies Considered
                             Reason Not Chosen
1. No Action
2. Off-site Landfill
3. Stabilization and Offefte Landfill
4. In-SItu Vitrification
5. Onsite Incineration

6. Off-site incineration
7. Biological Treatment
                                    -Source Corrtrol-
                   Doesnt remedy problem
                   Not SARA preference (Alternate Remedy)
                   Not SARA preference, large volume Increase
                   Questionable technically
                   State objects due to close proximity to Astroworld
                   and Astrodome
                   Cost prohibitive
                   Questionable technically
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 12/85, revised 4/89
• Open houses and workshops:  1989, 4/91, 7/91
• Original Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  2/88 (Source), 8/88 (Ground Water)
• Original ROD Fact Sheet:  5/88 (Source), 10/88 (Ground Water)
• Milestone Fact Sheets: Numerous 1988 press releases (6), 8/89, 2/90, 7/91 (PRPs), 9/92
• EPA Amended Proposed Plan and Public Meeting held : 9/92
• Amended ROD Fact Sheet: 12/92

• Citizens on site mailing list: 104

• Constituency Interest: Generally a low level  of interest- air stripping and chemical
dechlorinization activities prompted numerous complaints about odors.
 • Site Repository:
Houston Central Library, Government Documents Area, 500 McKinney
Street,  Houston, TX 77002
 Technical Assistance Grant
   Availability Notice:  4/89
   Letters of Intent Received:
       1) LIFT Endowment Fund, Inc. - 2/8/90 (withdrawn)
  ' Final Application Received: None
  > Grant Award: N/A

  > Current Status:  No apparent citizen interest in applying for the grant.
 December 6, 1995
                                                      SOL LYNN/INDUSTRIAL TRANSFORMERS

-------
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Glen Celerier, 214-665-8523, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact:  Mary Dunn (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator: Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Courtney Johnson, 214-665-8055, Mail Code:  6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor: Fluor Daniel (Source), Radian Co. (Ground Water)(Design)
                   Maxim Huntington Engineering & Environmental (Groundwater
                   Remediation)

Cost Recovery: PRP-lead (Enforcement) on Source Control, State-lead (Fund) on Ground Water

• PRPs Identified:  3
• Viable PRP:  1

• Source Control remedy implementation by PRP under terms of 1/8/90 Consent Decree
(original ROD) and 12/17/92 Consent Decree (Source - Revised).

Present Status and Issues  	
• Fencing the site and removing approximately 230 drums containing contaminated waste to an
off-site landfill have reduced the possibility of contact with contaminants at the Sol Lynn/
Industrial Transformers site while further cleanup activities are being completed.
• The revised Source Control remedy is compete.
• Groundwater remedial action is underway.
Cleanup  Measurements
• Remedial activities at the Industrial Transformers/Sol Lynn Superfund site have mitigated the
threat from site wastes fo'r 2,100 people living and working within one mile of the site.
• Upon completion of the Source Control remedy, over 2,700 cubic yards of PCB/TCE-
contaminated soil will have been treated and/or removed.
• Air Stripping operations will ultimately treat over 12 million gallons of ground water now
contaminated with TCE.
SOL LYNN/INDUSTRIAL TRANSFORMERS
December 6, 1995

-------

-------
STEWCO, INC.
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD0055337281
      EPA REGION 6
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 01
         Harrison County
Site  Description
Location:     • Harrison County, near east Texas border.
            • 1/2 mile south of Waskom, intersection Highway 9 and Interstate 20.

Population:   • The area is rural, and sparsely populated with only two residents near the site.

Setting:      •"The nearest residence and drinking water well are both 1,850 feet from the site.
            • Location 1 is characterized by two surface impoundments (the site of a removal
            action by EPA in 3/84 to 5/84) and a truck washing area.
            • Pond 1 contains approximately 2085 cubic yards, and pond 2 contains about
            2600 cubic yards.
            • Location 2 is a large evaporation pond with a 52,000 cubic foot capacity.

Hydrology:   • The site overlies the Cypress Aquifer.
Wastes and Volumes
• The wastes found at the site include Di(2-ethyhexyl) phthalate sludge , DDT sludge , and PCE
in water.
• The estimated volumes of site wastes were 6,830 cubic yards.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                            NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                Site HRS Score: 46.86
                               Proposed Date: 10/05/84
                                 Final Date: 10/15/04
                                 NPL Update; No. 2
                                                                 December 6. 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
             Dtecotof»d Suwompy A/ea
                  PlnoForoct
            Stewco Location 2
Pond 2  Pond 1
  Stowco
 Location 1
                                          Gasoline
                                          Plant  . •"
The Remediation Process	—

Site History:

• The Stewco truck cleaning facility was permitted for operation on 8/26/76; the permit was
amended on 12/5/79.
• The operators of Stewco were cited for permit violations in 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982.
• The owners filed for bankruptcy protection in 1983.
• During the period from March through May 1984, at Location 1, EPA and the State of Texas
removed contaminated liquids from two evaporation ponds, which were then treated and
discharged.
• Pond sludges were removed and disposed off-site, ponds were backfilled with clean soil and
capped with clay.
• EPA constructed a fence at the second location after it was determined that emergency
removal of material  from the pond was not necessary.
 December 6, 1995
                                                                         STEWCO, INC.

-------
Health Considerations:

• Residual contaminants associated with the former ponds at Location 1 and the existing pond at
Location 2 do not pose a substantial risk to public health or the environment.

Other Environmental Risks:

« A private drinking water well is located 1,800 ft. upgradient of the site.
• No wells are located downgradient of the site, and residents utilize city water.
e Monitoring wells on-site show signs of minor contamination from the site; however, risks posed
by site contaminants are not substantial.
• Risks posed by volatile organics, not attributed to the site, are significant for future potential
ground water use.
Record of Decision
                                 Signed: September 16,1988
• The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Stewco site selected a remedy of No further action for
both Location 1 and 2.
e Alternatives were  not developed since the 1984 Removal Action was highly'effective in
mitigating the threats posed by the site to human health and the environment.
e A Feasibility Study was not conducted.

Community Involvement  	
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 11/86
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  7/88
• ROD Fact Sheet:  10/88
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  12/87
• NPL Deletion public notice: 8/95

• Citizens on site mailing list: 63
e Constituency Interest:  Very low - only two residents near the site.

• Site Repository:    Waskom City Hall, 304 Texas Avenue, Waskom, TX 75692
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice: None
• Grant Award:  None
• Current Status: No further actions planned for this site.
STEWCO, INC.
December 6, 1995

-------
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact: Greg Tipple (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Anne Miller, 214-665-2169, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:. 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  CH2M HILL

Co»t Recovery: EPA-lead (Fund)

• PRPs Identified: 5
• Viable PRP: 1
• Cost recovery planned if parties can be proved liable.
Present Status  and Issues	

• The site is in Operation & Maintenance; NPL deletion anticipated by late 1995.
• The removal of contaminated waters and sludges from the ponds has eliminated threats to the
public at the Stewco, Inc. site. Although further investigations are being done to identify off-site
sources of the remaining groundwater contamination, surface contamination from the site has
been fully addressed and final site cleanup goals for these sources of contamination have been
achieved.
• The Texas Water Commission is investigating a mobil facility adjacent to the Stewco site.
• Mobil may be responsible for ground water contamination in the area.
Cleanup Measurements
  6,830 cubic yards of contaminated waste to off-site disposal.
  350,000 gallons of contaminated water treated and discharged.
 December 6, 1995
                                                                         STEWCO, INC.

-------
TEX-T1N
CORPORATION
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD062113329
                                       EPA REGION 6
                                    'NQRESSIONAL DISTRICT 09
                                         Galveston County
                                           Othar Namas:
                                     Gulf Chemical Metallurgical
Site Description
Location:
Population:

Setting:
Hydrology
The Tex Tin site is located in a mixed industrial/petrochemical/residential
area at the intersection of State Highway 146 and FM 519 in Texas City,
Galveston County, Texas.
The site is approximately 10 miles north of Galveston, Texas, and the City
of LaMarque is located approximately one mile northwest of the site.

An estimated 21,700 people live within a four-mile radius of the site.

Tex Tin is an inactive tin and copper smelter.
The 170-acre site contains numerous waste handling or disposal areas,
including five waste water treatment ponds, open and closed acid ponds,
slag piles, an inactive (permitted) landfill containing low level radioactive
wastes, and an inactive hydrocarbon recovery facility (Morchem).
Industrial waste disposal facilities and marsh areas are located south and
southwest of the site.

The shallow Chicot Aquifer is comprised of interbedded sedimentary
deposits of sand, gravel silt and clay, and extends from about 60 feet to
about  1,000 feet below the site.
The Chicot aquifer is overlain by shallow transmissive zones which are not
utilized for drinking water supplies.
Wastes and Volumes	

Surface Soils

•     Surface soils have been impacted by constituents released at site.
•     Major contaminants identified are arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead and nickel.
•     Radionuclides and low-level gamma radiation above background levels have been
      detected.

Subsurface Soils

•     Subsurface soils (generally in the upper 2 to 5 feet) have been impacted by site activities.
•     Major contaminants identified were arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead and nickel.
                                                                     December 6, 1995

-------
Former Acid Ponds
       Fill and sediment in ponds exceed background concentrations for various inorganic
       constituents and have a low pH.
       Radionuclides above background levels, and volatile organic compounds, were identified
       in some of the former ponds.
Slag Piles
       Piles have high concentrations of inorganic constituents.
       Several piles were identified that had high levels of gamma radiation and levels of
       radium-226 above background.
Ground water
       Shallow transmissive zone has been impacted by site activities.  Inorganic constituents
       (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel
       and selenium) and several organic constituents exceed MCLs and upgradient ground
       water concentrations.  Radium-226 and radium-228 exceed MCLs in some shallow ground
       water samples.
       Medium transmissive zone has been impacted by inorganic constituents to a lesser degree
       than the shallow transmissive zone. Concentrations of various inorganic constituents
       exceed maximum concentration limits (MCLs).
       The deep transmissive zone appears to have low levels of contamination with some
       inorganic constituents slightly above MCLs.
 Site Assessment and Ranking
                                NPL LISTING HISTORY
                                    Site HRS Score: 38.43
                                   Proposed Date: 6/24/88
                                     Final Date: 8/30/90
                                     NPL Update: No. 7

                             Site listing was challenged by PRPs,
                             and after court actions, the site was
                             removed from the NPL on 5/11/93.
 December 6, 1995
                                                                    TEX-T1N CORPORATION

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                                                          Galveston
                                                               Bay
                               Tex Tin
The Remediation Process  	

Site History:

•     The site was originally developed as a tin smelting operation by the U.S. Government
      during World War II.  Wah Chang Corporation bought the site after the war and sold it
      in 1970 to Associated Metals and Minerals which operated the site under the name of
      Gulf Chemical and Metallurgical Company until 1984, when the name was changed to
      Tex Tin Corporation.
•     Tin was processed at the facility from 1941 until 1989; secondary copper smelting began
      in 1989. All smelting operations ceased in April 1991.
•     In 1969 Amoco Chemical Co. purchased about 27 acres on the eastern portion of the
      site.
•     Amoco Chemical Company and Tex Tin Corporation entered into an Administrative
      Order on Consent in 1990 to perform a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
      (RI/FS).
•     The RI field work was concluded in August 1992, and development of the RI report, the
      Risk Assessment report, and the Feasibility Study report began.  The RI report was
      finalized in August 1993.
•     Tex Tin Corporation challenged the NPL listing in Federal Appeals Court. Oral
      arguments were presented May 23, 1991.
TEX-T1N CORPORATION
December 6. 1995

-------
•      On June 14, 1991, the Court issued its determination that EPA had not provided
       sufficient information to support the conclusion made in the HRS package that arsenic
       couid reasonably be released from waste piles.
•      The Court remanded the NPL listing to EPA for "a reasoned explanation" of why arsenic
       is likely to be released from the waste piles.
•      A hearing on the NPL listing status was held on April 5, 1993.
•      On May 11, 1993, The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
       ordered Tex Tin deleted from the NPL.
•      In a June 18, 1993, letter from EPA to the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
       Commission (TNRCC), the site was referred to the TNRCC. TNRCC subsequently
       designed a special study to collect data to evaluate the site under the federal Hazard
       Ranking System (HRS).
•      TNRCC completed the special study and submitted the results to EPA as a draft HRS
       documentation  record. In  a letter dated October 5, 1994, TNRCC requested EPA to
       evaluate the Tex Tin site for re-proposal on the NPL.

Health Considerations:

•      Potential human exposure  risks include inhalation of particulates from  site soils,
       incidental ingestion of sediments, soils, and shallow ground water, and  dermal contact
       with soils.
•      Inorganic constituents released at the site have impacted the surface soils, subsurface soils
       and ground water.
•      All wells within a  1-mile radius of the site are completed in deeper aquifers where
       contamination has not been identified.

Oth«r Environmental Risks:

•      There is a low-level radioactive material buried in a permitted landfill.  Radionuclides
       and low-level gamma  radiation were detected on the site during the Remedial
       Investigation.
Record of Decision
                                No Record of Decision to Date
J
Community involvement
       Community Involvement Plan: Developed 8/90
       Open houses and workshops: 4/90, 5/90, 6/90
       Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  N/A
       ROD Fact Sheet:  N/A
       Milestone Fact Sheets:  8/88, 5/90, 6/90, 9/90, 12/90, 2/91 (by PRPs)
       Citizens on site mailing list:  152
       Constituency Interest:  Residents are primarily concerned with airborne dust
       contaminants and off-ske migration of contamination from storm water runoff; site is
       located in a heavily industrialized area.
       Site Repository:      Moore Memorial Library, 1701 Ninth Avenue North, Texas City,
                           TX 77590
 December 6, 1995
                                                                    TEX-T1N CORPORATION

-------
Technical Assistance Grant
•     Availability Notice:  9/89,  Re-advertised 8/90
•     Letters of Intent Received:
             1) Tex Tin Area Citizens Group - 12/2/89 (withdrawn 8/90)
             2) Environmental Protection Advisory Group - 2/28/92
•     Final Application Received:  12/92
•     Grant Award: Pending
•     Current Status:  All grant paperwork is in order; award is on hold pending resolution of
      NPL listing challenge by PRPs.  '

Fiscal and Program Management 	
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Gary A. Baumgarten, 214-665-6749, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  State Contact: Glenda Champagne (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA): Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA):  Pam Travis. 214-665-8056, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:
Cost Recovery: PRP Lead (Enforcement)
•     PRPs Identified: 130
•     Viable  PRP:  Not Determined
•     Administrative Order on Consent with site PRPs for conduct of RI/FS was signed on
      3/30/90.
Present Status and  Issues
•     The site is not currently listed on the NPL.

Cleanup Measurements   	

•     Not established at this time.
TEX-T1N CORPORATION
December 6, 1995

-------

-------
TEXARKANA  WOOD
PRESERVING C

EPA ID# TXD008056152
                                           A REGION 6
                                           :SSIONAL DISTRICT 01
                                        v> y. /•^- •> •• v ^ *^j
                                        "^" * i s-T axarkana
                                        "" "  ."^
Site Description
Location:

Population:

Setting:
Hydrology:
 V9iubbock Street, Texarkana, Texas near Texas - Arkansas border

• Approximately 200 people live within a three-mile radius of the site.

  Nearest residence is 500 feet west of site.
 .Most area drinking water comes from Wright Patman Lake (formerly Lake
Texarkana), which is not impacted by the site.
  Former wood preserving operations
  Abandoned equipment, tanks, and buildings
  Onsite retention ponds and evaporation ponds

  Depth to first water zone - 12 feet.
  Sandy soils in the area.
  Ground water is not used in vicinity of sites.
  Confining zone at 110 feet.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the site include polynuclear aromatic compounds (PNAs),
pentachlorophenol (PCP) and dioxins.
• Waste volumes at the site are approximately 67,000 cubic yards of PNA, PCP, and dioxin-
contaminated soil and sludge, and 16,000,000 gallons of contaminated ground water.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                           NPL LISTING HISTORY
                               Site HRS Score: 4O.19
                              Proposed Date: 3/29/85
                                Final Date: 6/10/86
                                NPL Update: No. 3
                                                              December 6, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                                                    Arkansas
                                                Texarkana
            Texarkana Wood
    Operations
    Pood Area
The Remediation Process
 Stt« History:

 • Abandoned wood treating facility operated from 1909 to 1984 under various owners.
 • Prior removal actions have controlled site runoff and restricted public access
 • During the period from December 1986 to October 1990, EPA conducted five (5) removal
 actions to stabilize the site.
 • The site was cleared of vegetation in 2/91.
 December 6, 1995
                                                  TEXARKANA WOOD PRESERVING CO.

-------
Health Considerations:

• Nearest drinking water well is 2,400 feet east of the site.
• Creosote contaminated soils, sludges, present human health hazard
Other Environmental Risks:

• Contamination of ground and surface water; drainage is to the southeast to Day's Creek
Record  of Decision
                                  Signed: September 25, 19920
                               (Source and Shallow Ground Water)
Ground Water

• Extracting, treating, and reinjecting the ground water into the shallow aquifer.

Soil Treatment:

• Excavation of contaminated soils, on-site thermal destruction, and
burial on site.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. Capping

2. Chemical Treating

3. Solidification

4. Biological Treatment

5. Offsite Thermal Destruction

6. "No Action"
  Reason Not Chosen	

No reduction in volume or toxiclty of contaminants.

Only partially effective

Not permanent.

Only partially effective.

Too costly; transportation risks.

Not protective of human health and the
environment.
TEXARKANA WOOD PRESERVING CO.
                                 December 6, 1995

-------
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 12/87, revised 5/91
• Open houses and workshops:  1/88, 6/89, 6/92, 9/92, 1/93
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  7/14/90 (Source), 1/93 (Ground Water)
• ROD Fact Sheet:  10/90 (Source); 2/93 (Groundwater)
• Milestone Fact Sheets: 5/88, 11/90, 2/91, 2/93

• Citizens on site mailing list: 400+ includes Texas and Arkansas residents.

• Constituency Interest:                                                   .
       -  Site cleared of vegetation in February, 1991 in response to local fire officials concerned
       about potential air releases from grass fires on the site.
       -  Opposition to incineration remedy by community became very vocal in 1992.
       -  Arkansas Attorney General filed suit in December 1992 opposing remedy
       implementation; the suit was dismissed.
       -  Congressman Chapman has requested that incineration not be implemented until after
       the OTA and GAO complete their study of incineration safety and the alternatives
       available for remediating the Site.
       -  Incineration placed on hold pending review by Office of Technology Assessment.
       -  General Accounting Office. Visited the community twice to interview citizens and
       assess impact of site issues.


• Site Repository:    Texarkana City Hall, 320 Texas Boulevard, Texarkana, TX 75501
                    Texarkana Public Library, Texarkana, TX
Technical Assistance Grant
   Availability Notice:  1/11/89
   Letters of Intent Received:
       1. Citizens Against Pollution (CAP) - 10/19/92
   Final Application Received: None
   Grant Award: N/A                                                   .
   Current Status:  Working with citizens group to develop interest in an application.

 Fiscal and Program Management	

 • Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Earl Hendrick, 214-665-8519, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
 • State Contact:  Mary Dunn (TNRCC)
 • Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code:
 • Attorney (EPA): Paul Wendel, 214-665-2136, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
 • State  Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code: 6SF-AT
 • Prime Contractor: Roy F. Weston (A&E)
6SF-P
 December 6, 1995
                                                        TEXARKANA WOOD PRESERVING CO.

-------
Cost Recovery:  State-toad (Fund)

• PRPs Identified:  14
• Viable PRP: None
• Cost recovery to occur, if feasible.
Present Status and Issues
• On July 8, 1994, the Regional Administrator asked the State environmental agency to let bids
received from incineration contractors to expire without award to allow the  Congressional Office
of Technology Assessment (OTA) and General Accounting Office (GAO) to complete a study of
incineration and alternatives for the site. Incineration of contaminated soils at this abandoned
creosote site had been selected by EPA under the Superfund law in 1990. Community outreach
efforts and unusually strict operating requirements did not quell objections by some local
residents prompting requests from Congress for OTA and GAO studies that should be
completed in 1996.
Cleanup Measurements
• Over 67,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and sludge will be treated, as well as 16,000,000
gallons of water.
TEXARKANA WOOD PRESERVING CO.
December 6, 1995

-------

-------
TRIANGLE
CHEMICAL COJ
TEXAS
EPA ID#TXD055143705
   EPA REGION 6
NGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 02
      Orange County
Site Description	

Location:     • The site is located 1/2 mile south of Orange County Airport on Highway 87,
            Bridge City, Orange County, Texas.
            • The site is bounded by Coon Bayou and the highway.

Population:    •The area is moderately populated, with 15 permanent residents and 50 mobile
            homes within 1/4 mile of the site.

Setting:        The nearest residence is 200 feet south of the site.
             The facility covers 2.3-acre, with three buildings onsite.
             30 above-ground storage tanks have been removed.

Hydrology:     A shallow water bearing zone is found 5-8 feet below surface.
             The drinking water zone is 300-700 feet below surface.
Wastes and Volumes
• The principal pollutants at the site included ethylbenzene, benzene, chlorobenzene in tanks
and soils prior to remediation.
• Site waste volumes were approximately 53,000 gallons of liquid in tanks, and 3,200 cubic yards
of contaminated soil.
Site Assessment and Ranking
                           NPL LISTING HISTORY
                               Site HRS Score: 28.75
                              Proposed Date: 12/30/82
                                Final Data: 9/08/83
                                NPL Update: No. 1
                                                               December 6, 1995

-------
Site Map and Diagram
                                     oo
                                     oo
                                Tanks  O
                                       O
Broussard
 Property
                                   Triangle
The Remediation Process	

Sit* History:

• From 1970 to 1981, the site operated as a chemical mixing facility for automotive fluids.
• The site was abandoned in 1981 and placed in custody of the bankruptcy court.
• During April through August 1982, EPA installed a fence, removed drums, bulked and
solidified contaminated soils, then sent soils and equipment to a permitted landfill.
• Approximately 1,000 55-gallon drums, 21,000 gallons  of tank liquids, and 350 cubic yards of
contaminated trash and soil were removed.
• April 1985, EPA repaired the fence and dug a drainage canal after site was vandalized.
• The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for the site was completed in 6/85.

Health Considerations:

• The site is located in a moderately populated area.

Oth«r Environmental Risks:

 • Surface soil was contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
 December 6, 1995
                                                                 TRIANGLE CHEMICAL CO.

-------
Record of Decision
                                   Signed: June 11. 1985
• The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Triangle Chemical site called for deep-well injection of
liquids (53,000 gallons), and mechanical aeration of contaminated soils to release volatile
organics to the atmosphere under controlled conditions.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. Offelte landfill of soils
2. On-stte landfill
3. Capping site
4. "No action-
            Reason Not Chosen
Cost for double-lined facility too high
Cost too high, no available future land use
Contaminant leaching into shallow ground water.
Would not abate threat to health and environment.
Community Involvement
e Community Involvement Plan:  Developed 2/84, revised 11/87
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheet and Public Meeting:  5/85
• ROD Fact Sheet: 6/85
• Milestone Fact Sheets:  11/84, 3/85, 12/86, 1/87, 6/90, 8/90, 1/91
• Citizens on site mailing list:  41
• Constituency Interest:  Low interest at this time - primarily landowners concerned about fish
 kills in the past.
• Site Repository:    City of Orange Public Library, 220 North Fifth Street, West Orange, TX
                   77630

Technical Assistance Grant   	
• Availability Notice:  None
• Grant Award: None
• Current Status: Site is closed out.
Fiscal and Program Management
  Remedial Project Manager (EPA):  Ernest Franke, 214-665-8521, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  State Contact: Emmanuel Ndame (TNRCC)
  Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA):  Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
  Attorney (EPA): Paul Wendell, 214-665-2136, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
  State Coordinator (EPA): Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
  Prime Contractor:  Roy F. Weston, Inc.
TRIANGLE CHEMICAL CO.
                               December 6. 1995

-------
Cost Recovery:  EPA-tead (Fund)

* PRPs Identified:  5
• Viable PRPs:  None
• No enforcement options exist at this time.
Present Status and Issues  	—	

• The initial actions to secure the site and remove contaminated materials, as well as the
completed actions to decontaminate and treat remaining contamination areas, have eliminated
the exposure threat to residents and nearby Coon Bayou.
• Final goals have been achieved for the cleanup of surface contamination.
• The State of Texas is continuing to monitor groundwater at the site to ensure that  water
quality reaches acceptable levels.
• Site Close Out Report signed by the Regional Administrator on 9/27/90, signifying  completion
of remedial action.
• Waste treatment and/or removal is complete and site is secure.
• Five-year review report completed on 7/11/94; report concluded the remedy was still
protective of health and the environment and recommended continued groundwater monitoring.
Cleanup Measurements	—	

• 53,000 gallons of hazardous liquids, and over 3,000 cubic yards of contaminated sludge waste
have'been effectively remediated at the Triangle Chemical site, and the site is currently being
monitored by the State of Texas for remedy effectiveness.
 December 6, 1995
                                                                  TRIANGLE CHEMICAL CO.

-------
UNITED
CREOSOTING  CO.
TEXAS
EPA ID# TXD980745574
                                                    EPA REGION 6
                                               CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 08
                                                      Montgomery County
                                                          Conroe
Site Description   	

Location:     • Conroe, Montgomery County

Population:   • Approximately 13,000 people live within a two-mile radius of the site.

Setting:      • Nearest drinking water well is 1.8 miles southeast of the site, screened 160 feet
            below ground surface.
            • Site is now half residential, half commercial; approximately 100 residences
            onsite.
            • Approximately 100 acres.
            •Two waste lagoons on-site, now covered.

Hydrology:    • Shallow water-bearing zone is 25 feet deep, not currently used.
            • First water-bearing zone used for domestic supply:  100 ft.
            • City of Conroe water supply:  400-1000 feet below surface.
Wastes and Volumes
PRINCIPLE POLLUTANTS:
        Pentachlorophenol - in soil (up to 1,100 ppm) and ground water (50 ppb).
        Creosote compounds - in soil (up to 15,000 ppm) and ground water (100 ppb).
VOLUME:
        13,000 cubic yards of soil in two surface lagoons.
        67,250 cubic yards of contaminated soil
        43,000,000 gallons of contaminated ground water
Site Assessment and Ranking
                           NPL LISTING HISTORY
                               Site HRS Score: 37.29
                               Proposed Date: 9/08/83
                                Final Date: 9/21/84
                                NPL Update: No. t
                                                               December 6. 1995

-------
Site  Map and Diagram
                                                            ontgomery
                                                          County
                                                          Airport
                 United
             Oroosoting
The Remediation  Process  	——

Stte History:

• United Creosoting operated from 1946 - 1972 as a wood treating facility.
• Redevelopment of abandoned site for commercial and residential use began in 1977.
 Health Considerations:

 • Residences were constructed on the site of an impoundment contaminated with hazardous
 materials.
 Other Environmental Risks:

 • Ground water is contaminated.
 December 6. i995
                                                            UNITED CREOSOTING CO.

-------
Record of Decision
                                  Signed: September 30,1988
                            J
  INTERIM REMEDY: Temporary Cap, Future Disposal
  Other Remedies Considered
                 Reason Not Chosen
1.  Onsite landfill
2.  Onsite Incineration
3.  Off-site landfill
4.  Off-site incineration
5.  Permanent cap & slurry wall
       Not permanent Remedy
       Potential public opposition
       No facility available
       Facility not yet available
       Not permanent remedy
                                 Signed: September 29, 1989
                            J
• PERMANENT REMEDY: Critical Fluid Extraction and Reburial of Clean Soils Onsite;
Off-site Incineration of Liquid Organic Concentrate.
  Other Remedies Considered

1. No Action

2. Capping



3. On-slte Incineration


4. Biological Treatment


5. Off-site Incineration
          Reason Not Chosen
Inadequate protection of human health and the
environment.
If the caps are damaged or not maintained properly,
risk from potential exposure to the untreated
contaminants; inadequate protection of the
environment [ground water].
This alternative was not favored by the community;
costs are higher for this alternative than the
selected remedy.
The toxlcity of dtoxins and furans was not
significantly affected by this treatment process
(treatabiltty study).
Transport and Increased handling of the high
volume of contaminated soils create short-term risk
considerations during implementation.  In addition,
the costs for this alternative were nearly 10 times
greater than those for the selected remedy.
UNITED CREOSOTING CO.
                                December 6, 1995

-------
Community Involvement
• Community Involvement Plan: Developed 5/84, revised 4/91.
• Open houses and workshops: 8/83, 2/84, 1/86, 8/86, 5/88, 12/89, 5/90, 7/90, 5/91, 10/91, and
numerous open houses on relocation during 1991, 1992, and 1993.
• Proposed Plan Fact Sheets and Public Meetings: 8/86 (Interim),  7/89 (Permanent).
• ROD Fact Sheet: 10/86 (Interim Remedy) and 11/89 (Permanent Remedy).
• EPA Fact Sheets: 3/87, 6/87, 3/88, 5/88, 2/89, 12/89, 1/90, 2/90, 4,5,6/90, 8,9/90, 11/90.
• TNRCC Fact Sheets: 3/88, 6/88, 3/89, 1/91, 4/91, 5/93, 1994

• Citizens  on site mailing list: 232

• Constituency Interest:  High interest concerning health hazards, decreasing property values,
and requests for buyouts.  Community interest lessening as remediation is completed.

• Site Repository:    Montgomery County Library, 400 North San Jacinto, Conroe, TX 77301
Technical Assistance Grant
• Availability Notice:  2/89, readvertised 9/90.
• Letters of Intent Received:
       1) Tanglewood Assistance Group - 9/27/89 (withdrawn)

• Grant Award: None

• Current Status: No apparent interest in applying for grant.
Fiscal and Program Management
• Remedial Project Manager (EPA): Earl Hendrick, 214-665-8519, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
• State Contact: Jim Sher (TNRCC)
• Community Involvement Coordinator (EPA: Donn Walters, 214-665-6483, Mail Code: 6SF-P
• Attorney (EPA):  Courtney Johnson, 214-665-8055, Mail Code: 6SF-DL
• State Coordinator (EPA):  Shirley Workman, 214-665-8522, Mail Code:  6SF-AT
• Prime Contractor:  CF Systems (Contractor for contaminant  removal) ACE (General
                    Contractor) Roy F. Weston (A&E)
 Coat Recovery: EPA and State-Lead

 • PRPs Identified: 10
 • Viable PRP: 1
 • Cost recovery possibility
 December 6, 1995
                                                                UNITED CREOSOTING CO.

-------
Present Status and Issues
• Remediation of residential soils has been completed and yards restored.
• Remedial Action field activities to start in December 1995.
• Partial deletion of the site from the NPL is anticipated in late 1995 or early 19%.
Cleanup Measurements
• The cleanup at the United Creosote Company Superfund site has mitigated risks from 67,000
cubic yards of contaminated soil.
UNITED CREOSOTING CO.
December 6, 1995

-------

-------