United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
Publication 9320.7-071
September 1997
Descriptions of Six Final
Sites Added to the National
Priorities List in September 1997
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
State & Site Identification Center (5204G) ^
Intermittent Bulletin
yVolume 4, Number 2
This document consists of descriptions of the six final sites added to the National Priorities List (NPL) in September
1997. The size of the site is generally indicated, based on information available at the time the site was scored using the
Hazard Ranking System (HRS) or nominated using ATSDR health advisory criteria. The size may change as additional
information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. Sites are arranged alphabetically by site name.
CLEANING UP UNDER SUPERFUND
The Superfund program is managed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is
authorized by the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA),
enacted on December 11, 1980, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA), enacted on October 17, 1986. In October 1990,
SARA was extended to September 30, 1994. An
appropriation by Congress for Fiscal Year 1995
authorized Superfund to continue to operate. The
Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund set up by
CERCLA as amended pays the costs not assumed by
responsible parties for cleaning up hazardous waste sites
or emergencies that threaten public health, welfare, or the
environment; Superfund also pays for overseeing
responsible parties conducting cleanup.
Two types of responses may be taken when a
hazardous substance is released, or threatens to be
released, into the environment:
• Removal actions — emergency-type responses to
imminent threats. SARA limits these actions to
1 year and/or $2 million, with a waiver possible if
the actions are consistent with remedial
responses. Removal actions can be undertaken by
the private parties responsible for the releases or
by the Federal government using the Superfund.
• Remedial responses - actions intended to
provide permanent solutions at uncontrolled
hazardous waste sites. Remedial responses are
generally longer-term and more expensive than
removals. A Superfund-financ sd remedial
response can be taken only if a site is on the NPL.
EPA published the first NPL in September 1983.
The list must be updated at least annually.
EPA's goals for the Superfund program are to:
• Ensure that polluters pay to clean up the problems
they created; and
* Work first on the worst problems at the worst
sites, by making sites safe, making sites clean, and
bringing new technology to bear on the problem.
-------
REMEDIAL RESPONSES
The money for conducting a remedial response at a
hazardous waste site and a removal action, as well, can
come from several sources:
• The individuals or companies responsible for the
problems can clean up voluntarily with EPA or
State supervision, or they can be forced to clean
up by Federal or State legal action.
• A State or local government can choose to assume
the responsibility to clean up without Federal
dollars.
• Superfund can pay for the cleanup, then seek to
recover the costs from the responsible party or
parties.
A remedial response, as defined by the National
Contingency Plan, the Federal regulation by which
Superfund is implemented, is an orderly process that
generally involves the following steps:
• Take any measures needed to stabilize conditions,
which might involve, for example, fencing the site
or removing above-ground drums or bulk tanks.
• Undertake initial planning activities to scope out a
strategy for collecting information and analyzing
alternative cleanup approaches.
• Conduct a remedial investigation to. characterize
the type and extent of contamination at the site and
to assess the risks posed by that contamination.
• Conduct a feasibility study to analyze various
cleanup alternatives. The feasibility study is often
conducted concurrently with the remedial
investigation as one project. Typically, the two
together take from 18 to 24 months to complete
and cost approximately $1.3 million.
• Select the cleanup alternative that:
- Protects human health and the environment;
- Complies with Federal and State
requirements that are applicable or relevant
and appropriate;
- Uses permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery
technology to the maximum extent
practicable;
-- Considers views of the State and public; and
- Is "cost effective" — that is, affords results
proportional to the costs of the remedy.
• Design the remedy. Typically, the design phase
takes 6 to 12 months to complete and costs
approximately $1.5 million.
• Implement the remedy, which might involve, for
example, constructing facilities to treat ground
water or removing contaminants to a safe disposal
area away from the site.
EPA expects the implementation (remedial action)
phase to average out at about $25 million per site (plus
any costs to operate and maintain the action), and some
remedial actions may take several years to complete.
The State government can participate in a remedial
response under Superfund in one of two ways:
• The State can take the lead role under a
cooperative agreement, which is much like a grant
in that Federal dollars are transferred to the State.
The State then develops a workplan, schedule, and-
budget, contracts for any services it needs, and is
responsible for making sure that all the conditions
in the cooperative agreement are met. In contrast
to a grant, EPA continues to be substantially
involved and monitors the State's progress
throughout the project.
• EPA can take the lead under a Superfund State
Contract, with the State's role outlined. EPA,
generally using contractor support, manages work
early in the planning process. In the later design
and implementation phases, contractors do the
work under the supervision of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Under both arrangements,
the State must share in the cost of the
implementation phase of cleanup.
CERCLA requires that EPA select the remedy.
-------
National Priorities List Final Rule #19
Narrative Summaries
Site Name and Location
Central Chemical (Hagerstown), Hagerstown, Maryland
Del Amo, Los Angeles, California
Grand Street Mercury, Hoboken, New Jersey
Oeser Co, Bellingham, Washington
Ordnance Products, Inc., Cecil County, Maryland
Sprague Road Ground Water Plume, Odessa, Texas
.3
-------
xvEPA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
September 1997
CSWER/OERR
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
Washington, DC 20460
CENTRAL CHEMICAL (HAGERSTOWN)
Hagerstown, Maryland
Conditions at Proposal (June 19%): Central Chemical blended and produced pesticides and fertilizers at the 19-acre
site on North Jonathan Street in Hagerstown, Washington County, Maryland from the 1930s until 1968. Pesticide
operations ceased in 1968 and the company only produced fertilizer from 1968 until closure in 1984. Currently the
site is leased for warehousing, auto rebuilding, and other purposes. .
The site consists of three sources: an old stone quarry, a sinkhole, and an area of contaminated soil. Soluble
materials such as DDT, chlordane, and other pesticides and wastes that became out-of-date or were banned by the
government were buried in the old stone quarry. Insoluble wastes were buried in trenches or sinkholes throughout
areas east and northeast of the quarry. Following the discovery of elevated concentrations of pesticides and heavy
metals in 1976, the State of Maryland ordered Central Chemical to investigate and stabilize the site. After complying
with these orders by'capping the quarry and sinkhole areas with clay and soil and vegetating these areas, the State
issued a Notice of Compliance to Central Chemical on December 14, 1979.
After discovering an on-site dump area during the excavation of a sewer line in 1987, the State began negotiating a
Consent Order with Central Chemical to clean up the site. To date, Central Chemical has not signed this order.
Through, the Cooperative Agreement with EPA, the State conducted an expanded site inspection at Central Chemical
in May of 1993. DDT was detected at elevated levels in sediment samples taken from the storm water runoff system
and Antietam Creek. Antietam Creek is used for fishing and recreational purposes. High levels of DDT and other
pesticides were also detected in soil samples on and near the site.
Status (September 1997): EPA has conducted additional sampling at.the site. Central Chemical extended the fence
to enclose the contaminated area in response to the discovery of contaminated soil outside the former fence line.
[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description
may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600,
February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
OEPA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
September 1997
OSWER/OERR
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
Washington, DC 20460
DEL AMD
Los Angeles, California
Conditions at Proposal (June 1996): The Del Amo site is located in the city of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County,
California. From the early 1940s to the early 1970s, a synthetic rubber manufacturing facility operated on site. The
facility consisted of a butadiene plant, a styrene plant, and a copolymer plant; the butadiene and styrene were
combined to produce synthetic rubber. In 1972, the entire 280-acre facility was sold to a land development company.
The three plants were dismantled and the site was commercially developed. Current land use includes light
industrial/manufacturing and commercial office space. The Montrose Chemical Corporation site, another EPA
Superfund site, is located approximately 600 feet west of the Del Amo site.
A 1993 phase I remedial investigation identified likely sources for groundwater contamination in eight areas.
However, the Del Amo site consists of one area, Area 8 (Del Amo pit). This area occupies approximately 4 acres
in the southern portion of the site and consists of six disposal pits and two evaporation ponds. The pits and ponds
received process wastes such as sulfur tar oil, acid sludge, clay-like sludge, and propane cracking oils from the styrene
manufacturing plant. The pits and ponds are currently covered with fill material, weeds, and miscellaneous debris,
and the parcel is surrounded by a double row of fences. The waste remaining in the pits contains hydrocarbons with
high polynuclear aromatic and volatile aromatic content, which correlates with the chemistry of the styrene
manufacturing process wastes.
Contaminated soil associated with the pits has come to be located below the top of the water table beneath the Del
• Amo site, due to rising ground water levels. Soil sampling results indicate that, by 1987, hazardous substances from
the waste in the pits had migrated to a depth of at least 57 feet belpw ground surface (bgs). In 1987, the water table
was first encountered at a depth of 59 feet bgs. In 1993, the water table had risen to a minimum depth of 40 feet bgs.
There are 13 municipal drinking water wells within 4 miles of the Del Amo site.
Status (September 1997): The RI/FS is continuing for ground water. A joint ground water feasibility study is being
done with Montrose. A treatability and modeling study is continuing near well MW-20. The EPA is planning the
second phase of the RI, which focusses on soils and surface threats at the site.
[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description
may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600,
February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
&EPA
OSWER/OERR
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
September 1997
Washington, DC 2046f
GRAND STREET MERCURY
Hoboken, New Jersey
Conditions at Proposal (December 1996): The Grand Street Mercury site is located at 720 and 722-732 Grand
Street, Hoboken, Hudson County, New Jersey. The site comprises two buildings, a former industrial building
converted into 16 residential/studio spaces with the area of each space between 2,600 and 3,500 square feet and a
,four story townhouse also slated for residential renovation. The former industrial building is approximately 100
feet by 150 feet, five stories high and is constructed of brick and masonry with interior wooden structural and
flooring systems. The townhouse is approximately 25 feet by 40 feet, four stories high and also constructed of
brick and masonry with wooden structural and flooring systems. The surrounding area is a mix of
residential/commercial and industrial properties. Hoboken High School is located across the street to the
northeast. More than 40,000 residents live in a one-half mile radius from the site.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), on January 22, 1996, issued a Public Health
Advisory (PHA) that proclaimed "an imminent public health hazard is posed to residents of 722 Grand Street from
past, current and potential future exposures via inhalation, direct dermal contact and possible ingestion of metallic
(elemental) mercury and mercury vapor." In addition, the PHA states "the potential exists for mercury-
contaminated possessions to be taken out of the building to continue to expose residents of 722 Grand Street,
contaminate other areas and expose other members of the public." The PHA recommended that the residents be
dissociated from mercury exposure in the 722 Grand Street building.
Elevated concentrations of mercury have been detected in urine samples from residents. Adverse health effects
are associated with mercury levels greater than 20 //g/L (micrograms per liter). Mercury concentrations ranged
from 3 to 102 Mg/L, and 20 samples had mercury concentrations equal to or greater than 20 /ug/L. The elevated
concentrations of mercury detected ha the residents may be associated with subtle neurological changes and renal
tubule effects. A removal action was conducted to dissociate the affected residents from the metallic mercury and
mercury vapors, prevent further off-site migration of mercury, and to assess the extent of the mercury
contamination. All residents had vacated the building by January 11, 1996.
A mercury contamination study conducted at the site determined that mercury is widespread and remediation for
residential use is highly unlikely (mercury has been observed in the floor boards^within 13 of 16 residential units
and concentrations of mercury absorbed into ulterior brick within common areas exceeds 9,100 parts per million).
The site conditions are a result of a prolific production of mercury vapor lamps and mercury connector switches,
over 55 years of operation, and absorption of mercury into the porous wood and brick comprising the building.
The extent of mercury contamination coupled with an extremely low residential standard makes cleanup highly
unlikely.
Status (September 1997): EPA completed a Focussed Feasibility Study in early July 1997, which included a
technical engineering evaluation and risk assessment, and released a Proposed Plan for remedial action at the Site
inviting public comment on the preferred remedy. In mid July 1997, EPA conducted a public meeting to explain
the remedial alternatives developed, provide rationale for selection of preferred alternative and answer questions.
The preferred remedial alternative includes permanent relocation for the displaced site residents; demolition of the
buildings; remediation of contaminated site soil; and groundwater investigations. PRPs assumed building
maintenance and site security activities from EPA hi August 1997. Dissociated residents of the Site remain in an
ongoing EPA-administered temporary relocation program.
[The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may
change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600,
February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.}
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
EPA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
September 1997
OSWER/OERR
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
Washinqton, DC 20460
OESERCO
Bellingham, Washington
•
Conditions at Proposal (December 1996): The Oeser Company site is a wood treating facility located in the
northwestern portion of the City of Bellingham, Washington. The facility comprises approximately 23.5 acres and
is surrounded by mixed residential and industrial properties. The terrain at the site is relatively flat, but south of the
site the terrain drops steeply into a ravine drained by Little Squalicum Creek. The creek is fed by storm water
discharges from several outfalls and by ground water and flows approximately 2,100 feet from the Oeser Company
outfall into Bellingham Bay.
The Oeser Company has operated at the site since 1939 and prepares and treats wood poles for utility companies.
Creosote [which contains semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)] was used as the chemical treating agent until
1973. Pentachlorophenol {PCP) has been used on site since the 1960s in both pressure and thermal treatment.
An expanded site inspection (ESI) was conducted by Ecology and Environment, Inc., (E & E) in August/September
1995 at the request of the EPA. Sampling and analysis identified five sources of contamination at the site: the PCP
treatment system, the retort drip pad, the treated pole drying areas, gravel filtration beds, and contaminated soil. An
observed release to air of several VOCs and SVOCs including PCP was established with ESI air samples collected
August 30 and 31, 1996 and September 6, 7, and 8, 1996. Levels of 1-methyl-benzene, ethyl benzene, and
naphthalene were above health based benchmarks. An observed release to Little Squalicum Creek of PCP and several
other SVOCs was established with sediment and/or surface water samples.
Little Squalicum Creek is considered a fishery by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; however,
fish can no longer survive in the creek due to contamination present. Bellingham Bay and Puget Sound support large
commercial, recreational, and tribal fisheries. The peregrine falcon, the bald eagle, and numerous wetlands are also
in the vicinity of the site.
EPA is considering various alternatives for the site.
Status (September 1997): An EPA Removal Assessment was conducted in January, February, and in April 1997.
Significant levels of PCP and PAHs were detected in surface and subsurface soil, in shallow ground water, and hi a
deep aquifer. The assessment also revealed elevated levels of dioxins in surface soil. Inability to reach agreement
on the scope of removal actions resulted in EPA issuing a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to the Company
to conduct the work EFA has determined necessary to abate immediate health threats. Work is expected to be
underway by September, 1997.
[The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may
change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February
11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
September 199 j
OSWER/OERR
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
Washinqton, DC 20460
ORDNANCE PRODUCTS, INC.
Cecil County, Maryland
j*
Conditions at Proposal (May 1993): The Ordnance Products, Inc. (OPI), site is. located 2 miles northeast of the
Town of North East in Cecil County, Maryland. The 94.6-acre property, currently occupied by an industrial park
and warehousing facility known as Mechanics Valley Trade Center (MVTC), is located in a rural area. OPI
purchased the property in 1960 and began operating an ordnance manufacturing facility. During the Vietnam conflict,
OPI manufactured grenade fuses,, detonation devices, smoke grenades, and other types of ordnance. Some :off-
specification ordnance was burned hi open pits and ordnance was buried onsite. The waste water resulting from
manufacturing operations was disposed of into five unlined surface impoundments. Kraus Design, Inc. (KDl) became
a holding company for OPI in 1969. OPI ceased manufacturing ordnance in 1972 and closed the facility. In 1986,
the site was purchased by MVTC, which planned to develop the site as an industrial park. Since that time MVTC,
and the site were sold but retained the MVTC corporate entity. MVTC is currently, renting buildings in a secure
portion of the site to several tenants.
In 1987, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) discovered the site while investigating a nearby
property. An extensive MDE sampling program detected elevated levels of metals such as selenium and barium in
onsite soils, ground water, and surface water. MDE also detected elevated concentrations of trichloroethene; 1,2-
dichloroethene; tetrachloroethene;, vinyl chloride; and xylene in two onsite wells and four offsite residential drinking
water wells. One onsite well is currently connected to an air stripping tower and is still used as a water source.
On June 27, 1988, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order under CERCLA Section 106(a) requiring KDI to
investigate the extent of soil contamination and the amount of buried ordnance onsite. The order requires KDI to (1)
remove all contaminated soils and buried ordnance from the site, (2) determine the extent the contaminated ground
water plume has migrated both on- and offsite, and (3) install a water treatment system on all residential wells where
concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have exceeded EPA's Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs).
In response, KDI has (1) installed 10 offsite ground water monitoring wells to facilitate the offsite hydrogeological
study, (2) installed activated carbon filtration units on four residential drinking water wells, and is maintaining the
units and sampling the wells every 6 weeks, and (3) removed some drums and ordnance that had been buried onsite.
KDI's investigation identified the following hazardous waste sources, some of which KDI has already removed under
the order: drums scattered over the site, five surface impoundments reportedly used for disposal of plating wastes
and other wastes, three subsurface disposal areas.containing discarded ordnance, three burn areas also containing
ordnance, and other areas of contaminated soil. KDI is continuing to evaluate these sources and also plans to sample
water and sediments of Little Northeast Creek,, which is adjacent to the site.
*
On December 31, 1988, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to MVTC requiring MVTC to maintain site
security and to operate and maintain the onsite air stripper. KDI is continuing to remove all contaminated materials
from the site and the offsite hydrogeological investigation.
Status (September 1997): KDI conducted additional investigations of the sources, ground water, and surface water.
KDI Installed additional monitoring wells and also designed and installed a ground water treatment and recovery
system. Due to financial difficulties, KDI has now been liquidated and is unable to perform any .additional
investigation or remediation at the site. EPA's Removal Program anticipates beginning operation of the ground water
treatment and recovery system shortly.
[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description
may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600,
February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
-EPA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL)
September 1997
OSWER/OERR
State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center
Washington, DC 20460
SPRAGUE ROAD GROUND WATER PLUME
Odessa, Texas
Conditions at Proposal (April 1997): A plume of contaminated ground water has been identified in Odessa, Ector
County, Texas. The precise extent of the plume has not yet been identified; however, based on analyses of ground
water from 14 wells, it is approximately 180 acres In area. The primary contaminant detected in the ground water
plume is chromium. Three chromium plating facilities with various potential sources of contamination have been
identified in the immediate area of the plume - Leigh Metal Plating, Inc.; National Chromium Corporation; and
Machine and Casting, Inc. Several potential sources at these facilities have been presented in the HRS documentation
record as potential sources because of their proximity to the ground water plume and the presence of the same
contaminants as those identified in the plume. However, adequate information is not available to directly attribute
contamination detected at these facilities with the ground water plume. Therefore, the site has been scored based on
a contaminated ground water plume with no single source identified.
Based on analytical results from various investigations conducted at the three facilities, a plume of contaminated
ground water at concentrations ranging up to 5,240 micrograms per liter (/xg/L) has been identified. The ground water
pathway contamination is of concern because of the documentation of observed releases of chromium in ground water
(nine ground water drinking wells and five ground water monitoring wells) and the fact that the contaminated aquifer
is used as a source of drinking water in the area. Seven of the nine drinking water wells have concentrations of
chromium that exceed the Maximum Contaminant Level.
Status (September 1997): EPA conducted a response action by removing solid and liquid wastes at Leigh Metal
Plating and National Chromium, and contaminated soil at Leigh'Metal Plating. Removal actions by EPA resulted in
6,620 gallons of liquid and solid wastes, 156,320 pounds of vat and tank liquid and sludge, and 5,187,340 pounds of
soil removed from the site. EPA has also begun investigation of the ground water contamination near the three
facilities by installing 12 monitoring wells and collecting 40 water samples from monitoring wells and nearby private
water supply wells.
[The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may
change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February
11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]
Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
For further information, call the Superfund Hotline, toll-free 1-800-
424-9346 or (703) 412-9810 in Washington, DC metropolitan area,
or the U.S. EPA Superfund Regional Offices listed below*.
For publications, contact EPA Superfund Docket at (703) 603-8917
SUPERFUND.DOCKET@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV
by Mail:
EPA Superfund Docket (5201G)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Walk-in Address (by Appt.):
EPA Superfund Docket
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway
Crystal Gateway #1, IstFloor
Arlington, Virginia
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
(5204G)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
-401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(703) 603-8860
Region 1
Connecticut
Maine
.Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
Waste Management Division, HAA-CAN-1
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203-2211
(617)573-5707
Region 2
New Jersey Puerto Rico
New.Yp.rK ^JlSJnJllands
Emergency and Remedial Response Division
290 Broadway, 19th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
(212) 637-4390 •
Region3
Delaware
District of Columbia
Pennsylvania
Virginia
Site Assessment Section, 3HW33
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 566-3033
Region 4
Alabama Mississippi
Florida North Carolina
Georgia South Carolina
JCentuckjr JifUflSssee
Waste Management Division
. 100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404)562-8651
Region 5
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Waste Management Division
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 6th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 886-7570
Region 6
Arkansas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Texas
Hazardous Waste Management Division, 6H-M
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 76202-2733
(214) 665-6740
Region 7
Iowa
Kansas.-
Missouri
p_N_ebraska_
Waste Management Division
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7062 or 551-7595
Region 8
Colorado South Dakota
Montana Utah
.North. Dakota .Wy.offiiQg.i
Hazardous Waste Management Division, 8HWM-SR
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
_ (303) 294-7630
Region 9
American Guam Northern
Arizona Hawaii Trust Territories
California .Nsyj^JS
Waste Management Division, H-l
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415)744-1730 . •
Region 10
Alaska
Jdaho__
Oregon
Hazardous Waste Division, HW-113
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle. WA 98101 '
(202) 553-1677
* All EPA telephone and telecommunications systems may be
accessed via the Federal Telecommunications System (FTS).
------- |