United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R05-89/103
September 1989
&EPA
Superfund
Record of Decision
-------
50272.101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION f'. REPORTNO. 12.
PAGE EPA/ROD/R05-89/103
3. RedplenC'. Ac:ceaaIon No.
4. TltIa 8nd Subdtla
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Auto Ion Chemicals, MI
First Remedial Action
5. Reporl 0818
09/27/89
is.
-
7. Author(8)
IS. Perfonnlng Or;8IIlDdon R.~ No.
e. P8rfonnlng Org8inization Name and Add.....
10. Projac1lT.8IIIWorII Unil No.
11. Con1r8C1(C)« Cr8ll1(G) No.
(C)
(G)
12. Sponaoring Org8n1Z81lon Name 8nd Addr...
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
washington, D.C. 20460
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
800/000
14.
15. Suppl.ment8ry Nota.
111. Abatr8C1 (Urnll: 200 word.)
Auto Ion Chemicals. site is a former. plating waste treatment and disposal facility
pccupying approximately 1.5 acres of vacant, fenced land in Kalamazoo, Michigan. The site
is bounded to the north, east, and west by commercial/industrial facilities and lies
~djacent to and within the floodplain of the Kalamazoo River. Ground water at the site is
~ot currently used as a source of drinking water. From 1964 to 1973 the facility received
~hrome and cyanide plating waste. Heavy metals were precipitated from the plating waste
nd deposited in an onsite lagoon, and wastewater was discharged to the sanitary sewer.
~eaks and spills from storage tanks, lagoon seepage, and other site activities resulted in
50il contamination. In 1983 EPA conducted an emergency surface removal and, in 1986, they
jemolished the site structures which housed tanks and storage facilities. This first
~perable unit represents a source control remedial action for the soil. A second operable
Jnit will address ground water contamination. The primary contaminants of concern affectin
he soil are organics including PARs; and metals includirig arsenic, chromium, and lead.
The selected remedial action for this site includes excavation and offsite stabilization
of approximately 7,200 cubic yards of contaminated soil; offsite disposal of treated soil
in an approved land disposal area; and replacement of the excavated soil with clean fill.
~he estimated capital cost for this remedial action is $3,332,988, with an estimated
annual O&M cost of $5,900.
17. Doc-t Analyal. L DHcriptore
l.,
Record of Decision - Auto
First Remedial Action
Contaminated Medium: soil
Key Contaminants: organics
b. Idend1ler8l0pen-End8d T-
Ion Chemicals, MI
(PARs), metals (arsenic, chromium, lead)
Co COO" TI FIeIdIGr4KCI
111. "vlil.billy sa.-,.
111. SecwIty ClaM (Th\8 Aepor1)
None
2IL S8curtty ClaM (Th\8 1'808)
t\Tnnl'>
21. No. 01 P8gea
55
I
22. PrIce
(See "N$.z:sI.18)
See IIMInM:IIOfI8 on "--
(4.77)
(Formeny NT1S-35)
-------
UNITED STATED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION V
DATE:
November 22, 1989
Transmittal of 4Q FY89 Record of Decision for Auto Ion,
Kalamazoo, Michigan
SUBJECT:
FROM:
Rita Cestaric Ife.
Remedial Project Manager
'1'0 :
Bill Hansen, Chief
Remedial Planning and Response Branch
Hazardous Site Control Division
Enclosed you will find the following:
1) One hard copy of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the
Auto Ion Site, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Attached to the ROD
is the Responsiveness Summary; and
2) A diskette which contains the ROD and the Responsiveness
Summary for the site.
-------
v
Declaration for the Record of Decision
SITE NAME AND LOCATION
Auto Ion Chemicals Site
Kalamazoo, Michigan
STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
This decision document_presents the selected remedial action for
soil remediation for the Auto Ion Chemicals site in Kalamazoo, .
Michigan, chosen in accordance with CERCLA, as amended by SARA,
and to the extent practicable, the National Contingency Plan.
This decision is based on the administrative record file for this
site. .
The State of Michigan concurs with the selected remedy.
ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this
site, if not addressed by implementing the response action
selected in this ROD, may present an imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health, welfare or the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REMEDY
This operable unit is the first of two operable units for the
site. This initial operable unit addresses the source of soil
and groundwater contamination. The remedy addresses the
principal threats at the site by removing and treating the
contaminated soil. Treated soil will be disposed of off-site.
The major components of the remedy include:
excavation and off-site treatment, via stabilization, of
approximately 7200 cubic yards of contaminated soil:
disposal of the treated soils in an cppropriate off-site
facility: and
-------
2
A sUpplemental RI/FS report will be completed to identify the
extent of groundwater contamination and to develop and evaluate
appropriate remedial alternatives.
STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the
environment, complies with Federal and State requirements that
are legally applicable, or relevant and appropriate, to the
remedial action, and is cost-effective. This remedy utilizes
permanent solutions and alternative treatment (or resource
recovery) technologies to the maximum extent practicable and
satisfies the statutory preference for remedies that employ
treatment that reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume as a
principal element. Because this remedy will not result in
hazardous substances remaining on-site above. health-based levels,
the 5-year review will not apply.
/~~ #.
~
~tR~~~7,-,q!1,
Date
Valdas V. Adamkus
-------
i)
1
S1'IE 1Wm. lDCATI~ AND ~~
-
'!he Auto Ion site is located at 74 Mills Street in a ccmnercial/irrlustrial
area of Kalamazoo, Midligan (see figure 1). '!be site of the former plat:in;3'
waste, treatment and di~l facility occupies awroximately 1.5 acres of
vacant, fenced land adjacent to the Kalamazoo River. '!he land north of the
site is used as an auto i1tpo.m:i lot. An irrlustrial paint facility operates
to the \WIeSt of the site. A railroad yard is to the east. '!he nearest
residence is abcut 500 feet north of the site. As of the 1980 census, the
pop.tiation within a one mile radius was abcut 36,000.
Site relief is very flat ani all of the b.rild.in;1s have been rem:::Ned. A
cement slab in the northeast portion of the site is the only notable
feature remainin;J (see figure 2). '!he b.1ild.in;J which originally housed the
platirq waste treatment facility was located toward the center of the site.
A lagoon area that received waste was located to the WTeSt of the fonner
b.rilc:lirr;J. Tanks and storage facilities were located i~ the b.1il~ (see
figure 3). .
D.1e to its proximity to the Kalamazoo River, the site is located in a flocxj
plain. '!be average depth to the gramd water is ten feet. Urder norrral
c:x>rnitions, gramd water flow is t.c:IIorcm:1s the river in a SOJtherly direction;
however, due to the high permeability of the soil, the di.xection of ground
water flow is variable and related to the water level fluctuations of the
adjacent river. Groon:i water at the site is not currently used as a source
of drinkirq water. Drinkirq water for the ccrrm.mity is suwlied fram
rrunicipal wells. '!be nearest municipal ¥.'ell field is located approxilrately
one mile north of the site in the ~ite clirection of usual ground water
flow.
SUrface water fran the site drains to the Kalamazoo River and through direct
-------
2
srm~
'!he property at 74 Mills Street was originally used as an electrical
geI1eratiIg station by the city of Kalamazoo fran sanetime durirg the 1940s
until 1956, when Consumers ~ ~ the plant. Shortly thereafter,
"the plant was closed and dismantled. In 1963, Consumers ~ entered into
a land contract with James Rooney, owner of Auto Ion O1emicals, Irx:. In
1964, Rooney began carpany cperations.'!he facility received chrane and
cyanide platirg waste. 'I'reatJnent involved the precipitation of heavy netals
fran the platirg waste and deposit into a lagoon. Waste water was
discharged to the sanitary sewer. D.1riIg cperations, wastes were discharged
to the site soils, sewers, and the Kalamazoo River. Poor storage practices
were follaved resultirg in numerous spills and leaks.
'!he Auto Ion facility CP.-=Ised active waste haulirg cperations in 1973, when
its license to transport, store, and treat liquid iOOustrial waste was not
renewed by the Water Resources Ccmnission due to numerous violations.
Contained and U11COntained liquid waste was left in the building and on the
gJ:'CIUnjs at that time. .
'!he state OOtained title to the property in 1981 because of Auto Ion's
failure to pay taxes. In 1983, an Emergency Action Plan was Prepared by
EPA 's Technical Assistance Team (TAT). In ac:x:ordance with the Emergency
Action Plan, a surface ren-oval was c:orrlucted by OO-Materials, Inc. 'Ibis waS
follaved, in 1986, by dezoolition of the build:i.rgs on site. In addition to
James Rooney, awroxbnately sixty potentially responsible parties (PRPs) had
been identified through invoices fran Auto Ion's l:x.1siness records. 'IWenty-
three ffiPs signed an Administrative Order in 1987 to do the Remedial
Investigatio1VFeasibility Study. Special notice letters to con:h1ct the
Remedial Desi9ll/Remedial Action were sent on August 21, 1989 to the
identified PRPs.
~ PARrICIPATICN
Since Auto Ion is in an industrial area, there has been very little
c:amunity interest in the site. A PJblic meetirg to announce plans for
start of the RI was held in September, 1987. The RIfFS and Prop:>Sed Plan
for the Auto Ion site were released to the pililic in August, 1989. '!hese
two documents were made available to the p.lblic in both the administrative
record ani the infonnation repa;i tories maintained at the Kalamazoo City
Hall and the Kalamazoo Public Library. '!he notice of availability for these
two documents was PJblished in the Kalamazoo Gazette on August 3, 1989. A
p.lblic camnent pericxi was held fran August 3, 1989 through September 1,
1989. In addition, a PJblic meetirg was held on August 8, 1989. At this
meetirg , representatives fran EPA and the Midrigan Depart::ment of Natural
Resources (MI:NR) received PJblic ccmnents and answered questions about
prc:i:>lems at the site and the remedial al temati ves unjer consideration. A
re5Ponse to the cc:mtents received durirg this period is included in the
-------
3
'Ihi.s decisioo dcx:unent presents the selected remedial actioo for the Auto
Ioo site in Kalamazoo, Midrigan, chosen in accOrdance with the ~rehe.nsive
Env:ircnnenta1 Respcnse, ~tioo, an:! Liability law of 1980, CERCIA, as
amen:ied by the SUperfu:rxi Amerrlrnents an:! Reautborizatioo Act of 1986, SARA,
an:! to the extent practicable, the Naticraa.l O:I1tirxJercy Plan (NCP). The
-------
4
~ AND R.)rE OF ~ tfiIT
'!he '-Ork at the Auto Ioo site has been divided into bwo cperable units
(C(]s). 'these are:
- C(] ~: Soorce CXI"Jtrol remedial actioo for the soil
- C(] 'I'-o: Ratatial actioo for the gi1JUnj water
'Ibis R)[) ootlines U.S. EPA's preferred alternative for C(]~. 'Ibis
response action is a SCJ.Irce CXI"Jtrol cperable unit. 'Ibis cperable unit is
bein:] b1plemented to Protect pmlic health an:! the envi.roranent by preventirq
any type of clirect contact with CXX'1taminated soil an:! oontrollin:] migration
of oontamination into the. graJnd water. '!he cperable unit ad:3resses ~
areas of surface an:! ~thsurface CXX'1tamination in the site soils. .
O:>nfi..rnatory saIrplin:] at the site is required to ensure that all areas of
oontamination are bein:] acXiressed. '!he C(] is oonsistent with future site
'-Ork.
An FS is planned to detenn.i.ne the nee1 for an:! type of groJrx:i water
remediation. '!he result of this study, ani its rea::.111emations, will be
described in a future q::erable unit Record of Decision.
~ OF srm ~ISl'Ia:;
In :- :JJ1e, 1989, a Remedial Investigation report was cx:::t'rpl eted urrler the
guidance ani oversight of EPA ani MLIlR. '!he report surmarized all grouro
water, surface water, sediment, ani soil analytical data that had been
collected. '!his report should be consulted for a ItCre thorough description
of site characteristics.
SOIL
Several soorce areas of contamination W1ere identified: the site of the
fonner facility structure ani the area of the fonner abovegI"OOrrl storage
tanks ani seepage lagoons. Analytical results of the soil sanples irdicate
the presence of elevated c:x>ncentrations of several heavy metals with ~
to average regional bac:k:gra.n:i concentrations. 'Ihe heavy metals of concern
iocluJe arsenic, d1ranium, am lead. 'these are primarily localized in the
northwestern portion of the prq:erty. Several polycyclic arc:matic
h~ (PARs) W1ere foon:.i in the soils, includin:3 benzo(b) fluoranthene,
benzo (a) pyrene, ani duysene. '!he ~ of concentrations for these
-------
~
5
Q)emical
Arsenic
O1ranium
Lead
Benzo (b) fluoranthene
Benzo (a) pyrena
Ouysene
Conoentratioo rarQe (IrQ/kg)
Belai detectioo limits (OOL) - 80
7.50 - 3521.00
BDL - 928.0
BDL - 2.50
BDL - 0.44
BDL - 1.40
'!he soils are generally not cart:aminated belai the surface of the water
table, whidl is at awraximately 10 feet.
'!he soil n::i raJrrl was collected in April, 1988. Each raJrrl of grourd wat.er
sarrplirq prcxh1ced different analytical results. '!his may be explained by
the fact that durin;} oormal con:titions the graJrrl water flows ~ the
river in a saJthw1esterly direction, however, the high hydraulic
corrluctivity of the aquifer allows for a quick response for precipitation
events. Sud1 a response causes a reversal in the grourd water flai to the
oort.hwesterly direction ani WOlld explain the different analytical resul ts.
M:Jnitorm; ~l sarrplm; indicated that Safe Drinkin;J Water 1v::t Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCIs) were exceeded for the follaim; contaminants
barium, cadmium, d1rani.um, lead, 1,2 did1loroethane, trid1loroethane, ani
-------
6
SFDIMDrrs
A l'1lJlIt)er of metals and PAHs were detected in the sediment sanples. The PARs
were detected with greatest f~ and magnituje awroxbnately adjacent
to and slightly downstream of the site. Metals were JOOSt prevalent adjacent
to and awraximately CI1e-half mile downstream of the site. '!he rarge of
~ticn; of d1ranium and PAHs in sediment sanples taken adjacent to
and downstream of the site is:
Q)emica.l
Ou-anium
Benzo (a) pyrene
Benzo (b) fluoranthene
Cuysene -
~tion Rarx:Je (ITQ/kg)
12-113
BDL - 2.60
BDL - 2.10
BDL - 1.90
A CXI11'lete sumnary of analytical results for sediment salIt'lirq is given in
table 3.
SURFACE WATER
Surface water. sanples were taken fran the Kalamazoo River. Cadmium, copper,
lead, and nickel were detect.ed in surface water sazrples collected da..mstream
of the site at concentrations which exceed U.s. EPA Ambient Water Quality
Cri teria. The rarge of concentrations of these contaminants is:
O1ernical
Cadmium
~
Lead
Nickel
O:>ncentration Rame (JTQ/l )
.012 - .013
.032
.193 - .199
.060 - .061
A CClTplete SUImIaIy of analytical results for surface water is given in table
4.
The river is classified as a 307 site (Mid1igan Public Act 307), which means
that Auto Ion is on the State's list of hazardcus waste sites. '!his portion
of the Kalamazoo River is also inc::lujej as part of the Kalamazoo River
SUperf'urd Site. It is anticipated that the sediments anj surface water will
be ad::iressed as part of the Kalamazoo River cleanup.
~
-------
7
~ OF srrE JUgs
'!he eri.:Wgerment assessment was cxrducted to evaluate the risk to p..1blic
heal th an:! the envil: o.au=lt posed 17j the site an:! to assist in detenni.ni.rg
the prcpar level of ranecti.a.1 response. To define the risks posed to human
health an:! the envirament, the ~ ~~~ examines the
hazardcus substances foond at the site, the aJIOlI'1ts of these substances, am
the expcsure pathways. 'Ihe greatest risk present at the site is fran the
gram:i water lyCyclic aranatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
are contam.inants of cx:noem also foond at the site.
Health risks lXJtentially posed by contam.inants were qualitatively evaluate:i
for the followirg expcsure scenarios: . irqestion of soil, inhalation of
airtx:>rne soil particles, dermal contact with the soil, an:! irqestion of
graJnj water. Carcin:geni.c risk calallations were performed for potential
adult expcsure. Cancer risks are not calallated for children since cancer
is primarily a d1ronic di~c;e of adulthood. If an expcsed child remained
in the area for hisjher lifetime, the carrer risk to that in:tividual ¥r'OUld
be awroximately the equal to the carrer risk calallated for an adult in the
same area. If an in:tividual were exposed durirg childhcx:x:i ard then 1!CVed
fran the area, the excess lifetilte carrer risk to that iIrlividual woold be
sanewhere between zero an:! the risk associated with continued residence .in
the area. .
Excess lifetime cance.r risks are determined by zrultiplyirg the intake level
wi th the cance.r potency factor. These risks are probabilities that are
generally expressed in sci~ific notation (e.g. 1.0 x 10-6). An excess
lifetime <:::aJ'X:)eI' risk of 1. 0 x 10-6 iIrlicates that, as an ~ ba.1rrl, an
in:lividual has a one in one million charx::e of develcpirg cance.r as a result
of site related expcsure to a carcinogen CNer a 70 year lifetime urder the
specific expcsure corxti tions at the site.
Potential ooncem for noncarcin:geni.c effects of a sin;le contaminant in a
sirgle medium is expressed as the hazard quotient (9'.2) (or the ratio of the
estimated intake derived fran the contaminant c:x>oc1el1tration in a given
medium to the contaminant's refereJ"Oe dose). By aaiin:J the H'.2s for all
contaminants within a medium or across all media to which a pq:ulation may
be reasonably exposed, the Hazard Irrlex (HI) can be generated. '!he HI
provides a useful refereJ"Oe p:>i.nt for gaugin; the potential significance of
nul tiple contaminant exposures wi thin a sirgle medium or across media.
To be protective of p..1blic health ard the envirorment, a hazard irdex
-------
8
As stated in the Federal Register, 53 Fed. Reg. at 51505, reroocliation goals
that establish aroeptable e:n.se action selected in this roo, may present an
ilmU.nent am suC:stantial eOOa.rqe.rment to ~lic health, welfare, or the
envirornnent .
Specific risk is calo.llated for each of the exposure SC61arios uroer OJrrer1t
am potential future corrlitions. 'These risks are added to devel~ a
curn.llative risk nurrter for carci.ncgeni.c risks an:J chronic health hazards for
each potentially affected pc:pllation based on contaminants fcum at the
-------
9
Denna1 contact with on site soils was estimated by us~ the oral potency
factors an:i oral acceptable intake chronic. Exposures for <::urI'e!lt
conditions assume that contact with on-site soils will ocx::ur when
~~rs are on site. Exposures for future conditions assume the
develq:ment of the site into a residential area. UrDer neither the current
conditions nor potential future conditions. does the carcinogenic risk due to
denna1 contact exceed 10-6 or the hazard irxiexexceed 1.0.
Risks via soil in;1estion TNIeI'e calculated for 00th dUldren ani adults.
Children TNIeI'e assumed to irqest 200 ng of Soil per day; adults TNIeI'e assumed
to in;1est 100 ng of soil per day. Acceptable carcinogenic risk levels for
soil irqestion TNIeI'e exceeded Ul"rler 00th the IOOSt prcbable case am realistic
\rJOrst case scenarios. 'n1ese risks TNIeI'e in:luced primarily by arsenic ani
PAHs .
, Acceptable carcinogenic risk levels for adults via inhalation were exceeded
urrler both the m::st probable an::! realistic \rJOrst case scenarios. Arsenic
posed the greatest risk.
Grourrl water at the Auto Ion site is not aJrrently used as soorce of
dri.nk.in;J water. Grourrl water irqestion urrler potential future con:li tions
exceeded acceptable carcinogenic risk levels urrler both the m::st probable
case an::! realistic \rJOrst case scenarios. '!he risk is in:luced primarily by
arsenic, altha..1gh a number of metals incltrlinq cadmium, d1ranium, arrl lead
ani organics inclu::lin; vinyl chloride exceeded their MeIs.
Grourrl water contamination at the site may have an ilIpact on the degraded .
water quality in the Kalamazoo River. Health risk based cleanup goals
addressirq soil am grourrl water exposure scenarios will be protective of
hlmlan health am environmental e>qx)SUreS to Kalamazoo River surface water
arrl sectilnents.
Table 5 gives the carcinogenic health risks urrler current am future
conditions for each of the exposure pathways. Table 6 presents
noncarcinogenic risks for these conditions.
ClF.ARJP 1.EVEIS
'!his initial soorce control operable unit is beirq btplezrented to reduce the
threat via soil in;1estion as TNe1.l as to reduce the potential for migration
of the contamination to the grourrl water belC7w' the site.
The cleanup goals for aJ One establish a total carcinogenic risk of 10-6 for
soil situated above the grourrl water. 'Ibis number falls within the 10-4 to
10-7 individual lifet:ilre excess cancer risk, which is the stan::1ard used by
EPA to cc:rrply with CERCIA IS rnarnate to protect hlmlan health. Confinnatory
backgroJrx:l sanplirg shall be perfonned to further refine' the target cleanup
levels. If the ad:titional backgroJrx:l sanples have a greater risk associated
-------
10
~CfiOF~
Alten1atives for ~le Unit One, remediation of containinatEd soil,
~ foITll.1latEd to adUeve the followin; goals:
- minimize the potential for direct contact with the cont.arnination
- minimize the potential for migratior;' of soil cont.aminant.s into the
gI'alOO water
A carprehensive list of awrq>riate remedial tedmolcqies was identified
for ~ control. 'Ihese tedmolcqies ~ screened based on the
characteristics of the site an:i the d1aracteristics of the contaminants.
Cost was used as a sc:reenin;J criteria a'1ly between alten1ative
ted1nolcqies provid.irr; similar deg1'='=S of protection an:i treatment.
Ted1nolcqies whid1 satisfied the sc:reenin;J requirements ~ refined to
fonn remeclial action alten1atives. '!he six alten1atives develq:e:1 are
detailed below. '!he alternatives Presented are 1"1UI'It:ered to con~lX>OO
with the nurri::ers in the RI/FS report. '!he ~ control alternatives
for
-------
11
AI ternati ve 3: Stabil izatiavCal:Pin;
capital Cost: $1,857,597
Annual O&M: $70,980
T:iJre to Iq>l ement: 10 na1ths
The major features of this alternative involve excavation of all soils
above the qI"OUn:i water that cxntain cart:.aminants above target cleanup
levels, treatJnent of the soil usin; a stabilization process, an:!
replacement of stabil ized soil 00 site folla..we.d by a:nstruction of a
nulti-layer ~irq system.
-
The entire site WOild be ~. The cap WOJ.ld be designed an:!
constructed to pranote drainage, minimize erosion of the Ct:Ner, an:!
minimize the migration of liquids thro.Jgh the un::ierlyi.rq contaminated
soil. The contaminant residuals that remain are the fixated mass of soil
Ct:Nered with an i.nperme,able cap.
Annual O&M will oorsistof site inspections, grourd water san"plirq an:!
analysis, reports an:! mai.rrteJianoe of the cap.
The remedial cbj ecti ve of reduci.rq the risks due to contact with the
oontaminants will have been met, however there are lorq term
uncertainties regarci.i..rq potential da1rege to the ~irq system durirq
f1 ocd.in;; events.
AI te.rnati ve 4: Vadose Zone Excavation/Disposal
Capital Cost: $3,755,248
Annual O&M: $5,900
Time to ~lenent: 10 ronths
AI ternati ve 4 consists of excavation of all soil on site situated above
the water table and off-site d;~ in an awroved land dispa;al cell.
The volume of soil excavated Ul"rler this alternative is awroximately
16,800 amic yardS of soil. '!he excavated portions of the site \1JO.lld be
backfilled usin; clean, iltported gravel or soil. At the ~letion of
the remedial action, health risks posed by the soil \1JO.lld be 00 greater
than the selected cleanup level. .
-------
12
'Ibis alternative provides desired levels of Prot.ectioo at the site, 00t
does not satisfy EPA ' s pol icy gi vin:] preference to pertnanent solutioos or
alternative treatJnent methods. In adctitioo, off-site di~ of waste
of this type, classified as FOO6, witho.rt: prior treatJnent has been
prOOibited as of ~ 8, 1988 by 40 ~ 268, ~ lard di~
restricticns, unless EPA can certify that 00 treatJnent capacity is
available.
Al ternative 5: Selected Vadose Zone ExcavatiOO/DL~
Capital Cost: $1,627,158
Annual O&M: $5,900
Tine to IIrplement: 10 DDnths
!his alternative consists-of excavation of ar.proxiJnately 7,200 OJbic
yards of c:.ontami.nated soil fran hot spots fcond on site ard off-site
di~ in an ar.proved Ian:! d~ oall. '!he excavated portions of
the site will be backfilled usln:J clean, iIrported soil or gravel.
!he direct contact threat WOUld be eliminated alon; witil rencvaJ. of tile
~ of gramj an:! surface water inspecticns.
Annual O&M WOUld consist of site inspections.
'!his alternative provides desired levels of Protection at tile site.
. Al ternati ve 5 does not satisfy ~ Ian:! di~ restrictions.
Alternative 7: Vadose Zone Excavation,lStabilization,lDiS!.'=Sal.
Capital Cast: $7,797,179
Annual O&M: $5,900
Tine to IIrplement: 10 ncnths
Alternative 7 consists of excavation of 16,800 OJbic yards of soil,
stabilization, ani off-site di ~ in a permitted facility. All soil
locataj within the site baJrdaries an:! situated above the groJnj water
table will be excavated, treated, anj di~ of off-site. '!he
excavated soils WOJld be treated to meet ~ Ian:! di~ restrictions
for soils cxntam:i.nat.ed witil F006 wastes prior to off-site di~. The
excavated portiQ1S of the site v.oud be backfilled usin;J clean, iIrported
gravel or soil. At the CX1'!pletion of the remedial action, hea1til risks
posed by the soils v.oud be 00 greater tbanthe selected cleanup level.
-------
13
Alternative 8: Selected Vadose Zone Excavatiav'Stabilizatiav'
Di~l
capital Cost: $3,332,988"
Anrua.1 O&M: $5, 900
Time to IDplement: 10 Da'1'ths
Alternative 8 is a
-------
14
The six alternatives assamled TNere evaluated based on the
following nine "criteria:
~ OF a:MP~ ~IS OF ~'1"TVEs
- OVerall Protection of human health an:i the environment
- Catpliance with all federal an:i state awlicable an:i
. relevant or awrc:priate ~
- Reduction of toxicity, IOObility, or volLme
- Short tenn effectiveness .
- ~ tenn effectiveness
- IIrplementability
- Cost
- Camnun.i ty acceptance
- State acceptance -
A St..tl!1lnaIy of the relative perfonnance of the al ternati ves with
respect to eadl of the nine criteria is provided in this section.
Table 7 may also be consulted for a review of the CClTparati ve
analysis.
~ ffiQrEcrrON
Eadl of the alternatives with the exception of no action ~d
provide protection of human health an:i the environment by
eliminating, reducing, or COntrolling risk posed by POtential
exposure to contaminated soils at the site through. treatJnei1t,
engineering controls or institutional controls.
~CE ID'IH ARAAs
Alternatives 1 an:i 3 do not meet Michigan or Federal
requirements. '!he Federal regulation, 40 ern 264.18, limits the
placement of waste in a 100 year flocx:l plain. '!he Michigan rule
for location standards, MAC R 299.9603, specifies that exposures
arx:l enlargements. of existing facilities shall not be located in a
floodway.
Al ternati ves 4 arx:l 5 involve excavation and placement of the
waste in an off-site lam disposal cell witha.rt: treatment. Off-
site disposal of this type of waste, given 1QA hazardous waste
exxie F006, without prior treatment has been prchibi ted as of
August 8, 1988, by 40 ern 268< 1QA lam disposaJ. restrictions.
Alternatives 7 am 8 whidl involve excavation, treatment arx:l off-
site disposal, WOUld catply with all Federal and State aWlicable
am relevant or appropriate requirements. A St..tl!1lnaIy of ARARs is
-------
15
I.CN:; ~ £!O!' U:l'l. VEMSs AND ~
Alteznatives 7 an1 8 treat the Detals in the cx:nt.aminated soils. 'the
treatJnent will reduc:e the mobility of SCIDe of the imrganic Cc:ntaminant..s
Present in the excavated soils. 'the no actioo alternative prrrl!1OeS no
reductioo in PJblic health risks. Alteznatives 3,4,7,anj 8 provide for
eliminatioo of direct cart:act an:! inha.1atiav irgestioo via cx:nstruction
of P'xYsical barriers or scuroe I"E!I!rNal. Since the site is in a floed
plain, under alteznative 3 there exists the potential for damage to the
cappin] system durin] flocxting events whidl WOJ..ld make the cap
ineffective.
Neither the toxicity nor the volurre of the contaminants is reduced urxier
any of the alternatives. Re1uced roobility WOJ..ld be adUeved un:::ier
alternatives 7 an:! 8. Urder these alternatives, the reduced rocbility is
due to the ~ysical an:! d1emical bc>rn; fOrmed between ~ of the
inorganics am the stabilization reagent. ~er, the volurre of the
contaminated soil am reagent mixture will be greater than the volurre of
the soils before t.reat:zrent.
BWlcrI~ OF roXICI'IY. M:>BILIT'x'. OR ~UJME OF Q:M'AMINAms
5H:)Rr :I'm-! m'Ec'rJvrnEss
Each of the al te.rnati ves invol virq active si te ~rk poses POtential risk
due to exposirg am clistriWtirq contaminated soil. These risks can be
controlled by use of :
- water application for dust control
- sediment barriers am containment for run off control
- peI"Sonnel Protective equipnent for controllirq exposures
of si te ~rkers
None of the alternatives present appreciable risks to irxtividuals away
fron ilme:tiate construction areas.
~ILI'IY
-------
16
,.
O'::ST
There are no cx:nstructian costs associated with alten\ative l.
associated with the other al ten\ati Yes are:
'!he COSts
- Al ternati ve 3:
- Alternative 4:
- Alternative 5:
- Alternative 7:
- Al ternati ve 8;
$1,857,597
$3,755,248
$1,672,158
$7,797,179
$3,332,988
rnTE AQ:L.>rANCE
The State of Michigan SURX>rts EPA's preferred alternative.
Two PJ,blic meetirgs have been held for the site. '!he first was held on
September 24, 1987 to anramce plans to conduct an RI/FS for the site am.
to answer citizen's questions. '!he SE!COoo meetirq was held on August 8 I
1989 to Present EPA' s preferred al ternati ve ard accept PJ,blic canrrent on
the preferred alternative.
o::tMJN"rIy AQ:J:;p rANCE
Cam.Jnity interest in the site has been very low. This is prbrarily due
to the site's location in an irm1strial area. Two cx:mnents were received
fran the CCITItIJni ty on the Prcp::sed Plan. These are presented in the
Responsiveness Surmiary section of the 000,. alo~ with ccmrents SUbnitted
by the PRPs.
'IHE ~ ~
Based up:>n the consideration of the requirements of CERCrA, the detailed
analysis of alternatives, anj PJblic carrnents, the EPA anj the MI:NR have
det.ennined that al ternati ve 8: selected vadose zone excavation,!
stabilizatiarvdisposal is the JOOSt aw1:"'q:)riate lell~y for the Auto Ion
site in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Awroximately 7200 cubic yards of contaminated soil hot spots will be
excavated fran the site. '!he soil will be treated usirq a stabilization.
ted1nolo;y. Treatability stu:lies will be cx:n:iuctEd to determine the II'OSt
suitable stabilizatiCXVfixation agents for the contaminated soil a.t the
site. '!he treated soils JTUSt pass the 'Ibx.i.city O1aracteristic I.ead1i.rg
Procedure ('rQP) prior to off-site dispasaJ in an C!R'roved lard d.isposal
-------
17
Cbnfinnatia1al """Plin;J ,of the soil a! site is required to ensure that
all areas of CXWItaminatia! are beinq ad:Iressed. The ccnfinnatia1al
sanples will test soil for inorganics an::l organics. Areas of soil
CXWItaminatia! posin;J an """""" lifetime caooer risk above cleanup levels
will be "'edstin;J anti ticns at the 'Site have been c:Ieterntined to pose an """"""
lifetime caooer risk of 3.lx10-3. Act:iQ1 levels for c:cntaminants in soil
above the gra,m water table will be set to ccr'reSponj with health risk
based cleanup levels. The cleanup levels will be based on a site
specific analysis of ba~ soil sanples. Several additional
ba~ soil """PIes, taken in the ~ area, are required to
contino the health based risk level. If the adclitia1al bac:l~ly.
L'roer its legal authorities,' EPA' s PI'imazy I'esponsibili ty at .5uper-turo
si beg is to urrlertake remsdial actions that adtieve adequate Protection
of human health and the environment. In adclition, section 121 of CERcL;
establishes several other statutoxy ~ and preferences. These
specify that when CX>Iplete, the selected remsdial action for the site
must CX>Ipl Y with "R'licable or relevant and "R=Priate envi=nmenw
stardarns established urxIer federal and state envirnmentaJ. laws unless a
statutory waiver is justitia:!. The selected lQ',.,dy I1IJst also be =
effective anj utilize PEmnanent solutions an::l alternative treatment
technologies or reswrc.. reocvery technologies to the max:iJmJm extent
practicable. Finally, the statute i.nclu:ies a preference for remedies
that errploy treatment that ~y an::l significantly reduce the
vOllm!, toxicity, or mbility of hazamous waste as the Principal
element. The fOllowin;J sections di5aJss how the selected le.,ody meets
these statutory ~.
-------
18
~l'&..~l'lCN OF fUoool HEAJ~ AND 'ffiE ~
!he selEcted l=-:ly Protects human health an:! the envircnnent thrtough
ext:'avatia1 of ntrolled.
In additia1, no adverse cross-media ~cts are expect.ed fran this
CCI!ponent of the h:II-=dy.
~CE ~ AEPL:r~ OR ~ AND ~ffiIATE
~
'!his selected l=l8e7.Jy of excavation, stabilization, ard off-site disposal
will a:mply with all ~licable or relevant ard ~rq>riate d1emical,
action, ard loc::ation specific ~ts (ARARs). '!he ARARs are .
presented below.
Action-specificARARs :
RCRA generator ~ in 40 CFR 262 ard Mid'ligan Act 64, ?art 2, ~ich
set forth ~ ~licable to generators of haZardous waste.
RCRA ~rter ~ in 40 CFR 263 ard Mid'ligan Act 64,
Part 2, whidl sets forth ~ awlicable to t.ransp:,rters of
hazardc:us waste.
RCRA closure and past closure in 40 CFR 264 sets perfonnance ~
that ~ly to owners ard cparators of all haZardc:us waste managezrent
facilities for closure of the facility.
oor rules for transport of haZardc:us materials, 40 <:::m 107 and 171.1-
171.5, Whidl specifies p~ for packagirg, labellin;, manifest~
and transportin:3 haza:rdo.Js materials.
C\SHA geJ>eral industry ~ in 29 ern 1910.120 whidl specify, ,
CYY"'I~tiona.l safety and health ~ for hazardc:us waste actlvltles
-------
19
CSi1\ safety an:! health standards in 29 CFR 1926 -roch specify the 8 hc:::J.lr
time weighted average ccnoentraticn for variOJS substances.
CSiA record keepi.rq an:! reporti.rq in 29 CFR 1904 which sets forth record
keepi.rq an:! reporti.rq for euployers.
Soil erosicn an:! se:timentaticn
-------
20
EPA an! the State of MidUgan - determined that the selECted l..-ly
represents the mavimiUD extent to ~ ~ solutioos anj treat:2ne.nt
tedmologies can be utilized in a ao.TE 'lREA'IM>Nr
. 1roiP«)t.CX;~ ~ MAXIMN ~CART~.
The selected h:au=ly treats the principal threats posed by the soils.
selected r eal~ is at least as effectj ve as the other cptions in the
short te.nn, requiring 10 JtO'Jths to ~lement. The rCII-.ly is readily
ilrplementable. The selected rell-.ly is the least COStly tre.abnent anj
off-site disposal cption.
The
The selection of treatment of the contamir-at:ed soil is consistent with
pra;ram expectations that :in:licate that highly toxic anj m:i:>ile waste are
a priority for treatment anj that treatment is often ~"""'ry to ensure
the lorq tenn effectiveness of the r cu-.ly . The selected r emesJy can be
ilrplemented IIDre quickly anj at less cost than other treabnent anj off-
si te di~ cptions and is therefor determined to be the l!OSt
awropriate solution for contami.natej soil at the Auto Ion site.
By treatirg the contaminated soils t.hrc::ugh a stabilization process, as
required by ~ land disposal. restrictions for FO06 waste, the selected
lcuedy ad:iresse.s one of the principal threats posed by the site. '!he.
statutory prefeI"ena:! for remedies that enploy treatment as a principal
elelTe1t is satisfied.
PREFERJ:NCE FOR ~ AS A PRINCIPAL ~
-------
FJ5UR£ 1
N
.;
-.
~
'Eo..
'"
-------
-- .-----. - - - ~
-
~
O'NEIL
STREET
.x
ftI
)II(
-
...
..
=
c:
-
,..
c
-
-
-
C)
, I
)( ~
r-
r-
CJ:
CJ:
....
-
-
t':':
t':':
~ .
~
~
~
Co N C..
..rT[ SLAI \
N
FI~2
ALm:> ICH SITE
-------
LIGEND:
0--0 S8n'"ty s.-.,
0) . Acid Tanir
f2\ R.c',culallon Tanir To
\:J T "a. C~.n'd. & SlUdga.
1]\ fe"oIU"". 0,
\V Soa'Utn al,u",,,.
~ No. 2 DI..., fu.'
r. en,om. 8'0110'
6 Ch,om. 8'0119'
7 C~anld. fll.., Pa,.., .
o "'.nhola.
. f."flng Aofonl,ollng
W.",
o
r
'"
<
'"
C
~
o
...
:-f
"'----=-0-
r .--..--.---.
..
1
I
ACOlOR
'NC.
@
NOIIO SUI.
.
O'NEIL'T.
.
.
AUTO'ON
---..II-- . .1,8lOCktfOUI!
--Ai AI -;'''''~a.-.... .
-~- KAlAMA10Q H'VUt .
FIGJRE J
AlJro IGl FAcrlJTV
.- ',,'If.
. ... .......,
~
-
,..
,..
..
.-4
"
,
. "
-:,
.
.
-------
, ---:.,.-..---...,;J"..... ........."
.- w:i\
o
"
i
.
i
.
.
!
r
!
I
..
..
,.
"
.
!
,
':
.
,
,
.
.
CL£V£LAHD IT.
--"","-"-.
)(
au
Iu
c: )C
...
II)
...J
1&1
Z
-
0
'/
'If'
,:\
-.,-..
ML
... '....'...
S T II f fT"",.
r ,
....-.':...1.. :'
~
--------
'r::' ,,~::,-~-:,:,~~:::,,::,~,:::-~,''':~1{''~:';::;'':''K:J:'''' /'
' '. ) :'
". ...' '.
"" /' '.'
"",. " '!
"""", S-J
""'" '4 w. 6 ......" I -
)( . ~ - ~ 0 /' )( .
:', I ,
",:.."..... )(/ I ;
'.......... ..'
"'"'''~1.1'-'~''' "
. ..".,..0'
.
W-1
I
:'
,
"'
..
!
~......~........ .
~'..,.. "'"
JI \
,." 0-2 W.. I
I 4 O!
' -
J ,
I
..' ,.
.'
,..,.., ,
I ,
,~, ,
." . , .
. "'" I
>'-,,/,,-,,-u i
8 -, 8's... -"W.) ....~/. [WO' 5
4 j "-6 () "'''' ,. "". i .
.. 4 W - J ", .... ~
8-.8-1 0 '\'" \ \
..4. 4. '\ \.J :
X'- -.J '-.......-..."..-.-,...........1
- - -....
.. 8C Ie,.
... .
,
.
.
:
.
.
,
-:' ..
~
(IIIT'HO
. U Il D 'H 0
-
I .'
~, . ~.
4 ;
~
~
'
-------
'n\UU~ 1
.,
,
.
,
,
J
,
J
I
I
I
,
1&ntA1r or NMLYlUAL .(~IS or ~u ~u '-'.,.
,
I
1
--- On-sll, SurtJ18 Soil SA8DI.. '0-1 It.1 .".,...
Mu.ber "&80., I.d"...,.. ",....8
.1 ,.. . 'b. 5...1. ....,. 5..,.1. ",IIu Sell lee'.,...., '. .
"'..Ier '5..,.1..( I) '0, h. "- "'''(1) Se.p1.(I) ~"fI' ~.,~._~ .
~ ,I.,
1IIaIa. '. :.' . ".
...... "-.
AI..... II II 166'.00 - 4464.00 141J.15 114) 1.000-58...
AAI'..., 4 .....AII 1Mp1.. .,. IOL"." . cl-I'
Are...c 11 10 lOt - 80.008 11.0)8 .., ......
..,... " . 'Ol - 110.00 111.00 40.' JOo-,-
"~IIt. Il 1 10l .. 1.)08 1.)0. U Ci
C,,,,,,, Il 4 IOl - '.10. 4.40. U '.11-2., I.,
,..,-.. 11 II 11 00 - 14)).00. "'.!.4. II.' 1-10
,...1. 11 1 IOl - ~.OO ~.OO U 0.'
c~,., Il II U 00 - 120) .00. ,....,. 11.' cl~,
Cr...'~ II 10 IOl - '''.00 11.64. I
Ir... II II 1000.00 - ~100.00. 81104.') "94 1.000-10.-
1..4 11 II 5.60.. '18.00. 166.U. 1).1 c 10-10
...",.... II II lOt - ")00.00. 11889.00. 'IJ~ 104-1.000
"'''v'",,, It II 15 00.. 110.00 'OO...~ lJ, cl.,.ooo
Me" '''V 10 8 10l - o.~. O.U. u '.0)1- 0.1.
"'«11.1 11 II 8100 - 8020.00. 111.19. '.t cS-I'
S.I.".. Il I lOt - 1.00. 1.00. U cD. 1-0.5
S.I"'.r 11 . IOl - 1.)0. 1.)0. U CO. I-I.I 141
'...11 '. '2 . . 'Hll - ~. 104 ~.'O. U CO.I-O.' 4
~"'14'- 11 10 IOl - 11.00 1l.9t 11.' c,-~
"8C II II 11.00 - 1414.008 n6.U8 40.1 ...,.
1r'.lA'U:
AIt'''''CM. I I 'Ol - 11.00 ".00 NA
"".,....... I I 0.4' - 11.00 S.JO NA ..
,~,.". I I 0.)1 - 0.4' ...) 1M
'1. fl"'h~lh"II) .....1... 2 I IOL - 0.94 0.94 NA
DI~.,I",~ ... I I o.~ - '.0 '.06 ..
I .
I '
I
,
''''. t,' :v'..
-------
,.,.....,
""8..81,,:
AI..11k4
""'18M.,
."'8ft'C
,.,.1&011
,.,.",111..
C.d8'..
hr.l...
CO..I,
COppe,.
C"'."I.
h...
l...,
... III.. ''''
...",.,....
""hrv
"Ie '.1
'h.lIl..
S.I...I..
Sll".r
~."414'..
'lAC
..."1'1:
ACe,.,..
C.,...,. II,ul,...
ftll.,lbe......
...."",1.". (.I.,.~,
"'''.Ihlo,...,....
'r..I-I.l-DIChl.,.O.lh...
1.1.'-r'I~'.,..,-... -
.......,
.,
$...,..
- -
so
24
41
49
SO
~O
SO
~O
~O
U
49
~O
~
49
..,
SO
sa
49
sa
sa
.,
I
,
I
6
I
6
6
'lA1.iLL 1.
S~80I'1 £.II.~t'd I,.. 1-18 .,.
""'er
'.1 It...
'0.
~
I
J4
II
)
10
~
1
46
11
49
4'
4)
4'
IS
...
1
I
)
21
..,
1
1
I
S
1
1
I
----0
S..,I, ""18
I.. H''''
IW.oo - 1t100.ao
'Ol - ,.~
lOt. - !16 . 00-
101... 640.00-
loa. - I. 10-
IOl - 11.00-
, ~ -JUI.OO-
lOt. - 1. .00-
IOl - 10100.00-
'Ol - SH.OO
l66l.00 -1'1100.00-
IOl.. 601.~-
IlJl - "000.00-
It 00.. IW.OO
8Ot. .. 4.60-
8Dl.. JUI.OO-
IOl - 4.40-
'lil - I. )0-
.Ol - ".40-
'Ol - )1.00
'.10 - I4Ot.~-
.Ol ~
.Ol -
'Ol -
Ilil -
'"l -
bill -
IDL -
0.11
'.06
".10
0."
)'0
0.01
1.01
S..,I.
......
Ill' .M
'.Y
".U-
In.M
I. ..-
1.1'-
......,-
It. so-
441.71-
41.11
'US...
Jl...-
"".0,-
'J'.IO
8.'S-
ita. U-
4.40-
1.)0-
).11-
IS.tO
1..51-
I.IS
'.04
1.10
'.It
I.~
0.01
'.0'
)0
"
JO
)0
)0
)0
)0
)0
)0
11
)0
)0
)0
)0.
1t
)0
)0
)0
)0
JO
J8
.
.
,
.
.
1
1
......,
.,
s.,....
5..,1.. C'IIN'''' ,''-
a..,.. 6..,.,.,"l .'.1 M ,--
"-.,
hi I U...
,..
-
~,~
s..,..
....., I.
-
-
""'1",
-
-
-
JO au.1I . "'00.08 "".n
' ... ... 11.00- ".00-
, ... ... 10.00- '.IS'
, lOt. - 151.00 "'.50
,....., ~ ~ WI' - ",...
I ..... . .. 10 I. t.
Jo '.10 - &J5.00- 41.14'
....... AU ~ WI( - ......
. 1Ot... "'.00- 11.11'
of IOl .. ".40 1.)0
10 1"'.00 ... 11100.00- "".1)
10 lOt. - "..00- 1.',
)0 4l6O.oo ... 16100.00. 8119.10.
)0 41.08.. 1»>.00 U'.1J
S 'Ot. ... 1.00- 0."-
. lOt. - '9.00- ,".,,,
,...... AlL SAHftfS ~.( IlL ,.....
..- ""U8 flU ~"If ... ...... ,...
I -- .. ..y- ..~
SlOt.... )0.00 15.N
" _.. 141.. '1.44
. '.01 - '.'1 ...,
...... AU, ~US WI( ... ,.....
...... AU. SMlrUS "'If... ......
...... AlL ~l(S ~I( 'Ot. ......
...... AlL ~1'S ~(I( lOt. ......
...... AlL SANUS WI( .oa. """
III... AU. ~ till( ..... ,.....
,
f ',' '~\:" '1.
-------
.
I
f
I .
f
I
I .
I
I
I .
"'..'u
."..Ijt, a
cc..U--,)
I rI dI ''''''''''
1.1.....
"181 Iw'''''
"",..,.,-.
~"'..""rac...
a-'.".'rr8A8
'.ft..".' ~.......
,,,,,,...-.
Ory.....
n ..., ... '"''''
"'-...u.r...
'w'".
S'w"'"
II'fl-("w....wl.~~I.,.
au'wlblA','''''.''''
Ol~'r ~".I.,.
DI~'W'''~'.t8
.
~
1
j ,
I
/.
f
I '
'1at.ILldll:
He'hcM.,
..~
'''...'8':
.....,
.,
s......
.5&801.. £olluhd f u. 2-20 11..
""u
,..1 "..
10,
s..".
.....( I)
..DJ
1.61
)1.00
'.n
D."
'.41
1.61
I."
0.14
1.)0
1.6)
Ion
6.40
l.6J
4.90
'.16
I I 0.09 - 0.009 '.001
1 ...... AU. SAMPlu W(U lOt. ......
......,
.1
s..I.,
I
I
I
.
.
.
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
I
..
4
,
S
I
S..,I.. CoII.,ald f,..
a.a"'. ".&t., ~.. 2f 'I...
""r
,..1'1".
10,
S...I. ...r: s..,1.
Law II ... ~. .....n»
S...I. 1"'1:
1.. " ...
, 1 IOl - 0.10
. I 80&. - 1.00
. , 80&. - )1.00
!i , 'OL - D.n
6 ) '0&. - 1. '0
6 I 'OL - 0.44
6 I IOL .. l.!IoG
6 a 10L - '.!IoG
6 ) IOL - I. 40
6 ) lOt. - ) . )0
6 ) IOL - ).00
6 4 lOt. - ).00
6 , 'OL - 6.40
6 4 lOt - J .60
6 ...... AlL ,,",LIS W(8( 8Dl .....,
6 , .Ol - 4.CJO
6 a lOt. - ).80
"~~.J,~
...... AU. SAIft.IS.... - ......
...... AU. ~n .... - ......
...... AlL ~(S ~.. IlL ,.....
...... ALL ~l(S ~II IOL ,.....
...... AlL ~l(S ~I( IOL ......
...... ALL ~(S ~I( IOl ......
.,.... All ~(S V(I( IDL ......
...... All SAftllES VII( IOl ......
.,..., All ~L(S VII( IOL ......
..,.., ALL ~(S VII( IOl ......
...... ALL ~LIS VII( IOL ......
...... AlL ~L(S VIII IDL ......
...... ALL SNIPUI Waf - ......
, '.94 - '.40 1.6'
) IOl - I." 1.24
...... AU. ~ WI( - ......
, IDL - ,.,. 2.'0
'''''1 ALL SAItfIUS WI( - ......
I ,..... 8.118 8."1
. ,
. ..... 'h., "1. ".Iu. I. r'..'.' .... ...,... ,.,-.... ~'8'1U84 1....,.
101. ..... 1.1.. De'NaI.. u. ,.
GAif .... ..II~.,.. .w . OAIQC ~I' I, "...n'.4 .. ~II ,.....
~ ...~. ,..., ,... par...,., w.. .., IA.I.... ,.,.
I "&ft. ,~., t~l. ~... w.. r.J.ca.. I., Q4JOC r...on..
..&ft. '''8& '''11 c'''erl. .. .., .,,11,.... ,. U.II ..,..tll ~..... ... par-ae,', "..... ., ...
I.v.' 1.4Ie.... eon'..lft.'lon.
U ..... ,~.. '''1, ~... I, b.low '.qulr.d d.'.catOft '1.lt..
fl. S~1. ,.c.. Ion. .,. .h~ I. flgur. )~ .1',,,. l...dl.1 Iftv.lale.'I.. I.pe".
(I. ,... 'Mlpl. ...111 II cehull&M ..I. ,,- ,... ....1.. I. ...1£11 ... ,at-t., .... .iN"'- .., u.. '.ul
""".r ., ....1... .
fJ. s.u,c.: S.."'."..ft4 I..,n.... '914 (YA'.', .~"-I.. '18«11114).
C4. Jewe.. ~rl.... I"'.
U''')t
I. .
.. .~
. .
.~'1:[r'J '.'
..... ,.
-------
"1\1' J l-: J
ANAl VII! AI 51" :- ~~~I"I_N~~!(~
All CIAIA I ~ {nU'.!l1
'.ANS(C' A (~red!mt 0'. Sitel_- '.AMS(C,S I. C end 0 (Adjecent to Site)
llurber N~r N~r Nurtler
0' Pusit ive SMVI e A8r1ge S~le 01 P08itive S~le A8nlle S8IIp1 e
P8nwnrler S...,le. IDs low High ""en Sq>les 10. low High Me...
-.-'.. --- -.-.. -
~~.Jll!''-'-~:
AIUII'......, " 952.00 nn.oo 1112. ~O 12 12 66].00 2620.00 1378.61
A'.m'e " 1101 l.UO /.00 12 2 101 ~.60 ,.~
Ie, II'" ' 0 1101 801 8/11 Il 2 101 95.00. 78.50.
(8linI~ ' 0 1101 801 801 12 0 1101 801 101
0., UIII' UII " 16.00 . 19.00 17.~ 12 12 ' 12.00 113.00e 26.1J
('''~r . ' 2 1101 .1".00 10.00 12 8 101 117.00e 26.65
If (J' " J668 . 00 S n\.l. . 00 'i,()(). ~O 12 12 "S6.00 l1461.00e 909).50
leed ' 4 11.00 111.00 ".~ 11 11 8.00 208. ooe 49.65
MeQn88 '\ft '" 1666.00 9219.00 63109.00 12 12 6671.00 J6SOO. ooe 1JCW5.~.
Meov--e ' 4 192.00 ~9.00 ll1l.~0 12 12 1)1.00 29ft. 00 221.50
Me'ClJI y ' 0 101 801 1101 12 1 101 l.908 0.61.
Nidel ' 1 IIOl 16.00 16.00 12 2 101 111.00 15.00
'h.II.UII ' 0 101 801 1101 12 . 0 IDI IOl 101
V.,\8(ji UII " 0 101 80l 1101 12 , IDI 15 . ooe 15.00e
linc " 21.00 38.00 11.00 12 12 17.00 82.00 i,3.~
Q!:.i!!.'!.'.~:
Acetone 1 1 0.01 0.0" 0.0" 2 0 101 801 101
2 But 8"'''''' " 0 1101 801 1101 12 1 101 0.01. 0.01.
,,"th,'., e... " 0 BOI BOI 1101 11 2 lOt 0.11'. 0.6'.
~IO( .1..thr8Iet. " 0 1101 BOI 1101 11 1 101 2.00 1.11
let " o( . Ipyr er.- I, 0 801 BOI BOl 11 1 801 1.60 0.90
Imlo(bl 1 t uo' 8r1thene , 0 1101 ROI IIOl 11 1 801 2.10 1."
lenl 0(. I 1 I unr 8nt he,.. I, 0 BOI 801 BOI '2 2 801 1.00 0.90
, 1.90 1.()('
(h'v~er.- I, 0 BOl BOI BOI 11 1 801
-------
TABu: 4
ANALYTICAL SUMMARY - SURFACE WATER SAMPLES
Concentrations Concentrations
Upgradient Downgradient
~ ( mg ./ 1 )( 1 )
SW-A-1 SW-A-4 SW - 0 - 1 SW-O-4
Organics
Acetone U U O.O~~ 0.020
Bis(2-ethyl~er:' )phthalate 0.420 0.198 0.094 0.140
!r:crcar!ics
Alurr.inurr. U L.; 0.219 O.20i
Cadm1um U U O.Ol3 0.012
Calclu~ 74.0 73.25 76.8 77.0
ChrCIT~~~ 4 ~ ~ 0.007 U 0.039 0.C37
Cc~;er U U 0.032 0.032
Ircr: 0.46 0.32', 0.527 0.392
Lead U U 0.193 0.199
Magr.esiu7. 22.2 22.0 22.2 22.3
~an;anese 0.040 0.049 0.058 0.048
Nickel U U 0.060 0.061
Silver U U 0.27 0.28
-------
Pathway
Soil Ingestion
Inhalation
Direct Contact
TOTAL
Path",way
Soil Ingestion
Inhalation
Ground Water
Ingestion
Direct Contact
TOTAL
TABU:: 5
CARCINOGENIC RISK FO~ AD{J~~
UNDER CURRENT COND~ION
~LATIVE RIS
Most Probable Case
6.10 x 10-5
-1.50 x 10-5
1. 57 X 10-9
7.60 x 10-5
CARCINOGENIC RISK FOR ADULTS
UNDER POTENTIAL FUTURE CONDITIONS
CUMl.;!.ATIVE RISK
Most Probable Case
Realistic Worst Cas~
6.10 x 10-5
1. 50 x 10-5
1. 68 x 10-3
2.00 x 10-8
1.76 x 10-3
Realistic Worst Case
8.82 x 10-5
1.80 x 10-5
9.73 x 10-8
1. 06 x 10-4
8.82 x 10-5
1. 80 x 10-5
3.05.x 10-3
6.21 x 10-'
-------
~6
NONCARCINOGENIC CHRONIC HEA~~ HAZARD~
UNDER CURRENT CONDIT S
CUMULATIVE RIS}S
Children Adult
Most Realistic Most Realisti::
Probable Worst Probable Worst
Pathway Case Case Case Case
Soil Ingestion 1.7SX100 1.88x100 2.17x10-l 2.29XIO-l
Inhalation 3.37X10-2 4.27x10-2 1.92xIO-2 2 . 4.4 xl 0 - .:
Direct Contact 4.62x10-2 2.91x10-l 1.27x10-2 4.82xlO-2
TOTAL 1.86xIOO 2.21xIOO 2.49x10-l 3.02xlO-l
NQ~CARCINOGENIC CHRONIC HEALTH HAZARDS
UNDER POTENTIAL FUTURE CONDITIONS
CUMULATIVE RISK
Children Adult
Most Realistic Most Realistic
Probable Worst Probable Worst
Pathway Case Case Case Case
Soil Ingestion 1.78xIOO 1.88xIOO 2.17xIO-l 2.29xIO-l
Inhalation 3.37x10-2 4.27xIO-2 1.92x10-2 2.44xIO-2
Direct Contact 4.62xl0-2 2.91x10-1 1.27x10-2 4.82xIO-2
2.49xlOl 3.13xIOl 1.20X101 '
Ground Water 1.51xlO'"
Ingestion
-------
.,
£'dlI»1I1 A ClIIERI'
-
1Ip188ltibi I Uy
~.
M.lflllAlJWi ,
110 Act i(JI
-
-
'_"Iy 1Ip1...lllle.
IttIthln9 il ~Irtd ot'-'
tlwll*'ladlc IDIlter~ .
site I/wj8cttcrl.
lib .I~lfl~t ..lnlstratl.
~I~s.
AI. TUllATJ\t )
Stlllnilltl~1r9
.~ t8w 1/wpICt1n ....
...,.
IJIUtn l.ll11011't11nt I. tn-
cua f.lu. In.,q......
t8.
If\rtt8' I81b111vtttcn
rr...-ttd '" a,.
'lUnie1 ..... tD a,"'"
Irq rt.- f1clllq _W lit
P'dI'-ttc.
8ItJt 1'8111y t.,1881t1b1e cl8
to )1.110- n:r- nI
...,Itlng V. cfw'9asIstlllll
.1q8 GI CiII.
1tcrwtN:t ten of CIAIIrq IV'"
t. 181 .. 811X1111tnd 181119
ID8J'I Wth DIinQ ~tl88lt.
lib 11~ifi~ .."'tstratt.
,..,t.-u.
TABlE 7
1JWRf f1 AI. TmCA TlWiS
E'iAUlATICII
ALTUllATI\t .
£Iut1It 1crv'Dt1lD81
1Qwdet.. anltttn II1Ir-
1ytrq tIw ,Ite WIld" b8t-
eftted cle to _1 of
IIII'CI of cxnt8Itrwu.
'AIsd11y ........
It TUH4T1Wi S
SeltCtlw EJU« krV1H1ID81
~.. anlUlcre IIdr-
lying tlw site WIld" b8t-
eflted In tlwt ircr'gInlcs ...
... I'8INd to b8dqunf
1_1. ... IIII'CI8 of CJ"98I1c
CD1t81rwItI ... l'14l8I.
....ny lIp188\tible.
I£IcMtIcrl C8111t 811X1111I~ 'EJcMtI(J118111t 811X1111t~
td wing II81II ..u DIinQ ed wing I18111I8'd1 ~
~tl88lt. 1qJ1~.
'T1'ftiIIIUt ""181 .. a1DIP" 'TNnIpDItIt tal 181 .. a1DIP"
listed wlrq ClClWltlcN1 lInd lIIirt CDMrIttclls1
treta'tr.n.... trlCter trll1n.
""Its ~ fir aff11te IfInlts I'IIJIlrtd fer aff11te
d18lD81. ctllp8ll.
'5d81Il1ng III. 8i cx:ar.
'5ct8iIllng III'" 8i cx:ar.
lib 11~lfb1t edltnlstrltl. lib .I~lften edltnl8tl'8tt.
~t.-u. ~I~..
ff~-f-o To ~
c Ie ~ ffl. ,'-ca-t; ~ /~
/
'I - J- ) -9
AI. TUllATI\t 1
~IG'I/StIbnIJ1ttcrl'
0I5pIII1
It TfAlA II Wi I
SellCtlw bcMttaV
StlbI1tJlt 1av'Dt11Ul1
.---
1QunMt.. aTd1t1CN II1Ir- 1IQwd.et.. OTdltlcre "*-
1~ tlw ,Ite stolId .. ~ lying tlw lit. slwld III..
eflted cle to ,..,..1 of efltld In tlwt Ira'QIIIlcs ...
IIII'CI of CD'1t8tMtts. ... "."., to b8:iqunI
1_1' nI ."". af 0'gIII1c
cxnt8Iltw1ts ... rtIb8I
'AIsd11y 1Ip"'-'table bit ~ny tlil'1881t1b1t
dlff1Gllt II*» ccretl'tlnts.
'EJcMtIGl ~ .. 81JD111lIsh
'EJcMt1G1181 . 8CaII01t~ td wing CIMJI wth -tng
td wing CDU\ 81h 8W1ng ~I~t.
~1118't.
'TlWWjI7Utl(J1181 lit ~
'Trnp:J'UtIG1 an" a1DIP" Hnd wing ~tt(N1
HsIwd 181119 ~lcNl trtCter tr.nn.
trlCtCl' tl'tl1rt.
IfInlts I'IIJIlrtd fcr off 11t, . .
IfInlts ,...,.Nd fir aff1ttl dllp811.
dtllUl1.
'5ct8iIling dillV' 8i cx:ar.
'5ct84I11ng 1111. 8i cmr.
lib 11"lften ..lnlstrlt I.
lib ..tflc8lt IdItnt8trltt. ~1r_t8.
I'IIJIt-u.
-------
TABlE 7
SUIlURY OF ALTERNATIVES
(VAlUA T 1011
,V&Luane. tll1EaIA
AU(lImVE 1
110 Act 1111\
&L TEIIA II WE J
sullUt lit IClll/tlppl",
-------......-..
At TERIIA TIY( .
bclvltlon/Ollpoell
AlTERNATIVE 5
SlllCt Iv. bc.v.t lon/Ol8potll
AlWllIA IIVI ,
(xClVlt lon/Sub' II lit leJI .
Ohpot.I
Al1£ Rill I I vi .
StllCt hi l'~lYlt leJI/
SUb III lit leJI/OI.po..1
......................-.....
....-....... .................
...:1... aK...." ............... ..............,.. .............
....--...-..."
................-...."v
ItIo .,ottet Ion to ,,- l1l'i1,. 'fro'I1t111 tncrttlt4 deer. of 'Prcwldt1 tncr...'" 4ter. of "rcwldtl Incr"lteI deIIr.. of 'Short-tart rl8kl ...ochted 'Provldtl Incrl8l1d d'9r.. of'
.-nt. fI'OtlCtlOll to thlIllY'~t protlCt'on to IIIMII ht8hh prottetlon to hJ8111 httlth .Ith loll ..c.v.t ton un bt protlCt'eJI to ~8111 hIIlth
t!lrq" COllI t rvct '011 of phyt lea1 by rt8OVI1 of IOIre.. by rt80Yll of lourc.. Iddrtl..d by' dull controls. by rl80v.1 01 lovrel.
'110 .,ottet 1011 to ",11110 "ltll. IIIrrl. 1114 rtducId cont.llllt us. of protlCtlv. eqUfpe,"t,
-Uttr. 'Prcwld.. tncr,"ed dtvr. of 'Prov'dtI 'ncr"lteI dler.. of 'Provldtl Iner....d d'9r.. of
protlCtlOll to thl lIIy1~t protlCtleJI to thl IIIvl~t 'LeJlv-t.rt rlakl pot,d to protlCt leJI to :118 ,"v1r~t
'Prow,tIII 1ncrltl8d dlvreo of '!Irq" loure. r18OYl1. thr0U9h lourc. 1't8OY11. Vround..t.r vrtlt Iy rteluced. throuV" loure. rllOv.l.
"otacUOII to ...... ...1 tt! '"
111oc"'''' ,.'lIIIya for d'...., 'Potlllt'11 for tdvtr.. lIIy1... 'Potlllt',1 for IdYlr" lilY'''' 'Potent 1.1 for Idv.r.. ,"vir- 'Pot lilt 1.1 for .dYlr.. tnvlr-
contact'" '.....t1011. ~t.l 'tptCtI to oCcvr If OII8\t.l Itpactt to oc:cvr If onltntll Itpectt to occur" onltntll ttpect. to occur If
l1Mr I114/or 1MChtt. c01- lIn.r l114/or leachltl co 1- lIn,r .nd/or l..chet. co I- IIn,r Ind/or 1..chlt' co'-
1let '011 .yat... of dllpo8l1 1lCt'on lyat- of d'ipotil llCt'on ,yal- of dllpot.1 IlCt Ion Iy.t- of d'ipotil
hetHty fin. ftel1fty f.n. hclllty fin. hclltty f.l1.
,.11 frotactiOll
I."~-.....__....
..........."""..".....--
r,-.,--- r
.-..-----.
-....--...--
----.........----.
.........................1.... ............... ...............
.1I111C8 .'th AWl 'Dott not ,..,Iv .Ith proIII~11 lDate not CC8jIly .'th proIIIb1. 'In CCIIIIHtnC8 .Ith proIIIbi. "" CDlPHencl .,,11 _t pro- 'In cOlPH'nc. with prob.bll 'In cOIpltlnu .lth _t pro-
let 'on- 01' ."btttneHpec'ftC tct'on- or IUbttlllCHpectf'e WIlt. 111"11 ARAb. ARARt. blbll ARAR.,
AWl. AWit.
'Cotplltncl w1th lend dhpot,1 'CotpHenc." teMpvtel .lth 'COIplttnCI with lelld d,.pot.1 'COIplhnct I, .chllved with
,,,,, 1 ,....tt of IIID/IOIR Dr.f, ''''''rt8IIIl1 o' IIID/IOIR Dr.ft I'IItr'ctlonl. 11 det....lntcI to thl 1011 c II111'"11p WAt to rlllr!ct Ion,. If dltertlntel to the loll eI,-r -up ARAR. 10
"'dwt .f11 not 118 IIt,.'i" ..iA1tc8 8111 not III IIt'lfled III Ipplleab1.. ...1d not III thl tIIttnt thet '1IOI'9I"'CI bt Ippllc,"". -.Id Ilk.,y bt the ..Itnt t','1 Inorglnlc.
,....r"fIt 1011 C 1l1li.,., 1I.ltl. ~f", 1011 ell111'"11p 11.1tl. IOMtYtd. -.1 d be I'ttOYtCI to btck- IchlIVed. would bt r..."ed to back'
Vround 1..,11. Orvtnlc con- Vrouncl "v, It Orglnlc con-
I. not Clll8Ply .'th proIIIb1. t..'nantl wou 1d be rteluctel Uttn.nu 1IO,!d 118 rteluctd
10C1tfOll-lpeclfle AWl ,.rd- but IIV not lehl I'" ARARt. but IIY not ".hll.1 ARA~..
t"9 f100dpl.tlll.
'Cotplltnel .'th II1\d dhpot,l 'COIpll.ncl ,"h I.nd dh~..1
rtltrlctton., If clet....lned to r..trletlonl, If d.ar,lntd t
bt .pp lIc.b II, IIOU ld not bt be ,pplle.hl-. wou'd likely b
IChllYteI. .chl,.ad.
9"----..~ ..................-......... ........--......-.......... ...1..........".'............ .............................. .............................. ..sass......e: .sea............
~'i,.,J.)
t .
-------
TABIE 7
SMR\' rJ AI. mMATI\tS
tVa&..UATiOI
AI. TDIIATlW , Al.TUflAII~ I
Al.lfJllATlW I ...TBIIo\TM 3 Al.9lATM . Al.9lA11VE 5 flu«1~lIz.tb . SellCt I... EJa...t 1aII
I~AlUAII(JI a.: IIRIA Ib At;t IIJI Stlbll lilt 1GvtiAIir9 EICMt 1ov1I1sp:a 1 Select I... fa...t~lIDIl Otsp:a I Stablllm laVOtsp:a I
... ... - ;:&c:II;;:D ---...
w..:t icII In lIT'; "*' ...ut ilJl In ailltr. "tilllty II ~tc:lI'IIiad. "tiillty of Ir'QIIItcs rei In- "tilllty II Ir'QIIIlcs rei In- "tiility of Ir'Qllllca rod In- 'ltbt11ty of CJ'9I"ICS .-I lit"
Ir'QIIItca I'IIiad bv I¥ IeII Ir'QIIIlcs I'IIiad bv I¥ ICil Ir'Qllllca I'IIiad bv 1Ubt1- CJ'OIIIlca I'IIiad bv Itlbll.
"*' ...ut icII in tCJItclty. "tilllty II \rwrpIb(eapt IwT*, II .Ietlll dlllDll ""'1... II .1ICtId dtsp:al tilt ten. tmllJ1.
ItWItc) f'IIt ly 1'IIiad. fet1tty. fellity.
"" rwb:t ten jn 110118. \ "" I'8da IcrI In toIIctty. INo I'8da ten 111 tOilc Itr
"" I'8daIcrl In tDrtctty. INol'IILI:tfcn in taltclty. INo I'8daIcrl in tocIc:lty.
81~ In 1IO'k-<)I~) ... 81~ In 110"(1)100\) '"
8m- In 1ID\I8()IOO\)'" INo I'IIb:tfcn In IIDU.. IItII'IIb:t tal fn lID u.. to Idctttfcn II lUbt1tutlcn to ~ltllJl of Itlbllll" IIJI
to addlt.. II ...lIutlcrl 1981U. . 1IgIIItJ.
19IU.
- --
Iut -I... mitt i...... "" sIv't -t... ~I. 41'111 'fUnl.l bit amol11bl. 'FIuIt" 1 Ia.t amol11b 11 'FIuItt.l bit o:ntra111b1. 'IItItn" 1 ... amo 1 tab ,. 'lltltn1.11a.t CDltrol1lbl,
~1881tltilll. rl. ... to ~q rei r1. ... to ~q nt rl. ... to 8PPq nt r~~to~~anI rts18 cL. to ~in1 rei
dtltUtl~ artalOn.. dtm.flir9 artalOn.. dtsnrirl~ art.. IOn.. ~1tII1I.. art.. 1Ot1l. dtltutir9 art.. eoi!.
~ abjlCth.old hit
III.. Ifrllcill811'1S1D8 obJetl... ~ abJcth. C8I bI Ifrlrcfll81/'tIIUW abJct hi 'I8Iaw abJcth. CIn bI Ifrtrct 1181 I'8SID'N c:OJICt I"
of UI'Ot ,...1 old rat .. of Qrct ,...1 oW III .. of Qrct f'8IIM 1 !OJ Id bt
18 18(. bit direct CDItCt . .. to tI8 8Itn tt8t ..... .. to t'- ~...t tt-et trc1V-
Wwllttcry'\lUl5t1Cn old bI .,Ics ... I'fD1III to'" ...ta ... rWMd to b!oc-
,1t.InltId. ~ _I. rd ~tc gw'd 1_1. rd ~Ic
1...1. .",Id 18 recLI:8I. 1...1. old 18 r'II1ad
OtrtCt ant.ICt . Ww ,.. IaI/ OtrtCt OIJlUct . lriw lit Icry'
q.1crI .", Id III .118fn8t1d. fr988t1cn .",Id 18 ,lialroitlll
I.u9- 1- Effect t- If~ rip 1...1. !OJld rGt 18 If~ clI1n"\411...1. ff7 IfIr'Qllt cll8KO ,_,. f(J' IfIr'Qllt cll8KO 1...11 ff7 If. c18HC11_1. fer IfIr'Qllt cl~ 1...1. ff7
Ittl"-l ff7 tnt IXrItI8ln1ttd CDIt-in8tId .no 1011. IXrItI8In8t8d .n.. 1011. 1XrItI81nst8d .n108 lOll. amaln8t8d arfaID11a CD'It.tnltlll uf.. 1011.
1011.. IG1ld 18 an.v.I. IGIld 18 IttIv.I. IGIld 18 IttI Irwd. IGIId 18 IttIv.I. IGIlcI 18 1ttI1Iwd.
~ t81I ¥8pEt taw /8:- '15011. 18101 ttw ".......... 'Son. 18101 ttw "......... 8Sot1. 18101 ttw ~ 8Son, 18101 ttw".,...... 'Son. 18101 t'-~..
-.y. tab 1, rei lIDS in1 . prUIt" 1 tab 1e rei lIDS in1 . pat8'1t" 1 tabl, rei IbM cll8KO tIb I, rei 1IDS1I1 . pgt81t" 1 tlbl, rei IbM cl"'"141
rlsll )1.11" IGIW rat bI ~ risk )1.11-4 IGIlcI rGt 18 ~ _l.lGIld hit 18 ar-I. rtsll )1.11.. 8IIIld NIt be... 1...1. !OJld rGt 18 dh8td.
8(mfttlCN 'I tll lit. cwld ctw.I. ....... . ctw.I.
-------
TAm E n
I ..... .. 88'UAII8 ..., ..
I . .
I .. n-.... ~~~IIra::~.'-
'
,
, . .. c.
. '. .
' Kcu.A...,.
""'..'181. .. IIi....... -1I8nIq Mn.1~lunJ8r"11DIIID J J j J I .
I I......... "'Iur ~..
ICM ,.""~ .. u' JM.II(.. "'.'e "and8N 1IAIt... ..,.--.. .
1Aq.... 'teI.... ., ..,. ,.. ,.. "'c'n"~ ., . ,...,
~....... 'ft "'-" . -.
I .. u' JM.II(... "~.,.. 8''''''' II-h. pi..... . ~
8' ..... .. . '018 ..,. ".....,...
I ....., I".. ... .'dII'.. Ac, Jw ,....,... ...,..,... ,.,.... .
./ ...... ac, ''''na..... "'''---. "-"8'. .,.
I ,.Ik-.nt ., . "nc,,,. .. ""'. '...
fI''''''''n). ,..... Wit"..... ,.
.... ..., UMaII, '''''''''' ,.,. fU,...
J . . ..
... . "~,.,...,...
I
JID.w '-.,(1'1£ ~-
.... '-' """" .. u' l1li ..,. ,.,... ........... ... """'ell- " ' "
""'et... .. '''' ~'''''''. '''''''''. I""_~
......,.. ,.. e«1a... ......
C'... A', Ac, . ........ .. U' 50.. ....".. 24."" ..~., ''''''.,1 " ' "
....... A', ......, fer "'''''''8'. -..., .IUII .. "r~'8
..~ ~I_'er -.... ...,. '''' .... II ...,..
.111.0'.
, t l. ~ .
".'" ... ... w. -.. .~''''' ".. .'''''' ,.. ,,......,. . . . '.', .."
",...... -. .--. 'nlw'- .".,. . . .,
",
-------
MAoI8 ICII CIUMu 18' r ...
M~... ~"'~Iun -
llaul'lllf . No "" -
.aa.". . ... DA..,.un -..-.. MI'I.'c.u 'L' n 181..,.,-.. J J .~. I". I I
.. . ~
jU,. """" ~
~ ....., III c..., .. UI IIM.JI' Ie.. ,.,.11 "'''' .......... .
~.. .'N8nIn£e ''''''-e 'er '''''111
CW'. .~.-.
I ICI.t ca....,. ., .....,.... .. UI 11M.,,, ....",.. IUrv8w' ,1.. .11... II'" I... .
WIe'. 'ec....... BUt-..~ "'.ea ...... ... ""0'
.... ""'" .. ''''''et ~"'WtI8nce ef
... ....,... ...... ~''''''' ......
ICU ,... .. UI JM.1I1 '''''''''' poet """ car. ..,. die .
ca.....c.r. II........ ...... .''''''' 'ft" ... .
""011 ., SO ~.... """'. C,""",
1.11.. U4.II1Ut. ,..,.,.. '-II,...... ._~..._... --
., 8U8.. ''''''c18- -'" ...
",'cl.... ..,.....
IW ce..... "" .. U' IIM.1I1 .... ,.,.11 ""'''''''' 'er . ........ .
I """-' P''''' .. .. .......... ...
IftWOW'8C8 .., .... '.'_1 Ada,.....,...,.
.. fW1 ., Ute ...... '-.c.".......
t I(U ca..... ''''W8Mut .. UI 2M.1I1 .... '0,." C,"" ""-.ne. "....,... .
..~ 'or can""""8. .'n........
r ",.,,,",. ,...-c....... "'''''. &1..
'~Ir.. (1...-. .. .. PII'''''''' 'ft .
...., ",.. .'n..... .".... .'ftlln8Ik4.
.
J.~ I "J; .
~~.., . f# .'
\
-------
AlIMa fell ....... ..., ...
Al.n~I.. Mk'CM,Un ."
,~~~.
. /to.
-.auRIn . .
J , . c' .
.... .U. . W DAMon .''''8q Mft.'CM'l.ln~'_.I. J J i
80. .... .., "......,. " UI .01 ... lpee'". ~.. I.,. peU.''''' . . . .
., ....,.... ......... I".I-S '.II.,w. 88I'IU....", ... """"".
.......,.. ...,.....
.... . '--81 '--err It UI "'0.'» ~.". 8Cafll1I.... ""11 end . . . . . .
I..... ....... .1..,. ,.,. .....,.... ...,.
au 'w'"" ....., UICU. '-''''''
'8JJ'''-'I. ,.,. ""Iy p'am."" .h.
,....,.1, ",'n..., -",-a "'''''''.,
... .1 ""'.11.. ""'''''' .... ..,
"'''.'..
... . "'M, ... It UI It. ,.... """11.. """1.. .... I-a..". . . . . . .
...... 'tel.... II. .. '_a.. ...,... ccanc.nc, .11-
,.. ".,.... ..-....., ''''I~'.
"""". I.. .... "'''-1.
- . I........ It UI .- ..,. '0"''' """"". ... l'tIfIOtI'rw . . . . . .
... ........ .., "".",
.'.'1oM Mal.,.... acl M. W. * If-cll... ...... '''''''11- '.'''' .
..... --- F'UlIl acl . '''''''' ". 8fft' 'unl. 'or
'-1Ac1l.. '...,. 'CII'I8In.c;II... ........ ""'. .. '-'1\&1
.... ilia. ar-.. ...... ,81"""1 ... II..
J. U '.1, l. .1.
" ,... I
.. ~
. . '. ..
-------
MA8a IGI ........ .., I ...
&1.0-..... M91'CM,Un
/ lUlu...... ..-... ......~.-
.... "II. ...., IIANmn .'DinQ MI'I..CMI1. nJIIQl'_1QJ J J t J I .'
ICIA '."11''''''11'. 40 u. 111 ........... ''''''''''''''' 'w KIA ,.. A .
... ,.,. . ,.,... WUUU... ""
..,... ........ undh... WUc81. ..
... """".. .....,.............. ...
........ "''''eaU...
ICIA 611w.... I........ 60 u. J6l end .... ..,... "Ind8,.. 8A»IIC8IaI. .. . . . . .
.'eII'lIft Ac. 66. ----...,. ., .......... ..... 'IK'Ud..,
,..., ....". ".. fir'" .,..... """"
'-'''''''''''. .,.. ~.U..,
I end ,...,.,.-... '1#' ~..I....
,.,..,. U..
KIA I,.,...... 60 U. M.I ... .... ..,... ,-",1,-... .., """"''''' . . . .
II........ .'eII,.. Ac. 66, .. .....,.... -... ''''''UII'. C8p"~
,ei. 4, ...... .... ....."... 'W-'''' '.""".
/ end c....... .f .,'IdI.,... .,.
.,...,.,..
KIA "'''' """'" ,. u. "'. .... '0'''' "'''' ... ..,..... .
1 .. ....." 81. ........ . '''''',.-... '1#' 118.."... ....
'''''11'' 'IK'Ud.. ...... ''''.
' Can.. n.: II an. ...... 0( '.. ...,.......
I ~I. end 'KGnII8Ip'rw.
I
I . , I pl.!
. , .,....... .
-------
J .
.I.I.8A". . UW
I
I
I
I
.... . "",. and
~~ ..... '-8,...
I ;
I !
I.
IUluICIII..
DAN..., .'DI~
Acl ... 'wi. SOl
.'dl'"", Act ~'.
w.-,.
.... ... 8UA8u 1111' ..
Mft.ICMII.I n~I""'"
1lJeC1l1. I~,u' ''''-..U.. ,~...
,,.. C8WI~"", ........ ~ 'un'.
"""'" .. C-8n..:1 U,., .~'- f.
.....u...
''''''''' . ..II ........ and ..,--...,..
Pl. f- ~ ..r... dI-... ., ... ac,.
-..... AI.. ,.....,,,. I~I-......
., -.'. and .............. wne,..
........
AI. 0-..... Mft.ICM'I..n ..... '... . "'"
, "',
'. -.'
J
.' . ,
J
t
J
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.. - -... --"'-'-"""
;1 I. ..
-------
. '-.. - "."''' . ..
--00- .
-.-...--..~.-...~
~9
COST [STI~T£ . AlTCRHArlVE .
seleCTED VADOse lONE £ICAVATION/STABllIZATION/DISPOSAL
n!m No. Descr1Dt1on Total CosU!l
J. [xc.v.t! and to.d conttmfn.t!d $011
labor- ' $110,400
£QufPlDtnt JZ3,%00
H.ter-fals J56,140
Subcontractor/Expenses - 46.900
Subtotal S 435,640
2. Tr,nsportUion $ 316,230
3. DfspoUl S J,S03,6:~
4. 8'1:1'171 Ind Restoration
labor- .16,000
[Qu1PfDfnt 5,800
HHerfals 55,320
SUbcontractor/Expenses 3. JOS
Subtotal S '0,2Z5
5. SUPPort S.rvices & Restorlt1on
Llbor 12,820
Equipment J 7.000
If. terh 11 10.150
SUbcontractor-I/Expenses - 53 , no
SubtOh1 S J43,200
(stf.,t.d Totl1 Jt~ S 2.47i.89S
.. £ngfneerfng (JlI) S 117,585
. :...~.
. . 1.777,41:)
,. ,.";1 10tl1 [It 'alt.
. .."'- .: ... ~
" , ,-
' Cont1ngtncl (101) . .~.~. 155,500
~
-------
1
AU'l'O ION
KALAMAZOO. MICHIGAN
RES PONS IV'EN"F.SS SIDmAR~
INTRODUCTION
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)
entered into an 106 Administrative Order requiring the
undertaking of a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
(RI/FS) for the Auto Ion site located in Kalamazoo, Michigan with
the following potentially responsible parties (PRPs):
Amerace corporation; Brunswick Corporation, Buckeye Products
Corporation, Clark Equipment Company, Contractors United, Inc.,
Corning Glass Works, Dana Corporation, Faultless Caster
Corporation, General Motors Corporation, Gilbert Plating and
Bumper Exchange, Inc., Harman Automotive, Inc., Hoover Universal,
Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Kawneer, Inc., KTS Industries,
Inc., Muskegon Piston Ring Co., Shakespeare Company,
Sheller-Globe Corporation, Stanadyne, Inc., Sunstrand Heat
Transfer, Inc., United Technologies Automotive, Inc., Whirlpool
Corporation, and Wickes Manufacturing Company. The required RI/FS
activities for Operable Unit One (OU One) concerning soil
remediation have been completed, information was collected on the
nature and extent of contamination in the soil at the Auto Ion
site (RI), and alternatives for appropriate remedial action for
OU One at Auto Ion were developed and evaluated (FS and Proposed
Plan). At the conclusion of the FS, a Proposed Plan was
finalized by U.S. EPA in consultation with MDNR, which identified
a recommended alternative for remedial action at the Auto Ion
site.
~
U.S. EPA invited public comment on the Proposed Plan for the Auto
Ion Superfund site from August 3, 1989 through September 1, 1989.
On August 8, 1989, U.S. EPA held a public meeting at the
Kalamazoo City Hall in Kalamazoo, Michigan to present the
preferred alternative and accept public comments for operable
unit one outlined in the Proposed Plan. U.S. EPA representatives
in attendance at the meeting were:
"
'0
Rita Cestaric - EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM)
Frank Rollins - Previous RPM
Representatives from the MDNR were:
Gary Hoffmaster - MDNR Environmental Quality Analyst
Peter Ollila - MDNR Environmental Response Division
-------
2
The meeting was opened at 7:00 p.m. by Gary Hoffmaster, who
explained that the purpose of the meeting was to present EPA's
preferred alternative for soil remediation at the site and accept
pUblic comment. He pointed out that fact sheets were available
summarizing the alternatives evaluated for soil remediation and
presenting the Proposed Plan. He discussed site history and the
results of the Remedial Investigation. . The EPA Remedial Project
Manager for the site, Rita Cestaric, reviewed the alternatives
presented in the Feasibility Study, discussed EPA's nine criteria
Used to evaluate and compare the alternatives, and presented the
preferred alternative for soil remediation. She mentioned that
copies of the RI/FS r~port and PrOposed Plan were available in
the information repositories for the site. The meeting concluded
with a public comment period.
A transcript of the pUblic meeting was made. The transcript is a
fairly accurate account of the meeting. However, since there was
no taped audio account of the meeting, and the court reporter had
difficulties understanding parts of the presentations, a minimal
amount of reconstructing of the presentations has been done for
the written transcript. There was only one comment given at the
meeting, and that had been recorded accurately.
The purpose of this responsiveness summary is to document the
comments received durinc the pUblic comment period, and U.S. .
EPA's responses to the c~mments. All of the comments summarized
in this document were considered prior to U.S. EPA's final
decision embodied in the Record of Decision for the site.
The responsiveness surnr.~~y is divided into the following
sections:
I. ResDonsiveness Summarv Overview. This section briefly
outlines the proposed remedial alternatives as presented in the
Proposed Plan, including the recommended alternat~ve.
II. Summa of blic Comments Received Durin the Public Comment
Period and U.S. EPA ResDonses~ Both oral and written comments
are grouped by issues, followed by U.S. EPA responses to these
-------
3
I. ResDOnsiveness Summarv OVerview
On August 3; 1989, U.S. EPA made available to the public for
review and comment the Proposed Plan for OU One at the Auto Ion
site. The alternatives for remedial action describe methods for
cleaning up the soils on site. U.s. EPA's Proposed Plan
describes in detail six alternatives for remedial action at the
site. The proposed remedial alternatives are listed below:
Alternative 1 - No action - in which no further work will be done
at the site.
Alternative 3*- Excavation of all soil above the ground water
that contains contaminants above cleanup levels, stabilization
treatment of the soil, replacement of stabilized soil, followed
by construction of a mUlti-layer capping system over the entire
site. .
Alternative 4 - Excavation of all soil on site above the water
table and off site disposal in an approved land disposal cell.
Alternative 5 - Excavation of contaminated soil from hot spots
identified on site and off site disposal in an approved land
disposal cell.
Alternative 7 - Excavation of all soil on site above the water
table, stabilization,. and off site disposal in an approved land
disposal cell.
Alternative 8 - Excavation of soils above the water
within site boundaries posing a health risk greater
selected cleanup level would be excavated, treated,
to an approved off site land disposal cell.
table located
than the
and shipped
o
After careful. evaluation of the RI and the FS, the U.S. EPA
selected Alternative 8 as the preferred alternative in the
Proposed Plan for OU One at the Auto Ion site.
* - Alternatives are numbered as they appear in the FS.
Alternatives 2 and 7 were eliminated during the screening of
alternatives, and are not presented in the Proposed Plan.
~
-------
4
II. ~~ °i fo..e~ts ~e;etv~ ~r~~ ~e
. And U.5. EPA's R~sDOns 0 0 e t .L.
Public CO~ent Period
Comments received during the public comment period were given at
the public meeting and submitted to EPA in writing. Parties who
submitted comments are:
1) Mr. Edward Junia, Esq., on behalf of
Auto Ion Steering Committee
2) Ms. Kathleen SUllivan, Esq., on behalf of
Brunswick corp. -
3) Mr. Richard Butler, Esq., on behalf of
Faultless Caster
4) Mr. Richard Mc Callum
owner of property adjacent to Auto Ion
The public comments summarized below are organized according to
the following general subject areas: (a) risk assumptions: (bl
soil treatment: (c) separation of the site into operable units:
and (d) other comments. These comments have been taken into
consideration in determining the best alternative for addressing
contamination in the soil at the Auto Ion site.
Risk AssumDtions
General
During the course of an RI/FS at any Superfund site, the U.S. EPA
either prepares or has PRPs prepare a risk assessment according
to U.S. EPA policy and guidelines. This risk assessment provides
U.S. EPA with a basis for selection of remedy which would be
protective of public health, welfare, and the environment. The
U.S. EPA utilizes the best available in:ormation and makes
certain reasonable assumptions in risk calculations. The risk
assessment presented in the Auto Ion RI/FS was prepared
consistent with U.S. EPA policy and guidance, and with risk
-------
5
I.A. Co..eqt: Subsurface (2 to 20 foot depth interval) soil
concentrations for benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(a) anthracene, and
chrysene were used to characterize risk associated with potential
exposure to surface soils and to calculate theoretical surface
soil cleanup levels, even though these three pOlycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHS) were not dete~ted in any soil samples in the
0-2 foot depth interval. .
I.A. ResDOnse: Benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(a) anthracene, and chrysene
are possible cancer causing pOlycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs). These PAHs may be carcinogenic by all routes, including
dermal. Bioconcentration is important with these chemicals.
These PAHs were found in the soil primarily in the 2-11 foot
depth interval. Th~se carcinogenic chemicals were used to
characterize risk associated with exposure to surface soils for
the following reasons:
1)The depth interval in which the PARs were not found is
very shallow. Since the PARs are found starting at a
depth of only two feet, any future invasive site work
would likely expose the soil contaminated with PARs,
thereby posing risks associated with exposure to these
compounds.
2)Any invasive type of activity, such as digging, can mix
layers of contaminated soil with the shallow top layer.
I.B. Comment: The cancer potency factor (CPF) for benzo(a)pyrene
was used to assess potential carcinogenic risks ~or all PARs
~~:h a B2 weight of evidence of carcinogenity. This
approach overestimates the risks posed by PARs (i.e. chrysene)
that are regarded as less potent carcinogens than
benzo(a)pyrene.
,)
I.B. ResDonse: For years, the scientific community has been
conducting specific studies on a variety of PAR compounds and
conclusions regarding their actual carcinogenity are extremely
variable. The actual health risks associated with PAR exposure
are uncertain. The Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment (OHEA) within the U.S. EPA's Office of Research and
Development (ORD) has developed guidelines for carcinogen risk
assessment. These guidelines discuss weighing the evidence that
a substance is a carcinogen and classifying the chemical into one
of five groups:
'i
-------
6
Group A - Human carcinogen
Group B - Probable human carcinogen
Group C - Possible human carcinogen
Group D - Not classified as to human carcinogenity
Group E - Evidence of noncarcinogenity for humans
For the PAR group of compounds the cancer potency factor for
benzo(a)pyrene is Used for quantitative risk estimations, and
applied to those compounds which are actual or Possible human
carcinogens (i.e. Gro~ps A, B, and C). It should be noted that
there are uncertainties associated with the estimates of risks
and the assumptions-made in developing those estimations tend to
be conservative, i.e., with a tendency towards overestimation.
The actual risks are not likely to exceed those calculated, but
may be lower. This method of risk calculation for PAR, applyir.g
the cancer potency factor of benzo(a)pyrene to Group A, B, and C
carcinogens, provides for optimal protection of human health. '
The U.S. EPA risk calculations presented in the RI/FS complied
with Agency policy and guidance on risk assessment and resolve
any ambiguities in favor of protecting human health and the
environment.
Comment I.C.: The ingestion of surface soil at concentrations
equal to average regional background levels (6.5 mg/kg) of
arsenic in ~oil would result in carcinogenic risks greater than 1
x 10-6. Th~refore, the risk characterization calculations
performed for surficial concentrations of arsenic in this EA
probably greatly overestimate the actual risks posed by arsenic.
Response: The average regional background levels from literature
are actually a range of less than 1 to 6.5 mg/kg. Additional
background sampling for the site will be done during the remedial
design to confirm cleanup levels. U.S. EPA risk calculations are
done within a framework of policy and guidance and resolve any
ambiguities in favor of protecting human health and the
environment.
Comment I. D.: The calculated theoretical soil cleanup levels for
arsenic are lower than regional and site background
concentrations; therefore, the proposed cleanup goal for arsenic
should be, at most, to achieve regional background levels.
-------
7
Comment I.D.;Incidental ingestion risks for adults and
theoretical surface soil cleanup levels are based upon a
conservative ingestion rate for adults of 100 mg/day for a 70-
year lifetime exposure. This ingestion rate probably
overestimates the actual rate of soil ingestion by an order of
magnitude.
ResDOnse I.D.: U.S. EPA Directive 9850.4, "Interim Final Guidance
for Soil Ingestion Rates", recommends that soil ingestion rates
of 0.2 grams (200 mg) per day for children and 0.1 grams (lOOmg)
per day for adults be used in risk assessment calculations. This
guidance does not take into consideration children who exhibit
abnormal mouthing behavior. The standard adult weight for risk
assessment calculatrons is 70 kg. .
The ingestion risk
with Agency policy
any ambiguities in
environment.
calculations presented in the RI/FS complied
and guidance on risk assessment and resolve
favor of protecting human health and the
Comment I.E.: Three conservative assumptions were used in the
risk analysis for exposure to particulates in surface soil via
the inhalation pathway. Based on these assumptions, calculated
risks for the inhalation pathway overestimate the actual risk.
Since these values were used to calculate theoretical surface
soil cleanup levels for arsenic and nickel, it is likely that
these cleanup levels are much more conservative than anticipated
by the one in a million or acceptable risk level calculations.
Response I.E.: Inhalation health hazards or carcinogenic risks
were calculated using the maximum concentration of respirable
particulate matter in ambient air allowed under the Clean Air
Act, since no air sampling was performed at the site during the
RI.
v
In order to calculate inhalation exposures, the concentration of
the chemical of concern present in surface soil was used to
predict the concentration of the chemical in the air. The
percentage of the substance present in surface soil was assumed
to equal the percentage of the substance present in respirable
particulates in the air. The assumptions made in developing
those estimations tend to be conservative, with a tendency
towards overestimation of risk, and were made in compliance with
U.S. EPA policy and guidance which resolves any ambiguities in
favor of protecting human health and the environment.
n
-------
8
Co..ent r.~'L The potential for exposure via soil inqestion is
thouqht to be minimal under current conditions and any projected
future uses because the location of the site in an industrial
area and the presence of a fence around the site minimize site
access.
Therefore, site access would be restricted. Further, younq
children who are most likely to inqest soil are not expected to
be present on the site.
ResDOnse I.P.L The U.~. EPA Commonly uses a "residential
scenario" (i.e. unrestricted use of the site) when quantifying
risks. Althouqh the site is not currently zoned residential,
there are no assurances that this would not change in the future.
The preamble to the proposed National Contingency Plan (NCP), 53
Fed. Reg. at 51423, states that:"...institutional controls such
as water and deed restrictions may supplement engineering
controls for short- and long-term management to prevent, or limit
exposure, to hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants.
Institutional controls will be used. routinely to prevent exposure
to releases during the conduct of the remedial investigation and
feasibility study, during remedial action implementation, and as
a supplement to engineering controls designed to manage waste
Over time. us 0 institutional cont ols to estrict use or
access shou d not owever substitute for active res onse
measures (treatment and/or containment of source material,
restoration of ground water to their beneficial uses) as the sole
remedy unless such active measures are determined not to be
practicable, based on the balancing of trade-Offs among
alternatives that is conducted during the selection of the
remedy." (Emphasis added).
Trespassing has occurred on the site in the past, and is
to continue. Due to vandalism, there are large openings
fence surrounding the site. In addition, two schools are
within one-half mile of the site.
likely
in the
located
o
v
Soil Treatment
General: The Steering Committee appears to have six basic
comments on the Agency's preference for soil excavation,
treatment, and off-site disposal. The comments and the Agency's
-------
9
~O"ent ~I. A,~ Arsenic is not F006 waste. If arsenic is the
drivinq force behind the cleanup at the site, the Aqency'.
reliance on CERCLA's qeneral rules for cleanup standards i.
misPlaced. Hore specifically, since arSenic is not F006 waste,
treatment is not necessary prior to off-site disposal.
BeSDonse.II.A.~ The soil contains constituents of wastewater
treatment sludqes from electroPlatinq Operations which, when
excavated and removed outside the area of cOntamination, are
Considered listed hazardous Waste, qiven EPA hazardous waste
F006. This type of waste is described in 40 CFR 261 as:
Wastewater treatment SlUdqes from electroPlatinq
operations except from the fOllowinq processes; (1)
Sulfuric acid anodizinq of aluminum: (2) tin platinq on
carbon steel:(3) zinc Platinq (seqreqated basis) on
carbon steel: (4) aluminum or zinc-aluminum Platinq on
carbon steel;(s) cleaninq/stripPinq associated with
tin, Zinc, and aluminum Platinq on carbon Steel; and
(6) chemical etchinq and millinq of aluminum.
Code
Under the mixture rule, 40 CFR 26l.3(a)(2), when any solid waste
and a listed hazardous Waste are mixed, the entire mixture is a
listed hazardous Waste. Therefore, the entire mixture of arsenic
and F006, alonq with other soil contaminants, is considered
listed hazardous waste.
Land disposal, or placement, as defined in RCRA 3004(k)
includes, but is not limited to:
~
Since excaVation and off-site disposal of the soil cOnstitute
placement of a RCRA hazardous waste (F006), RCRA land disposal
restrictions (LDRS), which place restrictions on the land
disposal Of RCRA hazardous waste, apply. The treatment standard
established under the LDR which applies to F006 in the soil
matrix is a treatment standard expressed as a concentration level
to be aChieved prior to off-site disposal. Stabilization
treatment to reduce the mobility of inorqanics is required for
F006 wastes in order to meet the concentration level. The test
USed to evaluate compliance with the concentration level standard
will be the Toxicity Characteristic Leachinq Procedure (TCLP)
test.
any .Placement" of hazardous waste in a landfill,
surface impoundment, waste pile, injection well, land
treatment facility, salt dome formation, salt bed
formation, salt bed formation, Underqround mine or
cave, and concrete bunker or vault.
~
-------
10
C088en~ ~X.B'L The Aqency has no~ es~ablished BCAT tor arsenic in
F006 wastes.
ReSDOns~ XX.B.: For ~he r~asons se~ out in the response above,
~he treatment technoloqy wlll be that accorded F006 waste. Thus
the establishment of treatment standards under the LDRs on the
basis of the best demonstrated available technology (BOAT) for
arsenic is not necessary as BOAT exists for treatment of F006
wastes.
Comment II.C.L It is doubtful there is any viable treatment
technology for arsenic waste.
ResDonse II.C.L The treatment technology will be that accorded
F006 waste for the reasons given above. The stabilization
treatment required for F006 waste is not experimental, but is
routinely used to reduce mobility of F006waste. The soil must
pass the TCLP test for soil containing F006 waste prior to off
site disposal, as required by RCRA land disposal restrictions.
Comment II.D.:U.S. EPA has maintained that reducing mooility,
toxicity, and volume is a primary consideration. However, the
volume increases, the toxicity is not reduced, and it is
uncertain the effect treatment will have on the mobility of the
waste.
ResDonse II. D.: The stabilization treatment required for F006
waste is not experimental, but is routinely used to reduce
mobility of F006 waste. The results of the treatability studies
will indicate the most appropriate stabilization ~echnology.
Mobility of the F006 contaminants will be reduced, decreasing
migration of these contaminants to ground water. Toxicity is not
reduced, and volume will increase.
J
Comment II. E.: "The soils being remediated because of arsenic
levels cannot be considered to be F006 waste for two reasons:
The Steering Committee believes that the 1) primary source of
arsenic contamination at the site is the result of power plant
operat:~ns and 2)disposal of power plant ash at the site and the
land ban treatment standards do not contain a treatment standard
-------
o
11
Res~nse II.E.~ There are two separate issues brought up in this
comment. The first issue concerns the source of arsenic
contamination. EPA has determined that the arsenic on site is
from two sources; plating waste from the site and fly ash from
operation of the power plant. U.S. EPA neither agrees nor
disagrees that the primary source of arsenic contamination at the
site is the result of power plant operations. The second issue
concerns treatment standards for arsenic and is addressed in the
responses to soil treatment comments above.
Comment II.P.; The Agency Position, set out,in Vol. 51 Fed. Reg.
40577 (November 7, 1986), wherein the Agency stated that "the
treatability variances ~ be needed for some soils" and that the
Agency planned to "perform additional characterizations of soils,
and, where necessa~, amend the treatment standards by adding
additional standards specifically for these wastes", misled the
regulated community-into believing that additional standards for
soil treatment, not specifically addressed at that time, would be
established.
ResDonse II.P.: The Agency's anticipation that variances may be
needed for some soils and that it would do additional
characterizations of soils where necessary, was in no way
intended to mislead the affected community into believing that
additional standards would be established. The language was not
intended to bind the Agency to establishing such standards or to
indicate that such additional standards would be necessary.
Rather, the statement was intended only to indicate that such
variances maybe necessary. At this point, the Agency has not
:ound such additional standards necessary and asserts that the
standards established for F006 wastes are sufficient.
SeDaration of Site into ODerable Units
~
Comment III.A.: There is concern that the U.S. EPA's decision to
split the remedial action into operable units will result in the
U.S. EPA requiring work performed in each of the operable units
that is inconsistent and duplicative or that could have been
performed in a more cost effective manner if planning and
-------
12
ResDOnse III.A.. The RI has identified contamination problems in
the soils, including migration of the contaminants into the
ground water. In order to protect human health and the
environment, and to respond to the Aqency's .bias for action,
U.S. EPA has divided the site into operable units, one for soils
and another for ground water. While the ground water needs
further study, there is no reason to delay remediation of the
soils. The operable unit for the soils will be fully consistent
with all future operable units.
Other Comments
Comment IV.A.i A representative from the city of Kalamazoo
questioned what U.S. EPA was doing to pursue Jim Rooney, former
owner of Auto Ion. .
ReSDonse IV.A.: This question relates to U.S. EPA enforcement
activities against PRPs at the Auto Ion site. The purpose of
this responsiveness summ~ry is not to comment on U.S. EPA
enforcement strategy, but to respond to comments on the RI/FS and
its recommendations.
Comment IV.B.L An adjacent property owner had ground water
testing done on his property by a private firm. The owner states
that he wants a cleanup done on his property, since the results
of the testing indicate elevated levels of metals and organics.
ResDonse IV.B.: Operable unit two concerns ground water
contamination. Off site contamination problems will be
considered then, including the contribution, if any, of off-site
sources to contamination of the ground water at Auto Ion.
------- |