United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROO/R04-88/037
June 1988
3 EPA
Super-fund
Record of Decision;
Wamchem,SC
-------
50272 -101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION \1. REPORT NO. 12.
. PAGE EPA/ROD/R04-88/037
3. Recipient', Acceilion No.
I.. Title and Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Wamchem, SC
I ~. Remedial Action - Final
~)
5. Repoeff!~o 188
6.
. .
8. Performine Oreanization Rept. No.
9, Performlne O,.anizetlon Name and Addres,
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
-- --
-.--
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C)
(G)
----
12. Sponsorlnll Orllanintlon Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection
401 M street, S.W.
washington, D.C. 20460
- .
Agency
13. Type 01 Report & Period Covered
800/000
II,.
15. Supplementary Notea
11. AbstrKt (Umlt: 200 word$)
The 21-acre Wamchem site is located in Burton, Beaufort County, south Carolina on a
small -island in the midst of a salt marsh near McCalleys Creek, a tidal stream. The
creek is considered to be a habitat for the loggerhead turtle, a federally listed
threatened species, and a probable habitat for the short-nosed sturgeon, also a
federally listed endangered species. The water table aquifer at the site dischargeS
in~~ the creek, and has no distinct confining unit separating it from the underlying
i idian aquifer, the principal aquifer in the region. Between 1959 and 1972, the
~ lfort Chemical and Research Company owned and operated the site, producing dyes for
the textile industry. In 1972, M. Lowenstein Company purchased the facility and
continued operations until 1981. When solvent recovery and recycling operations were
discontinued at the site, M. Lowenstein Company closed tne plant in 1982. Liquid wastes
generated at the site were discharged to a drainage ditch leading to two unlined ponds.
A ditch was later extended from one of the ponds, discharging wastes directly into
McCalleys Creek. Waste treatment methods changed, and the ponds and ditches were
replaced by an unlined holding pond and a waste lagoon in 1972; however, these were soon
replaced by two spray fields and a concrete-lined holding pond in 1975. In 1977, the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) required the
(See Attached Sheet)
"
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
~ Record of Decision
Wamchem, SC
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Media:_gw, soil
Key Contaminants: organics, VOCs
b. Tdentlflers/Open.Ended Terms
(benzene, toluene, xylenes)
c. COSATI Field/Group
18.
,jfity Statement
-'--' . .--
19. Security CidSS (This Report)
None
21. NO. 01 Pases
53
O' .
----
20. Security. Class (This Pase)
. NOne'
22. Price
(S.. ANSI-Z39.18)
See In,tructions on Reverse
OPTION~L FORM 272 (4-77)
(Forme,Iy NTI5-35)
Department 01 Commerce
-------
Er'/ROD/R04-88/037
r hem, SC
I.' .t Remedial Action - Final
16.
ABSTRACT (continued)
company to use a spray-irrigation technique to improve its wastewater process. The
wastes discha~ged onto the spray fields consisted of neutralized sulfuric acid and
process water. Although the system was found to be in compliance with SCDHEC standards,
ground water contamination was documented at the site in 1982. Current soil and ground
water contaminants include: VOCs, benzene, toluene, xylenes, semi-volatiles, and
organics. . .
The selected remedial action for this site includes: ground water pump and treatment
using carbon adsorption with offsite discharge to a stream; excavation and low
temperature thermal aeration of 2,000 yd3 of contaminated soil followed by onsite
disposal; and ground water monitoring. The estimated capital cost for this remedial
action is $1,310,000, with annual O&K of $155,100.
-------
ENFCR:EMENI'
REIXJRD OF DEX:ISICN
REMEDIAL AL'I'mmIVE SEX:I'ICN
WAM:HEM SITE
BURItN, BE1>JJFCRI' CXXINI'Y
SCX1IH ~
PREPARED BY:
u. S. ENVIRCNMENrAL PR01U:l'lCN N;EN::Y
REX;ICN IV
~, GEDRGIA
-------
~CN FCR '!HE REXXIID OF DEx:ISICN .
Si te ~ and r.a:ation
Warrchen
Burton, Beaufort COlmty, SOuth carolina.
Statanent of Puroose
'!his decision c1octm\ent represents the selected remedial action for this site
develot:Ed in accordance with cmc:IA, as emended by ~, and to the extent
practicable, the National COntingency Plan.
DescriPtion of the Selected Raneqy
~
- Extraction of contaminated groundwater
- On-site treatment of extracted groundwater
. .- Discharge of treated gro1..1I'1dwater to off-site stream
- GrO\.II'ldWater ranediation will be perfonred until all contaminated water
meet~; the cleanup goals specified in the attached SLIn'IT'a.IY of Alternative
Selection.
SOIL
- On-site treatment of contaminated soil (awroximat.ely 2,000 cubic yards)
to rarove organic contaminants.
Declaration
'!he State of SOuth carolina haS concurred on the selected renedy.
'!his remedy is SlJPIX'rted by the Mninistrati ve Record.
"'!he selected renedy is protective of human health and t_'1e environment, attains
Federal and state requiranent.s that are awlicable or re levant and awropriate,
and is cost-effective. 'DUs remedy satisfies the prefe!'~~ for treatment that
reduces toxicity, robility, or volune as a principle el~t. Finally, it is
determined that this remedy utilizes permanent solutions and alternative
treatmant technologies to the max:imJm extent practicable."
JUN 3 0 1988
Greer C. Tidwell
Regional Mministrator
Date
-------
~Y OF REMEDI1\L ALTERNM'IVE SELEX:TICN
~ SITE
BURICN, B,EMJFORT CXX1Nl'Y, saJ1H G\RCILINA
F'REPARED BY:
u. S. ENVIRC:R1ENW. PROl'ti,;l'l.CN MJFN::{
REnICN rJ
ATI.ANrA, GEIJRGIA
()
-------
'I1\BLE OF CXNI'ENI'S
1.0 INIJO:U:TICN
1.1 si te Location an:! Description
1.2 Site History
PAGE
1
1
5
2.0 ENFORCEMENI' ANALYSIS
6
3. 0 CURRE.NI' SITE 5'l1crUS
3.1 Hydrogeologic setting
3. 2 si te COntamination
3.3 Receptors
4. 0 ~ CRI'I'ERIA
4.1 Groundwater Renediation
4.2 SOil Renediation
4. 3 surface Water isecliment Ranecliation
6
6
7
26
26
26
27
30
5 . 0 AL'I'ERNlcr'IVES EVALUATICN
. 5..1 Alternatives
30
36
6.0 REXXM1ENDED AL'I'ERNlcr'IVES
6 .1 Description of Reccmrended Rarecly
6.2 Operation and Ma.intenance
6. 3 Cost of Recorrmended Al ternati ves
6.4 SChedule
6.5 Future Actions
6.6 Consistency with Other ,Environrrental Laws
37
37
38
38
38
38
38
7.0 cc:M-tJNITY RELATICNs
40
-------
()
LI5r OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Regional Location Map
Figure 2 - Wamchem Site Facilities Map
Figure 3 - Wamchem Site and Vicinity
Figure 4 - SOil Sanpling wcations
Figure 5 - contaminants of Concern in SOils
Figure 6 - 1d:litional. SOil Sampling wcations .
Figure 7 - SUrface Water/sediment Sampling Locations
Figure 8 - Locations of Bui lding Wipe am Waste Samples
Figure 9 - wcations of onsite Wells .
Figure 10- wcations of Offsite Domestic Wells
Figure 11- wcations of kIUatic Life Sample Stations
LI5r OF ~Rr,F_~
Table 1 - Results of Analysis of SOils
Table 2 - Results of Analysis of ~itiona1 SOils
Table 3 ..., sediment Analysis Results
Table 4 - Results of Building Wipe Samples
Table 5 - Groundwater Analysis of onsite Wells
Table 6 - Groundwater Analysis of Offsite Wells
Table 7 - Groundwater Cleanup Goals
Table 8 - SOil Cleanup Goals
Table 9 - Remedial Alternatives for Groundwater & SOil
. Table 10- Preliminary SCreening of Renedial Actions
Table 11- SUITtnary of Remediation Alternatives
I . .
PAGE
2
3
4
8
10
11
16
20
23
24
25
9
12
18
19
21
22
28
29
31
32
35
-------
ENFCRCE11EN1'
REXX!ID OF DEX:ISICN
~y OF REMEDIAL AL~ SEUX:TICN
WAM:HEM SITE
BURICN, ~, rolNI'Y SCX1IH ~
1.0 INI'RCDJ:TICN
'!he Wanchan Site was prop::>sed for inclusion on the National Priori ties List
(NPL) in 5eptanber 1983 and ranks 211 out of 802 NPL Sites. '!he Warrchan Site
has teen the subject of a Renedial Investigation (RI) arx1 Feasibility Study
(FS) performed by the resp:)nsible party, Springs Industries, umer an
Mninistrative Order by Consent dated April 16, 1986. '!he RI rep:>rt, which
examines air, sediIrent, soil, surface water and grotn'XiWater contamination at
the site was completed on April 21, 1987. '!he FS, which develops and examines
alternatives for ranediation of the site, was issued in draft form to the
p..tblic on May 16, 1988. .
'!his Record of Decision has been prepared to surrtnarize the ranedial alternative
selection process and to present the selected raneclial alternative.
1.1 Site Location and DescriPtion
The Wam:han Site is located in Beaufort COtmty, SOuth Carolina, awroximately 7.
miles northwest of the town of Beaufort (Figure 1). The site consists of
awroximately 21 acres and is located on a small island in the midst of a salt
marsh near the upper reach of M:Calleys Creek, a tidal stream.
'!he Wam:han Site contains two spray fields, a product ion area, an office, a
waste lagoon, a trash diSp:)sal area and two holding ponds, none of which are
currently in use (Figure 2).
The land near the Wam:han Site has been developed without zoning and is a .
combination of residential, .commercial, industrial, and military development
(Figure 3). The Wam:han site is surrounded by a salt m:3Ish !:ordering M:Ca.lleys
on the north, east, and south sides. U.S. Highway 21 !:orders on the west side
of the site. A rotel, located across U.S. Highway 21 on the west side Of the
highway has less than 19 tmi ts, and is currently operated as a caIT1P3T0urx1.
Five nobile hcJtes are located to the north of the rrotel. Approximately 10
residents are located along a road cut through on the eastern side of U.S.
highway 21. '!he area where these residences are located is less than a mile
north of. the site. One'family lives adjacent to the northern boundary of the
site.
A large l,OOO-tmit housing developnent is located at Laurel Bay 3 miles to the
south\.lest. 'IWo small chanical campa.nies are located within a mile of the
Wam:han Site, and the 5, 300-acre federally owned U.S. Marine COrps Air Station
is located one mi Ie south of the plant off U. S. Highway 21.
Beaufort COtmty is approximately 69 miles fran O1arleston, SOuth Carolina and
awroxirnately 50 miles from Savannah, Georgia. The IX>p.llation of the county is
-------
-2-
~
OHIO
INDIANA
ILLINOIS
KENTUCKY
TENNESSEE
ALABAMA
GEORGIA
~
~
~
li
\:)
MISSISSIPPI
li
"-
f....
~
"
"J
f....
"
FLORIDA
GULF OF MEXICO
FIGURE 1
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
Dames & Moore
- ---
-. - ---.----
-------
'1
I
~. ----/. . .\~ ~
------~\.> r~„:-.~ -' "\ "\ ~.
~,( - \\ ( . ~ ~. . ~\ ,,\
\\',SfflAY fiELD B \' ~ . . . ., 'L
w. ~\ ~~~ 7' ~ . ~ . ,.:. .
"~, ..J \. ~ ~ JIJ' .
'.',- - - - - - ~ ~-- . / H. .
\::---() '\ - . ~,,;c;;;;Y'~;EK ~:~:
'\' ':'-4 C ~~~
~ \"-
,~, "--..: _.-
" \
" .~ ~~~ ;."
) .~ ~~ ) .
~ .. 00 -, (---, R ij~
w /",,-, WOIUjl("<~.,..(~~~ (-D;:::~1 ti ~I"'~
.... \ HOLD'''',,' '.... "I ~
- "oO' \ POND "'&" AlitA.,' '. II.-*" \ .'"
< .- \ \~::;:TE \ ~~w;T r~1 - ~ \~ .:-
\ SPRAY FIELD A ~ \ ., ., " - - - ( ~ ~
\" . \ - ~:..:::: :.a[~ HiGH ...~tER .... \1 If \ .~ \~
" - -.-' - . . . . l\ ~ ~ ~
-~- --/'~~~/-- -. -.- ~ ~ .
-.---.. ~ \ '
NOTE: BASE MAP IS TAKEN FROM LAW ENOINEERING TESTING CO., PROJECT No. MH 2116, FIGURE'.
o
I
-
SCAl E
200 F..,
I
c:
'"
1:
G1
1:
~
~
~
I
W
I
FIGURE 2
WAMCHEM SITE FACILITIES MAP
D...... & Moore
-------
l-
I'"
. ~ -:--:.
, I
SC: A L. E
. Appro,umate SIT! 10
cation
FIGURE 3
WAMCHEM SITE AND VICINITY
-
. .
"
Darn.s & Moo.. I
-------
-5~
65,364 according to the 1980 census.
1.2 Site History
'!he Wanchan site was originally owned and operated by the Beaufort Olanical and
Research Catpany which produced intennediate dyes for the textile in:h.1stry
between 1959 and 1972. In 1972, M.. Lowenstein CCITpany purchased the facility
and continued operation of the plant until 1981. In 1981, solvent recovery and
recycling operations at the site were discontinued and in 1982, the M.
I£Jwenstein Canpany closed the plant. Springs Industries, Inc. acquired the M.
Lowenstein Ccrrpmy as a subsidiary in 1985.
Waste handling at the site evolved fran an initial procedure of discharging
liquid wastes to a drainage ditch leading to two small, unlined holding p:mds:
a ditch later was extended from one of the p:mds, discharging wastes directly
into M::Calleys Creek. As waste treatment methods changed, the ditch and small
p:>nds were replaced. An unlined holding p:md and waste lagoon were constructed
in 1972: however, these were soon r~laced with t\oJO spray fieldS and a concrete
- lined holding p:>nd in 1975. In 1977, the SOuth carolina Department of Health
and. Environmental Control (sc:r:mx:) required the cCll'pal1y to use a spray-.
irrigation technique to improve its wastewater treatrne.'1t process. According to
SCIEEX:, the wastes discharged onto the spray fieldS consisted of neutralized
sulfuric acid and process water. Although the wastewater systan was found to
be in compliance with scr:HEX:' s standardS, groundwater contamination was
documented at the site in 1982. .
The principal types of synthesis conducted at the Wam:han Site were nitrations,
catalytic hydrogenations, oxidations, animations, amidations, esterifications,
condensations, low pressure reactions, and sulfonations- alIrost always
involving an aromatic substrate rrolecule. A 1978 initial 'IOSCA inventory list
ci ted the following as being. the major products used/rre.nufactured at Wam:han:
3-ni tro, 4-rnethylbenzarnide i 4-aminobenzarnide i 4-ni trobenzamide i
3-ni tro, 4-rnethylbenzoic acid i 3-ni tro, 4-Irethylbenzarnide; secondary-butyl,
ni trobenzene, and 4-ni trobenzoic acid.
'Ihe Wanchan Site was placed on the National .Priorities List in 5eptanber 1983
due to the presence of p:>table water wells wi thin a three mi Ie radius of the
site. EPA and M. Lowenstein Company signed a RI/FS Consent Agrearent on April
16, 1986. 'Ihe final RI was issued April 21, 1987 and the draft FS was released
to the p.1blic May 16, 1988. .
The objectives of the site investigation were to:
* O1aracterize and quantify contamination attributable to the Wam:han Site
in groundwater, soils, surface water, bottom sediments in M:Calleys Creek
and surfaces of onsite buildings.
*
Better define the geology and hydrology in the vicinity of the site,
especially with respect to the interrelationships aIT'Ong M::Calleys Creek,
the wa1;.er table aquifer, and the Floridan kpifer with an E!!1p1aSis on the
. problan of defining contaminant transp:>rt. . .
-------
-6-
*
Assess the risks that contaminants attritutable to the site p:>se to 00man
health am the envi rOJ Allent.
'!he p.lI1X>se of the feasibi li ty study was to develop am examine rareclial
alternatives for the site, am to screen these alternatives on the basis of
protection of human health am the envirOJIIlleIlt, cost-effectiveness am
technical ilT1plementabili ty. In accordarce with the CoopI ehensi ve EnvirOJllr8rt..a.l
RespJl1Se, CClTpenSation and Liability ~ of 1980 (CERCIA), as am:!rrled by the
SUperfuoo Amendrrents and Reauthorization ~ of 1986 (~), alternatives in
which treatment would p=rmanently and significantly reduce the voltme,
toxici ty, or rrobili ty of the hazardous substances at the site were preferred
over 1110se alternatives not involving such treatnent.
2. 0 ENFORCEMENI' ANALYSIS
'!he Wam:han Site was added to the NPL in 5eptenber 1983 and EPA asSUIred lead
resp:msibility for the site at that time. '!he current owner, Springs
Industries, acquired the site in 1985 and agreed to p=rfonn the RI/FS. A
notice letter was sent to Springs Industries on January 15, 1986. Negotiations
for the RI/FS Consent Agreanent were concluded with the signing of the dc:current
by u"1th EPA and M. Lowenstein C::ompany on April 16, 1986.
3. 0 CURREN!' SITE STAWS
3.1 HvdrOCleolcx:/ic settinq
'!he Wam:han Site is generally located downgradient of a basin ridge coincident
with the north-south trend of U.S. Highway 21; therefore all surface drainage
fran the site is within the confines of the M::Calleys Creek basin. Discharge
from M:Calleys Creek ITeY take several routes due to the connectivity of the
channel reaches. Therefore the Coosaw River, Beaufort River, Whale Branch, and
Broad River ITeY be recipients of discharge from M:Calleys Creek. ,Ultimately,
these rivers are connected to Port Royal SOund to the south am St. Helena
SOUOO to the east.
'!he water table aquifer at the Wam:han Site is CaTpJsed predaninantly of San:.is
and there is 00 distinct confining unit separating the '..Jater table aquifer fran
the uooerlying Floridan ~ifer. However, the difference in hydraulic
corrluct.ivity between the water table aquifer and the Floridan kIW-fer resultS
in partial confinement of the Floridan h:IUifer by the water table aquifer. '!he
vertical hydraulic gradient between the t\oJO aquifers was p:>sitive (up..;ard)
during the RI field work. This in:licates that the Warrchan Site is in a zone of
discharge for the Floridan kIW-fer.
In the Beaufort COtmty region, the Floridan ~ifer is mainly caTpJsed of the
Santee am O::ala Limestones. The O::ala Li1rest.one in the Beaufort COtmty region
is made up of a lower and an ~r tmi t. '!his ~r lIDi t is the principal
aquifer in the region and was estimated to supply over 99 p=rcent of the
grolIIldwater and rrore than 75 p=rcent of all water used in Beaufort CmIDty in
1976.
Water tables tern to be very shallow in the swampy, to tOFOgrapllcally lower
-------
-7-
elevations am. range fran surface grade to awraximately three feet deep..
3.2 Site COnt.ami.natian
'Ihe Warrchan Site contains six main areas designated as Spray Field A, Spray
Field B, Fonner Waste Lagoon, Forner Holding Pond, Existing Holding Pond, and
Trash DiSpJsal Area. SOil, groundwater, surface water am. sediment sanples
have been collected in and around each area and analyzed. All sanples have been
analyzed for Hazardous SUbstances List (HSL) volatiles, sanivolatiles and .
metalS .
SOilS
An onsite rrobile latoratory was used to screen soil samples taken fran 43
locations .on the Warrchan Site. 'Ihe screening program analyzed 98 soil samples
for three volatile organic CCJ1tX)unds (benzene, toluene, am. 1,1,2-
trichloroethane) and two sanivolatile cCJTp:n.Inds (aniline and nitrobenzene).
'Ihe p.1l1X)se of the soil screening program was to rapidly assess the spatial .
distribution and concentrations of the CaTp:>urm oUtlined above.
Based ui:on the results of the field screening program, five soil samples w.ere
sent to a CLP " :1Joratory to be analyzed for HSL volatiles sanivolatiles and
metals. 'Ihese were 50-20 and SO~2l (former holding pond), 50-18 (Former waste
lagoon}, 50-30 (production area) and 50-45 (background) (Figure 4). Results of
these analyses are presented in Table 1 and sumnarized in Figure 5.
'!he results of these analyses indicated that the main area of soil
contamination was in the vicinity of the forner holding pond. ~tional soil
1:orings were conducted in this area to fully delineate the arrount of soil
contamination. Figure 6 shows the locations of these. soil samples and Table 2
sumnarizes the analyses results. .
In addition to the HSL volatiles and sanivolatiles, various organic cCJ1tX)unds
not belonging to the HsL were dE!tected. 'lWenty tentatively identified
CCJ1tX)unds were detected in SO-20B, ranging in concentrations fran a minimum of
49,000 ug/kg for l-ethyl-3-rnethylbenzene to a maximum of 2,900,000 ug/kg for 7-
chlorothiazolo (5,4-D) pyrimidine. SOil sanple SO-2lB contained 15 tentatively
identified cCJTtIX'l1I'lds, with a minimum concentration of 15 ug/kg for
trichlorofluorarethane to a maximum concentration of 380,000 ug/kg for a
benzoic acid isaner. . .
surface Water
'Ihe surface water sampling locations are shown on Figure 7. '!he results of the
analyses did not reveal any HSL organic CaTp:>unc1s,' however ten tentatively
identified cCJTp:n.Inds were detected. All were hydrocar1:ons and ranged in
concentration from 8 ug/l to 38 ug/l in sample 5W-4.
5edinent
'!he sediment sanpling locations are shown on Figure 7. and results are given in
-------
1-
~
..
j
I~
. ,.."Cj
. . . \ 0 ---..... .
.\ \\ '\\,,\ '_~ '0' ',',
'\":'1) "\ J(:
. ...-\"....~:~, \ ~ ':. ~".' ,
--::;:--\ ("~ \ A -\I',' - . ,
.- .., ~ I' 'I 'Ii. .. \
' : \ \ '. :. '\ -, I \ "
. ,\\\\;\~~0;~~\' \
. " \\ '\ \, . \ \
, \\ \ \ ' ) "... I
',\\ \ \, \ 'I ~.\ '\
,'./) \\ \\} '" '" ~ ".
'v- \1 ',- \ ' 1..\.:-", - . '..
~ \ ".: ",..::.,lrS
11)/\ (~\ V" ,; "\': >~~~o.::~ 50-40
. ~. \ \ \\.~ \ APPROXIMATE '~';WO';9 ~"SO'-IJ
I CI ~<~"; AREAOFSPRAY X . "
. \, ..~ "\~ \ FielD B "'~". SO.38
=11 .' \ \ \ ." 'I .SO]-I
..1\.:;:;::::-.;, SO-35;,,'-,
~.;:-::::::::::::::c J- . r ~. , SO-36 I? SO-]7 ::?S.3033"2'" ",
vI . . - . ,_::..~ ~ \ \. , ' II ....' "',
. . ',:'" --C' .' \. ~ \~~\ . .'" /1 ,.:~ "co '(, APPROXIMA!.E
\). ~::'~~~'-~,') I. \\\ .//' /a//'- ~~\~O 0 .SO,31. C'~'..~~:~~:HOLDING
/ .r '-:::-0.:--'-'1' '~ . '/ " \1, POND
'':: 0-,':' \n I \ .'; /;,// '~- ; ,
/"'':''-;''':'~'L\'; \~ ,~ -.~.. ':. .0<.,. / ;;0 dl so'1:.:30 ~-} --APPROXIMATE
.:'/ . "\~\'~\~\'I\\..r~~. .;...\-/'~;r" ..SO-".J :::"~~:'~()i',IP~)-/j SO~ll,- ,~. ;. -.50-l') ~::~~~ISPOSAL
,~ i'\ \ 1\ -' ....." <;0.]. . . . SO-12~ i ~. AR~A
:.\\. ", I'~ 1 . SO-,ll. SlJ-i" SO-II SO~J9;/ , :\.,~~~~~"
'. ',' " ",' .' SO-I. S~".- ~SO-6 S{)~f() ..~J-J6. 150-25 SO~27- ..
'. \\ !\\ \' . . S' 7. . SO-~; SO-26
, '.\ \ '. \ . SO.:! 0- 050.8 I 50-13 E:
-------
-9-
'I1\BLE 1
RESULTS OF ANM,Y515 OF
SOILS CXJLLEX:TED AOOUST 1986 (ug/kg)
ccm:ound 50-18 50-20 50- 21 50-30 50-45
Methylene 20B 1300JB IlB 49B 76B
chloride
Acetone 33B 100 36B 81B
2-Butanone 53
Benzene 1.4.1 1. 7JB
'Ib1uerie 12000J 20
. :rotal Xylene 720;000 290 48
Phenol 68J
1,2 Dichloro 11,000J 1300J
benzene
Benzoic Acid 170J
1,2,4 Trichloro 18000J 29000
benzene
Napthalene 4000J
2,4-Dinitro 100J 480000 53000
toluene
Di-n-butyl 81JB
Ii'ttJ1alate
Bis(2-ethy1- 68J 340JB
hexyl) };i1thalate
1,4 Dichloro 35 ,.000
benzene
J- Indicates an estimated value.
B- Analyte was found in the blank as well as the sanp1e.
-------
I
i '
"...J.-
/;~,~~
i,'. (-
,
, : '..) "\
\ '\ I"
\ ' ,
-~
I
.....
o
I
,o><\.~::;. ""0 \
\\'. ;,~~.), ,
~\ ,\\'\' '\ \,
"'" \\~\,'" I ,> ~
1(;,. ' "
'~ ,"/ -,.': \ .'" "'"
Vr ' '.'.
; [J '/ -4 .,\ \ ~ ----.-')
" 1/ '~\V\\ \, .'~ . 050-41" J
, .LJ., \' ," . '\ 8 \./
:, ;',1 \ \~\ '. TOLUENE 112.0001 \. 8S0-42 \, i
0:::> 1\', ',\ TOTAL XVlENES 1720.0001 " SO-408'S0-41
~ \ I~ "'::: ~ \ 1.4 ' DICHLOROBENZENE 135.0001 S'O, 398 , ' ~ ~' \
'=\ I : .~;. 1.2, DICHLDROBENZENE m.OOOI '~\ '. ~O-!~ \ ----.'
, :.I'\.:;:::::: 1.2.4 - TRICHLDROBENZENE 118.0001 SO-358/ ,to-37 S0:;11.. ~ ,~CETONE 1361 / I "
,,-,:-::::::::=:=::::->:- 'NAPTHALENE 14.0001 SO-16 II .SO-'J3.-~'--:--, 'TOTA~~VlENES'1481 '-;-
, ,~/\ -', - ~ - - :- ' n," - 2,4. DNT 1480,0001 I?- . ~:-\SO-1~":' 1.2. DICHLOROBENZENE 11,3001
,ru'~\:\)~, .. ~;" <' ' , '" /:.' /-;;"~' '%~' I 1;2.;4 - T~ICHLOROBENZENE 129.0001
(\ ...... ~ ~ . 'i-". ~, ...
U .:::-;:::~::::---~, '" II' ,// 0 .~O 11' \ c....;'- "- '
:? , :'~-':~-~_./ I' if{ ,'i" "'~- ,/' '" ... ,,"
, 'r----:---~) \ " .,. " 1;50:: -30'S .')4 - " \' ,
.// "~-~'\\: \ ~~~~, :,::~, ,'!//'l.;~ tSO~/;;O-"'~ ~so-;1 I) '".
.-/ I . \.. nIl' '"...Q . . .SO-4 />~>,~_" SO-} 5 ' SO-21 ,': 0-26 -50-29. I I " '
-;./ ',;Ir~/"''''''' SO-3. -- ,;:.', - StJ~I2e'P. SO-22 , '. / - : '.. '\
\, =-')1"---, ':--=-S-;'~~~O-JJ., SO-i4 ~~-17 .SO'}9~ '~\I.SO;4.6('; I . I .
" '\1: \./' SU.'., .- .SO.6:, .SO-/O .SO-} 6 ' ' \..\.1027 , '.\ .
. '<-......", ":,' . ~. .SO-8; I . - 50-21 'S -25 I J '
-- ': ~\" "SO-2 SO-7. ~' 0-18 , {. . " , '
,.., (' ,-.., , ;' ....' SO-9 . .ACET~ E 11001 '
i,)'~< L:" , -'( / '. : ;~~~~~~\~~:II
, -, 'X ." i'\ ACETONE 1331 /i-pTAL X' YL, ENES 1481
~_.~ I ... 2.4-DNT,tJJlO~~~2.\~NT/~~3.0,O~1
' \ . '-'-, .,--....... , ",f '.' U '
\ J ,\' '::"" \:'" ;,. "', ) /.' \> . ,,' J
'.' f ~ c; : - <,0/" fIaiJ~5' h; -'
. ~ F,\ ',: ~ SO~~~~~~~A:~~~~~~~f:e~~: ~ ~~86
('~ \ \,:l .f\." -," \, (i
"
. -~->~\
/--/.. ,
"
" /'
......,--/ ..:,-- r.'
~ ./ -y----
~~ , ,/"
: ,,' --. <>"
\ \" r'/
:, I
- -)
,~~ ;~(lt'S
-~'
.'.'.~
. '.',IooC..
1
1/
Bine Map: P,epa,ed by
Conlinenlal Ac,ial Su,veys. Inc" 1986,
o
51H1)ff E T
I_-__J
t___.HI -
-------
. )( 7, I
;// r' //'6--
'/ ," / \
II . ~-'
II, '. ~i~
all' -~/-/
VI- ~--;~/ >
..,' //
/ ---'/:
-f/
~
\\ ~~.
~;, \\..
. II;
; ;I/,t-\
/'/ "
i
/~'
/'
./
x 6,3
100 Feet
I
o
:
SC). L.E
-
)( 7.7
. ,.
'. ,
" !
. I
" / .
./ "
'/
" I.
.--
,
;' 50;62
50-.51 :50.63 .;'
:. .50-68,'
o 50-3 50-52
~ . .50-64-
/~ 50-56. 50-6.5
50.57. .
50.58 50-.53
. .50.66
50-48 - ~ ~ 50-5.5
\50.59.~- .' /:.50:54\a
," 50-49'-. ." '. 50:50' .~0-67
:~ '-SO-60~ SO'2;'-?-X~
'" \., ~~q.P
" ,\~I
" "\ ,...-- .
, --.-------'
-"" -
"
"-.
~
-~-- -
5)
x ~,
FIGURE 6
ADDITIONAL SOIL SAMPLING LOCATIONS
-11-
Dames & Moore
--------
- ---- -~
-------
TA8LE 2
SOIL SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
(ug/kg)
S020A S0208 S020C S021A S0218 S021C S030A S0308 S047A S0478 S047C
Methylene Chloride 258 1 300J 8 52008 108 118 488 --- 28B 16B 128 228
Acetone --- --- 110008 118 100 260B 36B 708 20B 178 928
1 ,2 Oichloroethane --- --- --- --- --- 11 --- --- --- --- ---
2-Butanone --- --- --- --- 53 220 --- 6.2J --- --- ---
Benzene --- --- --- --- 1.4J 2.0J --- --- --- --- 1.3J8
Tetrachloroethene --- --- 2500J --- --- 6.7U --- --- --- --- ---
Toluene --- 12000J 21000 --- 20 72 --- 2.1 J 9.7 --- ---
Chlorobenzene --- --- --- --- --- 13 --- --- --- --- ---
Ethyl 8enzene --- --- 1100J --- --- 9.1 --- --- --- --- ---
Total Xylene --- 720000 140000 --- 290 370 --- 48 250 2.9J ---
Phenol --- --- --- --- --- 830 --- 280J 9lJ --- ---
l,4-0ichlorobenzene --- 3500 720000 --- --- 2400 --- 84J 1100 --- ---
1,2-0ichlorobenzene --- 11000J 110000 --- --- 3400 1300J 290J --- --- ---
Nitrobenzene --- --- --- --- --- 600 --- --- --- --- ---
2-Nit rophenol --- --- --- --- --- 7100 --- --- --- --- ---
2,4-0imethyl phenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 95J --- ---
Benzoic Acid 50J --- --- --- --- 1400J --- --- 470J --- ---
2,4-0ichlorophenol --- --- 4400J --- --- 100J --- 59J 660 160J 420J
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene --- 18000J 460000 --- --- 660 29000 4200 5200 --- ---
Naphthalene --- 4000J --- --- --- --- --- 46J --- --- ---
4-Chloro 3-ethyl phenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 93J --- --- ---
2,4-0initrophenol --- --- --- --- --- 4400 --- --- --- --- ---
2,4 Oinitrotoluene --- 480000 100000 --- 53000 6600 --- --- --- 3300 240J
4-Nitrophenol --- --- --- --- --- 1400JD --- --- --- --- ---
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 54J --- 3600J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
I
......
N
I
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
SOIL SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
(ug/kg)
S048A S0488 S048C S049A S049B S049C SOSOA S050B S050C S051A S0518 S051C
Methylene ChlorIde 188 148 29B 188 178 20B 3208 248 16B 14B 198 550JB
Acetone 6.9J8 608 448 .378 228 . 378 13B 130B llB 50B 75B 140B
Chloroform --- --- 1.7J --- --- 11 --- --- --- --- --- ---
2-8utanone --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 45
Toluene --- 9.6 5.5J --- --- 32 2.7J 9.7 1.7J 5.8 --- ---
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane --- --- 15 --- --- 14 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Chlorobenzene --- --- --- --- --- 3.6J --- 2.4J --- --- --- ---
Total Xylene 6.5 --- 25 --- 9.4 150 --- 80 25 81 28 3.4J
Ethyl Benzene --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1.9J --- --- --- ---
Phenol --- 79J 48J 100J --- 11 OJ --- 360J --- --- 180J 130J
.1,4-0ichlorobenzene 1800 2500 220J --- --- 74J 180J 310J 250J 160J 160J ---
1,2-0ichlorobenzene --- 100J 96J --- --- --- 70J 150J 140J 410 440J ---
4-Methylphenol --- --- --- --- 59J --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2,4-0ichlorophenol 610 74000 130J --- --- --- --- 76J --- 54J 93J ---
1,2,4-Trlchlorobenzene 120000 110000 270J 670 11 OJ 190J 1200 410J 630 89000 1900 ---
2-Nitrophenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 290J --- --- --- ---
Benzoic Acid --- --- --- --- 150J --- --- 77 OJ --- 230J --- 3000
4-Nitrophenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 54J --- ---
2,4 Oinitrotoluene 1600 1400 3300 150J 120.1 3200 170J 6300 75J 330J --- ---
4-Nitroanil.ine --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 320J 520J 1200J
Pentachlorophenol --- --- --- --- --- --- 55J --_. --- ---
Oi-ni-butyl phthalate lOOJ 79J --- --- --- --- 44J --- --- --- --- ---
Pyrene --- --- --- ---. --- --- 40J --- --~ --- --- ---
bis{2-ethylhexyl)phthalate --- --- --- 63J --- --- --- 59J 41J --- --- ---
4-ChloroaniUne 78J --- --- --- --_. --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
~
2.4.5-Trichlorophenol --- 390J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2.4 D1 nit rophenol --- --- 160J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
. -. ... .- --
.
....
w
.
-
-------
I
~
~
I
TA8LE 2 (continued)
SOIL SAMPLING ANALYSIS RESULTS
(ug/kg)
SOS2A SOS2B SOS2C SOS3A S0538 SOS3C SOS4A SOS48 SOS4C SOSSA SOSS8 S055C S056A
Methylene Chloride 550JB 13B 1SB 12B 228 498 428 368 658 268 228 7.68 148
Acetone 1600 270B 828 428 100B 1308 7.3J8 678 2208 1708 548 1808 7J8
Trans-I,2 Oichloroethene --- 7.2 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Chloroform --- --- --- --- --- 5.8J 2.6J 290 --- --- --- --- 2J
2-Butanone --- --- 83 --- 1lJ 22 --- --- 35 --- --- --- ---
Trichloroethene --- 4.2J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Toluene --- 66 30 9.0 2.1.1 1.5J --- 36 1.9J --- --- --- lJ
Chlorobenzene --- 2.3.1 3.2J 1. 7J --- --- --- 3.2J --- --- --- --- ---
Ethyl Benzene --- 2.6.1 2.9J 3.3J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Total Xylene --- 690 200 200 48 --- --- 18000 --- 9.9 --- --- ---
Phenol --- ISOO 260J --- --- 460 --- 2300 250J 120J 83J 76J ---
1,4-0ichlorobenzene --- 190J 650 820 150J 140J --- 660J 120J 410J 120J 50J ---
1,2-0ichlorobenzene --- 420J 2400 600 140J 91J --- 560J 8lJ 440J 140J 55J ---
4-Methylphenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 68J --- --- --- ---
Nitrobenzene --- --- 260J 2400 --- --- --- --- --- --- 90J --- ---
2-Nitrophenol --- 120J 150J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2,4-0imethylphenol --- 3300 57J 82J --- --- --- 1400 5lJ --- --- --- ---
8enzoic Acid --- --- 1100J 450J --- 63J --- --- 310J 460J --- --- ---
2,4 Oichlorophenol --- --- 6lJ 540 --- --- --- --- 51J 240J --- --- ---
1.2,4-Trichlorobenzene --- 1000 2500 4400000 7400 1 70000 130J 1800 64J 860000 160000 1000 ---
Naphthalene --- 200J --- --- --- --- --- 1800 --- --- --- --- ---
2-Methylnaphthalene --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 740J --- --- --- --- ---
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol --- --- --- 800 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol --- --- 4lJ 800J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
2,4 Oinitrotoluene --- 1600000 98000 1700 3400 890 --- 3000000 1700 750 320J 980 ---
4-Nitroaniline --- --- 5000 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Hexachlorobenzene --- 370J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Pentachlorophenol --- 510J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Phenanthrene --- 850 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Oi-n-butyl phthalate --- 370J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Fluoranthene --- 1100 --- --- --- --- --- 1000J --- --- ---
Pyrene --- 250J --- --- --- --- --- 1500 --- --- --- --- ---
3.3-0ichloro benzidine --- --- 69J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
bis(2-ethylhoxyl)phthalate --- 2700 69J 71J 61J --- --- 12000 98J 68J 41J 7lJ 98J
~~rysene --- --- --- .-- --- --- 1400 - - -
,t rachloroethene --- 430 5400 f...- --- --- --- 2.2J --- --- , --- ---
-------
TA8LE 2 (continued)
SOIL SAMPLING ANALYSIS R~SULTS
(ug/kg)
S058A S061A S0618 S061C S062A S0628 S062C S063A S064A S0648 S064C S065A S066A S0668 S066C S068A
Methylene Chloride 208 278 208 158 178 448 318 228 278 538 338 138 388 228 28D 178
Acetone --- 118J 49 43 248 478 100 328 408 608 270E 328 278 488 1508 13JB i
Chloroform --- --- --- 4J 1J --- 3J --- --- 7J8 --- --- --- --- --- ---
2-8utanone --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 91 --- --- --- --- ---
Toluene --- --- --- --- --- ---- 4J 33 110 3J 10 3J --- --- --- ---
Chlorobenzene --- --- --- --- --- --- 3J 2J --- --- --- 1J --- --- --- ---
Total Xylene --- --- --- --- 7 9 630E 240 49 35 33 --- --- --- --~
Phenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 11 OJ --- --- --- --- ---
1.4-Dichlorobenzene --- --- --- --- --- 270J 89J 400 290J 270J 7lJ --- --- --- --- ---
1.2-Dichlorobenzene --- --- --- --- 120J 6300 1500 440 --- 710 170J --- --- --- --- ---
2.4-Dichlorobenzene 830 --- --- --- --- --- --- 160J 160J 160J 53J --- --- 1l0J --- --- -.
1.2.4-Trichlorobenzene 2800 --- --- --- --- 1300 72J --- 82J --- --- 4200 470 380J --- --- - -
4-Nitrophenol --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 490J --- 100J --- --- --- --- --- -
2.4-Dinitrotoluene 610 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 200J 97J --- --- --- --- --- .-.
Di-ni-butylphthalate --- --- --- -65J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---..
Fluoranthene 40J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- \ --- --- --- --- ---
pyrene 49J --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
bia(2-ethylheryl)phthalate --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 83J 42J --- --- ---
Di-n-octyl Phtalate --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1l0J ---
.
.....
lJ1
- .
,
I-
-------
~
.
J
1
.. ,......
. '...'"
. ,...,.. . u
--.. - .
. '.1.~'"
. '...~
}i (I, ~::~'~(i,~:,~./\ .
, .' -.-\.:.' c.:... )
,.~, '\ -- ~\!:~"\
, l ( . ~!---' -. 'l
.' ~ .,;\ \" ')J.r -~~ ~, ~(~-, .",
. "" ",..::." '>:~ ' ,..J.. -,-- . .-; -.......... '
1"(0 " .~" IIC CALlers // ... ~ \',
'---~, ' ~ /' ,'" SW~j
'~~-~. 'SEj".../
" ~\\ . ,-' / ,,--- '--~ \- "'-,---/ ~'
. \' .' _:
\' .. I "". .. '
\\, I
,\ \
\\ . \ SW-4 ,,- " )
\~\ . . . "~ S£-4,----.... '
.., APPROXIMATE, ,.,'.t -' :./
AREA OF SPRAY '/ ,'r---:. ......: . ,--
FIELD 8 II -... '.':',.; ;---
'" . !, . . , H'
I:" /~/~' ~', 'SW.J(' APPROX;MATE
II 0 , 'i"" ~ /\.~\\ 5£-J EA OF ...
il . ,~ 'V \~ . \ ".r... fORMER tJOLDING
I; i/ :~ - ~. ~~ND~' ,
'" i .'0 ; 'i ' \ /1, ~ ", ' ~ \
'';':. , , 1;; ~'l'l'. (J~, ,." ;.\ OXIMATE
-#:-. , --T' ;' . 1(' 'l~/. 'N /.:' :rEA OF ":
""'11 "/Io,.C-< . . r /~~~,,_.... , (i~...;~"' T,RASH DISPOSAL
\ 'I.----:Y"..'~', - -:;.;:- - " ,'t.P , ARE~ !
"I ;: ~',::) , .. :::===-- '10::: is£jZ ) I I ,
' j~'~:::'::-:'-'~ ;0,' " ~XISTING ,...--J. '.;/,.., :.', '
.. . ' HOLDING: I 0
' H, POND ~ : , : ,;
~ , APPROXIMATE,..' I ,
~,.. APPROXIMATE . /~'-... AREA OF ... ~\
"--~REA OF S£-V ~ FORMER WASTE \
sP~Y FIELD A / .t~GOON /~ \'
\ ....-... \ "SW-1
' . ~ / ' . Sf: 2
\ ,,,. ",---",' , ,'" '- "-"~\J.--: "':, 1.. \' -
, \\) . -,"",-' '-, . ',"'" i '. '-- ' V /' :
~ ~ \ '. . .., , .' ,
"\\\ '~~ 1. / .' EIGURE 1-: ,- '
. ~ ~:\ \\ SURFACE WATE~'~ND BOTTOM SEDIMENT
'1\ SAMPLING lOCATIONS IN THE V,' TV
" "\.\ ":~'\\\ ~ OF THE WAMCHEM SITE, AUGU~ ~6
,\ I, \ \, "\
\ I \,. \, '... ' i -:-
,i '\ \ \\ ~ \\ , I
. ," \'
.'~""',
.. ~~. ....
1, ~ <:::>n:'')" ':
I 'U 1/
.' " ;"" ~.t1 :
"'" \ \ .'
\ ~r=;
,:='(,:'/
;- :i:J~:::=~
df<::::;~~' ~J.': i',
~ .f
-- -~-;:-
I
... I
I ,-, . /
,\ .
~' : /,
) --. ';'. ~ "
Base Map: Prepared bv
Continen,al Al!raal Surveys. Inc.. 19~ij,
.
~
~
. .
;
i .
j
i
_J: :
i ... I
~'......
( 0\
.:~;;. I
. It
. '
/
. I
\
-------
-17-
Table 3. '!he highest level of contamination was fOUl1d in sarrple SE-3. '!his
sanple is downgradient of the fomer holding p:n1d and contained methylene
chloride (59 ug/kg), acetone (26 ug/kg), benzene (1. 9 ug/kg), O1lorobenzene.
(180 ug/kg), 1,4-Dichlorobenze (190 ug/kg), 1,2-dichlorobenzene (240 ug/kg) ,
and pyrene (220 ug/kg). '!he semple also contained fourteen tentatively
identified hydrocarbons ranging fran 71 ug/kg to 920 ug/kg. SE-l is a
background sample. .
onsi te Structures
Nine hlilding wipe samples were taken fran onsite structures and analyzed for
HSL senlvolatiles and rretals. Table 4 surmm-izes the results, and the .
locations are shown on Figure 8.
A total of four HSL Senl volati Ie caTp:>urlds were detected, all 6f which were
phthalate esters.
Wastes
D.lring the RI investigation, two waste samples were encOlmtered. Q1e (50-46)
was a mixture of soil and red and yellow material obtained in the vicinity of
the trash disp:>sal area. '!he other sample (~l) was in a drum located in one
of the onsite buildings. '!he ~ char~erization analyses for these samples .
(Flash Point, Reactivity, corrosivity, and Metals) found that they do" not
exhibit the characteristics of a haZardous waste.
Groundwater
'!he results of the HSL volatile and senlvolatile ;:malyses for ten on-site
IrCnitoring wells (RI-lA through RI--7B) and ten off-site residential supply
wells (RI-9 through RI-23) can be found in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. '!he
locations of the onsi te wells are shown in Figure 9 ~ and the darestic well
locations are shown in Figure 10.
'!he deep aquifer, the Floridan, did not contain any volatile or senlvolatile
corrp:>unds. '!he shallow non:i toring wells near the perimeter of the production
area and the fomer holding p:>nd showed the greatest arrount of contamination.
The analyses for the residential and ccmnercial offsi te wells detected only
trace aITDunts of organics in three of the ten wells.
OYsters
Oyster samples were collected fran two locations in M:Calleys Creek (one
adjacent to .the site) and two background stations (Figure 11) and were analyzed
for acetone, benzene, 1, 2-dichlorobenzene, 1, 4-dichlorobenzene,
2 ,4-dinitrotoluene, naphthalene, toluene, 1,2 ,4-trichlorobenzene and xylene.
'D1ese analyses were conducted to determine whether site related contaminants
were bioacCUIT1l.l1ating in the aquatic life. rbne of the contaminants were
detected in any of the tissue samples. Split samples taken by the U.S. Fish .
and Wildlife confirmed these results, and in addition, found that metals .were
not a concern. .. .
-------
- '-"I~"'- -.-.
-18-
'1N3LE 3
SEDrnENI' ANALYSIS RESULTS
AlGJsr 1986 (ug/kg)
Cc:rtp:>UJ'X1 I SE-1 I SE-2 I SE-3 I SE-4 I SE-5 I SE-6 I SE-7
Mathylene 29 B 20 B 59 71 42 92 20 B
Olloride
Acetone 20 B 22 B 26 51 10J 60 18 B
carron 2.4.1
Disulfide
Olloroform 9.8
Benzene 1.9J
Toluene 1. 9J
0l1orobenzene 180
1,4 190J
Dich1oro-
benzene
1,2 240J
Dich1oro-
benzene
Pyrene 220J
-------
-19-
TABLE 4
RESULTS OF BUILDm:; WIPE SM-1PLES
AUGUsr, 1986 ng/5aITi>le
BUILDm:;
CClrpJuoo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Diethyl- 23 2.23 2.8J 3.63
lXlthalate
Di-n-butyl- 4.3JB l2JB l6JB l2JB l3JB 9.lJB 19JB 17JB
lXlthalate
Butyl beryl- 7.73 5300 4.73
lXlthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate 4.9JB 7.3JR 3.2JB 6.7JB 2.6JB
B - Analyte was found in the blank as well as the sample.
possible or probable blank contamination.
It indicates
J - Indicates an estimated value.
I.
I
[
-------
-20-
BLDG 7
BLDG' .
BLDG 5
BLDG 9
BLDG 6
BLDG. /
DM1
BLDG 2
BLDG 3
BLDG 1
LEGEND:
, :
SLDG 1 - Wipe Sample
OM 1 - Waste Sample
FIGURE 8
;'?i:'~CXIMAT!: LOCAIIO:'JS OF BUlL-DING '/,';p= A~J8 ''';~.37=
S~,'.1D:..=5 COLLEC7=S ON THE W.t..t;1CH=M SII=, AiY:;L:57 1936
>:;'J"o,,::',.
-------
-21-
'maLE 5 .
~ ~YSIS OF CNSlTE WELLS (ug/1)
AOOUsr 1986
Cara::ound RI-'...A RI-3A RI-7A RI-lB RI-2 RI-3B RI-4 RI-5 RI-6 RI-7B
Methylene- 1. 5J 830JB 1.1J 3.9J
C1loride
k:etone 6.6B 68000B -
Benzene 12 2100 55
Toluene 3900 1.5J
C1loro- 15
benzene
Ethy~ Ben- 2.1J
zene
". Total Xylene - 40 2.3J 4500 4.2J
bis(2-Ql1oro - 23
ethyl) ether
1 ,3 Dichloro- 2J
benzene
1,4-Dichloro- 19J
benzene
1,2-Dichloro- 19J
benzene
4-M:thy1phenol 4.4J
Is~rone 300
4-Ql1oroam line 4.4J -
Di -n-:tuthy~ 5.4J
phthalate
bis(2ethylhexy1) 3.2J
Ftlthalate
" - " - undetected
-------
-22-
TABLE 6
GrOtIrnwater Analysis of
Offsite wells (ug/l)
August 1986
C~und Rl-9 }U-ll Rl-12 Rl-13 Rl-14 Rl-19 Rl-20 Rl-21 Rl-22 Rl-23
Methlene -
O1loride
L3J
1.2J
Di-n--octyl
I=*1thalate
3.2J
-------
II
. . .., ~
I I
1""l~
11'.
. ,
'\" . \' . c
. \:~~) '\" '0,:':,'
- ~ -~\ ;' \\ \ - . ,'..',
, ~\ \\ \'., ! ,.., ", I
. \ \ " , I I <;.. " \ I
'\', .\ ~
~ '\ \" \', , '" ~ ~!;dal Slal;('Ji/
\~ \ I, (. :-, "
'~ ,~':~ -:\ .' , >, " ", ,.""
,: D 1;/\\(, ',\ \ RI~7J!-,RI-iA-'Y-,
, ~.LJ '.\ \ ' '\' \ . '~\, "
' c;:>.\'\ \" '\\', '\ \ \~"~\ I
c::>'\ I~-'~ \ \', '\ \ \' 'Rl-6
' ", ~ \\ . , ' ,
=11 '- ~', '~i: APPROmMA TE, .-
._-::J-,::::-~ \:~ I AREA OF SPRAY I,' ", '
' ~c:-:=--'- i' ',' ; . FIELD 8 1/ ,
~/': : ':";'-";"" ~~:",~ 1,\ . /-' . ~~.. ":, APPROXIMATE'
\r " ,,',1 ~, . . " 1/ «' . 0 I AREA OF '
\)' ,,'''' L.\. : . \\ \ '~., ,/';. / ':~ ~o FORMER HOLDING
..... ,---,. I 'A I' '\ II - 0 . ...
-' '-~:::'~I~...,,:_..' /Y\ \' . ;;" ",;~, ",\.\~~'RI'5PO~D '';',
,,: -:;"\' \'" ',,'/ ,/' " (' } : ' .
/r.:,:... ~:':~~)!~,; \\\\.\ \~~.. ..' // f'/ ~~~:~ \'> eJ-,., APPROXIMATE
. :#/ . \. , .\\ \\ ut'"':"'" I :.;:::. . .~I ,.'.'" \. ~ AREA OF
- / . <.'\\ \'\\ \; '\\ .", ,.~~:.~C;=?~Ri-lli..RI-~~,{~ .~~. " ,,'" > ~:~~H DISPOSAL
, \ \,\1 \ -,!" . > .,' "", -RI.4 '
" ". ,',~ \ \\\~\~\ \ " ;:J' ... i-:~B EXISTlfJG ) '
\ ',i \ \\ RI-2 HOLDING
\ ~ \ \ ' \1..''', , .. APPROXIMATE POND' ,
I. .' . ~" \ : . APPROXIMATE " '" AREA OF
\ '-\ I,', ~ \ "'" AREA OF ' \, FORMER WASTE
',\\:i~\\\ ,SPRAY FIELDA/ "L~GOON
\'\\\\\\'-.\" .
~ I ~ ~ \ \
'II "'\\":~"\\" \;, i\', FIGURE 9
LOCATIONS OF THE TIDAL GAGE AND
~ MONITORING WEllS INSTALLED DURING
.\ ~ THE WAMCHEM SITE REMEDIAL
:,\\ :\\\.' .i!' INVESTIGATION
, \, :\' ~
\ ,,\', . '.
,\
I
N
W
I
I '
. '
\
\
\
:, , i
,
_I
\
\
"
I
I
"
"
.."'"
, ,
':-- I
BasI! Map: Prepared hy
Contonenlal Aellal Surveys, Inc" 1986.
"
L~-n::.~,,' .
U)(lfffT
~~'-c"-.,=c~_'
-------
-24-
~
~
[.
o
i
3
4 v., ~,
5:..:. ~E
FIGURE 10
LOCATIONS OF DOMESTIC AND COMMERCIAL WELLS, AND BACKGROUND SOIL,
SURFACE WATER AND SEDIMENT SAMPLES DURING
THE WAMCHEM SITE RE\1EDIALINVESTIGATION, AUGUST 1986
Dames & Moore
~
-------
-25-
~
o
I
2
,
SCAL.E
3
. MI'.'
J
FIGURE 11
LOCATIONS OF AQUATIC LIFE SAMPLE STATIONS
WAMCHEM SITE
\\..
. Dames Or Moore
-------
-26-
3.3 Receptors
Based up:m the data gathered during the RI am. biological resources identified
on am. in the vicinity of the site, the p:>tential rn.m-.an am. enviroulent.aJ.
receptors in:lude the folla..ring:
* Nearby rural p:>p.llation that uses groundwater for drinking p.Irp:>ses.
These residents rely on groundwater wells for their water SUWly.
* Nearby rural IXJPl.lation that uses groundwater for dcmestic p.Irp:>ses other
than drinking, such as showering, bathing, food preparation, clothes
washings, lawn or garden watering, etc.
* Recreational users of surface waters fran M:Ca.lleys Creek.
* Hum3n.s consuming garre animals (f ish, small animals) that can be
contaminated by infestion of bioaccumulati ve contaminants.
* Bottan feeders of contaminated sedi1rent in M:Calleys Creek am. their
p:>tential influence on the food chain.
* TI1reatened or endangered SPecies present in the vicinity of M:Calleys
Creek.
* hiUatic biota, falma, and flora in and around U:e site that ITE.Y be
stressed.
* Persons that corne into direct derITBl contact wi t.h contaminants present at
the site.
* Onsite rerediation workers that inhale elevated concentrations of
volatiles during soil disturbance or that have direct dernal contact with
contaminated soil.
4 . 0 CJ..E:ANUP CRITERIA
The extent of contamination was defined in section 3.0 I current Site Status.
This section examines the relevance and awropriateness of water quality
criteria under the circumstances of release of contaminants at this Site.
Based up:m criteria found to be relevant and awropriate, the minimum goals of
renedial action at this site have been developed.
4.1 Groundwater Renediation
In detennining the degree of groundwater cleanup, section 121 (d) of the
SUperfund Arrer1c}nents and Reauthorization l>ct of 1986 (sr-.RA) requires that the
selected renedial actions establish a level or standard of control which
complies with all "awlicable or relevant and awropriate requirenents
(ARARs)". .
Groundwater in the surficial aquifer at the Warrchen Site is classified as Class
I, following methodology in the Final Draft of the U. S. EPA Groundwater
-------
-27-
Classification Guidelines of Decenber 1986. Class I groundwaters are affordej
extraordinary protection due to the risk of further ermngennent to species
deperx1ent upon tmique habitats.
Groundwater in the deeper aquifer, the Floridan, is classified as Class II A
using the aoove ci tej guidelines. Class II A groundwaters are a current source
of drinking water. However the deep aquifer was fourx:l not to be contaminated.
'!be surficial aquifer at the site discharges into M::Cal1eys Creek. Basej on
r~rtej sightings, the scientific literature and SUbstantiating doc,Jme11tation
fran the u.s. National Marine Fisheries seIVice, M:Calleys Creek is considerej
to be habitat for the loggerhead turtle (caretta caretta), a federally listed
threatened species. A turtle sighting in lvt'Calleys creek was r~rtej to EPA
in 1988 by the WaIrChem site caretaker, who has livej adjacent to the creek for
numerous years. Other species of sea turtles, all of which are either
threatened or endangered, may also be present in the area. An official
sighting of a Kanp's Ridley turtle in the vicinity of M:Calleys Creek was
recorded by the US Fish and Wildlife service in 1987. In addition to
suppJrting sea turtles, M:Calleys Creek is probable habitat for the short-nosej
sturgeon, a federally listed endangered species of fish. E'qual protection is
affordej to ooth threatened and endangered species under the EIldangerej Species
Act. .
. The" value to tho? environment of Class I groundwater resources suppJrts
restoration of Ulis contaminated groundwater to levels protective of the
environrrent. The grotI11dwater is highly vulnerable to contamination and
supplies a sensitive ecological system 5Upp:)rting a \IDique habitat. Based upon
groundwater Classification, renediation of the groundwater to reduce
contaminants to levels protective of the environrren.t would be necessary.
Groundwater cleanup goals given in Table 7 meet these requirements.
'!he conclusion of the above discussion is that a no-action alternative for
groundwater would be out of compliance with Section 121 of ~ which requires
cleanup of contaminated groundwater to levels which are protective of human
health and the environrren.t.
Indicator chanicals were used to establish cleanup goalS for grou:rDwater. All
indicator chero.cals analyzed for in the RI were utilized in the Public Health
Evaluation. Levels presented as groundwater cleanup goals are baSed on the
Federal Mlbient Water ()..lali ty Criteria (AW:C).
4. 2 SOi 1 REm3diation
'!he Public Health Assessment in the RI report detennined that risks to human
health as a result of exp:>sure to on-site contaminants via inhalation,
ingestion, and dermal contact are low under present use conditions at the
Site. Contaminants rE!t'aining in the soil will, however, continue to leach into
the groundwater. 'Iherefore the cleanup goals presented in Table 8 are
estimates of contaminant concentrations in soil at the Warrchan Site that would
- not result in future exceedances of "NI1;1:. in groundwater at the source area due
to leaching of soil contaminants. .
'lhe rrcdel usej was by SUrrmers (1980) and assumes that a certain percentage Of
the rainfall at the site will infiltrate the site and desorb contaminants fran
-------
-
~ - -'~'':'' -: -' ,-
-28-
TABLE 7
GROUNI:WATER CLEANUP C1.];LS
ca1J:DUND
rTFMffTP ~ zm/l
Acetone
1000a
Benzene
0.70
1, 2 - Dichlorobenzene
1. 97
1, 4 - Dichlorobenzene
1.97
2, 4 - Dinitrotoluene
0.37
Naptl1alene
2.35
Toluene
5.00
1, 2, 4 - Trich1orobenzene
O.l29a
Total Xylene
2.0
Goals based up:m USEPA ~ient ~,rater Quality Criteria fer Aquatic Organisms.
a- No NMX available. Goal .based uFOn a general aquatic :.3.ting assigned by the
Registry of TOxic Effects of Chemical Substances, 1982.
-------
-28-
TABLE 7
GROUNI:W>.TER CI:.Ei\NuP
-------
COMPOUND
Acetone
Benzene
1,2 - Dichlorobenzene
1,4 - Dichlorobenzene
2,4 - Dinitrotoluene
Naphthalene
Toluene
1,2,4 - Trichlorobenzene
Total Xylene
-29-
TABLE 8
SJIL CLE1\NUP <1Ji\LS
C LEA N U P G 0 A L (m::u1cq)
97.81
2.43
33.43
38.06
3.62
74.57
34.47
4.23
67.58
-------
. .
-30-
the soil based on an equilibrium soil-water partitioning. It is further.
assumed that this contaminated infiltrate will mix cClTpletely with a p:>rtion of
the groundwater belOlN the site, resulting in an equilibrium groundwater
concentration.
1o.ccording to this rrodel, the mixing of groundwater and infiltration and the
resultant contaminant concentrations in groundwater are related as follows:
Cgw = Op Cp
Q? + 03W
Where:
Cgw - Contaminant concentration in the groundwater (ug/l)
Q? - Volumetric flow3r~e)of infiltration (soil pore water)
groundwater (ft / Y
03W - VOlumetric flow rate of groundwater (ft3/day)
Cp - Contaminant concentrations in the infiltrate (ug/l).
into the
4.3 surface Water/sediment Renediation .
!'b surface water contamination (HSL volatiles, semvolatiles) was detected in
-t'Calleys Creek. . While the contaminant levels in the s jirnent (see Table 3)
are very low and not a cause for concern, it is. anticipated that remediation of
the contaminant source will result in the decrease of sedUrent contamination to
acceptable levels. TJ:n.1s, it was concluded that direct ranediation Of the
surface water and sediment is not necessary.
5.0 ALTERNM'IVES EilALUATICN
The P-lI1X>se of remedial action at the Wam:hen 5i te is to mitigate and minimize
contamination in the soils and gro1.D1dwater, and to reduce };X)tential risks to
ht.nnan health and the environment. The following cleanup objectives were
detennined based on regulatory requiranents and level of contamination foUnd at
the site:
. To protect the human health and the environment from ex};X)sure to
. contaminated on-site solls through inhalation, direct contact, or the
leaching of contaminants into groundwater.
. To restore contaminated groundwater to levels protective of htm\aI1 health
and enviroJllTeI1t.
An initial screening of {X)ssible technologies was performed to identify those
which best meet the criteria of section 300.68 of the National Contingency Plan
(N:P) (Table 9).
{ollowing the initial screening of technologies, };X)tential ranedial action
alternatives were identified and analyzed (Table 10). These alternatives were
further screened and those which best satisfied the cleanup objectives, while
also being. cost effective and technically feasible were developed further
(Table 11).'. .' .
-------
-31-
TABLE 9
Remedial Alternatives for Groundwater and Soil
Groundwater-General ResDonse Actions
I. No Action
II. Containment
A. Capping
B. Subsurface barriers
C. Access limi ta tions
III. Collection/Control
A. Pumping
B. Subsurface drains
IV. Treatment
A. Biological treatment
B. Chemical treatment
C. Physical treatment
Soils--General ResDonse ,'\c~ions
I. No Action
II. Containment
A. Capping
I B. Grading
[ -
C. Revegetation
III. Disposal
A. Excavation and removal
B. Offsite disposal
C. Onsite land disposal
IV. In-Situ Treatment
A. Bioreclama tion
B. Chemical treatment
V. Direct Treatment ' I
A. Biological treatment
B. Chemical treatment
C. Physical treatment
-------
General Response Action
Col lec tion/ control
. Treatment
W
N
Disposa~ .
In-si tu. trea tmen t
Direct trea tment
TABU: 10
Preliminary Screening of Remedial Action Technologies--
Applicable Technolo~ies for Groundwater and Soil Treatment
T echnolo~v /T echnolo~v Option
Comments
Pumping
Well- oint system best suited to hydrol-
ogy of site.
Auxiliary processes for pretreatment or
posttreatment and/or polishing; will be
. added into final design where applicable.
Chemical treatment
Neutralization
H ydrol ysi s
. Oxidation
Ultraviolet ozonation
Physical treatment
Flocculation and sedimentation
Activated carbon
Air stripping
Excavation and removal
Offsi te disposal
Landfilling
Detoxification
H ydrol ysis
Oxidation
Neutr ali za tion
Physical treatment
LTTA
Thermal destruction
(incinera tion)
Will require trial burn and possible
delisting of ash.
-------
General Response Action
Containment
Collec tion/control
w
w
Treatment
TABLE 10
(cont'd)
Preliminary Screening of Remedial Action Technologies--
Inapplicable Technologies for Groundwater and Soil Treatment
Technology/Technology Option
Caps
Vertical subsurface barriers (any lOa teriaI)
Horizontal subsurface barriers
(grou t cur tains)
Access limitations
Subsurface drains
Biological
Fixed film processes
Activated sludge
Chemica I
Precipitation
Reduction
Physical
Distillation, flashing, rectification
Reverse osmosis
Evaporation
Thermal destruction
Comments
Of limited durability, subject to settle-
ment and shrinkage; short-term use only.
Groundwater hydrology and high water
table preclude use; unproven
technology, expensive, possible waste
incompatibility, difficult to form
complete seal.
Topology precludes gravity flow; high
water table, artesian conditions, and
high soil hydraulic conductivity will
likely lead to leachate bridging or
under f low of drain.
Used for colloidal and suspended organic
matter, which is not found in Wamchem
groundwa ter in sufficient quanti ties.
Not suited to contaminants of concern;
insuff icient BOD.
Not suited for use with soluble organics;
currently has no practical applications
jnvolving reduction of organics.
Insufficjent concentrations of organics.
Not cost effective.
Not possible due to presence of vola tile
organics.
Insufficient heating value.
-------
TABLE 10
(cant'd)
General Re~ponse Action Technology/Technology Option Comments
Discharge to POTW Prohibitively expensive; distance is too far
for piping.
Containment Capping, grading, revegetation Primarily for prosion control; not neces-
sary at Wa!,\chem Site.
Onsi te land disposal. Not permitted under RCRA regulations.
In-Situ Treatment Bioreclamation Unproven, high risk.
Chemical
Immobiliza tion Not sui table for the soluble organics
found at Wamchem Site; unproven,
~ possible further water table contami-
na tion.
Mobilization
Solidi fica tion/stabilization Not applicable to other than near-
surface soil contamination due to
mixing requirements.
Direct treatmeni' Biological treatment Insufficient substrate for continuing
COlilposting biodegradation.
-------
TABLE 11
Summary of Remediation Alternatives
N~I Prltnar,
S,""m
CO" IS 1,0001 Pr~ srn( Publ,c Operalion
A lI~rnali~e Caplul Annu..t 0&1.1 Y.lIII~ /10%1 1t~.Illh COliC""" Envlronmenlal Concuns lile I,n)ol Technical Concernl Comm~nts
/. No ole lion ° ° ° Oocl 1101 meel r~,"~dl.ll No Itllme:dl.lle Ihreal. NA None:. Meets ARAR's al poinl 01
oblec II~U lor IOlh. dIK!l.r&e:.
2. Soil e:lcavallon and "0.9 101.) 1,10 I.. Onsi Ie: drronal and MInlonal. Tr'"porarll, NoI"'. Removes conlamlnatiOl'l
dlspoSJI. pi OVISO', IlIh..I..llo.. ~I"osu'r IlIue.H~d nOUr .nd IOtHee. Mre:IJ "PAR'J .1
&,oulld",..r, I'r"lm~nl, 1'00\lble du,",!; p~"od lhul levrh. PO'"1 01 ducharg~. Prole:c-
0100 man I lorln&a 01 .rllle:dl..IIOfI 0111,. lI~e 01 envlronme:nl--4\o
Ihreal 10 wellands.
). l TT A 01 lOll, pro~hor, 911.8 101.) 1.'00.) Onsllr dr,mal .100 MII,hnal. T rmpor.nll, Nonc:. DeSlrO,S conlamination
&.ound",..I"r I.ralmrnl. l"h..I..II,," ~ IpO,"''': IlIne:aled 1101", and IOUrce. M~~u ARAR'I oil
aoo I/Ioollorio, pou,bl" dUIIII& pe:rlod dust 1e~e:Is. polnl 01 duchar&". P,okC-
01 '''01"d.alloo 0111,. livr 01 eovlronme:ol--4\o
Ihre:.1 10 wr Iland J.
.. Inclne:,alion 011011, 2,UI.1 101.) 2,921.) Onsll" dumal .100 In- Jnc,~ue:d oolsr and Mobllr units arc la'ee Same as above. Also ash
pro~.sor, g.oundwaler h..I., 1100 fllk dull"l1 dusl. 8acld,l~d ash and I rquire II&nl hc aOl ma, requ..e dellllin& ~Io't
I.e:..lm~nl, and ,~ In~di.) I ion. Pou.ble h..1 no nulrl""1 value:, hrav, equipmenl durlOl rrquiremeol onille.
W mOllllor '''& au ,,,Ie..,,,s. ..III re:qulre reve:&e- mob/demobilization.
lJ1 (.1'00. AUI"'ar, luel will be
re:qulred.
,. 501l.,.ea~allon and 1,009.1 "6.1 1,191.0 Onslle dermal and Temporarll, Increased 10 R"qulrcs NP0E5 permIt. Meets ARAR's al source.
d.spr 109 ~}U""f.
-------
-36-
5.1 Alternatives
Alternatives 1: N:> Action
'!his alternative will eventually reduce the volume of soil contamination
through natural flushing. COntaminant rrcbility and toxicity are not reduceej in
the abSence of treatIrent. Given the contaminant concentrations at the Site,
the time required to significantly reduce contaminant levels is unrealistic.
r.b action does not provide permanent source Control.
Alternative 2:
Excavation. REmJval. and Transrort of SOi l. Groundwater
r-bni torim. Provisory Groundwater Treatment
'!his alternative would involve the excavation and rEmJval of contaminated soil
and the tran5IX>rt of this soi 1 to an approved treatment, storage and disp:>sal
('r.3[)) facility. 'n1e technologies would include excavation; de..Jatering of
excavated soils; reroval of soils and transp:>rtation to a 'r.3[) facility;
backfilling with clean soil, and revegetation.
'!his alternative would meet soil ranedial action objectives and rerove the
source of contamination onsite but would not destroy it. 'D1us, it is not
considered a permanent renedy.
uarterly rrcni toring of groundwater at the 10 existing ""ells, and three
~itional wells and surface water is recc:mnended for a period of five years.
After this, annual s~ling should be sufficient~ Included in this alternative.
is a provision that groundwater treatment would be initiated UlX>n detection of
any site related contaminants in. the surface water.
The ARARs for groundwater at this site are the ambient water quality criteria.
Groundwater rrcni toring will not reduce the level of contamination in the
groundwater and therefore, would not n-eet the groundwater ARAR.
Alternative 3:
T..I:Jw TemPerature Thennal Aeration of SOi 1. Groundwater
M::mi torim. Provisory Groundwater Treatment
'!his alternative would involve the excavation, treatment and backfilling of
contaminated soils. '!he technologies would include excavation; LTrA of soilS,
backfilling of treated soils; and revegetation.
'!he systan has proved highly reliable in pi lot tests and is avai lable as a
canplete systan, maintained and operated by the patent owner. Periodic,
sampling during excavation is required to determine whether renedial action
objecti ves are being met, as well as whether optimJrn systan operating
parameters are being maintained. '!he LTrA process for soils does not meet the
defini tion of an irx::inerator under RCRA and therefore is not. subject to
incineration performance standards. Following the LTm process, soils will be
redeIX>sited onsite. Treatment time is estimated to take one year.
I'\lternati ve 4:
Incineration of SOil. Groundwater MJnitorinq. Provisory
Groundwater Treatment
'!his alternative would involve the onsite incIneration of excavated
-------
-37-
contaminated soil utilizing a IrObile incineration unit, the subsequent
backfilling of clean ash in the excavated area, ani revegetation of the
disturbed area.
The systen requires trained operators during treat:Irent, ani on-si te ash testing
will be required to ensure t11a.t contaminant destruction is canplete.
r-bbilization and derobilization of the IrObile incineration units is a major
p::>rtion of the time an1 expense. Many systens require cranes, riggers, pad
construction, and trained personnel for assanbly.
Treatnent times would range fran 1-2 zronths, not cOtmting
IrObi li zation/derobi li zat ion time.
Alternative 5:
Excavation. Reroval. and Transrort of SOil. Air Striroim an1
carron Msorption of GroUI1dwc.ter.
'lhis option would involve the air striwing of extracted grllution control requirenent.s.
Alternative 6:
Low Ta11D::rature Thermal Aeration of .soil Air Striroim an1
carron Adsorption of GroUI1dwc.ter.
This alternative would provide a permanent renedy for ooth soil am
groundwater. Both treatIrents have been described earlier.
Alternative 7:
Incineration of SOil. Air Striroim and carron Msorption of
Groundwater.
'This alternative would provide a permanent renedy for ooth soi 1 am
groundwater. Both treatments have been described earlier.
6 . 0 RfXXM1ENDill ALTERNATIVES
6.1 DescriPtion of RecQT!1l'leI1ded Reredv
The recornnended alternatives for renediation of groundwater an1 soil
contamination at the Warrchen Site inc lude extraction, treat.rrent am discharge
of groundwater; and on-site treatment of contaminated soil (Alternative 6).
These recarrnended alternatives rreet tJle requiranents of the National Oil and
Hazardous SUbstances Contingency Plan (N:P), 40 CFR 300.68 (j), am the
-------
-38-
SUperfurxi Amanclments and Reauthorization k;t of 1986 (SMA). '!his recarmended
raredy permanently and significantly reduces the volurre of hazardous SUbst:ances
in the groundwater, and reduces the volurre of contaminants in the soil.
6.2 Oceration and M;:tintenance
When the raredy is canpleted no long-term operation and maintenance (O&M) will
be required.
6.3 COst of Recc:mnen:led Alternatives
capi tal costs, for groundwater renediation is $414,900 with systan operating and
maintenance cost at $155,100 per year, which incltIdes sampling and analysis.
'!he total present worth of the groundwater remediation is $1 ,203,200. '!he
LTI1\ process is based on the excavation and treatment of 2000 cubic yards of
soi 1. '!he use of a robi Ie unit has the advantage of no capital investments,
and since canplete destruction of the waste is achieved, no operation and
maintenance costs are incurred beyond the first year. CNerall cost for soil
excavation, treatment backfilling and periodic sampling is estimated at
$ 895,700.
~e Total ~resent worth cost :of this ranedy', including ooth soil and
~oundwater remediation, is $2,098,900.
6 . 4 SChedule
The planned schedule for remedial activities at the Wamchan Site will be
governed by the signing of the Consent Decree, but tentatively is as follows:
June 1988 - Approve Record of Decision
september 1988 ~ Sign Consent Decree
D:tober 1988 - Begin Renedial Design
March 1989 - Complete Remedial Design
May 1989 - Begin M:>bilization
6. 5 Future Actions
Groundwater rronitoring will be required throughout the rareclial activities to
assure the effectiveness of the grouridwater cleanup.
6.6 Consistency with Other Envirornnental Laws
Remedial actions perforrral urder cm:::IA ITUSt canply with all applicable Federal
and State regulations. All alternatives considered for the Warrchan Site were
evaluated on the basis of the degree to which they canplied with these
regulations. The recomnendedalternatives were found to meet or exceed all
applicable environmental laws, as discussed below:
* Resource Conservation and Recovery k;t
, .
. .
The LTrA process for soils c1oE!s not meet the definition of an incinerator
under RCRA and therefore is not subject to incinerator performance'
-------
-39-
stan:1ards .
* Clean Water Act
Trace aIrOtmts of contamination were detected in sedirrents in r-tCalleys
Creek. '!he soil and groundwater ranediation will delete the source of
any future contamination. ~ for the protection of saltwater aquatic
life have been used in the developrent of ranedial action. .
* FloOOplain Managerent Executive Order 11988
'!he site is located wi thin the 100-year floodplain am subject to the
requirenents of E.O. 11988. MY hazardous waste storage or treatIrent
facilities must be protected fram the 100-year flood.
* Department of TranspJrtation
TranspJrtation of hazardous substan:es is regulated by the Department of
TranspJrtation. '!he alternative chosen does not involve transp:>rtation
of hazardous waste.
* CCcupational. SaIt:>ty. and Health Administration
A health and safety plan will be developed during renedial design and
will be followed during the field activities to assure that regulations
of the CCcupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) are followed.
* Safe Drinking Water Act
Drinking wa.ter standards (M:L'S, M:LG's) are not arPlicable.
* National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systen
- ,
Discharge of treated groundwater is part of the recc:mnended alternative.
TI1is discharge will meet effluent limit requirenents of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systen (NPDES). ~tic Life chronic
toxicity values, which are used in the NPDES pemitting systen, were used
in detennining the groundwater cleanup goals in section 4.
* Enjangered Species Act
'D1e rec:anTIE!I1ded rerB:1ial alternative is protective of species listed as
endangered or threatened urner the Endangered Species i\ct:. Requirerents
of the Interagency section 7 consultation Process, 50 CFR, Part 402, will
be rret.. '!he Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. and
National CCeanic and AtlrOspheric Administration (M:M), will be consulted
during renedial design to assure that any endangered or threatened
species are not adversely impacted by implenentation of this remedy.
* Ambient Air Quality Standards
'D1e soil and groundwater treatIrent systens will be designed and rronitored
-------
-40-
. to assure that air anissions neet all state and Federal St.aI'mrds.
* State Drinking Water Standards
Maxi.nUlm contaminant levels established by the State of SOUth Carolina are
not applicable to the site.
7.0 CCM1UNITY ~F.T ~'M"rns
Fact sheets were transmitted to interested parties, residents near the Site,
media and state, local and federal officials before the RI YJOrk began at the
Site in JUly 1986.
An information rep:>sitory was established at the Beaufort Cmmty Library in
Beaufort, SOUth carolina.
A fact sheet describing the results of the RI was transmitted to interested
parties in August 1987.
A plblic notice was plblished in the Beaufort Gazette on May 6, 1988. '!his
notice announced the beginning of the Public comnent period and requested arrj
persons desiring a plblic meetijr to contact the EPA Project Manager.
rb conments were received during the three-week plblic ccmnent period which
ended June 6, 1988.
-------
Br.dloy II
Scllmdt 311
"orrisll c
H.yosll1
H R ER BB SO MVoun,rf
Jolnn
GGrosl 1111
Rilellioll
c.rm.n II
S S 3 3 Aguayo ""
o 0 1 0 o.wloy II
o 0 0 :~'"
Finl. WOlkO, \-
1. LOB-Now York I. K.nWI City .. 21-RHen-
dorson. Mel1lngly. ~- IJ.ckson CSI. SI-Wil-
son C.I. 8rol1 121. RHondo""n (:%51. S-R.n-
dol"". SF-IIo.l6Arulo 2.
III
Now Voril
Oollon W.4-0
Gu.nto S.3
K.nwi City
Gubic.. L.3-3
Flrr
Ouilnbry
WII-Gubic...
Umllorol-Homo. Irinkm.n,
Second. Coon8Y; Third. Merrill.
T-2:SI. A-3I.2SS.
C = C =
CALIFORNIA
.b r II bi
S 1 20 MeLmr211
4 1 1 1 lucknr dll
2 0 0 0 Armudll
o 0 0 1 Joynor Ib
S 1 3 2 CDnis rf
2 1 1 0 R.y II
3 0 1 1 Howell 3b
4 1 2 1 1I0lidor 3b
3 1 1 1 OWllllo cl
o 0 0 0 Wynog.r c
2 1 0 0 Hndrck 1111
3 1 1 1 Boono c
Scllofildn
Tol.11 33 1 11 1 Tol.11
Oolroit 040
Calilorni. 001
Gamo Winnino AII- Lomon (31.
OP-Oolro,1 2. C.lifornia 2. LOI-Dolrolt ..
Californ,. .. 11-Joynor. OWllilo. 31-Joyner.
COavil. SI- McLemore (.1. Poftls (151. S-
Shorld.n. SF-S"erldan.
IP
.2-3 .
2 1-3 1
3
o
'2.) 1
1 1.3 1
1 1
DETROIT
all r II bi
S 1 0 0
) 0 1 0
2 0 0 0
4 2 2 1
, 1 1 1
4 0 1 1
) 0 1 1
o 0 0 0
3 0 1 0
3 1 1 0
1 0 0 0
o 0 0 0
4 0 3 0
3.S114
201 001-'
130 OOO-S
"ol1il cf
W"ifokr 2b
Sal.or II
SlIorld.n II
Tramml n
Horndn d"
DEvns dll
Lomon rl
KnlO"llb
loromn Ib
Iroknl3b
Hu'" c
H II EA 88 SO
Oolrol'
Torrell
Hernandz W.2.1
Henneman S.,
C.liforni~
Finloy L.2~ 1 1.3 . 4 4 1 1
Cliburn 21.3 2 2 2 2 1
Kra...czyk 1 I.) 1 0 0 2 0
Ha...oy 3 1 1 1 0 3
IUleo 1 2 1 1 0 0
HIP-Salaar by Cliburn. WP-Torrell. IK-
Finloy 2.
Umlllres-Homo. Coblo; First. McClelland;
Second,Oonk,noo" Thord. McCoy.
T-3:24. A-13.111.
4 2.) ,
3 1
1 1-3 1
5
o
o
- -- ..... -
I..... '-' ...... ',-,
CLEVELAND SEATTLE
Ibrllbi Ibrllb,
4 0 1 0 Kinoory rf S 1 1 1
, 0 0 0 Irldloy c 4 2 1 1
S 0 0 0 Co 11o el 4 1 2 0
3 2 3 0 Ao.vis Ib 4 1 1 S .
4 0 1 0 ""elps d" 4 0 2 0
4 0 1 2 8r.nlley II 4 0 1 0
1010Prolloy3b )000
4 0 0 0 Aonlerl1b 1 0 0 0
3 0 1 0 MOln n 0 0 0 0
Roynlds 1b 4 2 2 0
ToI.11 ~ 1 10 1 ToI.I. 1S 7 U 7
Clovoland 000 100 0111-2
Soal110 001 005 OOx-1
Game Winnino ABI- Br.dley (I).
E-Branllo.,. OP-Cloveland 1. So.1110 2.
L08-Clovoland 10. s..nlo 7. 21- AWasll,ng-
Ion, Aoynoldl. Iradley. 8ranlloy. Kinoory. c.r.
lor. 38-Roynoldl. HR- AOavis (31. S8-c.rfor
(II.
AWs;In 3b
Upslll'" Ib
Franco 2b
c.rfor cf
Hall II
K,nlodll
OClark rf
Allanson c
J8elln
III
H A EA 88 SO
Clovol.nd
Vol1 L.1-2
Oodmon
Scll.nedr
OJonel
Soal110
Sw,fI W .2~ ., 2 2
MJ.cklo" 1 1 0 0
Oo
-------
~
\
"
....
TM ','and Pack.t, Thundav, M.r 26, "..
u.s. EP A offers cleanup plan for county hazardous waste site
---
8r MARY JO MIllER
'--... ,. n.. Pad.,
maIM al approximalely '1.3 million,
accordin.: 10 lJ1e report.
The Wamchem sile, ori,inally
ownM by Beaufort Chemical and Re-
search Co., was listM amane lJ1e
counlry's 100 mosl haurdous sites in
1984, making it eli,ible for cleanup
under the EPA's "Superfund" pro-
cram along wilh two other Beaufort
County siles.
1be oIJ1er siles are the Indepen-
~nt Nail Co., which is c:ur-rently be-
In, cleanM up, and the IUllama Spe-
cialily Chemicals Inc., both on u.s.
21 norlJ1 at Beaufort.
EPA umplin, al the Wamc:hem
sile, which was closed in 19112, de-
tectM several toxic chemicals, in-
cludin, acelone, benzene, toluene
and xylene. in soil and shallow
croundwaler and in the sedimeut 01
McCaUey Creek, where ~Unsbin,
has ~n prohibiled.
HeallJ1 orricials consider aU I.hree
siles potenliaUy hazardous bec:a~
lJ1ey are above the Floridan aquifer,
the primary drinkin, water SOUITe
ror weo users in Beaufort, CoII..lon,
Jasper and Hampton counties.
A 19116 study showed lJ1e Wamchem
sile contains soil and shallow UO'Jnd-
walpr conl~minalion in an on silp
W3\t..watrr pond and smaU amounts
or contaminalion in the sl'diml'nl or
McCaUey Cred, where shl'IIhshing
has ~n prohibiled
Althn,,~h ',I",pling revpaled small
amounu or contaminants in a res-
IriclM portion of lJ1e shallow, water
table aquirl'r beneath the Wamchem
sill', Ihe agl'ncy said il had deleclM
BEAUFORT - The U S. Environ-
mental Proleclion Agl'ncy has re-
leased its plans ror cleaning up an-
otMr or Beaufort County's three
haurdous wasIl' sites.
The agency, in a report on file at
the Beaufort County Library, out-
!iDes sevffal processes lJ1at would
use oxygen, carbon and heat to clean
. contaminated soil and ,roundwaler
, .t lJ1e Wamchem Inc. sile near lJ1e
, marsh on the west bank 01 McCal-
I ~y's Creek oIr U.S. 21.
, The EPA will accepl both oral and
written comments on its study unlil
June e. After the comments have
been evaluatM, the agency plans 10
maliI' a rllUll decision on its melJ10d
01 cleanup.
i -We should begin acluaUy clean.
: Inc up the site in May 1989," said Gie-
;z.elle BenneU, EPA projecl maula-.
11M': cost 01 the clea nup is esti-
no sill' related contaminatIOn in 1.11'
Floridan aquiCil'r.
To commenl on IJ1I' d~nup, con-
lact BI'MI'II al the U.S. EPA, 345
Courlland Slrl'l't NE., Allanta JOJfS,
or call (4041347.7191.
r
,~-
,
,
\
-------
Ju~ 12 '55 :2:55
P.2
i
South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control
CQm"luJc"'~
',~Ic~.~i C. 1.r~:1
ICI~d
~hH'!S Ioi Clrin~:'1. J~.. C'4:r~."
Ore" t.. Sr::jy. Jr, Y::!"':'U"'"
£',j;~ M C:I:vi"..\.1 = ~t;"';.'
~..~ ~, !-!1,,"1~,:.
H'~,rr 5 J:~I". \.! :
~~""el Cr~~..~. ,.:~ \; ;
~600 81;: S:rtt\
Cclu'""b\l, S.C. %9%01
~y 8, :!.Sse
:'.r. GrM%' C. !id'.te.ll
R8;'ic:-.&l ~~
us E?A, bqiQn rl
3 "S C::.:rtl ani S..... M~
A~""'...2, ~a J~j~~
R!:
r:...-:a1. ~ ~ c~ ~:'c:"t ~=)
~.s:: S:. toe - ~..:::::, Sc.:':..~ CO.- --::':.. "".&
:ear ~.
:~~,.~::
'::".a :e:-~ :.!.5 ::T.;~SJ;d -::.8 ?G('''-d o~ :'::.sion (R::O) fc:: -=.,.....
.r;a.~.E::'1 .:.~ ~'.-.d c:'l ::.. !, :.ssa. T':".a FCC is rr.l.y ~=r ~.. :::;;..
..a:, ~..ad ro-4d ~ ~: a~~c:'l ~c: t.~s s:. U c!.8Ve:~ 1....... ~....e..-.ca W'1 t..~ ~,
as a.-:'£"~ed by s;,.~ !."')j ~ t:..... ex-~ ~~..;.ci.:=l., t:-.a ~atiQ".al c.::.t.i.......--..:::y
P1A"'t.
S::.=.a t:... c.:.. '"":"a. ~ ~7'..C',. S'j::':" ~ :'-c.:.s t:ri QS , is neqc-.ia ti..-.q an
a.;."'.&."':t ....it.~ t:::A. t: ~c=- ":..~ ~.. ,,~ A--"':'~ (?.A) 1 tr..a S""..at.8 18 r'~
req; ~!"IId to =.a t..:h t:...-d. ~: -::.. o:'S ':oS e D&-X ~ ~ ~ .-:. ":.~ ~.:.s R.:iD. ~ ........!c......,
~I..", c...~... "'. ~_...... -_.~-. --.- ..i_"" ~.. '8 ~~--- -.-a.., ,-"~014'...
... ... .., ....... -.IIi8 W.. .,..., - -- . ~ - . ~ .... ~ ~ . w - -. .... I\. ~ ~ ......... - ~"""'J n- --.....
~~"::.-e:SH5 ~,;,;c~~ a.""i:i 801.:. AS !o::~..'!5:
~- -c.-at.c'
~
....
:::x-_""!:"~ :~ _.-'-~~~..!.-:a: ~._~.~t.e.:'.
On-si U t.. ~ "::'£":": ~: e.x"'".....-a="",-c ~:x:.-a -:.a: .
tiacl'.u-;e ~! ~~ q:":7:c..-a~ to:) ot!-si ta r..:-=o.-'.
G~-a.... tar ra:tedia":.icn vi 11 C. per: ~ \,;.-:""..il e.:l o::.:-:-...a:.:.r.a tId wat8:
r.eet.s t.". elM. "i\.:p qoa.l.s 5?8C i: i ed i"l t.~ :!:::::::3r'i ot Al tar:" ~ ta
Sel ec- ...ion.
2.
3.
~.
~
~-s:.te t...~'=£:t cf C=:~..:..~~ soil (!~!':xi.~.!,:e.:y 2, c:~ c:.:. r-!l.) to:
rrc-.'e c~"'.i: ~~.!--.e..-;~. ':':lQ tec.1.:..=l:c:e.s t,.;;'!l =--..:~~e exca\"'!tio~: 1~1
~_......:.. ""'",..-,.' a......".~~...... ...~ ~.. S ...~.-......." ~'!'Y!' ,.. --~-~ so.' S' .~
-1:""""""'W-~ ............-....~ ~-~_...... --- ......-- , ~---.........-~~ ~- _1iiiIIWt~ .....,....
rQ" /~9tatio.~.
-------
--- -- -"~!-,---,-~-~
~..:
Mr. Q:oeer c. ~~l
~ J\:ly 8, ,a8S
Pa;... 2 ,
'%he Stau has ccnt~ in !:PAt. a::hi."'J.st:...~t:.iQn '''''"4 C".tOto--~t. ot
. ,~k)C'. cCjec:tivu an:! P'J.:pCM a.'1d al..., that Spr1n;s ~.. Inc. will
~1~t8 th8 War.,lco Site as cUnctad.
.
S .inoI.."'8ly ,
" //~
I.,,~-- ~~'
R. law:" 51".a..,
.'":'1 ~~.d.MiClr.8:'
t:':v~ "" ..6.. ~ ClJal i ty cer:t..'"Cl
,"
ittS:alt
=z Gil ~"it.anove.....,
fl.a.ttsill 'I'rt 'AS'" a.: e
~I:;. ~SQ'1
~ Tayl=-
t:;n.-, :.'.Art.:.n
l<8i~~ u.~&:'
..
:J:~::L'::'::~'~"'S~'! ~,' ?_e,;,:;~<" ~~:'; ,-';~':~~:~,;~: :'.;:,~~,;"-;<;"~~~,,:,;:-:.: "j' ..'~ c'; ',... ~ ',", .
',~"- -,;':, ;.,:.;. '''', ','" ,,",,. >
------- |