United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R03-S6/021
Marcn 1986
Superfund
Record of Decision
Middletown Road, MD
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DA T A
(Pl~gsl nad /lfrtlUcflOffS Off (II~ 'f!Ytrrt ~ffNf! co",,,lt(iffll
,. AI'OJIIT NO. 12. 3. "'ECIPIENT'S ACC:ESSION NO.
EPA/ROD/R03-86/021
.. TITLE ANO SUITITLI 5. "'EPOIIIT OATE
SUPERFUND RECORD OF !:}ECISION March 17 1986
Middletown Road, MD 8. PEAFO"'MINC OAGANIZATION COOE
7. AUTHOACSI 8. PEAFOAMING O"'GANIZATION "'EpOAr "0
9. ""ApO..MING OAGANIZATION NAM. ANO AOOA.55 10. pAOCAAM EI..EM'NT NO.
I I. C:ONTAAI;T/I;jAANT He).
12. S"ONSOAING AGENCY NAME ANO AOC"'SS 13. TV"" OF AE"OAT ANC 10.1'100 COVEFlEO
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1:';"",1 ~nn -
401 M Street, S.W. 1.. S"ON50AING AGENCY COO,
Washington, D.C. 20460 --. 800/00
15. SU"'LEMINTAAY NOTIS
18. A8STAACT
The Middletown Road Site is a privately owned waste dump, consisting of approximately
2.3 acres, located off Maryland Route 50 near Annapolis, Anne Arundel County, !1a~)and.
The site operated as a dum~, pr imar ily for rubble and construction debris, for several
decades without proper State permits. In 1981, it was discovered that approximately 40
drums and four dumpster loads of suspected hazardous substances were on the site.
On June 24, 1983, $384,000 in CERCLA money was allocated for immediate removal
measures to excavate and remove hazardous substances and contaminated soil. The removal
activities conducted at the site consisted of: the removal of contaminated soil and
5-gallon pails of marine paint: additional soil sampling to confirm adequate contaminant
removal: installation of six ground water monitoring wells .around the perimeter of the
site: drum sampling, testing and the relocation of one million tires on the site in
order to conduct a more comprehensive subsurface investigation. Material removed duri.ng
the Immediate Removal Action included 68 drums, 70 contaminated tires, and 610 tons of
contaminated so il.
A remedial investigation was conducted to determine whether any remedial action would
be needed before deleting the site from EPA's National Priorities List. Based on the
findings of the RI, no risk to receptors via direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion
was found. Therefore, a No Action Alternative has been recommended, since there are no
(See Attached Sheet)
17. KIY WOJIIOS ANO COCUIIotINT ANALYSIS
a. Olsc".,rOAS b.IOINTIPIIAS/OpEN ENOEC TEAMS C. COSAT! Flch11Group
. .
Record of Decision
Middletown Road, MD
Contaminated Media: None-n9 observed release
Key contaminants: N/A
II. OISTJII'IUTI ON STATEMENT 19. SICUA'TY CLASS I nu~ Rtporr/ 21. NO. OF PAGES
None 38
20. SICUAITY CLASS I nli6 PGltl 22. p"lce
None
I'. ,- 2220-1 (I.... ..n)
""&VIOUI KOITIO'" II O.IO'-&T&
-------
EPA/ROD/R03-86/021
Middletown Road, Me
16.
ABSTRACT (continued)
~eleases from the Middletown Road Site ~hich may th~eaten public health.
The State of Maryland will monitor onsite wells as a pa~t of its existing
closed waste site inspectio~ schedule.
--.
-------
D., i':' .,.. i"-
., ..."." f' .' ~
. ..".~~. ..
RECORD OF DECISION
REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION
Site'
Middletown Road Site, Annapolis, MD
Documents Reviewed
I am basing my decision primarily on the following documents
describing the analysis of cost-effectiveness and extent of cleanup
during the emergency action at the Middletown Road Site.
- Middletown Road Dump. Superfund Immediate Removal. FEDERAL
ON-SCENE COORDINATORS REPORT.
--.
- Middletown Road Site. Remedial Investigation 56-600-23-33 -
Prepared by the :iaryland Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene. Waste Management Administration Support Services
Division.
- Staff summaries and recommendations.
pegcript~o~Selected Remed~
,.,
- No action with regard to remediation on site. as the RI/FS""""
has confirmed that the emergency action was complete and there are
from the Middletown Road Site which may threaten pubUc health.
00 releases
- The State of Maryland to monitor onsite wells at least annually.
as a part of their existing closed waste site inspection schedule.
Declarations
Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the National Contingency Plan
(40 C.F.R. Part 300), I have determined that the "no-action" alternative
combined with monitoring by the State of Mayland of onsite
welTs is the appropriate remedy for the Middletown Road Site.
Because of the extensive and thorough cleanup during the Emergency
Removal Action and the results of the remedial investigation, EPA,in
consultation with the State. has determined that the site poses no
sign1f1ca~t threat to public health or the environment.
-------
I have also determined that the action being taken 15 appropriate
when balanced against the availability of Trust Fund monies for use at
other sites. The "No Action" alternative in conjunction with ground
water monitoring will adequately protect public health, welfare and the
environment. -
James M. Seif
Regional Administrator
Region III - USEPA
Date
--.
-------
ATTACHMENT
At'.:: ."~ent 1 Surface/Ground Wat.er, Sampling Results
Attachment 2 Metals Content of Si te Soils
Attachment 3 Air Quality Study - June 28, 1985
Attachment 4 Middletown Road Site Map
Attachment 5 CotDIDunity Relations/Fact Sheet Press Releases
Attachment 6 Operat1~n and Maintenance
"
-------
SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTIO~
MIDDLETOWN ROAD SITE
I.
Site History
The Middletown Road Site was an unregulated dump located off Maryland
Route 50 near Annapolis, Ann~ Arundel County. ~aryland. This location
had been operating as a dump, primarily for rubble and construction
debris for several decades without proper state permits. In 1981, it
was discovered that approximately 40 drums and four dumpster loads or
suspected hazardous materials were on the site. This site was placed
on EPA's National Priority List (NPL) in December of 1982. The basis
for this designation was the potential ground water and surface water
contamination. .
After being placed an the NPL, a site assessment was conducted in February,
which revealed that emergency conditions were present. Site access was vir-
tually unrestricted. When coupled with its proximity to a residential
area and a day care center, a substantial threat existed via direct contact
with toxic substances.
1983,
On June 24. 19~3, $384,000.00 in CERCLA money was allocated for
immediate removal measures at the site. These actions were conducted as a
joint State of Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of
Envirocental Programs and US EPA Region III effort.
The immediate removal conducted at this site can be broken into several
overlapping phases. The first phase was the mobilization of manpower, materials
and equipment necessarY to complete the project. An Extent-of-Contamination
survey was conducted as a second phase and the removal of contaminated soil and
5-gallon pails of marine paint comprised the third phase of operations. Phase 3
included additional 50il 5amplin~ to confirm adequate contaminant removal,installation c
six ground water monitoring wells around the perimeter of the site, and a sub-
surface magnetic survey.
The magnatometer survey revealed partially buried drums on the opposite
side of the site,. thereby opening the door for Phase IV. This phase consisted
of drum samplin~, testing and the relocation of one million tires from the site
in order to conduct a more comprehensive subsurface investigation.
Phase 5 operations included removal of subsurface drums from the locations
identified .fn Phase 4 as iron-containing zones. This was followed by operations
to close out the project, including upgrading sediment control measures and
demobilizing.
The total amounts of material removed during the immediate removal action
were 68 drums, 70 contaminated tires and 610 tons of contaminated s011.
-------
. -2-
Remedial Investigation activities have bee~ undertaken by the
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene under a Cooperati~e
Agreement signed on January 2, 1935 with the US EPA, Region III. The
scope of work for the Remedial Investigation has consisted of data
collection at the possible routes of contaminant escape at 6-week
intervals to insure that there were no releases from Middletown Road which pose an
environmental threat. The work plan, implemented by the State
of Maryland Department~of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of Environmental
Programs, consisted of four phases.
Phase I was an assessment of the water quality in the vicinity of
the site. Data was collected from monitoring wells and surface water.
Phase II was an assessment of sit~ soils and sediments of the site.
Analysis was made for Priority Metals, Volatile Organics and Base/Neutral
Extractables.
Phase III was
and an overview of
against removal of
Priorities List.
an assessment of data generated by all prior phases
said data culminating in a recommendation for or
the Middletown Road Site from the EPA's National
Based on the findings of the RI, no risk to receptors via direct
contact, inhalation, or ingestion was found.
II.
Site Location and Descript~
The Middletown Road Site is a waste dump located off Maryland
Route 50 near Annapolis, Anne Arundel County, Maryland.
.The Middletown Road site is situated in a slightly hilly area that
was filled in to form a piece of relatively flat property. Two gravel
roads off of Middietown Road provide access to the the site. Figure I-A
is a map showing the site location.
-------
-3-
"
A.
Geolo~ and Soils
The M~ddletown Road site lies on an outcrop of the Aquia Formations
deposited during the later Paleocene-early Eocene Epoche, approximately
50 to 55 million years ago. The Aquia consists of sands, which are
clean to moderately clayey. The sands were laid down in very shallow
marine waters.
The Aquia sands are usually well-sorted, mediu~-g~ained ~i:h a fe~
areas where fine or coarse grains dominate. They are usually massive
or thick-bedded, highly fossil ferrous, and are "glauconitic".i3meaning
that they include minerals of the mica group (K, Na), (Ar, Fe ,Mg)2'
(Al.Si)4010 (OH)Z. Glauconitic sands are indicators of slow deposition
and usually have a characteristic green color. Another name for the
formation is Aquia Greensand. The thickness of the Aquia Greensand in
this area is estimated u. over 100 feet.
Terrace deposits laid down during the Pliocene (8 million years
ago) outcrop in bands northeast and southewest of the site. These
terrace deposits consist of interbedded sand, gravel and silt-clay.
,
The site lies in a small valley along the south bank of an unnamed
tributary of Whitehall Creek. The valley slopes from 100 feet to 40
feet in less than 800 feet, a slope of approximately 7.5%. The valley
extends mainly west to east before bending to the south along the stream
course. There, the stream meets another tributary of Whitehall Creek
flowing from the west to east. .
B.
Hydrology
The Middletown Road site lies within the drainage area for
Whitehall Creek. Three of the five sizeable streams feeding Whitehall
Creek drain the area surrounding the site. The site lies alongside
the center ~f the three northern tributaries, on the southern wall of
a west to east running valley. Running down the va~ley sides, the
slope is approximately 10%. All surface runoff from the site is thou~ht
to flow into the center of the three northern feeder streams, and then
into Whitehall Creek.
A wetland area begins less than 1200 feet downstream from the
dump area and continues for approximately 4500 feet until Whitehall
Creek widens. Net precipitation in the area is over 10" per year.
-------
-4-
The Aquia Greensand on which the Middletown Road site lies, is
one of the most important aquifers in southern Maryland and the Eastern
Shore. Wells from the aquifer have yields ranging primarily from 2 to
1300 gallons per minute (GPM). The wells are used primarily for drinking
water, although recently supplemental irrigation wells have begun to
draw on the Aquia. The water is generally of good chemical quality
and in many instances, may be used with little or no treatment.
There are 13 drinking water wells tapping the Aquia within two
miles of the site; three of these are classified as public supply wells.
Depths of the wells range from 53 feet below the 68 feet above sea
level. Yields range from 30 GPM to 36 GPM.
Two of the public supply wells are less than 1500 feet north of
the site. These wells are shallow (2 feet above, 16 feet below sea
level) and have moderate yields (8 GPM,' 12 GPM). The wells are owned
by Colonial Manor Estates, and were drilled in 1959 and 1969,
respectively. The st~eam lies between the well location and the site.
The permeability of the Aquia Greensand in the area is thought to
be between 10-4 CHis and 10-2 CHis.
Groundwater flow is generally governed by site
southeast. This is the opposite direction from the
contaminants were present and escaped from the site
likely flow in this direction away from public use.
topography and moves toward the
nearest public supply well. If
they would most away from drinking
During the emergency phase of the Middletown Road Project, six (6)
ground water monitoring wells were installed by the State of Maryland
at the site 1n locations designated to best monitor on or offsite
migration of contaminants. Routine monitoring of these wells began in
June of 1983 and has continued on a regular basis to date. The geographical
layout of these wells is represented in Figure I-A Middletown Road Site
Map." Results obtained from analysis of these samples have indicated
that no contamination has been detected.
The ground water samples were analyzed by the State of Maryland's
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Laboratories using EPA approved
methods. Parameters analyzed for included all priority metals, Volatile
-------
-5-
Organic Pollutants, Base/Neutral Extractables, Pesticides and Basic
inorganic and organic values (i.e.. pH, Conductivity, T-P04' NH4' NOZ'
Turbidity, Dissolved Solids, Alkalinity, Fe, COD, T06).
III.
Sampling Investigation and Results
~,) ,
',' and Sediments
During the emer~ency phase of the operation, ~xtensive soil sa~pling
was undertaken to deter~ne extent of contaoinat10n of the site.
Contaminated ~oils ~ere re~oved from th~ si=~ and tra~sported to secare
landfills located in Hawkins Point, Maryland and Coatesville, Pennsylvania.
Analysis of removed soils from the site indicated the presence of the
following materials in levels up to the indicated maximums:
Contaminant
Concentration ppm
Lead
Cr
Cyanide
Arsenic
Zinc
Copper
Cadmium,
Manganese
/ Barium
'10ron
Aluminum
..-------.. .
8,690.
76.6
1,000.
2.0
73.5
10
0.13
30
30
, 13
710
, In addition to the contaminants listed above, certain other organic
contaminants were identified onsite. They include phenolic compounds,
chlorinated compounds and Base/Neutral Extractable Compounds in levels
above standard detection limits by GC/MS verification.
Under the remedial phase of the project, soil sampling was again
undertaken to determine the success of the emergency removal of
contaminated soils. A 50' grid was laid out over the entire 2.3 acres
of the site proper. Using random numbers generated by a computer,
certain grids were chosen to be sampled. (See Figure III) Composite
samples were obtained from each grid using standard methods of soil
sampling as detailed in the EPA publication "Samples and Samplin~
Procedures for Hazardous Waste Streams." They were analyzed for metal
and organic. priority pollutants.
The results of these analyses were plotted aerially and analyzed
statistically. The analysis of this data proved that there is no
significant contamination at the site. The analyt1cal results from s011
samples taken from the areas where RCRA wastes and contaminated surface
and subsurface s01ls were removed show that the remaining soils in these
areas are comparable to the surrounding 50115 in the dump where construc-
tion debris. tires, and other trash had been depos1ted over the years. Additionally,
the EP-Toxic tests showed that the soil did not exceed any of the
RCRA EP-Toxics. '
-------
-6-
To confirm site cleanliness, a second soil sampling project yas
undertaken in mid-October 1985. S~x soil samples Yere collected from
various sections of the site at four points likely to have the highest
concentration of contam~nants; yith tyO additional saoples to serve as
controls. These sample points may be referenced- on Map 1 as BSS - 1
through BSS - 6. Results from this investigation confirmed lead and
chrome levels found in previous background sa~plir.gs and which typify
Greensand soils. (See Attachment 2).
Aquia
B.
Surface Wate!-lnvestigation
Site impacts on surface water have been topographically limited to
an unnam~d tributary of Whitehall Creek. There are two branches to -
this tributary which may be impacted, the confluence of these branches
is located within the bounds of the site proper. One branch is fed by
a spring which emanates from the site. The second branch is an
intermi-ttent stream flowing along the qorthern site perimeter.
Sampling of the surface water was initiated concurrently with the
hydrogeological survey. The strea~ was sampled at the three points, at
a point 100' from the spring head 1200 feet from the spring head and
3t the point where Route 50 crosses the stream 1/2 mile downstream from
the site.
During the emergency phase of the operations, contamination was
discovered in the vicinity of the spring head. This contamination had'
a tendency to dilute or attenuate at the 1200 foot station. This
contamination however dissipated at the 1200 foot station and was shown
to be at background levels during the Remedial Investigation samplings.
Table I-A in Appendix 1 gives the results of the sample analysis for
the Middletown Road Site's unnamed tributary to Whitehall Creek.
An environmental assessment conducted in 1983 shortly after clean-up
indicated that aquatic l1fe was not impacted by the site. This
conclusion was reached based on the presence of certain species which
thrive only in unstressed environments.
The ~ata for samples from the stream obtained after the emergency phase
did indicate sporatic increases in heavy metals such as arsenic, lead and barium.
Hence another sampling effort was launched. In late October and early
November of 1985, an attempt was made to identify the source of the
data anomoly. Samples were obtained from the site stream at S-1 as
well as from a control stream at, S-4, unrelated to the site~ A final
comparison of this data showed however that the water quality in both
streams was below the detectible limits set for the MCL during water
standards. Only slightly higher Total Dissolved Solids (TSD) were found in the
surface runoff from the Middletown site resulting from the flow off- the poorly veg-, ~t
surface terrainewhich may be linked with the periodic data anomoly. Hence, it
can be concluded that a8 a result of the emergency removal action, runoff from
Middletown Road is of similar quality to that of surrounding waterways
- and poses no threat to aquatic life or public health.
-------
-7-
C6
Air Investi~ation
Ambient monitoring of a~rborne contaminants at the Middletown Road
site was continous during the emergency phase. Except for seve'ral
excursions of airbQrne' pollutants resultin~ from disturbances of
containerized materials, there was no problem with the air quality at
the site. Several vents did. however, offgas methane and related landfill
gases but analysis of air bag samples obtained from these vents indicated
insignificant levels of chemical contaminants. Table I-B in Attachment 3
and 4 shows the levels of airborn contaminants found during the emergency
phase.
Durin~ the R~edial Investigation of the site, an air quality
survey was conducted onsite. Readings were made at chest level (3.5') .
and at ground level (0.5') along several transects running through the
site using the HNu photoionization detector. There were no readings
above normal site background encountered on any of these transects.
In addition to the site transects, several discrete readings were made
ardund the site, particularly at tne spring head and several vents
that had previously given off organic readings. The results of these
discrete samples were null.
D.
Ground Water Monitorin~ Well Results
During the remedial investigation, ground water samples were taken
and analyzed on six separate occasions for metals and once for volatile
organics. The six (6) onsite wells (OW-1-6) were tested in addition
to three (3) offsite domestic wells. Almost three years of sampling data from
on and off-site monitoring wells indicates that ground water is within the
safe drinking water levels. and its' quality is not threatened by hazardous materi
which were present on-site prior to the removal action.
(See Attachment 1 for Lab Results)
IV.
Community Relations
During the emergency action 3 public meetings were held. Two public
meetings were conducted during the Remedial Investigation CRI). The
second (RI) meeting was held to present the Remedial Investigation No
Acti~n Option on Aug. 27, 1985 and was not attended by the press or
publi.c. (See attached Fact Sheet and press release, Attachment 5)
V.
Consistency with other Environmental Laws
During the emergency action at the Middletown Road dumpsite, all
RCRA hazardous wastes and surrounding contaminated soils were removed
and disposed of according to all appropriate State and federal laws.
The Remedial Investigation further proved that the site is no longer
an environmental threat as all air, water, soil and sediment samples
were at or very close to naturally occuring background levels. The State
of Maryland will monitor the on-site wells at least annually as a part
of their existing closed waste site inspection schedule. (see Attachment 6)
-------
-8-
The site is currently consistent with the Clean Air Act as no
toxic airborn discharges have occurred on or offsite. Likewise, all
ground and surface water data shows levels of metal~ ~~d or~anics
which are well within the Clean Water ~ct, Drinking Water standards.
The site is also in compliance with all State environmental laws and
regul~tions.
Presently. the Middletown Road property has only trash and tires
onsite and is considered a solid-waste dump by the State of Maryland.
It is not subject to RCRA regulations because all RCRA waste and
contaminated soils were removed during the immediate removal action.
Although RCRA is no_longer applicable to this site the Maryland Solid
Waste Regulations apply. Therefore, as discussed in the attached letter
from the State of Maryland to EPA, (Attachment 6), the State has determined
that the site is a closed solid waste dump and will be monitored in
accordance with COMAR 1051 (Code of Maryland Register).
VI.
Recommended Alternative
Thorough cleanup at the site and conformance with other environmental
laws clearly indicates that the Middletown Road dump site is no longer
an environmental threat. The tires remaining on-site are a solid waste problem
that is regulated by Maryland's solid waste regulations. The State currently
has issued a consent order with the owner to have them removed and
properly disposed. A No Action alternative will be the
most reasonable and lowest cost-effective alternative for protection of
public health, welfare and the environment. Also,it is recommended
that Middletown Road 15 proposed for deletion from the National Priorities
List.
.
-------
(J) OBSERVATION WCLLS
A STREAM .AMPLE POINT
/Contaminated
New Housing Development
FIGURE-,Ł4
Middle town Road Slle- Ar HI polls, Md.
Situ Skfllrh (nnl tr r; :a| )
-------
HIDDLKroWN lOAD 5 lIE
METALS DATA
fiLTERED VATER 5AKPLES
Oct. Oct. Oct. Oct. 11/85 - Oct. 24/85 Oct. Oct.
(lATE 17/85 2M85 24/85 4/85 4/85
SAHrLF. rOINT 0"1 OW2 01-1) 0114 0tI5 OW6 OF-) 5-1 5-2 S-) 5-4 B-1 0-2 T-S 5-)
ARSt:IHC 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
RAR I UK 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 . 0.5
~:ADHIUK 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
COIION lU" +6 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
. ':IJRONlUli 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
.IWJ 0.05 0.05" 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0> 0.05
LERCURY 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
; Kl.EN IUK 0.001 0.004 0.005 0.003 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.005 0.002 0.004 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
:tLVER 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05.
OPP~R 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
AGNKSIUII t.3 4.) 31 22 3.2 2.0. 0.5 0.8
\ crrrAS 1 UII .
2.8 4.4 21 15 2.8 1.8. 1.4 1.9
,~
-------
Summary of Volatile .rganics Analysis on Ground
Water Monitoring Wells at ~iddletown Road Site,
Maryland, (Jan./Feb. 1985)
Purgeable Halocarbons
(EPA 601) Well III Well /12 Well 113
Chloromethane <1
-------
''''''''':1 .
~... .
AT~;a-2-~1'J;' 2
, ................--- -
.-- --
--.:t
-------
APPENDIX 2A "
November 1985
METALS CONTENT OF SITE SOILS
MIDDLc.""'TCWN RQ;'.D SITE
TOI'AL METALS-ppm
S5-1 55-2 55-3 55-4 .55-5 55-6
Arsenic 27.3 --. 13.1 8.4 18.5 24.5 22.5
Barium 23. 21. 27.0 32. 5.0 28.
Cadmium 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.59 0.50 0.60
Cr-Total 216. 90.5 57. 134. 244. 243.
Copper 4.90 3.88 - 22.0 20.2 2.0 5.98
Iron 90,200 41,990 30,000 57,708 88,000 81, 954
Lead 18.0 16.9 44.0 39.5 12.0 24.9
Magnesium 2,750 2,239 1,700 3,557 4,050 4,287
Potassium 8,500 6,975 3,000 6,522 12,500 8,375
Zinc .~ 80.0 56.7 98.0 120.0 63.0 85.7
Mercury O.lL 0.1L O.lL 0.1L O.lL O.lL
,
-------
-"-.----"-.- .
June 4, 1985
ME1'/\lS CC1'I'I'rnT or SITE SOl LS
MI[)()LE~ ROAD SITE
ppm DY DRY WEIGHT
: ; I 011 i ()II Chromium
I'IIIIIII1I'r I\r!;('11 i c Cadmium Tolill Lead Mercury Copper Iron Nickel Zinc Aluminum Bar ium Selenium
~ ;~;-O()l 3.45 0.57 18.2 10.2 0.1 3.97 11,351 5.7 19.9 99"9 19.3 0.188
~ ;~;-()O? 9.50 0.52 39.3 11.4 0.1 6.40 23,967 6.2 16.1 22.211 14.5 0.35
~;~;-O(U 8.87 0.52 53.2 71.0 0.1 17.2 28,184 8.4 125 9,916 40.7 0.64
~;~ ;-OOt1 10.5 0.51 66.5 21.5 0.1 8.90 30,675 8.2 77.7 10.481 25.6 0.51
~;: ;-00') 4.19 0.52 38.9 9.5 0.1 6.31 23,134 0.4 29.0 17.876 22.~ 0.05
~;S-O()6 6.46 0.51 54.3 58.4 0.1 29.3 30,738 9.2 107 10,246 38.9 0.62
:;~ ;-on I ('. )11 0 . r,l) 40.0 51.0 0.1 18.6 23,529 10.R 004 11 , 765 5(j.9 0.05
:;: ;-()(III )(). \ (I. '.in 2t1t1 JO.O o. J 2.69 101,695 13.0 59.8 11,715 10.0 0.35
: ;r;-ooy c).50 0.49 77.1 47.4 0.113 15.2 40,514 10.9 67.2 7,411 49.4 0.46
:;~:;-() I 0 21.6 0.50 219 10.0 0.1 3.50 101,493 13.9 75.6 13,433 5.0 0.05
:;~)-o II 5.39 0.50 34.7 6.9 0.1 &.65 22,817 6.9 24.2 13,393 12.9 0.05
~~S-01.2 9.27 0.50 93.1 36.7 0.1 19.1 46,535 9.9 73.3 8,416 31. 7 0.05.
S5-0 J.J 18.8 0.50 203 16.9 0.1 5.28 111,554 17.9 86.6 10,956 11.0 1.44
55-014 9.40 0.49 132 37.5 0.1 8.29 55,281 12.8 79.0 9.131 32.6 0.05
55-015 28.8 0.49 237 15.4 0.1 3.26 106,825 13.8 80.1 11,375 10.9 0.36
55-016 11.8 0.50 84.3 17.8 0.1 4.07 71,429 7.9 103 5,952 50.6 0.05
I .!
55-.017 4.43 0.50 78.4 11.9 0.1 3.97 .32,738 6.9 35.] . 5,456 16.9 0.05
~.>5-0 18 6.31 0.50 60.7 7.0 0.1 1.69 41,791 5.0 54.7 3,383 11.9 0.05
55-019 19.1 0.69 190 26.8 0.1 19.0 83,251 5.0 86.2 11 , 150 21.8 0.22
55-020 5.p 0.50 22.8 12.9 0.1 6.63 16,238 8.9 34.6 10,644 22.8 0.18
-------
J\PPENDI X 20
June 4, 1985
ORGI\N Ies CGWI1m OF SITF. SOl LS
MIOO~ ROJ\D srffi
ppm OY DRY WlnCIiT
Slation Nurrber Methylene Chloride MEK MIBK PCB 1260
55-001 34 112 150
55-002 30 22 35
SS-003 20
55-004 24 12
55-005 23 18 0.2
55-006 44 10
55-009 0.2
.~
-------
Cha.=",=- :;:
Results of 50il 5c~plinS
June 1983
51''''''.''='''
:"'1 '-J
June 28, 1983
Station Lead Chronium
01 TO 66
02 19 97
03 16 49
04 21 162
05 29 144
06 318 146
--.
07 340 124
08 22 175
09 12 50
10 137 112
11 8 95
12 31 170
13 18 124
14 75 94
15 <5 162
June 29. 1983
16 <5 101
17 7 139
18 12 57
19 <5 29
20 11 . 98
21 12 71
22 13 100
23 <5 27
24 5 107
- 25 <5 95
-------
. Results of Soi1 Sampling Survey
June 1983
June 29, '1983
Station Lead Chromium
26 36 79
27 6 130
28 7 123
29 19 45
30 ,,9. 34
31 8 84
32 20 70
33 66 72
34 <5 76
35 18 85
36 '26 113
37 <5 110
-------
S$K$N
lSrffVV-JvV**ir'r V v
INfife-r
Ground W.ilur Ciuilours ul the llfddleloun K(.
-------
"
--.
ATTACHMENT III
Results of Air Monitoring on 11/03/83 and 6/28/85
,
-------
STATE OF YARYLA!'fO
.
DE?~RT~ E~T 0 F HE>'L TH A:'fD :.t E::4T Al H':' S JE:I E
8' ~ . ,-...,
.----
4.1..C.
MEI10R~)/~UI4
Copies
Subject
'-.." -'/'5:'5 0=
:a~d..fill .:'iwoo
Frcm 'Nal ':e!" ..,.,. ("'o~np". ~ i -
" Management Admi!1is"t.ra~ion
~~~~1~~ ~~"O~-Q~ "/~'/~~
-~
T a ..~ ~,~ ,..~:c-' Waste Manacement
":..ration
DI18
ll/O~ 18:3
One te~la: ~ac; sa=?:c was col:ec~ed on the morning of Novemb~ 2, 1983 at ~e
Mid:Uetown Road site. This bag was analyzed in our Mobile Ai.r Monitoring Labora-
tory on the aŁternoon of Novecb"" 2. 1983 and repeeteci in the mc=unq of Nov- 3.
1983.
Here are ~~e results of this analysis:
.~"
Comt)ound
Me~~ylene Chloride
1,1 Dichloroethane
Chlorofo~ "
1,1,1 Tricblorop~~.~.
Carbon Tetrachloride
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1,2 Dichloropropane
Trichloroethylene
Perchloroethylene (Tetrachloroe~~ene)
Freon 12 , VCM - ,
Pentane.
Toluene
XYlene
E~Ylbenzene
Benzene
1'1'5 (v /-,,)
10.0
1.4
0.5
...~
2.9
- 0.1
0.07
0.6
1.3
17.0
approx. 10
12
approx- 15
approx. 4
2.8
In addition to these con:tizmed COmpounds, there vere 5 unidentified chlorinated
compounds which Łall in the range of 18ss than 1 ppb to 20-25 Ppb. There were a
large number oŁ uni.dentUied peaks on the FID detector but they are all less t..'lan
1 ppb except for one large peak early in the run which could be a combination of
light hYdrocarbons. .
WWC: c:w
..........
~"J
-~, ~
~.r'
~ ~_J ~
1".\1 ,.cz. .,';.
.~
_,.r ".
.'
, .
~.
"
-------
STAT!ON
?~S~L;S 0: A!~ ~CN:7:R:~G
.Jt:NE: 25th 1995
:'U::>Z.E':'C~iN R.CA:) 3:7:::
?~~~!c-:
3ACXGROUND
AS-1
.;S-2
AS-3
.;S-4
AS-5
7:-;NS::C':' A
!' RA. 'IS E: CT a
':'!'_~'lSE:C':' C
7~'lS::C':' :>
.-.
:"to f!X'~~'.t;; ,...""c:
CONCENTRATION
1.5 as Benzene ppm
1.6
1.4
!.oS
1.6
. -
_.~
:1-'--.'4
-'S-',~-.......,......a
..
..
..
..
..
'- ,..
~ ---'
-------
--.
A'l'TACHMENT IV
Middletown Road Site Map
-------
sJ'rX.^' ^^&=-
.?-q^^
s^-^^= \ —=
«*r
Ł0
-------
--.
ATTACHMENT V
Community Relations
-------
MIDDLETOW~ ?OAD ~~ZA?DOu3 WAST~ S:T~
FACT SEEET
DeceQber" 15, 1983
PHASE I I .
On July" 27, 1983,
on the western edge
tires stored on the
more drums could be
several partially exposed drums were discovered
of the site, ten feet from a massive pile of
site. This find led officials to SUSDect that
' .
buried on site.
Because of the possibility of burried drUms, the ow~er
of the approx:~atly one ~illion tires was re~uested t~ re=~7e t~e=
by October 14, 1983. This deadline was not met, therefore, Superfu~d
monies were utilized to relocate the tires beyond the edge of the
suspected drum area. This was accomplished by october 14, 1983.
A subsurface metal detection survey was perfor~ed and compleated
on October 18, 1983._Results indicated the presence of subsurface
deposites of metal iri" several locations. This investi~ation cocbi~ed
with historical areal photographs of the site led to several areas
of ,suspected drum burial. Excavation of these areas revealed a ~~ber
of 55 gal. drums, 5 gal. pails, fiberboard containers and co~posite
sacks containing hazardous materia~s. Total excavated durring this
:Ja",~~ of" the proj ect are as tollows;
" 159 Drums
" 115 empty
44 full
275 5-~al Dails
224 empty
51 full
Sample annalysis preformed on the materials found in t le drums
pails and contaminated soils indicate that the following hazardous
materials were disp~sed of on site;
a.. lead
b.chromium
c.zinc
d. phenolic compounds, including;
1. 2,4,6- Trichloropcenol "
2. N- Nitrosodiphenylamine
e. chlorinated ~d ba.se neutral compounds;
1. Ethylbenzene
2. acrolein
3. chlorobenzene
4. 1,2,-dichloropropane
5. toluene
6. 2- propen-1-01 (allyl alcohol)
7. 3,3-oXybis-1-propene (allyl ether)
8. 1,3-d1chloro-2-propanol
9. 3-chloro-1,2-propa.ned101
10. 1,2,3-propanetriol
11. 2-bydroxyethyl ester
1
-------
Middletown Road Responsiveness Summary
A public meeting was called on August 27, 1985 at 7 p.m. to discuss
the deletion of the Middletown Road Superfund Site from the National
Priorities List and to accept cocment from the public on the proposed
action. The only meeting attendees. were two Maryland Department of
Health and Mental Hygiene and ~o Environmental Protection Agency -
Region III staff. No written or verbal comments from the public were
received on the proposed action. .
Attached are fact sheets from previous public meetings.
--.
"
'.
- -
-------
F,Il.CT SHEET
MIDDLETOWN ROAD SITE
DELIST!NG PROJECT
, Aug.26,1985
The 14aryland Office of ~vironr.;ental Programs, Departr.'rent of Health and ~~ental
Hygiene is undertaking a Remedial Study of the Middletown Road IICERCLA" Emergency
Project Site in Anne Arundel County., The purpose of this investigation is to
develop the documentation needed to delete the site from the National Priority
List. In June 1983, hazardDus wastes from this site were removed uncer the
immediate phase of CERCLA. 'Superfund)
Environmental Samcling
During the emergency phase of the project. six ground water monitoring wells
'were installed encircling the site perimeter., Sampling of these wells was initiate~
in July of 1983 and has continued on a quarterly basis. To date, no ground water
degradation has been detected.
under the project to r~~ove the site from the National Priority List, six wells,
three domestic wells and three stream sites-will be sampled four times beginninQ
,'.1arch 27. 1985. The last scheduled same linn ;~ c::,.h~rf,,'orl 4:""" ~~o >,'001, ...4:
July 29, 1985. All water :samples will be analyzed for .Standard Inorganic Pa'imeters,
Priority Metals, and Volatile Organic Contaminants.
In addition to the water quality monitoring, samples will be taken of t:le
soils overlaying the si~e, to-<1~ermine if there is any :esidual ccntaminatio;,
from the materials removed from the site during'the Emergency Project. These samples
will be obtained from 20 points taken from random points within a grid layed I ut over
the site. Soil sampling is scheduled for the first week of May.
Site Backaround and History .
The Middletown Road Dump is a landfill located off Maryland Route 150 neir
Annapolis, Anne Arundel County. This location has been operating as a dump, Irimarily,
for rubble and construction debris for several decades without proper State pErmits.
In 1981, it was discovered that approximately 40 drums and four dumpster load~ of
. .
suspected hazardous materials were on the site. In December of 1982, this site was
placed on EPA1s National Priority List for clean-up under the Superfund Remedial
Program.
-------
""'-II'!i..~::t '
._- .-". .......-.~
!~. .~ -~.-..",,:
~~~:.
--.c.
State of ~1aryJand Department
of Health and ~t1ental Hygiene
30' .383-~ 18
FO" FURTHER IN FORMA T10N CONTACT,
. Rober~ C~ad~ick 215/597-6728
Jch~.W. Xoon~z 30:/3:3-6650
65 ~-6
May 1, 1985
"SL"PE:R::JmJ" S!7E TO 3E S7.;r;:!D
F~r ::m::1edia:e
Release:
The S:ate 0: Maryland,
~e?Qrtment of Health and Mental
Hyqiene's O;fice of Environmental Proqrams, Was~e Managemen~
Administration, and the United Sta~es Environmen~al Protection
Agency
(EPA) ,
ha va ~_egun a study to det ermi ne whc ~he r a "S:.Jpe r-
f'.J:'1d" s::.~~ on
~! .:.. :: = 1 e ~ = \~ n
Road in Anne Ar'.Jndel Coun~y can ~e
removed
fro~ EPA's Na:ional
Priority List of hazardous was:e
discuss this projec~ will be he:: C:'1
5i-:es.
A p'.Jbli: meeting to
~or:day,.M3':" 13,
1985 a ~ 7: 00 p. m .,' at the S r 0 a d n e c J< S e:'1 i 0 r
Hi;:'
School on COllege Parkway, Arnold,
Marvland.
"-:One
Middletown Road Cump operated ~or ma:'1Y years,
primarily
for the disposal of r'.Jbble and constru~tion debris. In 1982, the
site was placed on the National Priority lis~ after a;proximately
forty (40) drums and four ~umpster loads of ~uspected hazardous
materials were found on it. In 1983, S38~,OOO were allocated
under
"Superfund" for
immediate action to remove conta~i:'1ated
soil,
drums and other containers, and to take qradinq and erosion
control measures to stablize the site.
Curinq this emerqency phase of the project, six monitoring
wells were installed around the perimeter of the site. Sampling
of these wells, since July, 1983, has not dete:ted any degrada-
tion of qroundwater.
. . .
Under. the delistinq project, thes~ six wells, plus three
domes~ic wells and three surface water sites, will be sampled. and
analyzed for a wide ranie of constituents.
In addition, 20 sam-
ples will be taken from soil overlyinq the site to determine if
there is any resid~al contamination from materials removed from
the site..
-------
-- -, - - -.....
~~civity t~ Oat::
PHASE I
0:1 JU:le 2S I 1383 up to $384,000 was allocated under t.';e Super=und ?r:x;ram
for the lr.rnediate rerroval of soil conta.i:iJI.ated by heaV".f metals ar.d a:::~rexi;~:ately
90 paint pails found on the site~ located 0:1 HiddletovJ!l Road, on the Broadneck .
Penninsula in Anne Arundel County.
The heavy me~ls, c~nstit~ents of ~a~i~e pa~nt, were spread over
appr~i.'!'.ately one acre en the .northern end of the site. The ma=l."'!e pai.-:ts
~ from 55 ga120n drums which ~.;ere crushed, spreadirig the contents en tl:e seil.
Cont.;:niI'.atee soil was saIr.pled to determine the extent of contamination.
Once this was deterTni.rl-Q(i, soil was scraped and placed in a staging area to prepare
for transport to a hazardous waste facility. The sampling and scraping operation
continued uritil uncontaminated soil was reac.'led.
At the same tirne, the 'Pails containiz'lg various marine paints and tbir.."'le~s !,.,'ere
c~nsolidatsd into six S5 gallon drums. These dri...,.,s we~e sampled and staged i.."l
preparation for trans;:ort and disposal off site.
}.pproxiJi,ately 350 C'..;bic yards of contami.".ated soil were t1-ar.sported to t."le
Ha''';Jre fer ni c:::~~c:~ i ~~ ~i.~
cir"IJ.1iS or pai.."'lt waste were tr~"'1SpOrted to an out-of-state fae'"'ili to.,..
Other actions en ~'e:site included constructing S~"lt ~~ erosion controls
and L"lstalling a filter fe."lce in a stream ~'hich runs through the property to pre-
vent runoff of c:on-...aminants. Six ground'~ater mo=utorinq 'NIells were drilled around
the site.. .
:':rt-.sE II
On July 27, 1983, several partially ext:Osed dr.m1S were discovered on ~~e
'..."estern ec;e of t.';e lafldfill, te.'1 feet fran a massive pile of tires stored on
the site. This find led officials to suspect ~~at more drums could be buried on
site. .
. Because of the possiblity of buried druns, the owner of the approximately
one million tires was requested to remove them by O::tob!r 1, 1983.
This deadline was. not met; therefore, superfund monies 'NIere utilized to
relocate tires beyond the edqe of the suspected drum area. This was ccmpleted
by Cctober 14, 1983. .
-------
SUBJECT:
FROM:
TO:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19107
Need for public meetings during NPL site
delisting process
Ann Cardinal (3PAQO) . ..,j-~ .'
Office of Public Affairs
DA TE;
FES 0 5 1986
Lorna Schull (3HW21)
Site Response Section
In response to your questions on the need for a public meeting
prior to recommeq4ing delisting of the Middletown Road site in
Annapolis, Maryland, I do not believe a meeting is necessary at this
time. A public meeting was scheduled and a press advisory released,
following the completion of the RIfFS. Not only did no one -- not
even press -- attend the meeting, but we received no telephone or
written comments on the study.
Prior to the publishing in the Federal Register of the intent
to delist the Middletown Road site, we should issue a press release
announcing our intent, the availability of the information package
in a local respository, and an offer for a meeting if the public
requests one. This release will also announce a 3-week public
comment period.
Further, following the publication of
Register, there is a 60-day comment period
hold a meeting if the public requests one.
announced to the local residents through a
the delisting in the Federal
during which time we can
This publication will be
press release.
. Wi th the two upcoming comment periods and the of fer to hold a
public meeting, I do not see a need for a public meeting at this point
in time.
-------
Confidentinl Enforcer.:ent Stat;us
:l1cid leto\Jn Road Site
Curin~ lQH3, lPA responde~ to a release or a suhstantial tht'p.at of
a release or haz
-------
--.
~'1ENT'6
v~ Q.I..O.I.J!!
c:&U,.I. l"JC:U..Ht.l:!nance
-------
! ..-
c/M6Ą~
L
OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE
201 WEST PRESTON STREET. BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201 . AREA CODE 301 . 383.
iTY ~CR CEAF: 2alto. Ar!a ~.:3.7:55
~:C. ~,1e!~c :a:.CJ51
Adele Wilza~k. R.N., M.S., Secretary
Wil!iam M. Eichbaur.'l, Assistant Sc~ret.a~/
.-.
September 20, 1985
Mr. Stephen R. Wassersug, Director.
Air, & Waste Management Division
Environmental Protection Agency
Region III
841 Chestnut Building.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
Dear Mr. Wassersug:
As discussed between our staffs on September 11, 1985, the Middletown
Road Dump is presently part of the Stdte's solid waste ground water monitoring
program. The State will continue to monitor at the Middletown Road Dump and
provide your office with a copy of the sample results in a timely manner. The
frequency of such monitoring and length of that monitoring will be dependent
on the results of the monitoring and a finite period can not be specified at
t his time ..
If I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to call me at
(301) 225-5647.
Sincerely,
K~...()~
~
Ronald Nelson, Director
Waste Management Administration
RN/dl f
cc: Mr. John W. Koontz
Mr. Frank Henderson
------- |