United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R03-88/043
June 1988
Superfund
Record of Decision;
Westline, PA
-------
50272 -un
'REPORT DOCUMENTAnON 11. REPORT NO'EPA/ROD/R03-88/043
PAGE
2.
3. Recipient'. Acc8aalon NO.
4. Title and Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Westline Site, PA
£econd Remedial Action
~r(.)
So Repofllf'~9/88
-
6.
-.-
8. Performin. 0,.8nization Rept. No.
I
I .
9. Perform!nc Orpnlzatlon Name and Add.....
10. Project/Ta.k/Work Unit No.
.- _. ---
...--
11. Cont18et(C) 01 G18nt(G) No.
(C)
(G)
12. Sponsorlnc Orpnlutlon Name and Add.....
U.S. Environmental Protection
401 M street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
- .-
Agency
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
800/000
-
14.
15. Supplementary Not..
1.. AII8tr8c:t (Umlt: 200 wordS)
The westline site, located in the town of westline, McKean County, Pennsylvania, is a
40-acre tract of land formerly used as a lumber processing facility. Between 1901 and
1952, the onsite chemical plant converted lumber into charcoal, methanol, and acetic
acid. In 1952, the plant was closed due to equipment deterioration and declining
profits. Waste tars containing high levels of pOlynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (P.AHs)
and various phenolic compounds were left onsite. An Emergency Removal Action was
;~plemented in 1983 to remove the largest tar deposit, and a Record of Decision was
ined in July, 1986, to address the excavation and offsite incineration of remaining
, deposits and contaminated soil. This second operable unit addresses potential
ground water contamination. In 1985 high levels of benzene were found in two onsite
monitoring wells. Additional tests indicated the presence of toluene, trichloroethane,
phenol, and other VOCs: however, benzene was the only contaminant that exceeded Feder~l
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) of 5 ug/l, and is, therefore, the primary contaminant
of concern.
The selected remedial action for the ground water operable unit at the Westline site
is no further action. Since drinking water for the town of Westline is obtained from
(See Attached Sheet)
- -
17. Document An8'~ a. Dncriptora
Record of Decision
Westline Site, PA
Second Remedial Action
Contaminated Media: gw
Kev Contaminants: ~enzene
be liIentlfiera/Open.End8d Term.
e. COSATI Field/Group
1& Availability Statement
-.
19. Security Class (This Report)
None
.-
21. No. 0' Pales
- :.!8
. .
.-
20. Securitx .Class (Thl. P8.e)
NOne
22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.18)
See 'n.truet'on. on R_ne
OI'fIONAL FORM 272 (4-771
(Formerty NTI~35)
DeP8rtmant of Commerce
-------
EPA/ROD/R03-88/043
tline Site, PA
Jnd Remedial Action
16.
ABSTRACT (continued)
small streams upgradient ~f the site and all contaminants except benzene are below
Federal MCLs, EPA has determined that no significant risk to public health and the
environment exists. GroundDwater will be monitored to ensure effectiveness of natural
attenuation, and institutional controls will be implemented to prevent construction of
new drinking water wells in the contaminated area. There are no capital costs
associated with the remedy, and O&M costs for monitoring were not specified.
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
mtEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELOCTION
Site: Hestline Site, McKean County, Pennsylvania
Statement of Basis and Purpose:
'!he purpose of this decision document is to describe the selected
remedial action for ground water at the Westline Site and the technical
evaluation to support this decision. '!his Record of Decision (roD)
fulfills the statutory requirements fran SIB (k) (2) (B) (v) of the Canprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCIA) as
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 and
is consistent with the National Contingency Plan (NCP) 40 CFR Part 300.
Dxuments Reviewed:
'!he following documents are the key supporting infonnation in the
Administrative Record which describe the environmental concerns at the
Westline Site:'
- Ground water Verification Study, Westline Site, Westline,
Pennsylvania, ~ember 1987, prepared by EBASCO services
IncorPOrated.
- .
- Remedial Investigation Report, Volumes I and II, Westline Site
, McKean County, Pennsylvania, April 1986, prepared by NUS
Corporation..
- Feasibility Study Report, Westline Site, Westline, Pennsylvania,
May 1986, prepared by NUS CorPOration.
- Remedial Action Master Plan, ~1estline Site, McKean County,
Pennsylvania, October 1983, prepared by NUS Corporation.
- Federal Q1-Scene Coordinator's Report, Emergency ~sponse/ .
Imnediate Rerroval Action, ~lestline, Pennsylvania, prepared by
r1ike Zickler, Q1-Scene Coordinator.
'!he Agency has presented these documents to the public for at least
thirty (30) days and has placed newspaper advertisements describing the
remedial action selected in this decision. 'Ihe Agency has also discussed
these repOrts with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental ~sources
(DER) and both agencies agree on the alternative selected.
I have been briefed by my staff on the contents of these docunents,
the public ccmnents and DER's letter of concurrence and they fom the
principal basis for my decision. '
-------
. -
I.
Description of Selected Remedy
1. This Record of Decision (ROD) addresses only the ground water at the
Westline Site. A previous ROD was signed on July 3, 1986 by the Agency
for remediation of the waste tar which will be excavated and incinerated
offsite.
2. The selected remedy for ground water is a NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Wrl1f
CONTINUED MOOITORING. This means there is no specific treatment process
necessary to remediate the ground water aquifer at the Westline Site.
3. EPA and DER will continue to rronitor surface areas to be sure no
continued sources of contamination are released.
4. EPA and DER will continue to rronitor ground water contaminants on a
yearly basis for the next five years to confirm the natural attenuation
of contaminant levels and to assure there are no threats to public health.
After this period, EPA and DER will reassess the frequency of IIDnitoring.
5. DER, in cooperation with Lafayette Township and the ccmnunity of
VEstline, will prevent any new drinki~ water wells in the contaminated
water bearing zones for the duration of the natural remediation.
Declarations
The selected remedy is protect i ve of human health and the environment
and attains Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant
and appropriate. I have determined that the "no action" alternative can-
bined with continued monitoring of the onsite wells is an effective remedy
for the ground water at the vlestline Site. At this time the ground water
does not pose a significant threat to public health. since no residential
wells are located in the contaminated zone and the residents in the town
of \Jestline obtain drinking water fran the surface streams in the rrountains
surrounding the town. In addition, the remedy will reduce the toxicity
because the natural rate of ground water flow should canpletely flush the
aquifer in approximately ten (10) years.
Since sane hazardous substances remain onsite a review will be
conducted within five years after this decision to ensure that the remedy
continues to provide adequate protection of human health and the environ-
ment .
I have also determined that the action being taken is appropriate when
balanced against the availability of Trust Fund IIDnies for use at other
sites. The "no action" alternative in conjunction with ground water IIDni-
toring will adequately protect public health, welfare and the environment.
t --/1- <;;<6
Date
. M. Sel
~ional Administrator
Region III
-2-
-------
TABLE OF CONl'Etn'S
Site Location and Description
p. 5
p. 5
. Site History
Sl..UtImary of First Record of Decision
p. 8
p. 8
Basis for Ground Water Verification Study (GVS)
GV5 SCope of ~brk
p. 9
p. 9
Geology
Hydrogeology
Extent of Ground Water Contamination
p. 9
p. 14
Public Health and Environmental Risk
p. 17
p. 21
Community Relations
Recommended Alternative
p. 23
p. 24
Consistency with ARAR's
DER's Letter of Concurrence
p. 24
p. 25
Responsiveness Summary
-3-
-------
FIGURES
1. IDeation Map
2. General ArraD:]ement
3. Moni taring Well and Cross Section IDeation
4. Geologic Cross Section A-A'
5. Geologic Cross Section B-B'
6. Conceptual Flow Net
7. 1987 Ground Water Analyses (organics)
8. Advertisement
TABLES
.
1. Comparison of 1985 RI and 1987 GVS
Ground Hater Analyses
2. Ground Water Concentration/Function of Time
3. Ground Water Concentration/Function of time
4. Estimated Health Impacts
-4-
(10 Meters)
( 100 Meters)
p. 6
p. 7
p. 10.
p. 11
p. 12
p. 14
p. 15
p. 21
p. 16
p. 18
p. 19
p. 20
-------
SUmmary of Remedial Alternative Selection
Westline Site
Site Location and Description:
'!he \'lestline Site is located in the rural town of Westline, Iafayette
'lbwnship, McKean County, Pennsylvania. As shown in Figure 1, the site is
located in northwest Pennsylvania and is approximately 15 miles south-
southwest of Bradford and 8 miles northeast of Kane, Pennsylvania.
The town of Westline is situated along Kinzua Creek and is canp1ete1y
surrounded by the Allegheny National Forest. As shown in Figures 1 & 2,
the site is bordered by Kinzua Creek. to the south, 'l\.trnup Run to the
east, and a wetland area to the west. For this Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS), the northern border of the site extends about
250 feet north of the former chemical plant foundation. The site area
encanpasses approximately 40 acres. A portion of the site along Kinzua Creek
is flooded during wet seasons.
IDeated at the center of the site, adjacent to the main intersection
in town, is the Westline Inn. The Westline Inn is a popular landmark
that provides overnight accamoodations, a restaurant, and a bar.
Several tar-like deposits fran the \tKX)(j chemical processing operations
remain onsite. The largest deposit was once located next to the \'estline
Inn. However, this deposit was excavated in September of 1983 by an Emer-
gency Response ReIIDval Action implemented by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region III, in Philadelphia. Mother tar deposit
still exists behind Westline's church. 'lhis deposit is approximately 6
inches deep and 1,500 square feet in total area. A fence has been erected
around it to avoid surface soil disturbance and direct contact. Several
small tar deposits are located in the southcentral and southwest areas of
the site. 'lhese deposits are scattered and are generally found in the
low-lying portions of the ground. Smaller tar seepages can be seen with
dredged material along portions of the UI1J1aI'Ied tributary. A backhoe is
periodically used by the township to dredge portions of the unnamed
tributary to penuit flow into Kinzua Creek. A portion of the site along
Kinzua Creek is flooded during wet seasons.
Site Historyy:
In the late 1890' s, Ralph IBy and his son Edrrund purchased thousands .
of acres of land extending east of Thundershower Run to the small town of
Qlffy. Timber rights were obtained and a chemical plant was constructed
in the town of Westl ine . The plant, kT1OWr1 as the IBy Chemical Canpany,
began operating in 1901. '!he plant converted lumber into charcoal,
methanol, and acetic acid. . The basic process consisted of heating the
lumber in the absence of oxygen to a very high temperature, driviBJ off.
the chemicals and turning the remainiBJ wood il'\to charcoal. '!he chemicals
were treated to produce methanol1 and acetic acid. '!be charcoal was then
sold to iron producers. '!he methanol and acetic acid were also sold.
-5-
-------
MM MiP«APpHfWl(Or tm ULSJA WOfUNI.
CONTOUR MFEHWL 10*.
LOCATION MAP
WESTLINE SITE. WESTLINE. PA
SCALED I "-2000'
MOTOMVISKO 073).
FIGURE 1
-(!:-
AI li^uton Corryan
-------
MW.
"""'SffiSS1*0
""I* """ss^ —
o
-------
'!he D:ly O1emical Canpany was closed in 1930. '!he plant was sold to
David Hancock of Olean, New York, and the name of the plant was changed to
the Union Charcoal Company. By 1940, the plant deteriorated and was ready
to shut down when an explosion occurred in another separatiB;J unit. With
the insurance settlement fran the explosion damage, the plant was rebuilt
and provided chemicals to industries during the early part of WOrld War II.
However, because of high taxes, the company was dissolved and the plant was
sold to D:lvid and Robert Hancock and their wives who named the plant the
Westline Chemical Canpany and operations continued for six rore years. In
the surrmer of 1952, the plant was closed due to equipnent deterioration
and a decline in profits.
Today, all that is left of the chemical plant is the foundation. '!he
plant site, located behind the Westline Inn, is presently cOvered with
derolition debris and is overgrown. r-t:>st of the thousands of acres bought
by Ralph and Edmund D:ly in the late 1890' s are now part of the Allegheny
National Forest.
SUmna.ry of the First Record of Decision
(July 3, 1986)
'!he remaining waste tars at the v-lestline Site are the roost important
envirormental and public health concern. '!he tar contains high levels of
phenolic canpounds and polynuclear aromatic hydrocaroons (PAHs). '!here is
a possibility for direct contact and possible ingestion as well as a .
possibility for leaching into the ground water table over 10B;J periods of
time. '!herefore, the Agency decided to excavate the waste tars and con-
taminated soils. and backfill the excavated areas with clean fill.
The excavated materials will be incinerated at an offsite facility which
is in canpliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
The ROD also called for an additional ground water investigation to
detennine if the contamination at monitoring well MW-6 is present down-
gradient or in higher concentrations in the upperrost zone of groundwater.
The Ground Water Verification Study conducted in December 1987 ccmpleted
this additional work.
Basis for the Ground Water Verification Study
The results fran the Remedial Investigation ccmpleted in April 1986
revealed that two of the monitoring wells exhibited a much higher level
of contaminants which was not characteristic of the wood tar at the site.
Specifically, in 1985 benzene was found at 84 \.11/1 in MW-006. '!his concen-
tration level exceeds the Maximum Concentration levels (MCL) of 5 ug/l set
by EPA as well as Pennsylvania ARARs (Applicable, Relevant, and Appropriate
Requirements) . EPA must consider ARARs in detennining a remedial action
for a site in accordance with section l21(b) of CERCIA, as amended
42 U.S.C. S962l(b). In addition, the data fran the Remedial Investigation
did not fully delineate the spread of the contaminants upgradient, down-
gradient of at the connection of the ground waters and the surface waters
of Kinzua Creek.
'!he oammunity obtains its potable water fran an upgradient spring and
there is no present risk associated with ground water consumption. lbwever,
. future use of the ground water could present a low risk based on the level
of benzene detected at well location MW-006.
-8-
-------
Scope of Work
'!he scope of work for the ~lestline Ground \'later Verification Study
included drilling and installation of seven ronitoring wells in the
water bearing zones at the site. All of the ronitoring wells were
sampled and analyzed. Slug testing was performed on the new ronitoring
wells to calculate hydraulic conductivities for the water bearing zones.
Short-term pumping tests were also run. \later levels were also obtained
from the ronitoring wells.
Geology
The \'lestline site is underlain by unconsolidated alluvial sedUnents
consisting primarily of sand, silt and gravel with minor arounts of rock
fragments and clay found sporadically within the various deposits.
several layers of fine grained silt and sand deposits with the coarse
deposits and act as leaky confining units at the site. The alluvium in
the site vicinity ranges in thickness from 52 feet at MW-QIO to 99 feet
at MW-OOL The bedrock surface slopes across the site towards Kinzua
Creek.
Hydrogeology
There are three water transmitting zones within the alluvial aquifer,
and ronitoring wells were installed in each of the zones. Figures 3, 4 .
and 5 show roni~oring well locations and cross sections which illustrate
the screened depths and the three water transmitting zones (sands).
The groundwater flow in the upperrost zone is generally southwest
towards Kinzua Creek. In the intermediate zone the ground water flow is
west and rore parallel to the creek. The lower zone is expected to be
similar to the flow in the intennediate zone. Results from aquifer
pumping tests indicate that there is some vertical flow downward in the
northeastern corner of the study area which gradually lessens to the
southwest. A slight upward vertical gradient is found indicating the
area is near a ground water discharge point (Kinzua Creek). The observed
pattern is consistent with the expected flow pattern in this type of
hydrogeologic setting. The conceptual interpretation of flow conditions
is shown in Figure 6. Based on information fran the slug tests performed
on the newly installed ronitoring wells, the average linear flow velocities
were calculated. In the upperroost zone the average flow was 73 feet/year.
In the intermediate zone flow velocities ranged fran 201 feet/year to
912 feet/year.
In sunrnary, ground water flows primarily in three subhorlzonta1
units. The three flow zones are separated by low permeability layers.
which restrict but do not prevent ground water migration between the
zones.
-9-
-------
'• '''•'.': Ti 'Mil1
• - • -
•v;\.
. \
\\
;»*
i •'
M
•-••") \v
\ f
LEGEND
MK-OO4 NUSMOMI««M! Will •
9 (OENTiFC*TION NUMWH
NOTf MONtTOmN8WEtl.3 MW-OQI THWOUOM MW-OM WtHC 1
r "••--. •-',
••*>.•.. "vv
MOMTOIWM WILLS MW-OOt TMHOIMN MW-OS «MM COHSriWCTtO OUMMB TIC OVS (I»«T)
O
U)
WESTLINE SITE. WESTLINE. PA
400
-------
IMW-0141
A'
I47O
I45O
14 3O
mm SILT • GKAVCL
MMp «MP SjLTy TH ~
CD
TO
GEOLOGtC CROSS SECTION A-A'
WESTLINE SITE. WESTLINE. PA
-M-
-------
1470
I45O
1430
1410
i §
1390
K)
I37O
1350
B
MW-OO7
I MW-004
SH.TIMD
O.AY WITH Sir 8 SAND
WITH
IMD CL4T WITH
I S»!B WITH SILT
*NO GMVCl
ITM SILT
SH-! AND CL»r WITH
TO
STO'
HMD WITH SILT
lMW-0151
JIIT«HOCL»Y
WITH SILT
TANO SAND
ITHORAVfl
VtLl
| Mw
'If
B'
Mw-ooT| IMW-OOIB]
™
—
J __ $-^^~
Ill
ID
KXf
"ft!
WITH SILT
ITH SLT
SJJ WITH SAND an WITH SAND
SJU WITH SAND |
5AJJB WITH SLT
h AMOORAVCL
QIAytL WITH S*M)
TO
4SJ'
8K«Li (KOMOCKI
ro
no'
SfcTWITHORAVtL J^ WTH SAND
I AM) SAND
TO
•14'
tunnel luoatmim nil HUM Mil
IUVICI
- ficworan flr mreNNoM me HMMCI
OBAVtL WITH COOBLtS
SM»IE IKOKXK)
TO
994'
lo<0 iom M»'H a» mmam fin mo» tmncti
Mil «<)UIMMUM»MSI«nifMMM«Mt
Mil IMIOIMWBM WTUtt HUKMMS MO >UMM«.> •« I
rHOll THOM MM*
I WATCH LCVCLS TAKEM 7/2»/»7 I
I47O
I45O
I43O
1410
1390
I37O
1350
GeOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-B'
WESTLINE SITE. WESTtlftg. PA
ICDORPORA1 •_•
-------
1470
1430
1410
2
§
3 1390
1370
1350
SW
NE
• | A. .AMI n Ml I
t**ftvl t *'!'« .iM °* .1 I
rOMfOStU 'jilliloM .1»l*"»l
I47O
I45O
I43O
1410
LEGEND
CQuooTENriM. i me IIMSCO WHERE WTINMOI
FLOW LINE IMSHEO WHCHC MFEfWEDI
NOTE' rod MOMIOMNa WCU. CON3TSUCIIOH LEGEND SEE f« I I
CD
CONCEPTUAL FtJCHO NET
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'
WESTLINE SITE. WESTLINE. PA
VCHTCM. SC4LC W
IMUS
o
-------
Extent of Ground Water Contamination
Ground water contaminants detected at the Westline site include a
variety of organic canpounds (toluene, trichloroethane, benzene, ethly-
benzene, xylene, and phenol). Appendix D of the Ground Water Verification
Study (GVS) provides a canplete listing of ground water analytical results
with both laboratory and ()Jality Assurance/()Jality Control (OA/le log sheets.
Most of the contamination at the site was found in samples fran
roonitoring wells MW-006 and MW-Oll, which are shallow zone rrcnitorirYJ
wells installed adjacent to and imnediately downgradient of the Westline
Inn. 'lhese wells had both the highest diversity of contaminants detected
and the greatest concentrations found. However, in the 1987 GVS only
benzene (60 ug/l) exceeded the MCL of 5.0 ug/L 'lhe contaminants detected.
in 11W 006 and ~'l-Qll are similar in nature, indicating that the contaminants
were fran the same source area. 'lhe well cluster upgradient fran the
rlestline Inn, MW-009/MW-OlO, had only trace levels of contaminants in one
well (MW-OIO), had only trace levels of contaminants in one well (MW-OIO),
. indicating that the main source of the observed contamination is in the
vicinity of the Westline Inn. ..
ftDnitorirYJ Well MW-014, a shallow well downgradient of MW-006 and
MW-Qll i contained trace levels of carbon tetrachloride «1 ug/l). As a
result, this well location may define the approximate downgradient extent
of the contaminant plume found in the shallow water bearirYJ zone in the
vicinity of the Westline Inn. No contaminants were detected in deeper
wells MW-012/MW-013 installed adjacent to MW-014.
Vertically, roost of the contamination detected is confined to the
uppernx:>st water beariDJ zone beneath the site. No contaminants were
detected in the intermediate well MW-Q03 installed adjacent to shallow
well MW-006, the roost contaminated well. However, low levels of toluene,
ethylbenzene, xylenes, and naphthalene were detected in MW-003 during the.
1985 RI. Table 1 provides a canparison of 1985 (RI) and 1987 (GVS)
sampling results.
Other than MW-Q10, which had only trace levels of organics, no inter-
mediate or deep well exhibited contamination. Based on the vertical and
distribution data provided by roonitoring well water levels and the lith-
ology of the alluvium, the shallow contamination present in the vicinity
of the Westline Inn is expected to remain confined to the shallow flow
system.
-14-
-------
.EGEND
MWiCXJS NUSMCMTaHNG Wtl t •
9 acmrKAtKM MM* n
DID
MEAQFMTERSFCRStl)
TM» OtPOSlIS
MI-OCN! OOMESTC WELL AND «
LAB QUALIFCR tMOCAIMO
VALUt IS «MAI>PM»IMATI
MOTf: ALL AMUV3CS AW NCK9MTCO M uf /I AU. SAMPLES OOLUCTIO ON JU.T 30 M0 JULY ». IM7
CD
TO
m
GROUNOWATER VERIFICATION STUDY
GROUNDWATER ANALYSES (ORGANICS)
WESTLINE SITE. WESTUNE. PA
SCALE M rtCT
IIMUS
1 I CORPORATION
-------
I
.....
0-
I
.
COMPARISON OF 1985 (RI) AND 1981 (GVS) GROUNDWATER ANALYSES
WESTLINE SITE, WESTLINE, PENNSYLVANIA
-i
::t:o
c:g
.....
fTI
881-001 "'-002 ""-003 ""-005 ""-006 ON-OU ON-OOt
Conte.inent l
.. GYS .. GYIi .. 'I GYS .1 GVS RI GVS RI GVS .. GYS
..n..n. - - - - - ; - - - lo.J 6D - - - -
,
&thrlben..ne - - - - U - - - - LtO - - - -
Total .rl.ne. - - - - U - - - ZOODJ UOJ - - - -
Toluene - - - - t - - - UO.J no - - -
l,l,l-trichloroetha.e - - - - - - - - - IJ, - - - -
Chloroben.ene - - - - - - , - - "OJ - - - - -
Phenol IJ - - - - - - - 66J to - - - -
2-_thrlphenol 1l.J - - - - - - - 100.J ,)10 - - - -
t-_thrlphenol 2l.J - - - - - - - UO.J 1000 - - - -
2.t,-di_thrlphenol Jt.J - - - - - - - 16O.J 600J - - - -
naphtbalene - - - - - - - - n IOOJ - - - -
2-_thrlnaphtbalene - - - - - - - - U - - - - -
TN - IIA - - - - - - :l 8a - 8a 2 .a
Strre.e - - - - - - - j - 61 - - - -
1-'
All results are reported in u9/1 except
NA: Denotes -not analyzed for-
-: Denotes -not detected-
J: Denotes an approximate value
Total Petroleu8 Hydrocarbons (mg/l)
-------
A simple exercise using EPA's nodel for simulating ground water flow
behavior was used to estimate the time it would take for the shallow
aquifer contaminant levels to dissipate below MCLs once the source is
rem:>ved. Several target canpounds were ITDdeled to estimate their
concentrat ions (ug/l) over time (days). Table 2 provides estimates for
concentrations at 10 meters fran the source area which would be well
cluster MW-003/MW-006. Table 3 provides estimates at 100 meters fran
the source which would be at Kinzua Creek.
At the ten meter location the level of benzene would be below the
Maximum Contaminant level (MCL) of 5 ug/l within 480 days. 'n1e ITDde1
further indicates that complete flushing of the aquifer.should occur in
approximately ten years.
Public Health and Environmental Risk
The contamination of ground water at' the ~'lestline Site is limited to
three m:>nitoring wells. Both MU-006 and MW-Oll show the presence of
benzene (60 ug/l and 9 ug/l, respectively), ethylbenzene (150 UJ/l and
110 ug/l, respectively) and several additional ccinpounds associated with
the waste tars. 'lhe benzene contaminant levels are in excess of the
National Primary Drinking vlater Regulation (NPIJ'lR) Maximum Contaminant
level (MCL) of 5 ug/l and the r!aximum Contaminant Level nitori~
well samples.
'lhe risk associated with the ingestion of contaminated ground water
from the westline Site are given in Table 4 for each specific chemical
identified. Only two constituents have Carcinogenicity Potency Factors
and these clearly represent the greatest risk when ingested over a lifetime.
'lhe conse~'ative estimate of an increase in cancer risk is 8.93 X 10-5,
or one in 10,000.
'n1e environmental risks to be considered for this roD are limited to
the discharge of the ground water to the surlace waters of Rinzua Creek.
'lhe previous investigation of surface waters indicated that none of the
organic contaminants listed for the grouOO water samples were detected in
the surface waters and the low levels estimated for eventual discharge to
the stream are shown in the previous Table 3. -
Sediments from the unnamed tributary did show sane contaminants
associated wi th the ground water contaminants. The unnamed tributary
begins just a few feet downgradient from the contaminated wells (see
Figure 2 for SD-6 and SD-7). 'lhese soils and sediments are also high in
pAHsassocL:lted with the waste tars and will be excavated during the
waste tar renoval.
-17-
-------
GHOUHUWA'!'I::H CONCEN1'RA'!'!ONS AS A fo1JN(:TION Of" TIME
DISTANCE PRON SOURCt:: lU METERS
N~STLINt: SlT~. Nt:9TLINE. Pt:NNSYLVANIA
Concentretlon 1~9/11aa a runction Qf t'i-
Cha.lc:d
1.0 da,. no da,. ..0 da,. UO da,. .00 da,. '.0 da,. 1120 de,. 11.0 da,. 1..0 da,. 1600 da,. 1160 ...,.
'.n..". '.J . 101 1.41. 101 a. J . 100 1.2 . 10-1 1.1 . 10.J 1.0. 10') "0. 10-. ..~. 10-6 1.9 . 10-1 1.) . 10-' fi.1 . 10-9
t'oluana ... . 102 ... a 10J ).). 101 ... .-100 1.0. 10- i t.t . 10-2 1.4 . 10-2 2.0 . 10-) ).0. 10-. ..0 . 10-\ !a.1 . 10 ..
IIth,lben.ene I.) . 102 2.' a 102 I.'. 10l !t.' . 101 I. 1 . 101 '.!t. 100 1.1 . 100 ~.O . 10-1 a., . 10 1 .., . 10 1 I. 1 . 10 1
.lIa"ol t.. . 101 I.S. 101 a.. . 100 1.2 . 10-1 '.S. 10.) '.0 . 10-. 1.0. 10. '.1 . 10'6 ..1 . 10-1 "!a . 10 1 l.!t . 11'-'
.aphthalana t.' . 101 I.'. 102 ... . 101 2.2 . 101 6.. . 100 1.1 . 100 ..9. 101 I.) . 10-1 J." . 10.2 1.6 . 10') 2." . 10 )
See Appendi. F for AS8u8ptions. references, and calculations
I -f '. -
..- ~
00 CD
I .-
,."
N
-------
I
t-'
\0
I
GROUNfJWA'r~R CONCt,:NTRATIONS AS A t'UNC1'ION Of TIM!::
DlST~NC£ FROM SOURCE; 100 M~~ERS
Wa:;STLINE SITt:, Wt:STLINE, Pt:NNSy('VANI~
Cancentratian ...../11 a. a ''''It:lllln af TI-
Ch..lca'
no daJa UO d.J' ..0 da,. 1210 da,a 1600 d.,. I,UO da,. :UIO ...,. 2~flO da,. 2110 da,. noo da,. l'>lU 4_,-
..na.n. 1.0 . 10-1 &. 0 . 10 - I 4.1. 10' I 6.1 . 10"1 fl. I . 10-1 \.1 . 10.1 I.'. 1o-I 1.'. 10 1 1.1. 10'1 L 2 . 10-1 '.1 . 10'1
"ol...n. 2.0 . 10-' 2,S. 10-1 ..I. 100 ).,. 100 .... 100 '.6. 100 4.0. 100 ).1. 100 I.S. 100 &. 9 . 100 I.). IUD
.th,lben.e- ',1. 10-9 2.1 . 1.-] '.J . 10-2 ~.. . 10-1 ..). 100 2. I . 100 2. I . 100 1.0. 100 1.1 . 100 I.'. 100 1.1 . 100
""001 &.0 . 10-) 2.1 . 1.- I '.1. 10-1 1.0. 100 9:.. 10 I 1.' . 10-1 S.). 10-1 J.'. 10' 1 1.4. 10-1 I.!>. 10'1 9.1 . 10 I
..phthal.... ].1 . 10-' 1.0. 10-) I." . 10-1 .. S . 10-1 1.6. 10 I ... . 101 I. J . 101 .... 101 I. J . 101 1.6" 101 I.. . 101
See Appendi& F. for .ssumptious, references. and calculations
-i
~
co
.
rr1
(,...)
-------
I
N
o
I
:::t
CJ:)
,..-
I'T1
~.
.WORST-CASE ESTIMATED HEALTH IMPACT PROM THE INGESTION OF GROUNDWATER
WESTLINE SITE, WtSTLINE, PENNSYLVANIA
lIa.i.u. Adul t Da 11, ReferenceCl. carcino~enicitr(l. I.ti..ted
Che.ical Concentrat ion Oo.e Do.. (RrD. Potencr ractor aea1th Li fet i..
ug/l .C)/kC)/da, l8CJ/k CJ/da, (Cpr. kg-day/.g Ind.. a.c...
Cancer Ri8k
8enlene 60 1.11 . 10-] - ~.20 . 10-2 - 8.19 . 10-5
Carbon Tetrachloride O. 10.1 2.85 . 10-6 - 1.]0 . 10-1 - 1.11 . 10-7
'!'oluene 550 1.51 . 10-2 4.30. 10-1 . ).6~ . 10-2 -
Ethrlb.nzene 150 4.29 . 10-] 9.10. 10-1 - 4.42 . 10-) -
'!'otal 1,1enea no.l 1.14 . 10-2 1.00. 10-1 - . 1.14 . 10-1
l,I,I-'!'ric:hloroethane ].1 8.!i1 . 10-5 ~.40. 10-1 - 4.U . 10-5 -
Phenol 90 2.51 . 10-] 1.00. 10-1 .. 2.51 . 10-4 -
2-lIethrlphenol :nO 1.16 . 10-] - - - -
4-lIethylphenol 1000 2.16 . 10-2 - - - -
2,4-D1..thJlphenol 60o.J 1.11 . 10-2 - - - -
Vinrl acetate 1.1 2.16 . 10-5 - - -
St,re.e 14 4.00 . 10-4 2.00. 10-1 - 8.00 . 10-5 -
Pluoa-ene 0 . 2.1 5.11 . 10-6 - - - -
.ephthelene 11 0.1 J.lt . 10-) - - - -
2-lIethrlnaphthalene 2.0.1 5.11 . 10-5 - - - -
2-.e.anone 0.1.1 2.16 . 10-6 - - - -
,"otal 1. 'JS . 10-1 1.91 . 10-5
-------
One other factor which must be mentioned here is that the camunity
of \'estline does not currently use the ground water for drinkin] purposes.
'!be camn.mi ty has connected to a local system which uses surface waters fran
'!bundershower Run. 'lhe location of their water storage box is up in the
surrounding roountains and would not be affected by the localized
contamination discussed in the GVS.
Cannunity Relations
'!his discussion is limited to activities perfotmed durin] the GVS.
A surrmary of prior activities was presented in the March 1986 ROD. Since
that time the Remedial Project Manager (RPM) for EPA has infotmed the
local residents when any EPA activities were about to begin, specifically,
when drilling and NUS field work were to be done. '!he RPM also met with
residents during the field activities to answer' their questions and
address their concerns. 'lhe local press was also invited to the site
. during field activities.
After the sampling data was evaluated and the GVS report was finalized,
EPA and DER met with one of the owners of the Westline Inn to discuss
the findings and determine possible sources. We believe that contamination
may have resulted from anyone or tOOre of a number of activities including
mioor Past spillage of gasoline or other fuels1 use of flanmable liquids
to ignite trash or wood burned in the area1 activities related to the
former acetic bath noose at the wood chemical p1an1 and leakage or spillage
of snowrtDbile fuel, anDng other potential contamination sources. Ways to
. prevent any additional ground water contamination were discussed and the
owners have agreed to take precautions to eliminate further contamination.
'lhe Administrative Record was delivered to the ~stline Inn
and the other local repositories by the end of March 1988 and the
advertisement outlining the findings and proposed plan appeared in three
local papers (Bradford Era, Olean Times Herald and Kane Republic) on
March 31 and April 1, 1988. '!be ad is included here as Figure 8. No
formal requests were made for a public meeting but two letters were
received. '!bese activities have met the requirements for public
participation required in Sections 113 (k)(2)(B)(i-v) and 117 of CERCLA
as amended, 42 u.s.c. 559613 (k)(2)(B)(i-v) and 9617.
-21-
-------
u.s. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGE :V
SEEKS COMMENTS ON A .
. GROUNDWATER VERIFICATION STUDY REPORT
FOR THE WESTLINE SITE
-
The U ..S. E""ironmental Protection Agency (EPA) has completed a Groundwater
Verification Study Report for the Westline Site in WestHne, McKean County, Penn-
sylvania. The report was prepared in accordance with the EPA's 1986 Record Of
Decision (ROD) for the site.
The ROD required that comtaminated soils and wood tar deposits from a former
production facility, once located in Westline, be excavated and transported to an
oHsite incinerator. This decisioJ" was based on a study which determined that
groundwater was contaminated with low levels of volatile organics. To further
define the extent of groundwater contamination, and to determine if further action
was necessary, the ROD required a groundwater vertification study of the Westline
Site.
The groundwater verification study was conducted between June and December
1987. It revealed the presence of significant contamination ir'!"only one monitoring.
well (MW-006). This information and the nature of the detected contaminants
(benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, toluene and phenolic compounds) suggested
that the contaminant source may be occasional gasoline spills in the area near the
well. The study also noted that open burning was occurring in the vicinity of- the;
contaminated monitoring we". Of the contaminants detected, benzene was the on- .
Iy substance that exceeded acceptable drinking water' standards. Contaminant
levels in groundwater discharging to Kinzua Creek have had no adverse impact on
the creek. ..
Groundwater contamination at the Westline Site is very localized, according to the
groundwater verification study, and contaminant levels will begin to drop
significantly once the contaminant source is removed. Cleanup work, scheduled to
begin this spring, should result in a ciean aquifer within 10 years. Because the
Westline community obtains drinking water from a spring for upgradient of the
study area, the risks posed by contaminated groundwater at the Westline Site are
believed to be minimal.
THE RE~DIAl ALTERNATIVE PREFERRED BY EPA AND PADER, BASED ON THE AN-
DINGS OF THE GROUNDWATER VERIFICATION STUDY, IS NO ACTION. THIS ALTER-
NATIVE SHOULD RESULT IN A SATISFACTORY CLEANUP WITHIN A REASONABLE
TIME-FRAME WITHOUT ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION AT THE SITE. EPA IS ACaPTING
COMMENTS ON THE ALTERNATIVE FOR A PERIOD OF 30 DAYS. AU COMMENTS MUST'
BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED BEFORE A FINAL DECISION IS MADE.
Copies of the Groundwater Verification Study Report are available at the Westline
Fire Station and the W..tline Inn in Westline, the Bradfard Public library in Brad-
ford, and the County Court House in Smethport. To comment on the report or to r8-
quest additional information or a public' meeting to discuss the study, contact:
Ra, Germann
ONlce of PullUc AH.ln
(215) 5'7."71
0'
10' Schrock -
.Iemedlal Proled Mana,er
(215) 5.7...13
USEPA Reglon'lll
841 Ch88tnut Street
Phll.delphl., P A ,.,07
FIGURE 8
-
. "."
-------
Recarmended Alternative
1. 'lhis Record of Decision only addresses the grourrl water at the Westline
Site. A previous ROD was signed on July 3, 1986 by the Agency for
remediation of the waste tar which will be excavated and incinerated offsite.
2. 'lhe selected remedy for ground water is a OOo-ACTIOO ALTERNATIVE wrm
CCNI'INUED MOOITORING. 'lhis means there is 00 specific treatment process
necessary to remediate the groum water at the Westline Site.
3. EPA and DER will continue to roonitor surface areas to be sure 00
continued sources of contamination are released. .
4. EPA and DER will continue to rooni tor ground water contamination on a
yearly basis for the next five years to confinn the natural attenuation
of contaminant levels and to assure there are no threats to PUblic health.
Aft7r t:J:1is period, EPA and DER will reassess the frequency/ of the
ronl torlr~ program. .
5. DER, in cooperation with Lafayette Township ai1d the ccmnunity of
Westline, will prevent any new drinking water wells in the contaminated
water bearil'XJ zone for the duration of the natural remediation.
Alternatives considered included the no. action alternative, no action
with continued ronitoring and an onsite treabnent system, but 00 formal
feasibility study was prepared consideril'XJ the site circumstances and
risks (40 CFR S300-68)(f). 'lhere would be general public rejection of
any further remedial actions because of the costs involved, especially
since no one is threatened by the limited ground water contamination,
and the aquifer will clean itself in time. 'lhe Agency has chosen the
option to continue rooni toril'XJ because the rate of natural attenuation for
the benzene concentrations should be verified. 'lhis will be done by
the five-year review required in section 12l(c) of CERCIA, 42 U.S.C. S9621(c).
'lhere was one carment raised duril'XJ the camtent period which does not
make a significant change to the remedy selected at this time, but it is
worth discussion in this ROD. 'lhe carment concerned easements of the
property where the water is stored and ownership of the water rights.
'!he water supply used by the carmunity of Westline is an unpennitted
local system maintained by the residents of the cxmnunity. 'Ibe storage
capaci ty. is basically a dam and covered box containil'XJ surface water flow
fran 'lhuroershower Run. The supply is maintained largely by gravity flow
fran the box far uphill fran the study area. 'Ibis. water system has been
in place many years and this supply will not be affected by our recan-
mendations to allow the aquifer to flush out the contaminants Oller tine.
'lherefore the recarmended alternative does oot affect or require changes
to the water supply system. However, we do recxmnend that the Westline
camnmity should begin the process to obtain a permit.
-23-
-------
Consistency with ARARs (Applicable, Relevant and Appropriate Requirements)
After reviewing the regulations, standards and criteria of various
State and Federal requirements, this roD will oonsider the National
Primary Drinking Water Regulation Maxirm.un Contaminant revel (ftCL) and the
MCL Goals as the rrost stringent criteria for clean up standards. '!his
review will also discuss the Pennsylvania Water quality standards and the
Ambient Water ()lality Criteria.
'!he EPA policy for classification of aquifers can be applied to the
water bearing zones at the Westline Site. It is detennined that the
aquifer is a Class 2B and will require remediation to make it a potential
source of water if needed in the future. '!herefore, this roD will meet
the MCL for benzene of 5 ug/l. '!he GVS has discussed the MCL values and
it is estimated that this hydraulic setting can meet the MCL for benzene
within a five to ten year period, if we can prevent any further releases
to the ground surface. We also have the benefit of two years worth of
sampling data which shows the predicted decrease in the contaminant
concentrations.
'!he Water Q,lality Standards and Criteria are mentioned here because
the water table aquifer discharges into the surface waters of Kinzua creek.
Fortunately, the 1985 RI data has shown that these standards have not
been exceeded and do not require. remediation. -
Responsiveness Sumnary
'!he public ccmnent period lasted for 30 days during the rronth of
April and two letters were received. One letter is surrrnarized on the
previous page and the other letter concerned the relationship of the
contaminants to natural gas or oil wells in the area. '!he letters are
on file and can be reviewed by the public. No formal request for a
public meeting was received.
'DER's letter of concurrence for this Record of ~ision is attached as
part of this responsiveness sumnary.
-24-
-------
COMMoNwEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REsouRCES
Po8t 0fftc8 lox aou
H8nl8burg, Pennaytv.. 1'120
Deputy I8ar8t8ry for
InvIranmant8I Protection
Mr. Stephen R. Wassenul, Director
Hazardous Waste Management Branch (3HWOO)
u.s. Environmental Protection Alene)'
Resion m
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 1'107
Dear Mr. wassersu8:
The Groundwater Verification Study and draft Record of Decilion for the groundwater
operable unit at the Westline Superfund Site have been reviewed by DER staff me.mbers. The
Department concUri with EPAt. alHssment of the selected remedy. No action 11 required to
remedlate contaminated aroundwater at the site. Groundwater quaUty should be monitored on a
yearly basis ~ part 01 the chosen remedial alternative. After a five-year period of sroundwater
monitorlnl, a determination will be made regarding the need for continued annual 8lte aroun
------- |