|A Halliburton Company
ANALYSIS OF PERMITTED RELEASES AT
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
-FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS-
PROJECT FOR
PERFORMANCE OF
REMEDIAL RESPONSE ACTIVITIES AT
UNCONTROLLED HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE FACILITIES-ZONE 1
NUS CORPORATION
SUPERFUND DIVISION
-------
54O19851
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-75
ANALYSIS OF PERMITTED RELEASES AT
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
-FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS-
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
R-582-3-5-1
ANALYSIS OF PERMITTED RELEASES AT
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
- FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS -
TECHNICAL DIRECTIVE DOCUMENT NO. HQ-8502-11
CONTRACT NO. 68-01-6699
Prepared for the
HAZARDOUS SITE CONTROL DIVISION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
March 14, 1985
NUS Corporation
Superfund Division
Submitted by:
James Skridulis
TDD Manager
Approved by:
HEADQUARTERS LIBRARY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Lawrence J.Berez, 3r
Manager, EPA Support
-------
REVIEW DRAFT *1, 3-l*-75
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to analyze the relationships, if any, between
Federally-permitted releases or facilities at National Priorities List (NPL) sites
and the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) scoring of these sites. Ninety-six sites on
the NPL were identify from the NPL Data Base as potentially having associated
Federal permits.
Information sources used for this analysis included Site Descriptions, Site
Inspection Reports, HRS Scoring Worksheets, HRS Documentation Packages, and
extensive telephone contacts with U.S. EPA Regional and contractor personnel and
State personnel. Sufficient data was found for 93 of the 96 sites to make
reasonably informed decisions as to permit-scoring relationships.
Federally-permitted sources used in HRS scoring were divided into two Classes.
Class 1 sources included NPDES-permitted discharges in compliance with the
permit; RCRA Interim Status and RCRA-permitted regulated units that were in
operation on or after January 26, 1983; releases from NRC-licensed facilities; and
air-permitted releases. Class 2 sources included NPDES-permitted discharges out
of compliance with permit conditions; RCRA Interim Status and RCRA-permitted
regulated units that ceased operation before January 26, 1983; and air-permitted
releases out of compliance with permit conditions.
Based upon the information obtained during this study, the following conclusions
are made:
1. Of the 96 NPL sites identified in the NPL Data Base, one site (Northside
Sanitary Landfill, Zionsville, Indiana) has an HRS score which is based entirely
upon a Class 1 RCRA-regulated unit.
2. Four sites have HRS scores which are partially based upon a Class 1 release or
facility. The elimination of the contributions from Class 1 sources to HRS
scoring for these sites would not significantly alter the scores at any of the
locations.
3. Twenty-seven sites have been identified for which it could not be conclusively
determined that a Class 1 source was not contributing to the observed release
factor of the HRS score. However, it is believed that if such a contribution
actually exists at any of these sites, the elimination of the contribution would
have no effect on the HRS score.
4. The remaining 64 sites include ten sites which have HRS scores that are or
may be based upon Class 2 releases or facilities, and 54 sites which have HRS
scores total independent of any Federally-permitted release or facility.
11
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-l»-75
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION . PAGE
Title Page i
Executive Summary ii
Table of Contents iii
List of Tables iv
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. INFORMATION SOURCES 2
III. METHODOLOGY 5
IV. ANALYSIS RESULTS 11
A. Federally-Permitted Releases/Facilities 11
B. Site Permit-Scoring Relationships 13
V. CONCLUSIONS 20
APPENDIX A - List of NPL Sites with Environmental Permits A-l
APPENDIX B - Site Summaries of NPL Sites with Associated B-l
Federal Environmental Permits
111
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-H-75
LIST OF TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
1 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION DOCUMENTS *
2 NUMBER OF SITES WITH INDICATED FEDERAL 12
PERMITS
3 PERMIT STATUS OF SITES WITH NO ASSOCIATED 12
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
4 SITE PERMIT-SCORING RELATIONSHIPS 14
5 RELATIONSHIP 2 SITES (HRS MAY INCLUDE 14
CLASS 1 SOURCES)
IV
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1,
I. INTRODUCION
The purpose of this report is to identify the relationships, if any, between
Federally-permitted releases or facilities at National Priorities List (NPL) sites
and the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) scoring of these sites. Two parameters
within the HRS may potentially be related to a permitted release: 1) the hazardous
waste quantity, and 2) the observed release factor.
The basic questions which must be answered to establish a permit-scoring
relationship or a lack of relationship are:
• Does the hazardous waste quantity used in HRS scoring include a quantity
which has been released under a permit or from a permitted facility?
• Is the permitted release or facility a source of, or a contributor to, the
observed contamination that constitutes a scored observed release?
With these two questions as the primary focus, information from reasonably
accessible EPA records was collected and analyzed to determine if any permit-
scoring relationships exist, or if there is a potential for such relationships.
Section II of this report briefly describes the information sources used in the
analysis.
Each of 96 sites identified from the NPL Data Base as having Federal permits were
analyzed to determine the permit-scoring relationship for each permit type, each
HRS migration route, and each applicable HRS parameter. The methodology used
to analyze the sites is described in Section III, and the results of this analysis are
discussed in Section IV. Section V presents the conclusions drawn from the
analysis.
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-U-85
II. INFORMATION SOURCES
National Priorities List (NPL) sites which have Federal environmental permits were
identified from the NPL Data Base, an automated data storage and retrieval
system operated by MITRE Corporation for EPA. Appendix A of this report
contains a listing, as of October 23, 1984, of the 271 sites in the data base which
had permit data (either Federal or State). The data base at that time included
sites considered for the NPL up to and including update //2. Of these 271 sites, 96
have entries indicating one or more associated Federal permits (RCRA, RCRA
Interim Status, NPDES, or Air) for sites on or proposed for the NPL. These 96 sites
are those which were analyzed for this report. The remaining sites on the list are
either sites that have entries indicating only State permits or which were not listed
or proposed for the NPL.
Information in the NPL Data Base regarding regulatory status is taken solely from
site inspection forms (EPA Forms 2070-3 or 2070-13) that are submitted to EPA
Headquarters by Regional Offices as part of NPL-candidate submission packages.
While information drawn from the data base is probably valid for estimation
purposes, the following limitations should be noted.
• Of the 786 sites currently included on or proposed for the NPL, site
inspection forms were submitted in only about 78 percent of the cases.
• Subsequent to the initial submission of forms, the Regions have not
reviewed information in the data base on permit status to ensure
accuracy.
• The data base has not been internally validated to eliminate data entry
errors, with the exception of sites proposed for NPL Update //2.
• Regional and contractor site inspection personnel probably did not apply
consistent definitions of what constitutes a permit or interim status.
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
• In general, that portion of the form dealing with permits was probably
given a low priority among the respondants; that is, in many cases, if the
information was not immediately available, little effort was expended to
acquire it.
The overall effect of most of these data limitations would likely be underestima-
tion of the number of NPL sites having some permit or other regulatory status.
Four sources of information were used as the initial basis for establishing a permit-
scoring relationship or lack of such a relationship. These sources are:
• Site Descriptions,
• Site Inspection Reports (EPA Form 2070-03 or 2070-13),
• HRS Scoring Worksheets,
• HRS Documentation Packages.
Following review and initial analysis of these documents, telephone contact was
made with each EPA Regional NPL Coordinator to either verify information or to
obtain additional information. These contacts invariably led to further contacts
with Federal or State personnel in permits programs, and to personnel who had
first-hand knowledge of the sites or who had participated in the site investigation
and HRS scoring process. It is estimated that permit-scoring relationships for less
than 20 percent of the 96 sites could be established using only the written
documentation and initial telephone contacts. In addition, one-day trips were made
to Regions II, III, and V offices to review permit files. Using the preceding
information sources, sufficient data were found for 93 of the 96 sites to make
reasonably informed decisions as to the relationships between Federally-permitted
releases or facilities at NPL sites and the HRS scoring of these sites. Table 1 gives
the availability of the information sources sought for each site. It should be noted
that even though a document was available, specific data, such as permit issue
dates, were not always provided.
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-U-85
TABLE 1 - AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION DOCUMENTS
Document Available
Document
Site Description
Site Inspection Report
HRS Scoring Worksheets
HRS Documentation Package
Response from Telephone Inquires
Number of Sites
96
57
95
94
93
Percent of Sites
100
59
99
98
97
-------
REVIEW DRAFT *1, 3-14-85
ffl. METHODOLOGY
Five basic relationships have been identified between Federally-permitted releases
or facilities at NPL sites and the HRS scoring of these sites. These relationships,
in abreviated form, are:
• Relationship 1 - HRS includes a Class 1 source,
• Relationship 2 - HRS may include a Class 1 source,
• Relationship 3 - Data insufficient to make a determination,
• Relationship 4 - HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source,
• Relationship 5 - HRS does not include a Federally-permitted source.
The definition of Class 1 and Class 2 sources and the full definitions and the
criteria for investigating the above relationships follow.
In order to determine which of the above relationships are applicable to a given
site on the NPL, a determination of relationship must be made for each permit
(RCRA Part B, RCRA Interim Status, NPDES, and Air permits), each HRS
migration route (ground water, surface water, and air), and each applicable HRS
parameter (waste quantity and observed release factor). Thus as many as 2^
independent determinations Ct types of permits x 3 routes x 2 parameters) may be
required. However, due to non-applicable permits and non-applicable migration
routes, an average of approximately six determinations per site was required to
perform the analysis. These independent relationships will be referred to as
pathway relationships (Permit-Route-Parameter). The pathway relationships which
were applicable for the analysis are as follows.
• RCRA-GW-WQ
Regulated unit included in waste quantity (the permitted facility was
included in sources used to calculate waste quantity)
Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
Documentation insufficient
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
RCRA-GW-OR
Same contaminant—no other source (substances allowed by RCRA
Permit same as those in observed release and no other source is
present)
Same contaminant—confirmed contribution (permitted facility is
known contributor to the observed release)
Same contaminant—other source (source of observed release is
unknown, at least one non-permitted possibly contributing source is
present)
Same contaminant—confirmed other source (confirmed source of
observed release is a non-permitted facility)
Different substances (none of the substances found in the observed
release were permitted)
Regulated unit cannot contribute to observed release—time
(permitted facility not in existence at time of observed release)
Regulated unit cannot contribute to observed release—spatial
(substances cannot possibly migrate to the point where release was
observed)
Regulated unit cannot contribute to observed release—containment
(substances are contained by a method which would have an HRS
containment factor of zero)
RCRA-SW-WQ
Same as RCRA-GW-WQ
RCRA-SW-OR
Same as RCRA-GW-OR
RCRA-AIR-WQ
Same as RCRA-GW-WQ
RCRA-AIR-OR
Same as RCRA-GW-OR
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
• NPDES-GW-WQ
Discharge in compliance included in waste quantity
Discharge out of compliance included in waste quantity
Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
Documentation insufficient
• NPDES-GW-OR
Pathway relationships are the same as for RCRA-GW-OR except that
for the pathway relationships listed sixth and seventh, the regulated
unit is the permitted discharge and, also, there is one additional
pathway category
Permitted substances unknown—confirmed other source
• NPDES-SW-WQ
Same as NPDES-GW-WQ
• NPDES-SW-OR
Same as NPDES-GW-OR
• NPDES-AIR-WQ
Same as NPDES-GW-WQ
• NPDES-AIR-OR
Same as NPDES-GW-OR
The site permit-scoring relationship was determined by applying the pathway
relationships in a hierarchical manner to the five basic relationships. That is, if
any of the pathway relationships were the first relationship (i.e., "HRS includes a
Class 1 source"), then the site relationship was Relationship 1. If none of the
pathway relationships were the first relationship, and if any of the pathway
relationships were the second relationship (i.e., "HRS may include a Class 1
source"), then the site relationship was Relationship 2. This procedure continued
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
until the appropriate site relationship was found. It should be noted that this
method of categorizing the sites does not exclude the possibility that lower level
relationships may exist, but only that higher level relationships do not exist.
A. Relationship 1 Criteria
Relationship 1, "HRS includes a Class 1 source", exists when the HRS score
was based wholly or in part upon a Class 1 release or source. Class 1 releases
or sources include:
• NPDES-permitted discharges during the period that the permit was
active and in compliance with the permit,
• RCRA Interim Status or RCRA-permitted regulatory units that were
in operation on or after January 26, 1983,
• Releases from NRC licensed facilities during the period that the
license was in force,
« Air-permitted releases during the period the permit was active.
NPDES, RCRA, or Air permits issued by the U.S. EPA or by a State-
administered program approved by the U.S. EPA were considered as Federal
permits. However, State-issued licenses for releases of radioactive materials
were not.
A Relationship 1 for waste quantity exists if the HRS waste quantity includes
wastes from a Class 1 release or from a Class 1 regulated unit. A Relationship
1 for the observed release factor exists if any of the contaminants listed for
observed release in the HRS documentation package are permitted for release,
or treated, stored, or disposed of in the regulatory unit; and the release or
regulated unit is confirmed as a source or no other source (non-permitted) is
present.
S
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
B. Relationship 2 Criteria
Relationship 2, "HRS may include a Class 1 source", exists when a Class 1
release or source is present on the site and its contribution to an observed
release cannot be ruled out on the basis of time of release, spatial
considerations, or containment.
C. Relationship 3 Criteria
Relationship 3, "Data insufficient to make a determination", exists when
information necessary to make any of the determinations necessary to
eliminate either Relationship 1 or 2 is not available.
D. Relationship fr Criteria
Relationship 4, "HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source", exists when
the HRS score is or may be based wholly or in part upon a Class 2 release or
source. Class 2 releases or sources include:
• NPDES-permitted discharges during periods of non-compliance with
permit conditions,
• RCRA Interim Status or RCRA-permitted regulatory units that
ceased operation before January 26, 1983,
• Releases from facilities licensed by a State pursuant to NRC
delegation,
• Air permitted releases during periods of non-compliance with permit
conditions.
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
E. Relationship 5 Criteria
Relationship 5, "HRS does not include a Federally permitted source", exists
when the HRS score includes no contribution from a Federally-permitted
release or facility.
A Relationship 5 for waste quantity exists if the HRS waste quantity is
determined entirely from non-permitted releases or sources. A Relationship 5
for the observed release factor exists if none of the contaminants listed for
observed release in the HRS documentation package are permitted, or treated,
stored, or disposed of in the regulated unit; or if a contribution from a
permitted source can be ruled out on the basis of time of release, spatial
considerations, or containment.
10
-------
REVIEW DRAFT tfl, 3-14-85
IV. ANALYSIS RESULTS
The following analysis results pertain only to the 96 sites identified from the NPL
Data Base. All these sites have been included even though twenty sites were found
not to have Federal permits. Conversely, the 96 sites do not include all sites which
have Federal permits. As mentioned in Section II, limitations in the NPL Data
Base may result in more than 20 percent of the NPL sites not having permit status
information entered into the data base.
A. Federally Permitted Releases/Facilities
A Federal permit was defined for the purposes of this report as either a NPDES
permit, a RCRA permit (Part B), an Air permit, or RCRA Interim Status (Part A),
whether issued by the U.S. EPA or by a State under a State-administered program
approved by the U.S. EPA. RCRA notification, either by a generator or
transporter, was not considered a permit.
Table 2 gives the number of sites which have been issued at least one permit, listed
by type of permit. Information obtained both from the NPL Data Base and
independently during this analysis is presented. The 20 sites (21 percent of the
data base list) for which no associated Federal permits were found represent the
largest and most significant discrepancy in the NPL Data Base. Table 3 gives the
current permit status at these sites. For 11 of the sites, the indicated permits
were either not issued, were RCRA notifications, or were State permits under a
non-delegated program. For the remaining nine sites, no associated permits could
be found. It should be noted that information in the Site Inspection Report is many
times collected before a site is defined in the context of the HRS. Therefore it is
quite possible that these permits apply to areas that were originally part of a site,
but which were eliminated from consideration during the HRS scoring process.
Also shown on Table 2 are the numbers of permits which are common to both the
11
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
TABLE 2 - NUMBER OF SITES WITH INDICATED FEDERAL PERMITS
Type of Permit
RCRA I.S.
RCRA Part B
NPDES
Air
No Permit
Any Permit
TABLE 3
Permit
Currently in
From From
Data Base Analysis
21 34
23 8
56 49
13 16
0 20
96 76
Common to
Data Base Only
and on
Analysis Data Base
16 5
5 18
47 9
10 3
0 0
76 20
Only
from
Analysis
18
3
2
6
20
0
- PERMIT STATUS OF SITES WITH NO ASSOCIATED
FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
Status
Process
RCRA Notification Oniy
State Permit
None Found
Only
Number of Sites
3
4
4
9
Total
20
12
-------
REVIEW DRAFT *1, 3-14-85
NPL data base and this analysis, the number only from the data base, and the
number only from the analysis. It is clear that large discrepancies exist. Thus the
limitations of the NPL Data Base described in Section II are well founded.
B. Site Permit-Scoring Relationships
Table 4 presents the distribution of site permit-scoring relationships determined
for the 96 sites which were initially identified as having Federal environmental
permits. The sites contained in each relationship category and the general
characteristics of the sites in each category are discussed in the remainder of this
section. Appendix B contains a site summary for each site which includes:
• Site name and location,
• HRS scoring routes,
• Types of permits,
• Site permit-scoring relationships,
• Pathway relationships,
• Site background information,
• Explanation of the most significant
permit-scoring relationships,
• Current regulatory action.
Relationship 1 - HRS includes a Class 1 source
Five sites were identified for which the HRS score is based wholly or in part upon a
release or source that is a Class 1 source. These sites are:
Region II - Florence Land Recontouring Landfill, New Jersey
Region HI - New Castle Spill, Delaware
Region HI - Fike Chemical, West Virginia
Region V - Northside Sanitary Landfill, Indiana
Region VIII - Baxter Union Pacific Tie Treating, Wyoming
13
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
TABLE * - SITE PERMIT-SCORING RELATIONSHIPS
Relationship
Number of Sites
1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
3) Data insufficient to make a determination
4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
5) HRS does not include a Federally-permitted source
3
10
_51
Total 96
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-S5
The Florence Land Recontouring site has a State NPDES-permitted discharge
which contributed to the observed release identified in the HRS documentation
package. The Fike Chemical site has both a NPDES permit and RCRA Interim
Status. The NPDES-permitted release did not contribute to the HRS score;
however, the RCRA Interim Status, which was active after January 26, 1983,
did contribute to the HRS score in that the HRS waste quantity includes waste
from the regulated unit. The remaining three sites (New Castle Spill,
Northside Sanitary Landfill, and Baxter Union Pacific) each have a RCRA
Interim Status regulated unit active after January 26, 1983, which was used in
calculating the HRS waste quantities for both ground water and surface water
routes.
A detailed analysis of the scoring packages for each of five sites was
performed to determine the quantitative effect of the Class 1 sources upon
the HRS scores. It was found that scores for the New Castle Spill, Baxter
Union Pacific, and Fike Chemical sites were unaffected by the inclusion of the
Class 1 sources since the HRS rating factor values did not change even though
the waste quantity was reduced (e.g., 1000 drums and 501 drums both have an
assigned value of 4). The Florence Land Recontouring site score decreased
from 47.39 to 40.99; this is not considered a significant change.
The Northside Sanitary Landfill site HRS score is totally dependent upon the
Class 1 source since the entire waste quantity used in the scoring was from the
regulated unit. The score decreases from 46.04 to 0 when the Class 1 source is
removed from consideration. It should be noted that the regulated unit, the
landfill, was ordered closed on April 26, 1983, three months after its change
from a Class 2 to Class 1 source.
15
-------
REVIEW DRAFT 01, 3-l*-85
Relationship 2 - HRS may include a Class 1 source
A total of 2k sites fall into the Relationship 2 category. These sites are listed
in Table 5. In all cases these sites fall into this category because of an
observed release relationship. That is, the permitted release or regulated unit
involves at least one of the substances used to establish an observed release in
the HRS documentation package, and a contribution from the permitted
release or regulated unit could not be ruled out on the basis of time of release,
spatial considerations, or adequate containment.
These sites remain in the Relationship 2 category because the documentation
available did not support a conclusion that the permitted activity could not
contribute to the observed release. Perhaps more importantly, in all but three
sites, the documentation did confirm the presence of other sources
contributing to the observed release. At the three sites, other sources were
present, but documentation was not available which would confirm that they
contributed to the observed release. Based on our analysis, it is expected that
most, if not all, of these Relationship 2 sites in fact do not have a Class 1
source contributing to the HRS score. However, the type of study necessary
to conclusively make this determination is not normally done during a site
investigation (the basis for HRS scoring), but rather during the remedial
investigation which is performed after a site is placed on the NPL. With
further detailed study, it is believed that all Relationship 2 sites would be re-
classified under Relationship 5, "HRS does not include a Federally-permitted
source".
Relationship 3 - Data insufficient to make a determination
For three sites out of the 96 sites investigated, sufficient information could
not be found to determine if the HRS score includes or may include a Class 1
source (Relationships 1 or 2). These sites are:
16
-------
REVIEW DRAFT *lf 3-14-85
TABLE 5 - RELATIONSHIP 2 SITES (HRS May Include Class 1 Source)
Region
Site Name
State
Region I Solvents Recovery Service of New Engalnd
Region II Hercules, Inc. (Gibbstown Plant)
Region II Shieldalloy Corp.
Region II Marathon Battery Corp.
Region III Delaware City PVC
Region III Ambler Asbestos Piles
Region III L.A. Clarke and Son
Region III Follansbee Site
Region III Mobay Chemical
Region IV Olin Corp. (Mclntosh Plant)
Region IV Koppers Co., Inc. (Florence Plant)
Region V Fisher Calo
Region V General Electric Co.
Region V Reilly Tar & Chemical Corp.
(Indianapolis Plant)
Region V E.I. DuPbnt de Nemours & Co., Inc.
(Montague Plant)
Region V Thermo-Chem, Inc.
Region V St. Regis Paper Co.
Region V Allied Chemical and Ironton Coke
Region VI Vertac, Inc.
Region IX Motorola, Inc. (52nd Street Plant)
Region IX Tucson Airport Area
Region IX 3.H. Baxter Co.
Region X Bunker Hill Mining & Metallurgical Complex
Region X Western Processing Co., Inc.
Connecticut
New Jersey
New Jersey
New York
Delaware
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia
West Virginia
Alabama
South Carolina
Indiana
Ohio
Indiana
Michigan
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Arkansas
Arizona
Arizona
California
Idaho
Washington
17
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-S5
Region II - RCA Del Caribe, Puerto Rico
Region II - Fischer and Porter Co., Pennsylvania
Region V - Fields Brook, Ohio
Permit information was the data which could not be obtained. Therefore, it is
possible that a site-permit relationship could exist for these three sites.
Relationship 4 - MRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
Ten sites were identified for which the HRS score is or may be based wholly or
in part upon a Class 2 release or source. These sites are:
Region II - ML Industries, New Jersey
Region II - Radiation Technology, Inc., New Jersey
Region II - Scientific Chemical Processing, Inc., New Jersey
Region IV - Anniston Army Depot (Southeast Industrial Area), Alabama
Region V - Sheffield (U.S. Ecology, Inc.), Illinois
Region V - North Bronson Industrial Area, Michigan
Region V - South Point Plant, Ohio
Region VII - Findett Corp., Missouri
Region IX - Iron Mountain Mine, California
Region IX - Operating Industries, Inc., Landfill, California
Scoring for three of the sites included discharges of substances permitted
under an NPDES permit, but which were in violation of concentration
limitations. Three additional sites had RCRA Interim Status and had regulated
units which were included in the HRS waste quantity. All three sites had
ceased operation by January 26, 1983. The remaining four sites had
insufficient information for determining whether a Relationship 5 (HRS does
not include a Federally-permitted source) was applicable.
18
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
Relationship 5 - HRS does not include a Federally-permitted source
For 54 sites it was possible to determine that the HRS score had no
contribution from a Federally-permitted release or facility. Twenty of these
sites had no contribution because no Federal permits are associated with the
site. The other 34 sites had Federal permits, but the permitted releases or
facilities did not contribute to the HRS score in any way.
19
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
V. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the information obtained during this study, the following
conclusions are made:
1. Of the 96 NPL sites identified in the NPL Data Base, one site (Northside
Sanitary Landfill, Zionsville, Indiana) has an HRS score which is based
entirely upon a Class 1 RCRA-regulated unit.
2. Four sites have HRS scores which are partially based upon a Class 1
release or facility. The elimination of the contributions from Class 1
sources to HRS scoring for these sites would not significantly alter the
HRS score at any of the locations.
3. Twenty-seven sites have been identified for which it could not be
conclusively determined that a Class 1 source was not contributing to the
observed release factor of the HRS score. However, it is believed that if
such a contribution actually exists at any of these sites, the elimination of
the contribution would have no effect on the HRS score.
i*. The remaining 64 sites include ten sites which have HRS scores that are
or may be based upon Class 2 releases or facilities, and 54 sites which
have HRS scores total independent of any Federally-permitted release or
facility.
20
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
APPENDIX A
List of NPL Sites with Environmental Permits
October 23, 1984
The NPL Data Base is an automated data storage and retrieval system.
Information in the data base is derived entirely from information available on site
inspection forms.
The NPL Data Base listing of sites with environmental permits is tabulated into
seven columns. The first two columns contain the EPA site identification number
and the site name, respectively. The third column indicates which list nominated
the site for NPL status. The last four columns are reserved for the permit status
of the site.
A-l
-------
I
CO
01CTOOJ LAOBBL PABK. IMC. OBI6IHAL
OtCTOO* S. 11 HOB All LABDPILL BOT LISTED
OICTOOS SOLICITS BCCOtEBI SERVICE OBIGIHAL
01BA002 CABHOB EBGIBMBING COBP. (CBC) OBICIBAL
0111*003 CBABLBS-GBOBGI BECLABATIOB LP OB1GIBAL
OIBAOU PLTBOOTB BABBOi/CABMOB EBGBBB6 OBICIBAL
01BA01S PSC BBSOUBCBS OBICIBAL
01BA016 BE-SOLVB. IBC. OB1GIBAL
01(11019 SILBBSIM CHEMICAL COBf. OBIGIHAL
01IU02* HOLDBB LtMDPILL HOT LISTED
01BB012 UIHTBBOP LABDPILL OBIGIHAL
OIHB001 AOBOBH MOAD LABDPILL OBIGIHAL
OIHBOOt KBBPE EHftBOBBBHTAL SEEVICES . OBIGIBAL
01BH016 CCuJ.iSI LAMDPILL UPDATE «2
0 IB1001 BIISTOL LlfDPILL BOT LISTED
01BIOOS STABIMA BIbLS, IMC. OBIGIBAL
01BI007 LCBB, IRC. OBIGIHAL
01BI010 RHODE 1SLAHD SOLID MAST! MOT LISTED
01BI011 SABITABT LAHDPILL HOT LISTED
02BJ013 BBICK TOBBSBIP LABDPILL OBIGIBAL
02HJ017 CALDHELL TBOCKIHG CO. OBIGIHAL
02HJ021 COBBE PILL HOBTB LABOPILL OBIGIHAL
02HJ022 COBBE PILL SOOTH LAHDPILL OBIGIHAL
02NJ02* CPS/BADISOH IBDOSTBIBS OBIClHAL
02BJ026 DBBZBR 6 SCHAPEB I-BAI CO. OBIGIHAL
02BJ033 GEMS LAHDPILL OBIGIHAL
02BJ035 BEBCOLES, IMC. (GIBBSTOBH PLABt) OBIGIHAL
02HJ039 JACKSOM TOHBSBIP LAHDPtLL OBIGIHAL
02BJOH6 BBLEB KBABEB LABDPILL OBIGIBAL
02BJOS1 BCT DBLISA LABDPILL OBIGIHAL
02IJ053 BAIBOOD CBEBICAL CO. OBIGIHAL
02HJ060 ML IHDUSTBIES OBIGIBAL
02BJ06* PJP LABDPILL OBIGIHAL
02IJ067 BEBOBA. IHC. OBIGIBAL
02BJ068 BIBGMOOD B1BBS/LAHDPILL OBIGIHAL
02BJ072 BOBBLIBG STBBL CO. OBIGIHAL
02HJ07S SCIEHTIPIC CHEBICAL PBOCSS3IBC OBIGIBAL
02BJ080 STBCOB BESIBS OBIGIBAL
02HJOB2 CIBA-CBIGI COBP. OBICIBAL
02BJOB3 OBIVBBSAL OIL PBODOCTS(CBEfl DIT| OBIGIBAL
02BJ086 HHITE CBEBICAL CO. MOT LISTED
02BJ095 B. B. GBACE C CO. (BAIBE PLAMT) UPDATE ft
02BJ097 LABDPILL t DBfELOPBBBT CO. UPDATE II
02BJ09B MASCOLITE COMP. UPDATE 11
02MJ099 BADIATIOM TECBBOLOGT, IMC. UPDATE II
02BJ100 SUICLDALLOI COBP. UPDATE II
02BJ101 UPPBB OBEBPIELD TOBBSBIP SLP UPDATE (1
02BJ105 TIMELARD CHEBICAL CO., IBC. UPDATE II
02BJ107 PLOBEBCE LAHD BECOBTOOBIBG LP UPDATE B1
02BJ1IS CIBBAMIBSOB GBOOBD BATBB COBTAB UPDATE 12
02HJ118 BICH POIBT SABITABf LABDFILL ROT LISTED
02BJ120 BESEABCH OBGABIC/IBOBCABIC. IBC. BOT LISTED
02BT007 PACET EHTERPBISES, IBC. OBIGIBAL
02BT017 HABATHOB BATTEBT COBP. OBICIBAL
02BI021 OLD BETHPACE LAHDPILL OblGIHAL
STATE MO DATA
STATE HO DATA
BCBA IBT. STATUS HO DATA
STATE HO DATA
STATE HO DATA
STATE HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
STATE HO DATA
STATE BO DATA
STATE MO DATA
STATE MO DATA
STATE MO DATA
STATE MO DATA
STATE MO DATA
• - UHCODABLI MO DATA
STATB MO DATA
STATB MO DATA
STATB BO DATA
STATE BO DATA
STATB BO DATA
STATE BO DATA
STATB MO DATA
STATE MO DATA
MPDBS HO DATA
MCBA IHT. STATOS HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
HPDBS HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
• - DBCODABLE MO DATA
All STATE
STATE HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
STATB MO DATA
STATB BO DATA
BPDBS STATE
MCBA BO DATA
MPDES HO DATA
BPDES BO DATA
BPDES HO DATA
STATB HO DATA
STATE HO DATA
AIB HO DATA
BCBA IBT. STATOS BO DATA
BPDES AIB
STATE BO DATA
STATE HO DATA
MPDES STATE
STATE BO DATA
STATB BO DATA
AIR MCBA
STATE HO DATA
MPDES STATE
BCBA BO DATA
•0 DATA
•O DATA
•0 DATA
•O DATA
MO DATA
•0 DATA
•O DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
•O DATA
•O DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA -.
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
•CBA IHT.
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
NO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
STATOS MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
-------
02k - POBT VASUIHGTOH LAHDPILL
02NT029 StOSSET LAHDPILL
02111046 EOCBHBBB LAHDPILL
02UT049 PASLET SOLVBHTS C CUEHIC1LS. IBC.
02IYOSO SCHENECTAD* CHEHICALS, IHC.
02HI052 UOOKEB CUEBICAL/BUCO POLIBEB COBP
02BI053 GBHEBAL IHSTBUHBHTS COBP.
02HV05S NIAGABA BOUAUK POHEB/CUEBBI PABHS
02BI057 AHCHOB CBEBICALS
02HKOS8 BATTIACB PETBOCHEBICAL
0211060 HABHICK LAHDPILL
02HI067 LIBEBTT IHDUSTBIAL PIBISUIHG
02HY070 POUHTAIH AtBHDE LAHDPILL
02B1071 VOLHBV BDHICIPAL LAHDPILL
0211072 CLABEBOHT POLYCBEBICAL
02HV07S LTHDOHflLLE DOHP
02NY076 OUAHTA BESODBCES COBP.
0211078 ABHOHK fILLAGB HELLS
02HT081 BELLSIILLB AHDOVEB LAIDPILL
02HY091 PRIDE SOLfEHTS 6 CBBBICAL CO..IHC
02HI10I GOLDISC BECORDINGS, IBC.
021Y103 TBOHIC PLATING CO., IHC.
02HY104 BEBTEL LAHDPILL
02HT105 PBBPEBBBO PLATIHC COBP.
02IY108 HEPEBA CHBBICAL CO., IHC.
02PB007 BCA DEL CABIBB
03DEOOI ABNI CHEBB LABOPILL
03DC002 DBLAHABE SAHD & GBAIBL LAHOPILL
03DS003 DELAVABB CITT PVC PLABT
03DBOO* HABfBT 6 BHOTT DRUB, IBC.
03DEOOS BBH CASTLE STEIL
03DB006 BEH CASTLE SPILL
03DB007 TtBOOTS COBHBB LAHDPILL
03DE010 DOVEB AIB POBCE BASE
03BDD02 ABDHDEL COBP. BD. SITI
03HD003 LIBESTOBB BOAD
03HDD07 SAHO, GBAVBL * STOHB
0390008 ST. STEPBEHS CHOBCB BD
03HD009 STEEL DBUB SITE
0300010 BID-ATLAHTIC BOOD PBBSBBfBBS, IBC
03B0011 SODTHBBH BABUAHO HOOD XBBATIB6
03PAOOS CEHTBE CODBTT EBPOHE
03PA007 DOUGLASSIILLB DISPOSAL
03PA010 FISCHBB C POBTEB CO.
03PA01S JEPPEBSOB THP DBUB SITB
03PA017 LACEAUABBA BEPOSE
03PA023 BCADOO ASSOCIATES
03PA03S BBSIB DISPOSAL
03PAOS3 IHDOSTBIAL LAHB
03PAOS7 BODBBH SAHITATIOH LAHDPILL
03PA06I ABBLBB ASBESTOS PILES
03PA063 HIDDLBTOHH AIB FIELD
03PA06S HUITNOTEB LABOBATOBIBS
031*002 HATTHBHS BLECTBOPLATIHG
03WA003 SALTIILLE HASTE DISPOSAL POHDS
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
HOT LISTED
UPDATE t2
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
HOI LISTED
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
•OT LISTED
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 82
UPDATE 12
•OT LISTED
HOT LISTED
•OT LISTED
HOT LISTED
•OT LISTED
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
UPDATE *2
UPDATE »2
OBICIBAL
ORIGINAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBICIHAL
OBIGIBAL
OBICIHAL
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
OHICIHAL
OBICIHAL
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
UPDATE »2
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
OHIGIHAL
OHICIHAL
UPDATE M
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
BCl r. STATUS
STA1.
STATE
STATE
HPDES
AIB
HPDES
HPDES
STATE
STATE
BCBA
STATE
BCD A
STATE
STATE
HPDBS
BCBA
• PDBS
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
AIB
STATE
STATE
STATE
• - UHCODABLB
AIB
fcCBA
STATE
HPDES
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
BCBA IHT. STATUS
SPCC FLAM
BCBA
HPOBS
HPDBS
•PDBS .
• - DHCODABLB
STATE
STATE
• - UHCODABLE
STATE
STATE
HPDES
BCBA IHT. STATUS
BCBA III. STATUS
HCBA
BCBA
HO DATA
HO DAI A
HO DATA
•0 DATA
BCBA III.
STATti
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA IHT.
HO DATA
BO DATA
HPDES
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
STATE
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS BCBA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO. DATA
HO DATA
-BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
•0 DATA
•0 DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DAT1
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•O DATA
-------
>
04 U.S. TITANIUM
s05 VOTAM
OJtAOOb BUCKINGHAIt COUNTY LANDFILL
0371007 AVTEX FIBUBS. IHC.
03VAOOB L.A. CLAHKE I SON
03UV001 COLLET PILE SALVAGE 10
03HI002 ELDEB STBEET LANDFILL
OJif003 PIKE CHEMICAL, IHC.
OJUVOOl* FOLLAHSBEB SITE
03HT008 HITBO SANITATION
03UVOI1 TACKETTS CBEBK
03HV013 NOBAV CHEMICAL (HEN BABTINSfILLB)
03HV01« OBDHAHCE UOBKS DISPOSAL ABEAS
01AL009 OLIN COBP. (BCIMTOSH PLANT)
OUAL011 STAUFFEB CHEN (COLD CREEK PLAHT)
04AL012 ANiUSTON ABHV DEPOT (SB IHD AHBA)
OUFL001 ALPHA CHEMICAL COBP.
04PLOOU COLENAH-EVANS HOOD PBKSBBtlNG CO.
04FLOOS DAVIE LANDFILL
OUPL01S PICKETTVILLB BOAD LANDFILL
04PL016 PIONE2B SAND CO.
04FL021 TAYL08 BOAD LANDFILL
04GAOOJ UEBCDLES 009 LANDFILL
04KY002 AIBCO
OmYOOM B.F. GOODBICU
04KYOI4 HOBB fALLEY
04KY015 KENTUCKY IHD. HAULEBS
04KY016 LEE'S LAHE LAHDPILL
04KV017 BAXBY FLATS HUCLBAB DISPOSAL
04KY01B NEUPOBT DDBP
OMKVOI9 OLD LEXINGTON LANDFILL
04KY022 SMITH*S FABH
01HC007 SOUTUEBH HOOD PIEDMONT
OMC010 BYPASS 601 GBOOND WAXEB CONTAM.
04SCO II IHDEPEHDBHT HAIL CO.
OHSCO13 KOPPEBS CO., IHC (FLOBKNCS PLAHT)
04SC015 HAHCUBB, IHC.
04TM011 LEHISBOBG DUMP
05IL001 A 6 F HATEBIAL BECLAIHIMG, IHC.
OSIL007 CABBOMDALE/KOPPEBS
05IL014 GALBSBUBG/KOPPEBS CO.
OSIL021 OOTBOABD HABIHB COBP.
05IL02B fBLSICOL CHEMICAL (ILLINOIS)
05IL036 PBTBBSEB SAND C CBAfSL
OSILOJ7 SHEFFIELD (U.S. ECOLOGY, XHC.)
05IN006 FISHBB-CALO
OSIH022 BBILLY TAB (INDIANAPOLIS PLAHT)
05IH029 HOBTHSIDE SAHITABY LAHDFILL, XHC
OSIN032 INDIANA ABBY AMMUNITION PLANT
05HI010 BOBBOHS SAHITATIOH
OSBI02S DUBLL 6 CABDMEB LANDFILL
OSHI03I GCH LAHDPILL
OSHI039 K6L AVEHUB LAHDFILL
OSBXOS1 OBGAHIC CHEMICALS. IHC.
05MI056 PBTOSKBY BONICIPAL BBLL FIELD
OBIGINAL
HUT LISTED
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
OMIGIHAL
OUIGINAL
HOT LISTED
HUT LISTED
UPDATE (2
OPDATB 12
OPDATB M
UPDATE I 1
UPDATE 12
OBIGINAL
OBIGIMAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGINAL
OBIGINAL
ORIGINAL
UPDATE 11
OUIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
HOT LISTED
NOT LISTED
ORIGINAL
UPDATE 12
ORIGINAL
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 11
UPDATE «1
UPDATE tl
OBIGINAL
OfclGINAL
HOT LISTED
OMIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE i2
UPDATE 12
OUIGIHAL
UPDATE It
UPDATE »1
HOT LISTED
UPDATE (I
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OMIGIHAL
OBIGIMAL
OBIGIMAL
H«-.,« IHT. STATUS
NPOES
HPDES
BCHA
STATE
HPDBS
BCBA
STATE
STATE
HPDES
HPDES
MPDES
HPDES
HPDES
HPDES
HPDBS
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
HPDES
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
HPDES
BCBA
STATE
BCBA
HPDBS
STATE
STATE
BCBA IHT. STATUS
SPCC PLAH
STATE
STATE
HPDBS
BCBA IHT. STATUS
BCBA
HCBA
STATE
HPDBS
STATE
STATE
STATE
• - UHCODABLE
STATE
HPDES
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
BCBA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA
STATE
HO DATA
SPCC PLAN
BCBA IBT.
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HPDES
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
AIB
BCBA IHT.
BCBA IHT.
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
• - UICOOABLB
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
SPCC PLAH
HO DATA.
HO DATA
AIB
STATUS STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
STATUS HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA1
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
NO D;
HO 01
NO DAI.
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
BO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
NO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
MO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
-------
05BI060 SCA IHDEPEBDBBT LAHDFILL
OSBI066 SPABTA LAHOrtLL
05BIOB4 CHAULEVOII CHBHICAL CO.
OSaiOBS BETAflOBA LAHOPILL
osaioaa LACKS INDUSTRIES, nc.
05H1089 THEBHO-CUEB, IHC.
05BI090 HOBTHEAST GRAVEL CO.
OSHI093 NORTH BBOBSOB IHDUSTRIAL ABBA
05HI094 aiCHIGAH DISPOSAL (CORK ST LP)
OSBI09S LBHAUEE DISPOSAL SERVICE, IHC. LP
OSBI097 PIHB GBOVE SUBDIVISION
OSHI103 E.I. DU POBT |NOBTAGDE PLABT)
OSBBOOI BUBLIHGTOH NORTUEBH (BRAIHEBD)
OSBH002 FBC CORP. (PBIDLEI PLAHT)
OSRN010 HASTE DISPOSAL ENGINEERING
05HN014 BACCILLIS C GIBBS/BELL LUBBER
05HN017 NUTTIHG THUCK 6 CASTER CO.
OSHH019 ST. BEGIS PAPIB CO.
05aH020 UHIOH SCRAP
OSHH022 WASHINGTON COUHTI LANDFILL
OSBB030 OAK GROVE SABITABT LANDFILL
OSBN032 PIBE BEBD/CBOSBT ARERICAH LP
05BN038 BOCB RBFIHIHC CO./H-REH CORP.
OSOB001 ALLIED CHEBICAL & IBONTOH COKE
0508004 BSE IBC. LAHDFILL
050HO11 COSHOCTOH LAHDFILL
OSOU016 FIELDS BROOK
OSOU04) SOOTH POIHT PLABT
050H047 ALSCO AHACOHDA
OSOU048 GBBERAL ELECTRIC(COSUOCTOR PLABT)
050H051 PPG INDUSTRIES (BABBEBTOB PLABT}
050H054 BOBDEB CUEHICAL-PBIHTIHii IBK DIV.
OSBIOOt CITT DISPOSAL COBP. LAHDFILL
OSBI014 JANBSVILLB OLD LABDPILL
OSHI021 BASTBB DISPOSAL SEBflCE LABDPILL
OSHI023 BID-STATB DISPOSAL, IHC. LAHDFILL
OSHI026 BUSKBGO SAHITABI LAHDFILL
OSHI029 ONEGA HILLS HOBTH LABDPILL
0511030 OHALASKA MUNICIPAL LABDFILL .
OSHI033 SCHBAIZ DOBP
OSBI034 SCRAP PBOCESSIBG CO., IBC.
05UI035 HASTE BESBABCB t BECLABATIOB CO.
OSBI038 HATIOBAL PRESTO IBDDSTBIES, IHC.
06AB004 FBIT IHDOSTBIBS
06AROOS GURLEI PIT
06AR006 INDUSTRIAL HASTE COBTBOL
06AB009 VBRTAC, IHC.
06AB010 PIBE BLUFF ARSENAL (SPLIT-011-014
otHitooi AT * sr (CLOVIS)
06NH002 HOHBSTAEE HIBIHG CO.
06NH004 OBITBO BOCLBAR COBP.
060K003 COBPASS INDUSTRIES (AVER! DIITB)
06TI001 BIO-BCOLOGt SISTERS. IBC.
06TI004 HARRIS (FARLBI STBBET)
06TI020 BBIO BBFIBIBG CO., IBC.
ORIGIBAL
ORIGINAL
HUT LISTED
UPDATE «1
UPDATE 12
UPDATE «2
HOT LISTED
UPDATE §2
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
ORIGINAL
OaiGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE II
OPDATB »l
UPDATE «l
UPDATE tl
UPDATE *1
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
OBIGIHAL
HOt LISTED
OBIGIIAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE 11
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 11
UPDATE «1
UPDATE M
UPDATE 11
UPDATE M
UPDATE 11
UPDATE fl
OPD1TB 11
UPDATE «1
UPDATE 11
UPDATE 12
OBIGIHAL
OBIQIHAL
OBIGIHAt
OBIGIHAL
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
OHIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE tl
ORIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE 12
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
BCBA IHT. STATUS
STATE
HPDES
STATE
STATE
STATE
HPDES
HC8A
HPDES
STATE
• - UHCODABLE
STATE
BCBA
BCItA I IT. STATUS
STATE
STATE
STATE
AIB
HPDES
HPDES
STATE
HPDES
HPDES
HPDES
HPDES
AIB
HPDES
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
STATE
HPDES
STATE
STATE
HPDBS
BCBA
BCRA I HI. STATUS
STATE
• PDES
STATE
STATE
STATE
HPDBS
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
.HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO • DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
AIB
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA IHT.
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO "
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
STATUS SPCC PLAB
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA .
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
MO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO C.'TA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA'
BO DATA
-------
>
I
06T1U24 STEHCO. IHC.
06TI02S PETBO-CIIEBICAL (TURTLE BAIOO)
07IA006 U.S. HABBPLATE CO.
07KS007 HATIOHAL IHDUSTBIAL IHIIBOH SBBf
0780001 ABOCO OIL BBPIHBBT
07B0007 CITY LPILL - PIGEON BILL
07H001S WHEELING HASTI DISPOSAL
07B0020 PIHDETT COBP.
07H0024 BBOUHINC-PERBIS (BISSOOBI CITI)
07HE001 PBILL1PS CHEBICAL
08C0002 CALIPOBBIA GULCH
08C0016 LIBCOLH PABK
08C0018 EAGLE BIHE
08COOI9 BOCKf BOUHTAIH ABSEBAL (BASIB P)
08C0021 UBAVAH UBANIUH (UHIOH CABBIDE)
08C0022 BOCKT PLATS PLAHT (OSDOE)
08C0023 BOCKT BODHTAIH ABSEHAL
08BT001 AHACOHDA CO. SHBLTEB
08HT002 AHACOHDA - CHEAT PALLS
08HT003 LIBBT GBODHO BATES COBTABIHATIOB
08HT007 EAST HELENA SITE
08BT008 BOBLIBGTOH HOBTHBBH(SOBEBS PLAIT)
08BT009 IDAHO POLB CO.
08SD001 HHITBHOOD CBEBK
08UTOOS POBTLAHD CEBBBT (KILH DUST 2*3)
oauTOoa OGDEB DEFENSE DEPOT
08UTOI2 BICBOBUTBIBHTS IHTBBHATIOHAL
08HT001 BAITBB/DHIOH PACIFIC TIB TBIATXB6
09AZOOH HOUHTAIH fIBH BOBILI HOBBS
09AZOOS TUCSOH IHTL AIBPOBT ABBA
09AZ009 HOTOBOLA. IHC.(S2HO STIEET PLAHT)
09CAOOI AEBOJET GEHEBAL COBP.
09CA012 IBOH HOUHTAIH BIHE
09CA040 SOUTHEBH PACIFIC TBAISPOBTATIOH
09CA043 OPEBATIHG INDUSTRIES, IHC. IP
09CAOS3 BK( SAHITABf LAHDFILL
09CAOS4 J.H. BAITBB CO.
09CA06I LOUISIANA-PACIFIC COBP.
09HI002 SCHOPIBLD BABBACKS LABDPILL
10ID002 BUBKEB HILL HIHIHG t BETALLUBG
IOID004 HOBABDA (BLACKBIBD)
10IDOOS POCATELLO FBC
100BOOI ALLIED PLATIHG
100aOO« SIADPPEB CHEMICAL
10NA002 COLBEBT LAHDPILL
10HA007 PBOHTIIB HABD CHBOBE, IBC.
10BA008 BABBOB ISLAND (LIAD)
10HA011 LAKBUOOD SITE
10BA013 QDBEH CITT FABHS
10NA01S HBSTBBB PBOCESSIIG CO.. IHC.
10HA021 BOSCH PBOPEBTI
UPDATE »2
UPDATE 12
UPDATE «2
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE II
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
UPDATE *2
UPDATE 12
UPDATE »2
OBIGINAL
HOT LISTED
OBI6IHAL
UPDATE «1
UPDATE 12
UPDATE *2
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE 12
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OUIGIHAL
UPDATE 12
r::iciHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE »2
UPDATE *2
HOT LISTED
UPDATE «2
UPDATE 12
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
HOT LISTED
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
OBIGIHAL
UPDATE »1
OBICIHAL
HOI LISTED
Alb
STATE
BCBA
STATE
HPDES
STATE
STATE
HPDES
STATE
HPDES
HPDBS
STATE
HPDBS
HPDBS
HPDES
HPOBS
HPDBS
STATE
HPDBS
STATE
• - UHCODABLE
BCBA
BCBA
HPDES
STATE
BCBA IHT. STATUS
SPCC PtiB
RCBA IHT. STATUS
AIM
HPDES
HPOBS
• - UMCODABLB
STATE
STATI
BCBA IHT. STATUS
BCBA
BCBA INT. STATUS
BCBA
STATB
HPDES
HPDBS
HPDES
BCBA
AI8
• - UHCODABLE
STATB
HPDES
HPDBS
HPDES
HPDBS
• - DHCODABLE
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA IHT.
UCBA IHT.
HCBA IBT.
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATE
BCBA IHT.
STATE
AIB
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
SPCC PLAI
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA
BCBA IHT.
HO DATA
HPOBS
HO DATA
STATE
•CIA IHI.
HO DATA
STATE
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
AIB
BO DATA
STATB
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA IHT.
•0 DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS BO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
HO DATA.
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS BCBA
HO DATA
BCBA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
BO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
BCBA IHT.
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS STATE
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO D1TA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DA1A
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
STATUS HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
HO DATA
TOTAL SITES LISTED: 271
-------
REVIEW DRAFT f 1, 3-14-85
APPENDIX B
Site Summaries of NPL Sites with
Associated Federal Environmental Permits
B-i
-------
1
-------
SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICE OF NEW ENGLAND
Southington, Connecticut
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
Solvents Recovery Service of New England (SRSNE) began to distill and recover
solvents in 1955. Wastes were stored and disposed of on site until the mid 1970's on
12 acres west of the Quinnipiac River. In September of 1976, the State found that
several production wells serving the Town of Southington were contaminated with
volatile organic compounds. EPA contractor studies have confirmed that SRSNE is
responsible for contamination of one of the wells. The HRS scoring for both ground
water and surface water was based on contaminants found in a lagoon on the site.
As part of a Consent Decree signed in December 1982, Solvents Recovery Service
applied for a RCRA permit for on-site storage and management of hazardous
waste. Substances covered under RCRA Interim Status included industrial
solvents. In 3une 1983, the company submitted to EPA a complete engineering
analysis for the design of the waste management system. Since the lagoon was
used for HRS scoring and is not part of the activities covered under RCRA Interim
Status, there is no relationship between HRS scoring and the RCRA action.
Furthermore, the lagoon was apparently not used after 1967. The State issued an
NPDES permit to SRSNE in 1980 for a ground water recovery system and for
process water treatment using air stripping. The conditions in the permit were
appealed by the facility and the Town of Southington, and hearings are still
ongoing. Thus no NPDES permit was applicable to scoring of this site.
1-1
-------
-------
CIBA-GEIGY CORP.
Toms River, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship:
5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Ciba-Geigy is engaged in batch manufacturing of synthetic organic dyes, pigments
and epoxy resins at this site. Waste waters were discharged under NPDES permits
into the Atlantic Ocean. Other wastes were disposed of in on-site landfills. Within
the property boundaries are inactive landfills that received large quantities of
chemical wastes. Ciba-Geigy was issued an NPDES permit in 197^ which regulated
four discharges to the Toms River (storm water drainage, cooling water from heat
exchange and screen backwash) and one to the Atlantic Ocean (treated process
waste water). Two of the outfalls were regulated for heavy metals, nitrobenzene
and hydrocarbons. Ciba-Geigy was notified numerous times for discharge
violations from their treated process waste water discharge point; there were also
a few violations for other discharge points. However, there is no relationship
between the HRS scoring and the NPDES permit because there was no documented
observed release to surface water and the hazardous waste quantity was calculated
from drums and sludge disposal in an on-site landfill. EPA is preparing a remedial
plan outlining the investigation needed to determine the cleanup required at the
site.
II-l
-------
CPS/MADISON INDUSTRIES
Old Bridge Township, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
CPS/Madison Industries covers 35 acres. Since 1967, the two companies have
repeatedly dumped and discharged chemicals to the public sewer system and on
their respective properties. Volatile organics detected in the surface and ground
water were used for the HRS scoring. Through a Middlesex County Superior Court
decision (October 15, 1981), the State has begun the process of remedying the
surface and ground water problems associated with the site. The Court Order
directs both CPS Chemical and Madison Industries to reimburse the State for costs
it incurs for site cleanup. The two companies are in the process of obtaining a
significant indirect user NJPDES permit to discharge materials to the local sewage
treatment plant.
II-2
-------
DENZER & SCHAFER X-RAY CO.
Bayville, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
Denzer & Schafer reclaims silver on a 5-acre site. Since 1979, the facility has
discharged caustic waste water to an on-site septic system. The underlying aquifer
is contaminated with organic solvents and sodium hydroxide. Denzer & Schafer
was issued an Administrative Order in 1981. The only permit activity this site has
is as a generator of cyanides. There is no permitted storage or disposal of
hazardous materials. EPA plans to prepare a remedial plan outlining the
investigations needed to determine the full extent of cleanup required at the site.
II-3
-------
FLORENCE LAND RECONTOURING, INC., LANDFILL
Florence Township, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed contribution
NPDES-Air-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDE5-Air-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
The landfill covers 39 acres and was licensed by the State as a municipal landfill.
It ceased operations in 1981 in response to an Administrative Order denying an
application to expand and requiring it to close. The facility was issued a NPDES
permit in 1976 which regulated the heavy metals content of leachate discharge to
an aeration pond and a settling pond. The operators were notified for failing to
meet effluent limitations by July 1, 1977. There was no prosecution but a specific
compliance schedule was set forth. In 1979, the operators were given an NPDES
permit for rainfall runoff from the landfill into the Assiscunk Creek. No specific
constituents were mentioned. Arsenic, cadmium, lead, chromium, and zinc;
constituents listed in the 1976 permit, are among those that were detected in the
surface water for the HRS score. For the "containment" category, the HRS
documentation mentions only a "landfill... dikes unstable, past leakage reported.
No observed release was scored for ground water, and no connection to permitted
activities is apparent for the ground water route score. The EPA is planning a
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study to determine the type and extent of
contamination at the site and identify alternatives for remedial action.
-------
HERCULES, INC. (GIBBSTOWN PLANT)
Gibbstown, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Different substances
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
Two unlined chemical disposal pits are located adjacent to the Delaware River.
The unlined pits were used by Hercules, Inc. and the site's previous owner for
disposal of industrial chemicals, solvents, acids, and waste oils. One of these
substances, benzene, was detected in the ground water and was the basis for the
HRS ground water score. Hercules has an NPDES permit which regulates phenols,
BOD, COD, fecal coliform, pH, temp, TSS, and oil and grease only. Therefore, the
NPDES permit is not related to the HRS scoring. The RCRA Interim Status
includes treatment tanks, a surface impoundment, and storage in drums. The HRS
scoring was based on an abandoned dump which was not covered under the RCRA
Interim Status. However, benzene, one of the constituents on the Part A
application, was detected in the ground water. The dump was abandoned in the
late 1950's; however, the plant is still active. EPA is preparing a remedial plan
outlining the investigation needed to determine the full extent of cleanup required
at the site.
II-5
-------
NASCOLITE CORP.
Millville, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: Air
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Nascolite Corp. operated an acrylic sheet manufacturing plant from 1953 to 1980.
In 1980, they were issued an Administrative Order by the State to stop discharging
waste water into a nearby ditch, to install monitoring wells, and to prepare a plan
for waste removal and disposal. The factory closed shortly thereafter. In 1981,
Nascolite entered into an Administrative Consent Order with the State which
repeated the previous requirements and added a provision for removal of
contaminated soil. The company still has not complied fully with the two orders.
Ground water underlying the facility is highly contaminated with organic
compounds attributed to Nascolite. Only the ground water route was scored for
HRS. Nascolite filed a RCRA transporter's notification for ignitable materials and
methyl methacrylate. According to the NPL data base, they also have an Air
permit. Neither of these permitted activities is related to HRS scoring. EPA is
planning a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study to determine the type and
extent of contamination at the site and identify alternatives for remedial action.
II-6
-------
NL INDUSTRIES
Pedricktown, New Jersey
Routes Scored for MRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, Air
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NL Industries recovers lead from spent automotive batteries and separates plastic
from rubber casing. The plastic is reprocessed and the rubber and slag from a
smelting operation is placed in a lined, uncapped 1^-acre landfill. Both the ground
water and the surface water are contaminated with lead and other heavy metals.
The Air permit does not affect the HRS scoring process since the air route was not
scored. The RCRA Interim Status covered the landfill waste piles, tanks, and bins.
The HRS waste quantity, which is based on the landfill, is related to the permitted
activity. The RCRA Interim Status also covers lead dust and sludge from the
smelting industry and lead was detected in the ground and surface water. Thus, the
RCRA Interim Status is related to the observed releases. There is no record of
RCRA violations. The plant has been fined by State water and air agencies for
pollution control violations. NL Industries ceased production in 1981 and was
purchased by National Smelting in 1983. The RCRA Interim Status was not
transferred to National Smelting. A closure plan for the landfill was submitted in
1982. . .
II-7
-------
RADIATION TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Rockaway Township, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
Radiation Technology, Inc. manufactures plastics. Analyses by the State indicate
that ground water is contaminated by plasticizers and chlorinated solvents which
were released through dumping of wastes and/or burial of drums. In March 1982,
the State filed a Verified Complaint and Order to Show Cause when Radiation
Technology did not comply with directives to remedy the situation (contaminated
wells). On July 7, 1983, the Stated issued a Consent Order requiring the company
to monitor ground water to determine the source of contamination. Two of the
contaminants detected in the ground water, methylene chloride and methyl
methacrylate, are also contained in their application for RCRA Interim Status.
The source of the waste quantity used for scoring the ground water route was
buried and on-site stored drums. The RCRA Interim Status application was for
storage in on-site waste piles and drums. It is possible that contaminants migrated
(or are migrating) from these waste piles to the surface and ground water.
Radiation Technology is voluntarily cleaning up this site.
II-8
-------
SCIENTIFIC CHEMICAL PROCESSING, INC.
Carlstadt, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
RCRA-SW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Different substances
Scientific Chemical Processing recovered and recycled various chemical wastes on
a 13.5 acre site. As a result of a State order, the company ceased operation in
1980. About 370,000 gallons of hazardous materials are stored on-site in drums and
tanks, and the soils have become contaminated. Solvents detected in the surface
water include benzene, chloroform, toluene, trichloroethylene, and
tetrachloroethylene. Scientific Chemical had an NPDES permit which was issued
in July 1974 and expired in July 1979 covering discharges of standard water
parameters such as flow and pH as well as some metals. This permit did not cover
discharges of the organics found in the HRS observed release to surface water.
Therefore the NPDES permit did not relate to HRS scored releases. Scientific
Chemical also submitted RCRA notification in 1980 to store various substances,
including organics, in tanks. Some of the these substances were the same
substances as those detected in the surface water samples. The source of the
contaminants used in the HRS scoring, based on waste quantity calculations, was
from an inventory of the site which may have included the tanks covered by the
RCRA Interim Status. The waste quantity and surface water release may be
related to the RCRA Interim Status. Furthermore, Scientific Chemical has been
subsequently cited for sloppy housekeeping, spills, and container discharges to
surface water. In 1983 three corporate officers of Scientific Chemical Processing
were convicted in Federal District Court of mail fraud charges resulting from the
improper disposal of chemical wastes. The State has filed a civil complaint against
the owner and operators of the site to require full cleanup of the site. In addition,
EPA is preparing a remedial plan outlining the investigations needed to determine
the full extent of cleanup required at the site. It will guide further federal actions
at the site.
II-9
-------
SHIELDALLOY CORP.
Newfield Borough, New Jersey
Routes Scored for MRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES, Air
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 2 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDE5-5W-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant-confirmed other source
Shieldalloy Corp. manufactures specialty alloys, particularly chromium at the site.
Prior to 1971 the plant released untreated process water to an unlined lagoon and
to surface water bodies. The plant received an NPDES permit in 1974 for
discharge to the Maurice River. The constituents permitted include TDS,
hexavalent chromium, and chromium. There were repeated violations for TDS and
chromium and some violations for hexavalent chromium. The HRS scores for both
ground and surface water routes are based on observed releases of hexavalent
chromium which is covered by the NPDES permit. The non-compliance with the
NPDES permit may be related to the hexavalent chromium surface water release.
However, a large part of the chromium contamination probably resulted from the
discharge of the non-treated process water, which occurred prior to the issuance of
the NPDES permit (1974). Therefore, the HRS score may or may not relate to
permitted activities at this site. Shieldalloy Corp. also has an Air permit which has
no bearing on the HRS score since the air route was not scored. The company is
currently under a state directive to prepare a detailed proposal for
decontaminating ground water.
11-10
-------
SYNCON RESINS
South Kearny, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
Syncon Resins manufactured paints, varnishes, and resins on a 5-acre site.
Operations ceased in 1981. Currently about 11,000 55-gallon drums are stored in
warehouses and on the ground. Two unlined ponds used for subsurface disposal of
process waste contain organic wastes. The ground water, surface water, and air
are contaminated. HRS scoring for all routes is based on observed releases and on
the 11,000 stored drums. Syncon Resins filed a generator RCRA notification.
Toluene was detected in the ground water and it was a substance in Syncon's RCRA
notification to the EPA. Removal of surface drums and preparation of a feasibility
study has been initiated under an EPA cooperative agreement with New Jersey.
II-11
-------
UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS (CHEMICAL DIVISION)
East Rutherford, New Jersey
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Universal Oil Products manufactured specialty chemicals on an 85-acre site.
Waste solvents and solid chemical wastes were dumped in unlined lagoons. Waste
solvents were detected in the ground water and surface water. Universal operated
with an NPDES permit for three years ending in 1977. This permit regulated
standard water quality parameters such as temperature, pH, and COD as well as
some metals. These substances were not those involved with the observed release
to surface water in the HRS scoring package. However, during a routine NPDES
monitoring trip in 1979, volatile organics were detected. An Administrative Order
was issued to the company to stop discharging solvents into the stream (Ackermans
Creek). The plant was razed in 1980. The solvents detected in this monitoring trip
were used for the surface water release HRS score. New Jersey has issued an
Administrative Order to conduct a remedial investigation.
II-12
-------
HOOKER CHEMICAL/RUCO POLYMER CORP.
Hicksville, New York
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: Air
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Hooker Chemical/RUCO Polymer Corp. site covers 72 acres in an industrial
park area of Hicksville in Nassau County, New York. The company is still an
active manufacturer of plastics and synthetic organic compounds. RUCO
discharged liquid wastes into dry wells from 1951 to 1975. The wells for Plant 2,
which manufactured polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and latex, received approximately
two million gallons per year of waste water from 1956 to 1975. The primary
materials were PVC resin solids, vinyl chloride, trichloroethylene, and vinyl
acetate. Contaminants detected in the ground water are vinyl chloride, 1,1,2-
trichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene. According to the Site Inspection
Report, the site has an SPDES permit issued by the NYDEC for discharging cooling
water to the ground water (two pumps). The SPDES permit is issued under a state
program and is not a permit related to the NPDES Federal Program. The air
permit has no relationship to HRS scoring at this site because the air route was not
scored.
11-13
-------
MARATHON BATTERY CORP.
Cold Springs, New York
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
This company manufactured nickel-cadmium batteries. From 1953 to 1970, plant
waste (cadmium) was dumped at the edge of a marshy area at the back of Foundry
Cove which leads to the Hudson River. They also discharged wastes into the
sanitary sewer at Cold Springs pier which discharged into the Hudson River. This
discharge may also have contributed to the surface water release. In 1966, the
plant was ordered by the New York State Health Department to clean up its
emissions. The company dredged the outfall site and placed the materials in an
underground vault on site. An NPDES permit was issued in 1975 and regulated the
chemicals cadmium and nickel, which were detected in the surface water. The
NPDES permit covered the same discharge location as was used previously to
dispose of the untreated waste into the cove. There were continuous problems for
Marathon to meet the permit discharge requirements. They ceased operations in
1979. Since the waste quantity used in HRS scoring was based on the dumping of
cadmium containing waste between 1953 and 1970, and the NPDES permit was
issued in 1975, it appears that permitted discharges had no effect on the HRS
waste quantity score. The State and EPA are negotiating a Cooperative
Agreement for a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study.
-------
OLD BETHPAGE LANDFILL
Oyster Bay, New York
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
Old Bethpage Landfill is located in Oyster Bay, Nassau County, New York. From
1968 to 1978, the Hooker Chemical Company disposed of liquid and solid industrial
process wastes and damaged drums containing organic residues. In 1978, the town
of Oyster Bay submitted an application to the NYDEC for approval to operate a
solid waste management facility at the Old Bethpage Landfill. The 2070 Form
indicated that the landfill had a RCRA part 360 permit (1978-1982) issued by
NYDEC. Additional research has found that this permit is a NY state issued solid
waste permit for a landfill. Since issuance of the 1978 permit, the only industrial
waste disposed of at the landfill has been metal hydroxide sludges. Constituents
detected in the ground water were toluene, xylene, vinyl chloride, benzene, and
zinc. The landfill is presently inactive and the EPA has prepared a remedial plan
outlining the investigations needed to determine the cleanup required at the site.
II-15
-------
PORT WASHINGTON LANDFILL
Port Washington, New York
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
The Port Washington Landfill was in continuous operation since March, 1974. It has
been inactive since the spring of 1983. Prior to operation as a landfill, the site was
used for sand mining. The landfill has accepted refuse at a rate of 200,000
tons/year. Benzene, toluene, xylene, and vinyl chloride were identified in gas from
landfill parameter vents and nearby residences. Various organics were also
detected in the ground water. The site does not have a RCRA permit, RCRA
Interim Status, or an Air permit. The landfill did have a NY State part 360 Solid
Waste permit issued in 1979 and expired in 1980. The state is working with the
Town of North Hempstead for cleanup of the site. EPA is preparing a remedial
plan outlining the investigations needed to determine the full extent of cleanup
required at the site.
II-16
-------
RCA DEL CARIBE
Barceloneta, Puerto Rico
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, Air
Site Relationship: 3) Data insufficient to make a determination
RCRA-GW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
RCA Del Caribe, which manufactures masks for television screens, generates
wastes containing chromium, selenium, and iron and has discharged them into four
holding lagoons. Sinkholes in the area discharged the contents of two lagoons into
the ground water. There were no observed releases for the HRS scoring. The
facility has RCRA Interim Status for the waste piles and surface impoundments.
The waste quantity for the HRS score was calculated based on two lagoons on-site.
Two surface impoundments are covered under the RCRA Interim Status and these
may be the same lagoons which were used to compute waste quantity. A closure
plan for the surface impoundment was accepted in December 1983 and the site has
since been cleaned up. The Air route was not scored, so the Air permit has no
effect on the HRS score.
11-17
-------
-------
DELAWARE CITY PVC SITE
New Castle County, Delaware
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
The site includes an active PVC plant, which has operated since the early 1970's, as
well as several inactive unlined lagoons and sludge burial pits. These waste areas
hold plant wastes and off-spec products and have been shown to be contaminated
with the same compounds detected in the HRS observed releases to surface water
(vinyl chloride and 1,2-dichloroethane) as well as ground water. The plant
(Formosa Plastics Corp.) has an NPDES permit that requires monitoring for the
cited compounds. However, pending issuance of Effluent Guidelines, no limitations
have been established. It is not clear whether the compounds in the surface water
observed release are due to the NPDES permit, or to an unpermitted discharge of
surface runoff from the pits and lagoons. The waste quantity used was related to
the lagoons. In 1982, the former owner of the site, Stauffer Chemical, performed a
detailed site investigation and in 1983 presented the results as well as a proposal
for a detailed feasibility study to EPA. Stauffer has provided alternate water
supplies for residents whose water is contaminated. A cleanup order is being
negotiated.
IH-1
-------
DOVER AIR FORCE BASE
Dover, Delaware
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Base's operations generated numerous wastes including paints, solvents and
oils. These wastes were disposed of in various locations on site totalling W acres.
While some of the buried wastes were in drums, other wastes were disposed of
through a storm drainage system. The ground water is contaminated with arsenic
and other metals and an on-site stream is contaminated with trichloroethylene;
however, observed releases were not scored for these routes. The permitted
activities on site include the lagoon which has a RCRA permit for waste
treatment. Since the information to score the site was obtained from the landfill
and fire training areas, and there was no observed release to the ground water, the
RCRA permit does not appear to be related to the scoring effort. An NPDES
permit for the base was voided on 8/17/75 when the previously permitted
discharges were transferred to a POTW. The Base is participating in the DoD
Installation Restoration Program.
III-2
-------
NEW CASTLE SPILL
New Castle County, Delaware
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-DW-OR: Same contaminant—other source present
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
The Site, initially listed as "Tris Spill", includes a contaminated aquifer in an-
industrial location and an active RCRA-permitted drum storage area belonging to
Witco Chemical Corp. Witco has had several leaks and spills and is one of several
possible ground water contamination sources. A ground water observed release of
chloroform, phenol, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and 1,2-trans-
dichloroethylene was scored. Some of these compounds came from the RCRA-
permitted area. However, others do not have a known source. The waste quantity
scored for both surface water and ground water migration routes was taken from a
waste volume stored in the RCRA facility. This facility was active on January 26,
1983. Remedial actions have been taken at the RCRA facility including the
installation of two concrete pads. No ground water clean-up actions have been
taken. According to the Site Inspection Report, the spill occurred in 1977, prior to
the RCRA permit, which was issued in 1980. The State DNREC served a notice of
a RCRA Interim Status violation to Witco for having ignitable wastes within 50
feet of their property boundary..
III-3
-------
NEW CASTLE STEEL
New Castle County, Delaware
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: Air (State DNREC)
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The site includes an active iron casting plant which has disposed of electric furnace
dust on site is open piles since 1973. Since 1980, the plant has recycled the dust.
The site has a state air discharge permit for the plant, but no permits of any kind
for the piles. Leachate from the piles is therefore not permitted, and it has caused
a surface water observed release of lead. No ground water observed release was
scored. For HRS scoring, the volume of the waste piles was used for waste
quantity and lead was used to establish toxicity and persistence. EPA is preparing
a remedial action master plan to investigate cleanup of the piles. The state is
negotiating with the company for cleanup under RCRA. However, it does not
appear that the site has RCRA Interim Status or a RCRA Permit.
-------
SOUTHERN MARYLAND WOOD TREATING
Hollywood, Maryland
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Southern Maryland Wood Treating Site preserves wood with creosote.
Creosote and such related materials as pentachlorophenol and benzene as well as
lead were disposed of in sludge ponds. The major causes of concern are
contamination of ground water, surface water, and soil on the site. The source of
the waste quantity for HRS scoring was the volume of the sludge ponds.
Contaminated seeps down gradient from the plant's process area have
contaminated an on-site steam, and they have been counted towards a surface
water observed release. A fresh water pond on site was also contaminated. The
wastes were all deposited prior to any RCRA action. The RCRA Interim Status
was issued in 1980 to cover cleanup activities and was expected to be in effect for
one year. As a result of an Administrative Order by the State, the Company
excavated and treated parts of the soil contamination. At present, litigation is
continuing.
IH-5
-------
AMBLER ASBESTOS PILES
Ambler, Pennsylvania (Montgomery Co.)
Routes Scored for HRS: SW, Air
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-5W-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-Air-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-Air-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute observed release (Spatial)
From 1867 to the 1970's, asbestos waste had been disposed of in piles on this site.
The piles are the source of observed releases to surface water and air. For HRS
scoring, air releases used were related to contamination resulting from asbestos
blown away from the uncovered piles, and the surface water releases used were
related to blowing asbestos from the piles settling on local surface water bodies.
The State issued an NPDES permit in 1977 for a non-contact cooling water
discharge to Wissahickon Creek which monitors and restricts BOD, suspended
solids, iron, pH, and asbestos. However, asbestos detection is generally negative,
and the permitted release is not believed to be related to the current high level of
asbestos contamination in the creek. In 1962, the site was sold to two companies.
In 1971 and 1972, these companies applied to the State for permits to continue to
use the piles for waste disposal. In 1974, the State denied the permit applications
and issued orders to both companies to cease dumping and to stabilize the piles.
One company agreed to comply; the other did not. In 1983 and 1984, EPA took
emergency measures to cover and stabilize the pile owned by the non-complying
company.
III-6
-------
CENTRE COUNTY KEPONE
State College, Pennsylvania
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
This site involves an active batch chemical manufacturing plant which produced
mirex and kepone at various times. Process wastes were originally disposed of on
site in a spray irrigation field, in a lagoon, and stored in drums. As a result of
State action, the drums and contaminated soil were later removed, and the
material in the lagoon was treated with a hardener. Because it failed to harden
properly, contaminants such as Kepone and volatile organics began leaking into the
ground water. The ground water has been contaminated with Kepone since before
1970. The lagoon was the source of the waste quantity used in HRS scoring. A
surface water score was based on contaminated ground water discharging to
surface water through underground seepage and Thorton Spring. This is not related
to the current NPDES permit issued in 1982, after the release to surface water was
observed. This permit covers a process discharge contaminated with Kepone,
trichloroethylene, benzene, chlorobenzene, and tetrachloroethylene, all of which
were counted in the ground and surface water observed releases. Another
previously issued, now expired, NPDES permit covered a cooling water discharge
which did not allow any chemical releases. The air release was scored near
Thorton Spring using an organic vapor analyzer. In 1982 the company excavated
and removed the buried material and began treating the ground water. As of July
1983, EPA was planning additional sampling to determine the need for further
remedial action at the site.
III-7
-------
DOUGLASSVILLE DISPOSAL
Douglassville, Pennsylvania
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
The site includes a partially closed waste oil refinery and recycling facility.
Lagoons on-site were active from 1941 until 1972. The lagoons were then closed
and covered. 700 drums were stored on-site from 1979 until 1982, when the State
ordered the drums removed. The refinery and nearby tanks are still being used to a
small degree. The site applied to the State for an NPDES permit in the early
1970's but the State has not acted on issuing a permit because of an application
backlog. The permit application was for a waste water discharge containing lead,
zinc, benzene, and trichloroethylene to the Schuykill River. This discharge was
scored as a surface water observed release. The ground water at the site is
contaminated with lead, zinc, toluene, benzene, and trichloroethylene leaking from
the old lagoons and from spills around the plant. Old lagoons and a former drum
storage area were used to determine the waste quantity scores. The HRS scoring is
not dependent on permitted activities since no permits have been issued. As of
July 1983, EPA was preparing a remedial action master plan outlining the
investigations needed to determine the full extent of cleanup required at the site.
A remedial investigation/feasibility study is now underway.
III-8
-------
FISCHER AND PORTER CO.
V
Warminister, Pennsylvania
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 3) Data insufficient to make a determination
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
NPDES-SW-OR: Permitted substance unknown—confirmed other source
Fischer and Porter Co. produces scientific equipment and chlorinators at this site.
Company activities such as spilling or dumping of wastes are apparently the source
of ground water contamination with TCE and PCE. As a result, some municipal
wells were closed in 1979. In order to minimize contamination of a public water
supply, PADER issued an emergency discharge release, effective February through
July 1980, allowing contaminated ground water to be discharged into a nearby
stream. The well water was to be treated beforehand and stream contaminant
concentrations were not to exceed ^.5 ppb. Stream sampling disclosed that the
permit restrictions were violated during several months. A surface water observed
release was based on the violations of the permitted discharge. Waste quantity
scoring for both ground and surface water routes was based on an estimate of the
original volume of the spills. A suit filed by EPA against the company in October
1980 is proceeding. As of July 1983, EPA was in the final stage of negotiation.
IH-9
-------
MIDDLETOWN AIR FIELD
Middletown, Pennsylvania
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
This site is owned by the State of Pennsylvania and operated as the Harrisburg
International Airport. The site includes the airport properties, a residential area,
and several industrial properties. The Federal government owned and operated the
airport until 1966 as the Olmstead Air Force Base. There is information that
numerous areas on the base were used for disposing of solvents that were used to
clean airplane engine parts and to strip paint. Waste quantities, disposal areas and
disposal methods are unknown. Various chlorinated solvents have been identified as
contaminants in the surface water and ground water. Although Middletown Air
Field currently has several RCRA generators, ground water contamination
occurred prior to 1980 and is due only to a small degree to these generators. The
vast majority of the ground water contamination is believed to be due to activities
of the U.S. Air Force before 1966. Surface water releases were all due to past,
undocumented spills and not covered by RCRA permitted storage or treatment
activities. The site is being studied by the EPA, the State and the Air Force. The
Air Force has also completed a study on past disposal activities.
Ill-10
-------
WHITMOYER LABORATORIES
Jackson Township, Pennsylvania
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
This site was an active manufacturer of animal Pharmaceuticals from 1934 until
July 1984. In July 1964, Whitmoyer Labs became a subsidiary of Rohm and Haas.
Rohm and Haas sold the facility in early 1978 to Beecham, Inc., which sold it to
Stafford Laboratories of Phoenix, Arizona. Arsenic based wastes were disposed of
on site in concrete vaults, holding tanks, and in unlined lagoons. Arsenic
contamination found in ground water was attributed in the HRS scoring to these
storage practices. Surface water scoring was done based on documentation that
Tulpehichen Creek had been contaminated from the discharge of arsenic-
contaminated ground water into the stream. The site has an NPDES permitted
cooling water discharge issued in 1980. This discharge is for non-contact cooling
water and restricts pH, temperature, and iodine. The discharge is unrelated to the
surface water observed release. The site also submitted a RCRA closure plan for
treatment and storage covering a tank and drum storage area unrelated to the
observed releases or the areas scored under Superfund. The site is currently in
violation of the storage area closure plan.
Ill-11
-------
AVTEX FIBERS, INC.
Front Royal, Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Avtex Fibers, Inc. has been in operation since 1940 as a rayon manufacturer.
Wastes have been disposed of on site in piles, unlined basins, and in landfills which
are the sources of the observed release to ground water. Contaminants detected
include arsenic, phenols, and sulfur compounds. The site, which is on the east side
of the South Fork of the Shenandoah River, has contaminated on-site wells and
residential wells located on the west side of the river with the same substances.
There is a State NPDES permit covering the discharge of zinc and other substances
into the Shenandoah River, but as there was no observed release to surface water
that permit is not related to the HRS scoring of the site. The Shenandoah River
does not appear to be affected by discharges from the plant at this time. The
company applied for a RCRA disposal permit, but withdrew its application. The
State had detected violations of the NPDES permit, but the company is correcting
them. The company and the State have devised a two-option plan for providing
alternative residential drinking water sources: Drill new wells or buy out the
properties and relocate the residents.
111-12
-------
L. A. CLARKE AND SON
Spotsylvania County, Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State RCRA, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Different substances
L. A. Clarke and Son is a wood preserving operation which treats railroad ties with
a creosote/coal tar solution. Operations began in the late 1930s and now continue
under a different owner, who has filed for bankruptcy. Spills, poor housekeeping,
and drippings from treated wood are sources which have contaminated soil, ground
water, and surface water with heavy metals and organic compounds, which are
constituents of creosote and coal tar. The facility has a RCRA permit issued by
the State for an impoundment and waste piles; however, these are not the sources
of the observed release to ground water. These facilities were active as of January
26, 1983. The company is in compliance with their State RCRA permit. The site
also has a State NPDES permit issued in 1975 to regulate phenols. There were non-
compliances in 1976. Contaminants scored as an HRS ground water observed
release are not regulated by the permit. There is no relationship between
permitted activities and releases used in the HRS scoring. In June 1982, L. A.
Clarke & Son consented to a court order requiring remedial actions specified by the
State. A new consent decree was signed in June 1983.
111-13
-------
MATTHEWS ELECTROPLATING
Roanoke County, Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
The site includes a ciosed electroplating plant which operated from 1972 until
1977. No details are available on the closure. In the late 1970's the State took
steps to control surface water runoff with the cooperation of the site owner. In
November 1981, $340,000 was made available under RCRA to fund a remedial
investigation. The work was finished in January 1983. A Superfund State Contract
for cleanup is in the final stages of negotiation. A discharge of process waste
water containing chromium and cyanide directly onto the ground is the source of
the observed release to ground water scored by HRS. The State has sampled local
residential wells and has detected chromium in them. There was no observed
release to surface water. The estimated volume of waste water dumped on the
ground was the waste quantity used for the surface water scoring.
-------
SALTVILLE WASTE DISPOSAL PONDS
Saltville, Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
The Saltville Waste Disposal Ponds Site consists of two ponds adjacent to the North
Fork of the Holston River. Between 1951 and 1972, chlorine and caustic soda were
produced at a plant near the ponds. The plant has been demolished, but the ponds
remain. These ponds are the sources of observed releases of mercury to ground
water, surface water and air scored by the HRS. Discharges from past operations
of the plant and leachate from the pond have contaminated 50 miles of the North
Fork of the Holston River with mercury. Since September 1970, this portion of the
river has been closed to fishing for eating purposes. Ground water contamination
and releases to air have also been documented with the ponds as the contamination
source. A task force comprised of EPA, TVA, and the State was organized in 1979
to study the mercury contamination problem. Several steps have been taken under
a State order to stop discharges from the waste ponds, and portions of the river
were dredged in 1982 to remove mercury-contaminated sediments. The river is
being monitored to measure the effectiveness of the cleanup measures.
Ill-15
-------
FIKE CHEMICALS
Nitro, West Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Different substances
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Different substances
RCRA-Air-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-Air-OR: Different substances
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Different substances
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Different substances
NPDE5-Air-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-Air-OR: Different substances
The site includes an active chemical production plant, a tank storage area, a drum
burial area, and four lagoons; two of which are backfilled. The site has an NPDES
permit to discharge process waste water and storm water overflows. A ground
water observed release was scored for benzene, chloroform, and methylene
chloride leaking from the lagoons and drum burial area. The site also has RCRA
Interim Status covering the #3 lagoon with a 40-drum equivalent waste quantity.
This facility was active as of January 26, 1983. However, this permit covered only
cyanides. The only effect that this lagoon had on the HRS score was with regard to
waste quantity and this lagoon is only responsible for 0.3% of the total waste
quantity. Removing this quantity has no effect on the HRS score. A surface water
observed release was scored for chloroform, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, benzene,
and 1,2-dichloroethane. The NPDES permit at present does not include limitations
on any of the hazardous constituents included in the HRS scoring, so there appears
to be no relationship between the permit and the scoring. An EPA suit against Fike
Chemicals resulted in a Consent Decree being filed in November 1982. Cleanup
was proceeding according to the terms of the decree in 3uly 1983.
Ill-16
-------
FOLLANSBEE SITE
Follansbee, West Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship:
2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
The site includes an active wood preserving plant. The plant was built on fill
material. Poor housekeeping and spills have contaminated both surface and ground
water with phenol. The waste quantity scored for both routes was based on the
volume of phenol contaminating the ground water beneath the site. The surface
water observed release was based on ground water springs and seepage into the
Ohio River. The facility includes waste tanks containing waste water produced in
the production of creosote. The tanks are active but are not believed to be a major
source of the contamination. The plant owner has installed a trench and pumps to
remove contaminated ground water and is removing the phenol in a treatment
facility. The owner and EPA are currently negotiating further cleanup of the site.
Ill-17
-------
MOBAY CHEMICAL
New Martinsville, West Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES, Air
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Different substances
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
The site includes an active organic chemical plant that has operated since the
1950's. The plant has disposed of 540,000 cubic feet of waste in a landfill and a
lagoon which are now closed, but are believed to be the source of an observed
release to ground water of benzene, toluene, vinyl chloride, and carbon
tetrachloride. No surface water observed release was scored. Waste quantities
scored for both contamination routes were based on the volume of the lagoon and
the landfill. The plant currently has an NPDES permit which does not include
limits or monitoring requirements for any organic compounds. The site also has
RCRA Interim Status for several active waste areas, including tanks, incinerators,
treatment surface impoundments, container storage areas, and waste piles. These
waste areas are not believed to be major contributors to the observed release,
although they do contain organic chemical wastes.
Ill-18
-------
ORDNANCE WORKS DISPOSAL SITE
Morgantown, West Virginia
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The site includes a landfill, a PCB drum storage area, waste piles, and a lagoon.
Since the 19^0's, the site was used by previous owners and adjacent property
owners to dispose of chemical plant wastes. The waste areas are no longer being
used. No details are available on their closure. The site has an NPDES permit to
discharge cooling water and sewage to the Monongahela River. However, the
source of the surface water observed release is zinc-contaminated surface runoff
from the drum storage area and the landfill, neither of which is permitted.
Therefore, the NPDES permitted discharge is not related to the site scoring. The
site does not have a ground water observed release scored. The current owner has
removed all 58 remaining drums and PCB contaminated soil around the site to
alleviate the immediate threat at that portion of the site.
HI-19
-------
-------
ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT (SOUTHEAST INDUSTRIAL AREA)
Anniston, Alabama
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) was designated in 1941 as an ammunition storage
area. Its mission was later expanded to include the overhaul and repair of combat
vehicles and artillery equipment. The area of ANAD contained in this site is the
600 acres within and near the southeast industrial or vehicle rebuild area. Various
individual disposal sites within this area were aggregated into a single site. Two
waste disposal portions of the site have had closure action under RCRA, initiated
and completed in 1982. These two areas were not used for the HRS scoring;
however, contamination plumes from those areas apparently exist, including some
of the same substances known to be emanating from HRS scored areas. Disposal
areas used for ground water scoring were leaking lagoons, an area where paint
stripper was dumped, and chemical waste lagoons. Some of the lagoons have a
State NPDES discharge permit. The total volume contained in the lagoons was
used for the waste quantity calculation instead of the volume flowing into the
lagoons because discharge from the lagoons was permitted. There are numerous
documented violations of the discharge permit, but they were not used for HRS
scoring. The surface water score was zero because of no targets; the lack of a
background sample precluded an observed release. ANAD is participating in the
Installation Restoration Program, under which the Department of Defense has been
identifying and evaluating its past hazardous waste sites. The Army has completed
Phase I (records search), Phase II (preliminary survey), and Phase III (assessment of
remedial action alternatives). The State issued an order in February 1982 directing
ANAD to implement a cleanup plan.
IV-1
-------
OLIN CORP. (MCINTOSH PLANT)
Mclntosh, Alabama
Routes Scored for MRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulatd unit not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
The Olin Corporation's Mclntosh Plant, constructed in the early 1950's, originally
manufactured chlorine and caustic soda using the mercury cell process. In 1956,
they constructed a pesticide and organic chemical plant on site. In 1981, Olin
closed the organic plant and switched from the mercury cell process to the
diaphragm cell process. Additional products are still manufactured at the site.
Olin's past waste disposal practices have contaminated ground water, according to
EPA. Waste quantities used in the HRS scoring for ground water and surface water
are attributed to an old landfill and lime slurry ponds. The facility has a RCRA
(TSD) permit for the active portion of the facility, including four surface
impoundments. RCRA-permitted waste quantities were apparently not used in
HRS scoring. However, compounds cited in the HRS observed release to ground
water are included in the RCRA Interim Status, so there may be some relationship.
Olin is continuing to study the ground water problem and regularly reports to the
state. Their NPDES permit is for process waste water and is not related to the
disposal practices scored for the HRS. As of June 1984, EPA was considering
various alternatives for the site.
IV-2
-------
STAUFFER CHEMICAL CO. (COLD CREEK PLANT)
Bucks, Alabama
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Stauffer Chemical Company's Cold Creek Plant manufactures pesticides. In the
past, the facility operated three on-site landfills for disposal of process wastes.
The wastes in the oldest landfill were excavated, placed in drums, and disposed in
the two newer landfills. The exact location of the oldest landfill is unknown. The
two newer landfills are supposedly lined with clay and covered with plastic caps.
The landfills are now graded, seeded, and fenced. Contamination has been
detected in monitoring wells located downgradient from is not related to the newer
landfills. Stauffer's NPDES permit is for process waste water, and is not related to
the landfills which were used in the HRS scoring process. There was no observed
release to surface water. As of June 1984, EPA was considering various
alternatives for the site.
IV-3
-------
ALPHA CHEMICAL CORP.
Galloway, Florida
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship:
5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Alpha Chemical Corporation Site is a facility that manufactures polyester
resins. In the past, process wastes were released to evaporative ponds. At the
request of the State, Alpha Chemical modified its process and upgraded its waste
water treatment to control most discharges. The waste ponds were lined and used
as a surface impoundment for the facility's waste waters; however, some residual
sludge may not have been removed before the ponds were lined. Ground water near
the ponds has been contaminated with organic compounds. Drums may also be
buried at the site. The NPDES permit is for a cooling water pond, not the
evaporative ponds. The observed release to surface water was based on a sample
collected from a swamp below the cooling water pond. The permit is for discharge
of non-contact cooling water. The regulated parameters are flow, pH, and
temperature and do not include the organic compounds in the observed release. As
of July 1983, the State was negotiating for monitoring of ground water and for
building a new lined surface impoundment for the facility's wastes.
IV-4
-------
COLEMAN-EVANS WOOD PRESERVING CO.
Whitehouse, Florida
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
1
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Coleman-Evans Wood Preserving Company Site has treated wood with penta-
chlorophenol (PCP) since 1950. The company discharged its waste waters into
unlined pits which were later covered. Currently, waste water enters a water/oil
separator; sludge settles out and the liquid is recycled back to the plant. Sludge is
removed every 90 days. The contamination source is the covered, unlined pits.
The NPDES permit is for process wastewater treatment, and is not related to
releases used for HRS scoring. There was no observed release to surface water
scored by the HRS. The State signed a Consent Order in December 1982 with the
company for a remedial investigation at the site. The investigation was to include
a hydrogeological assessment and a determination of the extent of offsite
contamination. The first round of data was due in July 1983.
IV-5
-------
B. F. GOODRICH
Calvert City, Kentucky
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The B. F. Goodrich site is a two-acre industrial landfill that operated from 1969 to
1978. Among the wastes accepted were brine sludges which were disposed of
mainly in bulk. The site also contains several old pits where organic materials
were burned. Later the pits were covered. Ground water contamination associated
with waste disposal operations is suspected; however, no observed releases were
scored for either ground water or surface water. EPA recently completed a
remedial plan outlining the investigations needed to determine the full extent of
cleanup required at the site. The NPDES permit for the site involves the process
waste water discharge for a manufacturing operation. This is not related to any of
the routes scored for HRS. The company has a RCRA-permitted waste disposal
lagoon for active operations at the site. The lagoon is not related to the landfill
used for HRS scoring.
IV-6
-------
BYPASS 601 GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION
Concord, North Carolina
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: None
This NPL site is in an area where private wells are the only source of drinking
water. Heavy metals contamination has been detected in some of the private
wells. EPA recently found heavy metals in monitoring wells near a local business,
Martin Scrap & Recycling, Inc. A ground water release was scored for the HRS.
However, the HRS documentation does not claim a relationship between the Martin
Scrap & Recycling operations and contamination in the private wells. There are no
permits for the Bypass 601 site since the "site" is a contaminated aquifer and no
facilities are involved. There has been no EPA or other regulatory action at this
site except that relating to CERCLA.
IV-7
-------
KOPPERS CO., INC. (FLORENCE PLANT)
Florence, South Carolina
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
Koppers Company, Inc., operates a wood treating and preserving facility. The
company uses creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) in its operations. The primary
problem at this site is an old evaporative lagoon closed since 1979. This lagoon has
caused contamination of six of nine monitoring wells on site, according to company
data. Koppers has also had numerous difficulties in the past with contaminated
runoff. However, there are no observed releases to surface water documented for
the HRS, and the surface water score is relatively insignificant. The facility now
uses treatment ponds and spray irrigation for waste handling. These operations are
RCRA-permitted (TSD). Landfarming is currently being done near the old lagoon.
Both these operations, particularly the landfarming, may be related to the HRS
scoring since the listed waste (K001) includes the same compounds found in the
HRS observed release to ground water. In October 1981, the State issued a
Consent Order requiring the company to conduct a groundwater study. As of June
198^, the State was reviewing the company's response to an amended Consent
Order which called for the company to complete installation of monitoring wells,
report on the progress of a sampling program, submit a hydrological report, and
submit a plan for remedial action.
IV-8
-------
WAMCHEM, INC.
Burton, South Carolina
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
Until the late 1970's, Wamchem, Inc. synthesized organic chemicals and formulated
color concentrates at this site. Wastes such as phenols, lead, cadmium, and
solvents were disposed of in an unlined, evaporative lagoon; then the company
switched to spraying its wastes onto two fields. The lagoon and spray fields
contributed to the observed release scored for ground water. The observed release
to surface water was the result of ground water seepage from an embankment
along a nearby creek. This ground water seepage to surface water may be related
to by the State NPDES permit, which covers discharges from an on-site land
treatment system. The company is conducting further ground water studies to
determine the effect of the spray fields and lagoon.
IV-9
-------
-------
OUTBOARD MARINE CORP.
Waukegan, Illinois
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Outboard Marine Corporation (OMC) purchased approximately 9 million pounds of
PCBs from 1959 to 1971 for use in hydraulic equipment. Subsequently, OMC
discharged substantial quantities of PCBs into Waukegan Harbor, which feeds
directly into Lake Michigan. About 11,000 yds.3 of soil are contaminated with
greater than 500 ppm PCBs and 10 times that are contaminated with 10-500 ppm
PCBs. In 1976-1977, USEPA and Illinois EPA took action to have OMC
significantly reduce its output of PCBs. The State regulatory agency entered into
negotiations with OMC to clean up the harbor. Following a breakdown in
negotiations, litigation under CERCLA was instituted. The NPDES permit, issued
in 1979, which regulated discharge of PCBs into the harbor, came as a result of the
above actions and did not affect the HRS observed release, which occurred prior to
the permit issuance. The RCRA permit covers storage in tanks, unrelated to the
discharge of PCBs responsible for the score. OMC is constantly monitoring PCB
output according to its NPDES permit and the concentration of the effluent now
approaches the permitted value of 1.0 ppm PCBs.
V-l
-------
PETERSEN SAND AND GRAVEL
Libertyville, Illinois
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Petersen Sand and Gravel Site is a 1,000 acre quarry that various wastes
including paints and solvents were dumped into until about 1977. Two instances of
drum removal have occurred in the past, although it is believed that drums and
some contaminated soils remain. Contaminants have leached into the ground
water. The only permit associated with this site is an NPDES permit that is about
to expire. This permit allows the quarry to be pumped for removal of excess water
and also allows surface runoff. However, the parameters that are regulated are
only standard water quality parameters such as pH, flow, and TSS. Since organics
in the ground water are the substances of concern, the NPDES permit is not related
to the HRS score.
V-2
-------
SHEFFIELD (U.S. ECOLOGY, INC.)
Sheffield, Illinois
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: *f) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed contribution
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
This site is a 45-acre landfill in a strip-mined area which at one time was the
largest hazardous waste disposal site in the state. Monitoring wells in the shallow
aquifer on site were contaminated with a variety of organic substances including
aromatic hydrocarbons and PCBs. In 1980, U.S. Ecology submitted a RCRA Part A
permit application with 18 pages of substances it wished to be able to dispose of in
an on-site landfill. Included in these 18 pages were those substances used to give
this site its score. This release continued after the site was granted Interim
Status. Subsequently the Part A application was denied and the site was ordered
closed. The landfill stopped accepting wastes prior to January 26, 1983.
Therefore, this site is eligible for cleanup under CERCLA. EPA has since rejected
U.S. Ecology's closure plan and the status of this site is currently pending a
decision.
V-3
-------
FISHER-CALO
LaPorte, Indiana
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
The Fisher-Calo Chemicals and Solvents Corporation is a solvent recycler that has
operated since 1972. Wastes were buried on site and as a result of this disposal, as
well as spills and a large fire, the ground water became contaminated. The
substances which were found in monitoring well samples and used to determine the
ground water score were chloroform, benzene, and cyanide. Subsequent to the site
scoring, Fisher-Calo submitted RCRA Part A and Part B applications for its
operations. However, the application was for treatment and storage only, not land
disposal of wastes. The RCRA facility was active on January 26, 1983. The buried
wastes have been excavated and Fisher-Calo continues to monitor the ground water
at this site in response to the Consent Order they entered into in 1982. EPA is
currently evaluating the need for remedial action.
-------
NORTHSIDE SANITARY LANDFILL, INC.
Zionsville, Indiana
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed contribution
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
The Northside Sanitary Landfill (NSL) is located north of Indianapolis and has
accepted hazardous wastes since 1971. The NSL accepted a whole array of
hazardous chemicals, including those that were the basis for the HRS score. In
1980, NSL filed a RCRA Part A application for a landfill which included the
substances scored in the HRS. These substances continued to be disposed in the
landfill until the EPA and Indiana Environmental Management Board further
reviewed the application and on April 20, 1983, terminated NSL's Interim Status,
and ordered the site closed. In this way, releases from a site with RCRA Interim
Status contributed to groundwater contamination. This facility accepted wastes
after January 26, 1983. This makes this a Class 1 site which was also the entire
basis for the HRS score. NSL fought the regulatory action in court originally, but
is now going to close its hazardous waste facility.
V-5
-------
REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL CORP. (INDIANAPOLIS PLANT)
Indianapolis, Indiana
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, Air (State)
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
The Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation is a facility which for approximately 50
years ending in 1972 refined coal tar and preserved wood using creosote. The
process waste water was disposed into a trench, a landfill, and several unlined
lagoons on site. The ground water in the area is contaminated with pyradine from
the wood preserving operations. Reilly Tar applied for and received RCRA Interim
Status in 1981. However, this application was for tank and containerized storage
of organic substances, not for on-site disposal. The RCRA facility was active on
January 26, 1983. The trench, landfill, and lagoons are being considered a separate
facility and are being closed and cleaned up. These areas are not affected by the
RCRA Interim Status. The Air permit for this site is a state permit for which we.
have not discovered what parameters have been permitted. However, because the
air route was not scored, the HRS score is unrelated to the permit. The Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study for this site is underway in its preliminary stages.
V-6
-------
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO., INC. (MONTAGUE PLANT)
Montague, Michigan
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA, State NPDES, Air (State)
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
The site is a petro-chemical plant that discharges process waste water to Lake
Michigan and into a deep well and disposes solids in on-site waste piles. The plant
has been granted a RCRA Part B permit. However, this permit is only for using
containers for storage, while the source of the release in the HRS scoring was
uncovered, on-site waste piles. The permitted facilities were active on January 26,
1983. The State air permit is independent of the HRS scoring as the air route was
not scored. Some question does arise, however, with regard to the NPDES permit.
DuPont received an NPDES permit to discharge effluents that include two of the
three substances that were scored in the HRS. One of the receivers for this
effluent was a deep well. It is assumed that the terminus of this well was not the
same aquifer as the one of concern in HRS scoring, but it is possible that some of
the contaminants from this deep well injection entered the aquifer from which
local individuals receive their ground water and from which contaminated
monitoring well samples were taken. Information to confirm or deny this
possibility is incomplete. DuPont has installed two interceptor wells that pump the
contaminated water to a treatment plant. All inspections of DuPont have found
them in compliance with their NPDES permit.
V-7
-------
NORTH BRONSON INDUSTRIAL AREA
Bronson, Michigan
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: > State NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Discharge out of compliance included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
The North Bronson Industrial Area Site consists of five industries which were
involved in metal plating operations in the 1960's and 70's. Wastes from these
operations were deposited in two seepage lagoons which are now inactive. The
contaminants resulting from these unlined lagoons are responsible for this site's
HRS score. However, an observed release was reported to the surface water from
one of the firms, Bronson Plating. Bronson Plating has an NPDES permit that
covers three of the substances used to score the site, chromium, copper, and
nickel. On several occasions, they were found to be in violation of the permit.
This was accounted for in the HRS scoring package. Furthermore, lead which is
not covered by the permit, was also used in scoring the surface water route. Lead,
in and of itself, will yield the same surface water score as was calculated
originally.
V-8
-------
PETOSKEY MUNICIPAL WELL FIELD
Petoskey, Michigan
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Petoskey Municipal Well Field Site is the City of Petoskey's only supply of
drinking water. It is located on the shore of Lake Michigan in the delta of the Bear
River. In September 1981, TCE was found in the wells. Petoskey Manufacturing, a
die casting and plating firm located next to the well field, is suspected of being the
source of the contamination. Petoskey Manufacturing does have an NPDES permit.
However, the permit only regulates the flow and pH of the discharge to Bear River.
It is not related to the HRS scoring of the site. This site is now the subject of a
Federal Enforcement Action.
V-9
-------
THERMO-CHEM, INC.
Muskegon, Michigan
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
The Thermo-Chem, Inc. Site is a chemical manufacturing plant that was formerly a
disposer of liquid wastes. The disposal operations were suspended in 1980. Right
about the same time, Thermo-Chem submitted a RCRA Part A permit application.
Although the permit covered the same organic chemicals that were the basis for
the HRS score, the permit was for storage and transport activities, not disposal
activities. This facility was active on January 26, 1983. Under the 90-day
allowable storage limit, Thermo-Chem is now withdrawing its Part A application.
All waste has been removed from this site and disposal operations have ceased.
V-10
-------
BURLINGTON NORTHERN (BRAINERD/BAXTER PLANT)
Brainerd/Baxter, Minnesota
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
The Burlington Northern (Brainerd/Baxter Plant) Site is a wood preserving
operation that has discharged process waste water since 1907. The waste water
was sent to one pond until the 1930's when it was closed and covered and a second
pond was used until late 1982. The observed release to the ground water consisted
of various organics associated with the wood preserving industry that migrated
from these ponds. The only involvement this site has had with RCRA is a
notification of the intent to generate (not dispose) certain cyanide wastes. These
wastes are unrelated to the organic wastes used in the HRS scoring. Therefore, the
RCRA permitting process is completely independent of the HRS score. Burlington
Northern is now involved in the primary stages of a Remedial Investigation at this
site.
V-ll
-------
FMC CORP. (FRIDLEY PLANT)
Fridley, Minnesota
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
FMC-Northern Ordnance Works and its predecessor, Northern Pump Company,
disposed of hazardous waste on site in an unlined landfill. FMC closed its existing
facility on November 19, 1980 and agreed to a Consent Order to clean up the
contaminated soil on site. The RCRA Part A and Part B applications that FMC
filed for this site, which are pending approval, were for the disposal of the
contaminated soil. In other words, the permit was for the site cleanup. In this
respect, the permit does not affect the HRS score because it covers activities
completely subsequent and unrelated to the ground water contamination.
Regarding the NPDES permit, it covered parameters involved with noncontact
cooling water which contained none of the constituents contained in the observed
surface water release.
V-12
-------
KOCH REFINING CO./N-REN CORP.
Pine Bend, Minnesota
Routes Scored for HRS:
Permits for this Site:
Site Relationship:
GW
RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES,
Air (State)
5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
This site is a 50 square mile area that is now an industrial park. An investigation
conducted in 1972 found lead and phenols in the ground water. This contamination
was attributed to holding ponds, lagoons, and spent bauxite piles. No information
on N-Ren Corporation was found - it was not involved in any permit action. Koch
Refining is still active and is the party that is involved in permitted activities. The
air and surface water routes were not scored, therefore the air permit, a State
permit for which the regulated parameters have not been identified, and the
NPDES permit were not involved in the HRS scoring. The RCRA Interim Status
applies to a surface impoundment, a different one than those used to calculate
waste quantity in the HRS scoring. No observed release was scored for ground
water.
V-13
-------
ST. REGIS PAPER CO.
Cass Lake, Minnesota
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
The St. Regis Paper Company has operated this wood preserving facility since
1957. Process waste water containing inorganic and organic contaminants was
disposed in landfills or open, unlined lagoons on site. The State of Minnesota
discovered evidence of these contaminants in monitoring well samples. This
contamination forms the basis for the HRS score. St. Regis submitted a RCRA
Part A application in 1980. However, this permit was for temporary storage of
process waste water, not ultimate disposal. This facility was active on January 26,
1983. Furthermore, under the 90-day allowable storage limit, St. Regis is
withdrawing their permit application. In conclusion, the RCRA permit for St.
Regis has no direct effect on the HRS score. This site is now going through
closure.
V-14
-------
UNION SCRAP IRON AND METAL CO.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Union Scrap Iron and Metal Co. sorted and crushed lead battery fragments for eight
years prior to 1980. Plastic and rubber fragments which contained lead were
accumulated in on-site piles partially covered by tarps. This lead contamination
entered the environment through all three scorable routes. However, only a RCRA
permit exists for this site. This RCRA permit covered lead; however it was for the
removal and future proper storage of waste piles. Therefore, this permit has no
effect on the HRS score for this site. Union Scrap is currently working with EPA
and MPCA on the cleanup of this site.
V-15
-------
ALLIED CHEMICAL AND IRONTON COKE
Ironton, Ohio
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
The Allied' Chemical and Ironton Coke Site is two adjacent facilities that used
lagoons to hold hazardous waste on their properties. The Ironton Coke Plant is now
shut down. Hazardous wastes from these lagoons are suspected of contaminating
ground water. These lagoons are the source of contaminants used for HRS scoring.
Allied Chemical has submitted a RCRA Part A permit application for storage of
hazardous wastes in containers (barrels, drums, etc.) and a storage tank.
Therefore, the RCRA activities had no direct effect on the HRS scoring. These
RCRA activities continued after January 26, 1983. The storage tank was closed
under a plan approved by Ohio EPA in January 198*. The State NPDES permit is
for a waste water treatment plant at Allied Chemical where compliance has not
been consistent; however, neither noncompliances nor regular operations were used
in HRS scoring. This site is now being remediated under a Federal Enforcement
Action.
V-16
-------
ALSCO ANACONDA
Gnadenhutten, Ohio
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Reiationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Alsco Anaconda Site is an inactive sludge disposal lagoon. The lagoon is
excavated in permeable soils and is not lined. The company disposed of waste in
the lagoon between 1971 and 1978 and this is the source of the HRS scored
contamination. The facility has no RCRA permits except as a generator of
hazardous waste. The NPDES permit is for an on-site treatment plant for process
waste water that is not associated with the inactive sludge disposal lagoon that was
the source of the waste quantity used is in the HRS scoring. Therefore, the
NPDES permit has no effect on HRS scoring. This site is now being cleaned up
subject to a Federal Enforcement Action.
V-17
-------
FIELDS BROOK
Ashtabula, Ohio
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 3) Data insufficient to make a determination
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Documentation insufficient
NPDES-SW-OR: Permitted substanced unknown—confirmed other source
Fields Brook meanders for aproximately four miles through a diversified chemical
industrial complex and through a residential area before flowing into the Ashtabula
River. The site consists of the brook and 14 industries bordering it. Point and
nonpoint sources adjacent to the brook have contaminated the sediments with a
variety of toxic chemicals. Twelve of the fourteen facilities have Ohio NPDES
permits. Unfortunately, we have not been able to identify these plants and their
associated permits. Therefore, it can not be determined if any NPDES permitted
discharges were involved in the observed release to surface water that was
included in HRS score. However, the two facilities that do not have permits have
contributed to contamination of the sediment. One of the facilities has a landfill
that is leaching chlorinated organics to the stream; the other facility has a
discharge of PCBs via a storm drain. Both classes of chemicals were scored by the
HRS as an observed release to surface water. The observed release to ground
water was discovered at a well near an unlined lagoon at one of the 14 facilities
bordering Fields Brook. This release was not related to any NPDES permit.
V-18
-------
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. (COSHOCTON PLANT)
Coshocton, Ohio
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Different substance
General Electric Company disposed of wastes at its Coshocton, Ohio plant in a
landfill and infiltration lagoons from 19^6 to 1977. Ground water has been
contaminated by these sources. General Electric has a RCRA permit to store, not
dispose, hazardous waste. However, this permit may be related to the HRS scoring
as a potential contributor to the observed release to ground water. Their NPDES
permit is not related to HRS scored releases as the surface water route was not
scored. Therefore, there is no relationship between permitted activities and
releases used for the HRS scoring.
V-19
-------
SOUTH POINT PLANT
South Point, Ohio
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release
(Spatial)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Discharge out of compliance included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed contribution
The South Point Plant is presently owned by Ashland Chemical. From 1943 to
1979, Allied Chemical, the previous owner, produced ammonia, urea, nitrogen
fertilizer, and formaldehyde at the site. During operations, several landfills and
surface impoundments were used for disposal of process wastes. According to the
State of Ohio, many leaks and spills in production areas, plus runoff from a large
fire, have contaminated ground water. The observed release to surface water was
scored by the HRS based on violations of the site's Ohio NPDES permit for
discharges of formaldehyde, ammonia, and organic nitrogen in excess of the
permitted concentrations. EPA has not yet resolved what actions will be taken at
this site.
V-20
-------
-------
FRIT INDUSTRIES (WALNUT RIDGE PLANT)
Walnut Ridge, Arkansas
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
Frit Industries has manufactured fertilizers from chemical waste materials since
1973. A fire in 1979 led to runoff contaminated with heavy metals. Site
operations have caused further runoff problems, possible ground water
contamination from waste piles and surface impoundments, and air pollution from
particulates blowing off of the site. The company had an air permit issued by the
State, but no Federal air permit. This permit did not pertain to the observed
release to air scored by the HRS; the source of air contamination was attributed to
windblown particulates from waste piles. The company had an SPDES permit that
was active until 1976. The permit did not pertain to the source of the observed
release to surface water, which was drainage ditches that were contaminated by
runoff from the site and runoff from the 1979 fire. A SPDES permit was proposed
in October' 1984 as part of remedial action at the site. Since December 1981, the
company has been studying runoff, the potential for ground water contamination,
and the buildup of heavy metals concentrations in sediments of drainage ditches
and a nearby creek. The company has dredged contaminated sediment from
drainage ditches and has built containment structures on some of the drainage
ditches. The company submitted reports to the State and EPA on their efforts. In
February 1983, EPA issued an Administrative Order requiring the company to
perform investigations and conduct any remedial actions necessary. The company
presently collects and treats runoff from the site under the SPDES permit proposed
in October 1984. This State permit had not been finalized as of March, 1985. The
company also has submitted a RCRA Part B application as a part of the remedy at
the site.
Vl-1
-------
VERTAC, INC.
Jacksonville, Arkansas
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
RCRA-Air-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-Air-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release (Time)
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release (Time)
NPDES-Air-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-Air-OR: Permitted discharge can not contribute to observed release (Time)
Since the late 19Ws, insecticides and herbicides have been manufactured at the
Vertac, Inc. site. As a result of inadequate waste disposal methods and production
controls, soil, surface water, and ground water have been contaminated. The
source of contamination used for HRS scoring of observed releases to surface
water and ground water was an old drum storage area and a contaminated cooling
water pond. There was also an observed release to the air. The active portion of
the site has RCRA Interim Status; however, the contamination sources from
inactive portions of the site used for HRS scoring existed before RCRA was
enacted, so there is no direct relationship between RCRA Interim Status operations
and the HRS scoring. The RCRA Part A application includes dichlorophenol wastes
such as those found in the observed release to ground water. However, the RCRA
Interim Status is only for storage in drums and tanks and does not include the
cooling water pond and landfills. The site includes drum storage areas being
monitored under RCRA and other drum areas currently covered by CERCLA
authority. Information is unavailable to definitively decide which drums were
included in the HRS waste quantity. The facility has a State NPDES permit, but it
was issued in October 198^, after HRS scoring occurred. There is no air permit for
the facility. In 1980, the Department of Justice (DOJ), on behalf of EPA, brought
civil action against Vertac, Inc., the present owner/operator, and Hercules, Inc.,
the former site owner. The State also filed against the companies, and the cases
were consolidated. In April 1980, a hearing required Vertac to drain and cover the
contaminated pond, treat the drained liquids, install a cutoff wall and drain around
the pond, and cap all disposal areas. All of this work was completed by summer
1981. To address the remaining contamination problems, EPA, the State, and DOJ
negotiated a Consent Decree with Vertac that became effective in January 1982.
Vertac was required to provide a study of on-site conditions, a proposal for site
remedial work, a study of offsite conditions, and a plan for on-site waste
management
VI-2
-------
AT&SF (CLOVIS)
Clovis, New Mexico
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: None
The Atchison, Topeka, and Sante Fe (AT&SF) Railway has conducted switchyard
and car repair activity at this site since the early 1900's. Activities over the past
30 years have included washing of hopper cars and refueling of locomotives. Waste
water from the various operations discharges to a nearby lake, a potential source
of contamination of the underlying aquifer. This lake was used as the source of
ground water contamination for HRS scoring as AT&SF is the only discharge into
the lake. Diesel oil from refueling operations at the site has also been found atop
the underlying aquifer. No permits were found for this site, so no relationship can
be established between permitted activities and HRS scoring. EPA and the State
have requested that the company determine the extent of contamination at the site
and develop any needed remedial program.
VI-3
-------
UNITED NUCLEAR CORP.
Church Rock, New Mexico
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
United Nuclear Corporation has operated a uranium mill on a 640-acre site since
May 1977. Tailings from the mill are deposited in a large impoundment on site. A
break in the tailings dam in 1979 released 93 million gallons of tailing fluid to a
nearby river. Subsequently, seepage from the impoundment contaminated an
aquifer in the vicinity of the pond. The tailing pond is the source of the observed
releases to ground water and surface water used for the HRS scoring. There was
also an observed release to air. The State NPDES permit is for the uranium mine,
not the mill which was scored for inclusion on the NPL. The facility has no RCRA
or air permits, so there is no relationship between permitted activities and the HRS
scoring. The State is requiring the company to address ground water contamination
through a Ground Water Discharge Plan. To obtain State approval, the plan must
include ground water monitoring, a program to control contaminant migration, and
neutralization of the impoundment contents.
-------
BRIO REFINING CO., INC.
Friendswood, Texas
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: State NPDES, Air (State)
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Brio Refining Co., Inc., Site includes approximately 12 closed pits. Tanks and
processing facilities also remain on a portion of the site which Brio operated from
the early 1970's to December 1982. There have been at least eight previous owners
and operators of the facility. Operations at the site included copper catalyst
regenerating, oil blending and refining, and hydrocarbon (styrene) cracking. The
closed pits are identified as the source of probable contamination of ground water;
however, the facility has no permits related to ground water. The observed release
to surface water identified by the HRS scoring was spills of liquid containing
copper compounds; the State NPDES permit regulated chromium and phenols, but
not copper. The facility when operating had a State air permit. The site has been
inactive since December 1982 and air samples were collected in January 1984.
There is no relationship between permitted activities and the HRS scoring.
Regulatory actions that have occurred include EPA site inspections and some air
monitoring. In 1974, the Texas Air Control Board won a court judgement forcing
the removal of on-site wastes. In 1976, the facility was charged with contempt of
court for failure to fully comply with the 1974 judgement.
VI-5
-------
STEWCO, INC.
Waskom, Texas
Routes Scored for MRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
Stewco, Inc., formerly owned, operated, and maintained a fleet of trucks at this
site. The company contracted with the oil and gas industry to haul glue, resin,
gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, and creosote. The company is now bankrupt. Wash
water from tank truck cleaning was routed to a series of ponds for evaporative
treatment. Wash water was routed to the first pond for evaporative treatment;
overflow from the first pond went to a second pond in which a spray evaporation
system was installed and sometimes operated; any overflow was to be trucked to a
third pond at another site. The ponds are unlined and in poor condition. Drainage
from the parking area flows into the on-site ponds, causing them to overflow. The
ponds were to be skimmed to remove surface oil; but there is no record of this, so
when the ponds overflowed, the surface oil layer moved with the overflow onto the
surrounding drainage areas. This has caused surface water and possibly ground
water contamination. Surface water contaminants include oil and grease,
pesticides, and phthalates. Ground water contaminants include phthalates and
pesticides. The site had no Federal permits, so there is no relationship between
permitted activities and HRS scoring. EPA regulatory action at the site has all
been in connection with CERCLA. A compliance inspection by the State in 1980
found unpermitted discharges at the site.
VI-6
-------
-------
FINDETT CORP.
St. Charles, Missouri
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, State NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
Findett Corporation, among other activities, reprocessed fluids containing PCBs
between 1963 and 197^. Some wastes from reprocessing were disposed of in a
small pond on site. Because of various Administrative Orders issued by EPA,
contaminated soil from the pond has been removed by excavation, drumming, and
approved disposal. Findett Corporation was also required under RCRA to design
and implement a monitoring, sampling, and analysis plan to characterize the nature
and extent of soil and ground water contamination. Ground water contamination
was attributed to the previous operation of the pond for HRS scoring. A violation
of the site's State NPDES permit also contributed to the HRS score. The State
NPDES specified no discharge of PCBs; PCBs were detected downstream of the
discharge, but were not detected in an upstream sample. This was scored as a
surface water route observed release.
VII-2
-------
U.S. NAMEPLATE CO.
Mount Vernon, Iowa
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
U.S. Nameplate Company manufactures nameplates on a seven-acre site. Liquid
process wastes are acidic, with high concentrations of chromium, fluoride, lead,
and zinc. Prior to 1979, U.S. Nameplate treated the wastes in septic tanks that
discharged into a drainage field and a nearby creek. In 1979, the State received
complaints and the company responded by constructing a waste treatment lagoon
system. U.S. Nameplate filed a RCRA Part A permit application for the lagoon
system in 1981. In 1982, the State determined that the lagoon was leaking. EPA is
taking a compliance action under RCRA for present operations at the lagoon. The
HRS scoring of the site and listing on the NPL is due to previous operations
involving the septic tank and drainage field. No observed release was scored for
the ground water route because the release detected was attributable to the lagoon
covered under RCRA.
VII-1
-------
8
-------
CALIFORNIA GULCH
Leadville, Colorado
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
California Gulch flows about 1.5 miles to the Arkansas River in Colorado's
Leadville Mining District. The gulch has been seriously impacted by lead, zinc,
copper, and gold mining activities. Numerous abandoned mines and tailing piles are
located in the gulch. The most serious problem is acid mine drainage from the Yak
Tunnel. This is the primary source of ground water and surface water
contamination used in HRS scoring. There are three NPDES permits associated
with this area. One is for a sewage treatment plant, one is for the airport, and one
is for a mill operation. ASARCO runs a mining and milling operation and has an
NPDES permit for the milling operation but does not discharge into the Yak
Tunnel/California Gulch. Mine drainage from ASARCO mines used to flow into the
Yak Tunnel. Changes in their permits now require this mine drainage to be treated
with the milling operation and therefore no longer impacts the Yak tunnel. These
changes occurred about the same time as the HRS scoring. The EPA contact does
not believe there are any permitted discharges into the Yak Tunnel. Based on this
information there are no relationships between permitted activities and HRS
scoring. A Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study has been performed under
CERCLA.
VIII-1
-------
EAGLE MINE
Minturn/Redcliff, Colorado
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Eagle Mine Site covers 110 acres in Eagle County, Colorado. Zinc mining and
milling operations were active from 1912 through 1977. Silver mining continued
intermittently until the early 1980's when the mine was essentially abandoned.
There are two tailings ponds which exist on the site. The older of the two ponds
was abandoned in 1946 and is the source of the contaminaton used in HRS scoring
for both ground water and surface water. The discharge from the newer pond is
regulated by an NPDES permit. Mine drainage is pumped to the tailings pond as a
part of normal operation. Since the plant was abandoned there has been no active
treatment of the mine water which has resulted in numerous violations of the
NPDES permit. The violations did not enter into HRS scoring. In 1984, CERCLA
emergency funds were used to remove transformers containing PCBs. These
sources were not considered in the HRS scoring.
VIII-2
-------
ROCKY FLATS PLANT (USDOE)
Golden, Colorado
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA, NPDES, Air
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Rocky Flats Plant began producing components for nuclear weapons in 1951.
Major operations at the plant include fabrication and assembly of plutonium,
beryllium, and uranium; recovery of plutonium; and research on americium. The
HRS scores are primarily spill related. Contamination at the site resulted from a
spill of cutting oil containing plutonium. This went into the Great Western
Reservoir and the sediment from this reservoir is the apparent source of air and
surface water contamination. Groundwater contamination is based on landfill and
solar ponds which are known to have leaked. The NPDES permit is for sanitary
sewage. The RCRA permits primarily cover solvent disposal. The air permits
cover boilers. The permits for this facility have no relationship to the activities or
areas that were used for HRS scoring. The US DOE has completed some remedial
work.
VIII-3
-------
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL
Adams County, Colorado
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES, Air
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Rocky Mounty Arsenal covers 29 square miles and has been used since 1942 for
operations related to mustard gas and chemical munitions. From 1952 until 1982,
Shell Chemical Company used the site to manufacture herbicdes and pesticides.
There are 165 "possibly polluted" areas at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal.
Contamination from these areas continues to migrate from these areas principally
via ground water. The HRS score is based almost entirely on the ground water
route. The surface water route contribution to the total score was minimal. There
is no RCRA permit for this site. The site has two NPDES permits. One is for a
sanitary sewer and the other is for a source which is not contaminated and was not
included in HRS scoring. There is an air permit for the site which covers an
incinerator. Air was not scored for the HRS. There are no relationships between
permits for this site and activities that were used for HRS scoring. A major
Installation Restoration Program is being conducted by the U.S. Army at this site.
-------
URAVAN URANIUM PRO3ECT (UNION CARBIDE CORP.)
Uravan, Colorado
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: Uranium Mill License (State), NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
The Uravan Uranium project began as a radium recovery operation in 1915 and was
expanded to include vanadium recovery in 1935. There is little current activity at
the site and Union Carbide plans to completely shut down and reclaim the entire
facility. This site has a State issued uranium mill license. The primary source of
the HRS scoring for both ground water and surface water is from seepage from the
raffinate ponds located in the flood plain of the river. There appear to be no
relationships between Federally permitted activities and HRS scoring. Federal and
State agencies have inspected this facility many times and have brought action
against Union Carbide for numerous permit violations and hazardous material
spills.
VIII-5
-------
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD (SOMERS TIE TREATING PLANT)
Somers, Montana
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
Burlington Northern Railroad has treated ties on this site since around 1900. Two
lagoons near Flathead Lake were used to dispose creosote wastes from wood
treating processes and are the source of ground water and surface water
contamination. The Burlington Northern Site has four disposal areas. Two of these
are recently active facilities and the other two have not been used since 197^.
These two older lagoons are the source for the HRS ground water score. One of
the older lagoons is in a marshy area next to Flathead Lake and is the source of
surface water contamination. The plant has opted to close the newer facilities
rather than obtain RCRA permits. The plant has stopped using the newer lagoons
within the last six months and there is a Consent Agreement to close these two
lagoons. No permitted activities were considered in the HRS scoring. The NPL
data base listing a RCRA permit is in error.
VIII-6
-------
IDAHO POLE CO.
Bozeman, Montana
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
Idaho Pole Company treats wood products with pentachlorophenol (PCP). Ground
water is very shallow and flows into Rocky Creek. Any material leaking onto the
ground could contaminate the ground water due to highly permeable soils and
shallow ground water. The source of ground water contamination is from past
practices such as spillage and tank leakage. No permitted activities were
considered for the HRS scoring. This site has no RCRA permits because the waste
production at this site is below the small generator requirement. The NPL data
base listing of a RCRA permit is in error. An NPDES permit may result from a
current enforcement action related to contaminated storm runoff. Measures are
being taken under a State Compliance Order to eliminate discharges and migration
of PCP.
VIII-7
-------
WHITEWOOD CREEK
Whitewood, South Dakota
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: NPDES
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Gold mining and mill tailings have been discharged for over 100 years into
approximately 20 miles of Whitewood Creek. Heavy metals have contaminated
soil, ground water, and surface water. The HRS score for this site is based on
tailings which were discharged into Whitewood Creek before permitting was
required. The plant now has a tailings pond for these waste materials. The NPDES
permit associated with this site is for a water treatment plant and has no
connection with the HRS score. Under a voluntary agreement with EPA and the
State of South Dakota, the responsible party is performing a Remedial
Investigation.
VIII-8
-------
OGDEN DEFENSE DEPOT
Ogden, Utah
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Ogden Defense Depot covers 1,139 acres and has facilities to maintain and repair
vehicles and equipment. Operations include metal plating, degreasing, and
painting. The depot also recontainerizes chemicals for storage on site and
shipment off site. The RCRA Interim Status covers storage and transportation of
solvents and waste solvents. Various chemical warfare agents are buried on site.
The surface water score is based on the sanitary sewer discharge which receives
numerous hazardous waste materials. Mustard gas and phosgene were buried 10 to.
20 years ago and are the sources of ground water scoring. These HRS scores are
not related to permitted activities. Ogden Defense Depot is participating in the
DOD Installation Restoration Program. DOD has completed Phase I (records
search) and a geohydrological survey.
VIII-9
-------
BAXTER/UNION PACIFIC TIE TREATING
Laramie, Wyoming
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 1) HRS includes a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
This site is a tie treating facility which has been operating since the ISSO's. The
site consists of 140 acres. On-site surface impoundments are unlined and contain
one million cubic feet of waste. Approximately five acres in the middle of the site
are covered by RCRA regulations and were still accepting waste as of January 26,
1983. Since there is no way to differentiate between the five acres in the middle
of the site and the rest of the site, it may have been part of the overall HRS score.
However, elimination of this impoundment would not affect the HRS score.
Ground water and surface water have been contaminated from pollutants migrating
from these surface impoundments, and are the source of the HRS scoring. The
plant stopped discharging to the RCRA regulated portion of the site in May 1983.
By November 1984, the plant had closed the five acres in accordance with a RCRA
closure plan.
VIII-10
-------
-------
MOTOROLA, INC. (52ND STREET PLANT)
Phoenix, Arizona
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
Motorola, Inc. manufactures semi-conductors and related components at its 52nd
Street Plant in Phoenix, Arizona. Ground water beneath the plant is contaminated
with trichloroethylene, trichloroethane, and other organic and inorganic
compounds. Contamination may have resulted from leaking storage tanks, leaking
effluent lines, and past disposal practices; including the use of dry wells. The HRS
score was based on the estimated volume of waste disposed of in a dry well over a
12 year time period. The site has no NPDES permit and its RCRA Interim Status
includes a container storage pad. This facility was active on January 26, 1983.
Motorola submitted a closure plan for the storage pad area in lieu of submitting a
Part B application. The company would like to change its status to that of a
generator. The state has not acted on this request at this time. In October 1983,
the Arizona Department of Health Services established a task force to guide and
evaluate Motorola's remedial activities.
IX-1
-------
MOUNTAIN VIEW MOBILE HOME ESTATES
Globe, Arizona
Routes Scored for HRS: Air
Permits for this Site: Air (State)
Site Relationship: 5) HRS does not include a federally permitted source
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates is a 17-acre site which has been subdivided
into 55 lots. The subdivision is built on graded asbestos tailings around the defunct
Metate Asbestos mill, directly adjacent to an active asbestos mill. The hazardous
material associated with this site is asbestos via the air route. There was an air
permit, issued to the Metate Asbestos mill through the State of Arizona, which
required monitoring only for visibility effects. Therefore, the emission of asbestos
was not monitored and regulated directly. This air permit was terminated in 1974,
prior to the HRS scoring effort because of numerous violations. It appears that
there was no regulation of airborne asbestos at this site. In January 1980, the
Arizona Governor declared a state of emergency at the site and temporarily
relocated residents while the site was partially covered and the homes were
decontaminated. Wind, water, and human activity have subsequently eroded the 6-
inch soil covering, exposing the asbestos tailings. The EPA initiated a feasibility
study which recommended permanent relocation of Mountain View residents with
subsequent site closure, capping, and maintenance. The residents have now been
permanently relocated.
IX-2
-------
TUCSON AIRPORT AREA
Tucson, Arizona
Routes Scored for HRS: GW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status, NPDES, Air (Local)
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
The Tucson Airport Area Site covers about 24 square miles and encompasses the
Tucson International Airport, Air Force Plant No. 44, portions of the San Xavier
Indian Reservation, and residential areas of South Tucson west of the airport. Air
Force Plant No. 44, operated by Hughes Aircraft, is the only source of
contamination identified in the HRS documentation. HRS scoring was based on
ground water contamination from unlined surface impoundments which were used
through 1977. In 1977, Hughes began using clay lined impoundments. The plant has
NPDES and Air permits, and RCRA Interim Status. Since the surface water and
air routes were not scored, the NPDES and Air permits did not affect the HRS
score. The surface impoundments used prior to 1977 were not subject to RCRA,
and were not included in the Part A application. The Part A application did apply
to a series of on-site surface impoundments. However, the application was for
synthetically lined ponds which are now being retrofitted with double liners.
During negotiations with EPA, the State, and the city; the Air Force agreed to take
the necessary actions to clean up the contamination caused by the plant. The State
has received $581,000 in CERCLA funds under a Cooperative Agreement with EPA
to complete the investigation to identify the extent and sources of the
contamination.
IX-3
-------
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE
Redding, California
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: State NPDES
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Discharge out of compliance included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
NPDES-SW-WQ: Discharge out of compliance included in waste quantity
NPDES-5W-OR: Same contaminant—confirmed other source
Iron Mountain Mine is a privately-owned site in the Klamath Mountains of Shasta
County, California. The mine area, which encompasses about 2,000 acres,
ultimately drains to Keswich Reservoir, which is a major source of drinking water
for the town of Redding. The State estimates that a daily average of 2,350 pounds
of zinc, 300 pounds of copper, and 50 pounds of cadmium are carried into Keswick
Reservoir from this site. Seepage from the side of the mountain, springs, and
drainage from mine portals all contributed to the HRS score. Drainage from the
mine is collected and sent to a treatment pond which is regulated by an NPDES
permit. There have been numerous documented violations of the NPDES permit
and this was considered in HRS scoring. The State has brought action because of
the violations, resulting in a $16.8 million default judgement against the company.
CERCLA findings for Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study were being
requested as of 3uly 1983.
-------
3.H. BAXTER CO.
Weed, California
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-GW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
J.H. Baxter Co. has operated a wood treatment facility at this site since the
1960's. Other companies previously conducted similar operations on the site for
about 20 years. Chemicals they used in wood treatment include pentachlorophenol
(PCP), arsenic compounds, and creosote. Arsenic, wood polynuclear aromatics, and
PCP were detected in the ground water below the site. Heavy metals, PCP, and
creosote have been detected in surface water downgradient of the site. The site
has RCRA Interim Status for tank and container storage of bottom sediment sludge
and waste containing arsenic. Treatment of, and a surface impoundment for,
bottom sediment sludge is also included as part of RCRA Interim Status. The
facilities covered by RCRA were active on January 26, 1983. HRS scoring is based
on waste quantities of drummed waste and various waste storage tanks.
Relationships between HRS scoring and RCRA interim status cannot be
conclusively determined from the information currently available for this site.
However, parameters similar to those used for HRS scoring appear on the RCRA
Part A application. 3.H. Baxter failed to submit a Part B application by the
required date, claiming to being exempt because they store waste for less than 90
days. EPA has requested information from 3.H. Baxter for verification. No
enforcement action has been taken at this time by EPA. The North Coast Regional
Water Quality Control Board issued the company a Cleanup and Abatement Order
in March 1983 and a Cease and Desist Order in May 1983. The company has
installed monitoring wells and has taken measures to collect and direct rainwater
run-off.
IX-5
-------
LOUISIANA-PACIFIC CORP.
Oroville, California
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
The Louisiana-Pacific Corp. Site covers 100 acres and consists of a saw mill, a
planing mill, and a hardboard plant. Pentachlorophenoi (PCP) is sprayed on the
lumber as a preservative. Soil and sawdust on the site contain high levels of PCP
and ground water under the site is contaminated with PCP. HRS scoring is based
on an observed release of PCP. No HRS waste quantities are provided, but the
attributed source of the PCP for observed release is soil and sawdust on site. This
site has filed for RCRA status as a generator, but has not applied for either RCRA
Part A or B permits. There is no apparent relationship between HRS scoring and
permitted activities. The California Department of Health Services, the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, and EPA are presently attempting to determine the
cause and extent of contamination and identify the actions necessary to clean up
the site.
IX-6
-------
OPERATING INDUSTRIES, INC., LANDFILL
Monterey Park, California
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 4) HRS includes or may include a Class 2 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-Air-WQ Regulated unit included in waste quantity
RCRA-Air-OR: Different substances
Operating Industries, Inc. operated a 190-acre landfill in the City of Monterey
Park. From 1948 to 1983, the company disposed of hazardous liquid wastes on a
32-acre portion of the site. The landfill is the source of contamination used in the
HRS scoring for both the ground water and air routes. The waste quantities used in
HRS scoring were taken from the facilities RCRA Part A application. This facility
stopped accepting wastes prior to January 26, 1983. The company has submitted a
closure plan rather than a RCRA Part B permit application. The California
Department of Health Services (CDHS) and EPA have determined that the plan is
deficient. The primary deficiencies are the failure to develop an adequate plan for
monitoring ground water and for collecting and disposing of leachate. California's
South Coast Air Quality Management District and CDHS have taken enforcement
actions against the facility for airborne vinyl chloride contamination. Vinyl
chloride is the substance scored for observed release via the air route. The landfill
was the attributed source..
IX-7
-------
10
-------
BUNKER HILL MINING & METALLURGICAL COMPLEX
Smelterville, Idaho
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Sites NPDES, Air (State SC>2 and Particulate)
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
NPDES-GW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-GW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
NPDES-SW-WQ: Permitted discharge not included in waste quantity
NPDES-SW-OR: Same contaminant—other source
The Bunker Hill Complex is a lead and zinc smelter that had been in operation for
over 50 years. The plant closed in 1981 for economic reasons and was sold in 1982.
Environmental problems at Bunker Hill are long standing, although there had been
some improvement. When operating, the company had installed treatment
facilities for wastes that were once discharged untreated. Several factors
contribute to continuing environmental concern, including: accumulations of lead
in soil and dust, hazardous wastes in an on-site storage pond, and surface water and
ground water contamination. The on-site pond was the waste quantity source used
in HRS scoring for ground water and surface water. The site had an NPDES permit
to discharge lead, cadmium, mercury and other substances to a river, and there
were additional unpermitted discharges. There was no permitted discharge from
the pond itself; the pond was a unit of the treatment system and all discharges
were supposed to go to other units of the treatment system. Lead, cadmium, and
zinc detected in the river were scored as an observed release. There were also
numerous violations for mercury in the NPDES permitted discharge. However, this
was not used in HRS scoring. Furthermore, the permit has since expired. An air
permit was issued by the State to regulate sulfur dioxide and particulates. On the
other hand, the HRS score for air evaluated lead and other heavy metals. As of
July 1983, EPA was preparing a Remedial Action Master Plan outlining the
investigations needed to determine the full extent of cleanup required at the site.
Economic considerations will determine if and when full-scale operations at the
Bunker Hill Complex resume. Environmental controls will be a factor in those
considerations.
X-l
-------
HARBOR ISLAND (LEAD)
Seattle, Washington
Routes Scored for HRS: SW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
Operation of a lead battery recycling plant has resulted in heavy accumulations of
lead in soil and dust at the site. This has caused lead runoff to surface water,
percolation into ground water, and dust in ambient air. The sources of the
observed release to air are contaminated soils and dusts. The observed release to
surface water was documented by lead-contaminated sediment near a storm drain.
Ground water was not scored because no observed release could be documented,
and the targets score was zero. Although a potentially responsible party
(Quemetco) had State water and air permits, permitted discharges were not the
sources used for HRS scoring. The State water permit included lead limitations but
the company ceased surface water discharges in 1982. It is assumed that they
currently discharge to a POTW. The City of Seattle has paved areas of the site
where lead concentrations are highest. One company that is a source of airborne
lead has taken measures to reduce their lead emissions. As of 3uly 1983, EPA
completed a draft Remedial Action Master Plan outlining the investigations needed
to determine the full extent of cleanup required at the site. The Puget Sound Air
Pollution Control Agency has enforced several penalties against Quemetco for
sulfur dioxide emissions and opacity.
X-2
-------
LAKEWOOD SITE
Lakewood, Washington
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW
Permits for this Site: None
The Lakewood Site, near McChord Air Force Base, covers about one square mile
and includes a commercial dry cleaner that has been identified as one source of
contamination. McChord is also known to have used solvents and degreasers
similar to the site contaminants. An estimated 45,000 gallons of waste solvents
have been disposed of on the Air Force base over a 30-year span. This was the
waste quantity used in HRS scoring for ground water and surface water routes.
Elevated levels of organic chemicals have been found in local ground water and
surface water. As a result, the Lakewood Water District has shut down two
contaminated wells. There are apparently no permitted activities under the name
"Lakewood Site" in EPA Region X files. However, McChord Air Force Base, a
potential responsible party, has an NPDES permit and RCRA Interim Status, but
neither are related to the HRS scoring. McChord AFB was proposed for addition to
the NPL in 1984. Any permit relationship should be addressed with respect to that
site. The State ordered the commercial dry cleaner to remove contaminated soil
from its property and to cease discharging solvents. Ground water monitoring has
been conducted by the EPA, and EPA is carrying out a full field investigation to
determine the exact source of pollution in the two contaminated wells.
X-3
-------
QUEEN CITY FARMS
Maple Valley, Washington
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, Air
Permits for this Site: None
This site covers 320 acres and includes six ponds, at least three of which had been
used for the disposal of industrial wastes from 1955 to the late 1960's. The site
also includes a gravel pit, Queen City Lake, a wooded area, an airstrip, and several
residences. There were no permits found related to the scores given to ground
water and air in the HRS evaluation. Waste materials disposed of in three of the
ponds include waste motor oils and synthetic organics. The waste quantity used for
the ground water HRS score was the volume of the three ponds used for waste
disposal. An observed release to surface water was based on samples collected
from Queen City Lake which detected chromium and cadmium. The source was the
ponds which drain to the lake. The surface water HRS score was zero, because
there were no targets (no use of Queen City Lake). The waste disposal ponds were
also the source of the observed release to air. Toluene and 50 other organic
compounds were detected downwind of one of the ponds. The upwind sample did
not contain any contaminants. In November 1980, EPA detected heavy metals and
organics in water and soil from the six ponds. In March 1981, EPA found very low
concentrations of PCBs in five drinking water wells in the vicinity of the ponds, but
not the same PCB compound detected in the ponds. In June 1983, EPA was granted
access to the site to drill test wells. Also in June, Queen City Farms submitted a
plan to EPA to investigate shallow ground water and take over the investigation
EPA had started. As of June 1984, the company began to construct deep
monitoring wells. Work was also underway to develop a remedial investigation and
a focused feasibility study to determine appropriate interim remedial measures to
remove and/or contain the wastes in the three main ponds.
-------
WESTERN PROCESSING CO., INC.
Kent, Washington
Routes Scored for HRS: GW, SW, Air
Permits for this Site: RCRA Interim Status
Site Relationship: 2) HRS may include a Class 1 source
RCRA-GW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-WQ: Regulated unit not included in waste quantity
RCRA-SW-OR: Same contaminant—other sources
The principal operations at the Western Processing Co., Inc., Site were recovery of
solvents, neutralization of acidic and basic wastes, and precipitation of heavy
metals. Other chemical and/or physical processes were used on a batch basis.
Hazardous materials were stored directly on the ground and have entered the
environment from leaks and spills. In the past, before RCRA, wastes were buried
on site. Wastes to be recycled were also stored at the site. These wastes were
used to determine the hazardous waste quantity for the ground water score and for
the observed releases to surface water and air. When the facility was operating
under RCRA Interim Status, wastes to be reclaimed were stored in drums, holding
tanks, above-ground lagoons, and waste piles; none of which had adequate
containment. Reclaimed/recycled wastes were halogenated solvents and paint
sludges containing heavy metals. The observed release to surface water was based
on the detection of halogenated solvents, metals, and phenols in a stream adjacent
to the site. The observed release to the air was scored because halogenated and
non-halogenated solvents were detected. In 1981 and 1982, EPA ordered the
company to meet the hazardous waste requirements of RCRA. The company did
not comply. In 1982, the State found the company in violation of the Clean Water
Act for discharging without an NPDES permit. In April 1983, the Court ordered
the company to stop accepting and processing hazardous substances and to remedy
the contamination of soil, surface water, and ground water. The company stated
that it was unable to undertake remedial measures due to lack of financial
resources and has in fact, not performed any Remedial Actions. EPA, using
CERCLA emergency funds, implemented measures to stabilize the site. Further
investigation was underway, as of July 1983, to assess the extent of contamination
and to determine appropriate corrective actions.
X-5
------- |