PB97-964021
EPA/541/R-97/185
February 1998
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
FCX Inc. (Washington Plant)
Washington, NC
12/18/1996
-------
RFCORD OF DECISION
PCX WASHINGTON SUPERFUND SITE
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OPERABLE UNIT 2
-------
5 9 0002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECISION SUMMARY 1-1
I. SITE NAME. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1-1
A. Introduction 1-1
B. Site Description 1-1
C. Demography and Land Use 1-6
D. Geology ..• 1-7
E. Hvdrogeology 1-8
F. Climate/Meteorology 1-9
II. SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES 2-1
A. Site History 2-1
B. Summary of Previous Investigations 2-1
C. Enforcement Activities 2-3
III. HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION 3-1
IV. SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION WITHIN SITE
STRATEGY -. 4-1
A. Soil Investigation 5-1
VI. SUMMARY OF SITE RISK 6-1
A. Contaminants of Concern 6-1
B. Exposure Assessment ............... 6 — 1
C. Toxicity Assessment 6-2
D. Risk Characterization 6-3
E. Environmental Assessment 6-4
F. Conrl \ision 6-4
VII . THE SELECTED REMEDY 7-1
A. Selected Remedy 7-1
APPENDIX I
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-------
5 9 0003
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
SITE NAME AND LOCATION
PCX WASHINGTON SITE WASHINGTON,
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OPERABLE UNIT 2
STATEMENT. OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
This decision document presents the selected remedial action for
the FCX Washington Site in Washington, Beaufort County, T'orth
Carolina, chosen in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) , as
amended by the Superfuhd Amendments and.Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA) and, to the extent practicable, the National Contingency
Plan (NCP). This decision is based on the administrative record
file for this Site.
The State of North Carolina concurs with the selected remedy.
ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from this
Site, has been addressed by implementing a time critcal removal,
and the imminent and substantial endangerment to public health,
welfare, or the environment has been abated.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY
This remedy addresses the sub-surf ace and surface soils that remain
on Site following the Time Critical Removal. The remediation of
the groundwater was addressed in September 1993 Operable Unit 1
Record of Decision.
The selected remedy: No Further Action
The five year review will include a
thorough ecological assessment.
-------
5 9 OU04
STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the
environment, complies with federal and state requirements that are
legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial
action, and is cost-effective. The soil remedy implemented during
the removal utilized permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technology to the maximum extent practicable, and satisfies the
statutory preference for remedies that employ treatment that
reduces toxicity, mobility , or volume as a principal element.
Since this remedy may result in hazardous substances remaining
onsite above health based levels, a review will be conducted within
five years after commencement of remedial action to ensure that the
remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human health and
the environment.
Richard D. Green Date
Acting Division Director
Waste Management Division
11
-------
.9 0005
DECISION SUMMARY
I. SITE NAME. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Introduction
The FCX Washington Site (hereinafter referred to as the "FCX
Site" or the "site") is defined as an area located on the western
edge of Washington, North Carolina, in which soil, sediment,
surface water, and groundwater were contaminated by multiple
sources. Previous investigations have indicated that the former
Farmers Cooperative Exchange (FCX) Inc. facility, comprised of
seven tracts of land, was one of the major sources of concern.
This facility acted as a farm supply distribution center which
repackaged and sold pesticides, herbicides, and tobacco treating
chemicals from 1945 to 1985. Five source areas of contamination
related to these pesticide handling and disposal practices have
since been identified in this area.
B. Site Description
The FCX Site is located approximately 1.5 miles northwest of and
within the city limits of Washington, North Carolina, in west
central Beaufort County (see Figure 1-1) . The Site covers
approximately 12 acres and is bounded on the northeast by the
intersection of Grimes Road (SR 1402) and Whispering Pine Road
(SR 1404), Mount Pleasant Canal to the east, wetlands leading to
Kennedy Creek and Tar River to the south and southwest, and
agricultural land to the west-northwest (see Figure 1-2). A site
features map showing the approximate locations and limits of the
warehouse, main chemical burial trench, blending building, and
known features is provided in Figure 1-3.
Source area 1 is located between Grimes Road and the farmland,
approximately 230 yards north-northwest of the former FCX
warehouse, and is comprised primarily of several small to medium
office/storage buildings and silos/tanks associated with the W.B.
Gerard & Sons Inc. fertilizer and hardware company located at 425
Grimes Road. This source area is located on relatively flat
terrain which has a gradual slope to the south and southwest. In
addition, a man-made drainage ditch, located parallel and south
of Grimes Road borders this source area to the northeast. This
1-1
-------
5 9 0006
TCX WASHINGTON
SITE
NORTH
CAROLINA
BEAUFORT COUNTY
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
SITE LOCATION MAP
PCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA
1-2
FIGURE NO.
1-1
-------
5 9 OUC7
250
0 250
SCALE IN
LEGEND
- -• — SURFACE WAFER CHANNEL
*-Uu WETLANDS
•REEUNE
r'ENCE
WASTCKATER _
A TREATMENT «
PIAMT
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
AREA FEATURES MAP
PCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROUNA
1-3
FIGURE NO.
1-2
-------
5 9 0008
CHARLIE TOM-S
RESTAURANT &
OYSTER BAR
(Former Blending
Building)
2CO
LEGEND
SCALE ;N FEE
w.8. GERARD
4 SONS. INC.
(Former FCX
Storage Building)
—X— FENCE
" -x TREEUNE
SURFACE WATER
SOURCE ARCA
BOUNDARY
(D SCURCE AREA
LATHAN
RESIDENCE
(Former FCX
Office)
AP3ROXIMATE AREA
OF THE MAIN CHEMICAL
3UR1AL TRENCH
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
SITE FEATURES MAP
FCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA
FIGURE NO
1-3
-------
5 9 000
man-made drainage ditch also borders both source areas 2 and 3 to
the northeast. Surface water in this ditch flows in a
southeasterly direction prior to its confluence with the Mt.
Pleasant Canal northwest of the Cleon Lathan residence (source
area 3).
Former PCX operations and/or subsequent disposal activities
within source area 1 could not be confirmed prior to or during
the Remedial Investigation (RI). However, the deed search
conducted as part of a PRP search indicates that source area 1
once belonged to FCX (Techlaw, 1988). Current operations at this
source area by W. B. Gerard & Sons Inc. includes the distribution
of agro-chemicals.
Source area 2 is located between Grimes Road and the farmland
located 115 yards north-northwest of the former FCX warehouse.
The significant site features of source area 2 include a large
warehouse building and a gravel parking lot associated with the
Cl.arlie Tom's Restaurant & Oyster Bar (the former FCX olendinc,
building). A surface water drainage ditch originates in the
southwest corner of source area 2, and water in this ditch flows
in a southeasterly direction parallel to the southwest property
line and the abandoned Seaboard Coastline Railroad Spur. This
drainage ditch discharges into Mt. Pleasant Canal near the Cleon
Lathan residence.
Source area 3 is located between Grimes Road and the farmland
located west of the former FCX warehouse and 50 yards north-
northeast of this warehouse. Mount Pleasant Canal forms the
eastern border of source area 3. The significant site features
of this source area include a large warehouse building located in
the northern portion of the source area, and the Cleon Lathan
residence located in the southern portion of the source area,
adjacent to the Mt. Pleasant Canal. At the time of the RI field
investigation, residents occupied the large warehouse. Several
small depressions/drainage ditches are also located in the center
of source area '3 which divert surface water runoff northeast
towards the drainage ditch parallel to Grimes Road. Source area
3 also contains a former loading dock (concrete ramp), several
concrete grain silo support pads located south of and adjacent to
the large warehouse building, and a secondary access road
parallel to the abandoned Seaboard Coastline Railroad Spur. The
access road connects the southwest corner of source area 2
(Charlie Tom's parking lot) with the paved entrance road to the
Cecil Campbell Trucking Company (old FCX warehouse).
Source area 4 is located between source area 3 and source area 5.
It consists of the Cecil Campbell Trucking Company warehouse (the
old FCX warehouse), a paved entrance and parking lot located
south of the warehouse, existing grain storage silos, a former
grain storage silo, concrete support pads on the southwest corner
of the warehouse, and secondary access roads that surround the
1-5
-------
5 9 0010
warehouse to the nortn, west, ^nd south. The Mt. Pleasant Canal
borders source area 4 to the southeast. Water in a small surface
drainage ditch originating at ^he former silo concrete support
pad flows in a southeasterly Oj.rection between source areas 4 and
5, and discharges into Mt. Pleas-r.t Canal near the waste
stockpile (source area 5). In the southern part of source area 4
is a monitor well (WMW-1) which is located adjacent to the
warehouse. This well was installed by Westinghouse.
Source area 5 is located south-southeast of source area 4, and
north-northwest of a small agricultural field and the wetlands.
The Mount Pleasant Canal borders source area 5 to the southeast.
Located in this area are the excavated and backfilled main
chemical burial trench, and the fenced contaminated pesticide
waste stockpile. A small concrete block retaining wall and
gravel pad where above ground storage tanks once existed, are
located on the southwest corner of the fenced stockpile area. In
the southeast part of source area 5 are three monitor wells (WMW-
2, WMW-3, and WMW-4) which are located along the border between
source area 5 and the small agricultural field. These wells were
installed by Westinghouse.
C. Demography and Land Use
The city of Washington with an estimated population of 9,075 is
located within a four-mile radius of the Site. Additionally,
there are four minor population centers located within a four
mile radius of the Site. These population centers include
Washington Park centered three miles southeast_ of the Site,
Chocowinity centered four miles south-southwest of the Site,
Hootentown centered 3.5 miles east-southeast of the Site, and
Wharton Station centered 3.9 miles northwest of the Site.
Washington Park has an estimated population of 403 and
Chocowinity has an estimated population of 624, based on 1990
census results. Demographic information was not available for
Hootentown and Wharton Station which are unincorporated.
Current land use around the Site is primarily light industrial,
commercial, residential, and agricultural. Agricultural fields
surround the Site to the north, west, southeast, and southwest.
A 275-acre freshwater wetlands is located further to the south
and southwest of the Site. The former abandoned city dump is
located within these wetlands. Industries in the area include
distribution centers for trucking, agro-chemical, propane, and
manufacturing companies related to the textile industry.
Commercial operations include a restaurant, "grocery store, retail
lumber and hardware store, day care nursery, barber shop,
automobile parts store, insurance sales office, and a D.O.T.
office located on Grimes Road north of the Site.
Residential neighborhoods are interspersed within the light
industrial/commercial areas which line the main roads within a
three-mile radius of the Site. Approximately 11,350 residents
1-6
-------
59 00i1
are estimated to live within a three-mile radius of.the Site. Ar
previously mentioned, two structures including the large
warehouse building and the Cleon Lathan residence located in
source area 3 are inhabited.
Recreational areas near the PCX Site include a public swimming
pool located on Grimes Road and a little league baseball field
located east of the National Spinning Company. Tranters Creek,
Kennedy Creek, Tar River, and Pamlico River are used occasionally
for fishing and swimming purposes. Kennedy Creek, Tar River, and
Pamlico River are classified for secondary recreation, indicating
waters of lower quality (WPB, 1990).
The population in the vicinity of the Site obtains its potable
water supply from either public water supply wells or from
private wells. Industrial production wells are also located in
the vicinity of the Site.
D. GEOLOGY
Three distinct lithostratigraphic units were penetrated during
the subsurface investigation. They include the surficial
undifferentiated sediments, the Yorktown Formation, and the upper
portion of the Castle Hayne Limestone.
Directly beneath the Site lies the surficial undifferentiated
sediments which are comprised of unconsolidated sand, silt, and
clayey sand of Quaternary age. For the most part, the dominant
lithology of the surficial unit is a fine to coarse grained
quartz sand. Locally, within stream basins, these deposits have
been chemically and mechanically eroded into alluvium. These
alluvial deposits mantle deeper marine and non-marine sediments
along surface waters. The thickness of surficial sediments
underlying the Site ranges from 9 feet at MW-03 to 17 feet at MW-
06, and averages 12.3 feet. In addition to naturally occurring
deposits, there are localized zones where clean soil material was
used to fill low lying or excavated areas at the Site.
Below the surficial deposits are the sediments of the Yorktown
Formation. Based on existing well log data, surficial sediments
gradually interfinger with sediments of the Yorktown Formation.
The contact between these two units was determined from
lithological variations observed in split spoon soil samples and
is delineated by a near surface clay unit. This clay marks the
top of the Yorktown Formation and was encountered at depths
ranging from 9 to 17 feet bis. The Yorktown Formation underlying
the Site consists of: an upper sandy, shelley, clay; an
intermediate shelley, sand; and a lower sandy clay. The
thickness of the upper sandy, shelley, clay varies from 6 feet at
MW-06 to 12 feet at MW-02. The intermediate shell and sand unit
varies in thickness from 16 feet at MW-02 to 28 feet at MW-01.
The deeper sandy clay unit varies in thickness from 14 feet at
• 1-7
-------
5 9 0012
MW-14 to 23 feet at MW-08. Overall, the Yorktown Formation
varies from 4-0 feet at MW-01 to 42 feet at MW-08.
E. Hydroaeology
The FCX Site is underlain by seven aquifers. They include a
surficial (water table) aquifer and six deeper semi-confined to
confined aquifers. A more formal designation of these aquifer
systems in order of increasing depth is as follows:
• Surficial/water table aquifer
• Yorktown aquifer
• Castle Hayne aquifer
• Beaufort aquifer
• Peedee aquifer
• Black Creek aquifer
• Cape Fear aquifer
The water table or surficial aquifer is comprised of
undifferentiated surficial sands of recent age. The thickness of
the water table aquifer ranges from 2.0 feet at MW-03 to 8.0 feet
at MW-06, and averages 4.6 feet. Underlying the water table
aquifer is the Yorktown aquifer. The Yorktown aquifer is semi-
confined and is separated from the water table aquifer by the
upper clayey sediments of the Yorktown Formation. This clay is
formally designated as the upper Yorktown semi-confining unit and
is continuous throughout the Site area. The thickness of the
upper Yorktown semi-confining unit ranges from 6 to 12 feet, and
averages 9 feet. Below this upper semi-confining unit are the
permeable sediments that comprise the Yorktown aquifer. These
sediments consist primarily of shells and sand. The saturated
thickness of the Yorktown aquifer ranges from 16 to 27 feet, and
averages 23 feet. The base of the Yorktown aquifer is formed by
the clays of the Yorktown Formation and of the Castle Hayne
Limestone. Formally this clay unit is designated as the Castle
Hayne confining unit (Winner and Coble, 1989). Only the upper
portion of the Castle Hayne confining unit was penetrated during
the RI subsurface investigation, and therefore its exact
thickness below the FCX Site is not known. Based on Site
lithologic data, it is known that the Castle Hayne confining unit
is at least 38 feet thick. The Yorktown aquifer is the deepest
aquifer that was penetrated during, the subsurface investigation.
The deeper aquifer systems underlying the Yorktown aquifer are
important from a hydrogeological perspective. However, they are
unaffected by the Site. As a result, these systems are not
discussed in this document. Additional information on these
systems is available in the Remedial Investigation report.
1-8
-------
5 9 OU13
F. Climate/Meteorology : •
The climate, is moderate with warm and humid summers, and calm
winters. Summers are long and quite warm, with afternoon
temperatures averaging 90 °F. approximately 33% of the midsummer
days, and with sea breezes generally occurring around noon to
alleviate the inland heat. During winter, numerous polar air
masses reach the middle Atlantic Coast causing sharp drops in
temperatures. The temperature, however, rarely falls below
freezing. The average annual temperature for the period 1945-
1982 is 63 °F (NOCD, 1986).
Rainfall is generally evenly distributed throughout the year with
the driest weather usually occurring in the spring and the
wettest weather occurring in the summer. Summer rainfall comes
principally from thunderstorms which occur one out of every three
to four days during the summer. Winter rain is generally a slow,
steady rain or drizzle only lasting one or two days. Seldom is
there a winter without a few flakes of snow. However, several
years may pass without a measurable amount.
1-9
-------
5 9 OU14
II. SITE HIS1JRY AND gNFQ^BMENT ACTIVITIES
A. Site History
The PCX facility operated a farm supply distribution center which
repackaged and sold pesticides, herbicides, and tobacco treating
chemicals from 1945 to 1985. From 1960 to 1981, an unknown
amount of chemical waste in plastic containers and paper bags,
generated by PCX, was.buried in an on-site landfill located in
source area 5, southwest of the former PCX warehouse (NCDHR,
1987).
Since mid-1986 to date, several site investigations have been
performed at the PCX Site. Sampling studies have been conducted
by local, state, and federal agencies, as well as private
consultants to PCX Inc. and Fred Webb, Inc. These previous site
investigations, however, have been primarily limited to source
areas 2 and 5 of the former PCX facility (see Figure 1-3) . In
September 1990, EPA initiated this Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS) to address all potential source areas
and associated contamination at the PCX Site.
B. SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
In July of 1986, a preliminary assessment of the PCX Site was
prepared by the North Carolina Department of Human Resources
(NCDHR). This preliminary assessment indicated that pesticides,
in the form of toxic powder and liquid wastes, were buried on-
site, and a potential for groundwater, soil, and drinking water
contamination existed. The report recommended that a site
investigation be performed.
The PCX Site was inspected by the NCDHR, Solid and Hazardous
Waste Management Branch, on August 26, 1986. Chemical analyses
revealed the presence of aldrin, dieldrin, chlordane, DDT, DDE,
DDD, hexachlorobenzene, carbon disulfide, naphthalene,
phenanthrene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, dibenzofuran, 2-
methylnaphthalene, and mercury at measurable concentrations. No
volatile organic, semi-volatile organic, pesticide, or metal
contamination was revealed in any of the five groundwater samples
collected. Ambient air monitoring during the Site inspection
using an HNU did not detect volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
above background levels.
In May of 1987, PCX Inc. employed the resources of Rose and
Purcell, Inc., and GSX, Inc., to study the on-site contamination
and clear the chemical warehouse located in source area 4.
Chemical analysis of one soil sample collected by GSX in the
vicinity of the main chemical burial trench revealed the presence
of toxaphene at a concentration of 2400 milligrams/kilogram
2-1
-------
59 0015
(mg/kg) and copper at a concentration of 480 mg/kg, -among other
contaminants (McLaughlin, 1987).
August of 1988, EPA Region IV's technical assistance team (TAT)
conducted a site reconnaissance sampling investigation. An
electromagnetic survey (EM-31) and a magnetic survey were used to
identify the boundaries of the chemical burial trenches located
in source area 5 (TAT, 1989). Soil samples collected near the
main chemical burial trench during the 1988 sampling
investigation revealed the presence of elevated concentrations of
DDD, DDE, DDT, Alpha-Chlordane, Gamma -Chlordane, Dieldrin,
Phenol, Heptachlor Methoxychlor.
In January of 1989, a removal action at the Site was initiated in
which approximately 3000 cubic yards (cy) of contaminated soil
was excavated from the main chemical burial trench located in
source area 5. The soil was stockpiled wi'\in a secured area in
the southern corner of this source area (TAT, 1989).
Additionally, in 1990, TAT collected soil samples from the area
surrounding the former PCX blending building (Charlie Toms
Restaurant & Oyster Bar) located in source area 2 (see Figure 5-
1) . Subsequently in late January, an additional 49 cy of
.contaminated soil was excavated from the area surrounding the
former FCX blending building. This removed waste was
consolidated with the previously removed waste located in source
area 5 (TAT, 1991).
In association with the 1990 TAT sampling investigation and
subsequent removal action activities at the Site, additional soil
sampling in source area 2 revealed the presence of pesticides,
volatile organics, and semi-volatile orgahics at elevated
concentrations (TAT, 1991).
In July of 1990, in response to a report -that the permalon liner
covering the contaminated soil stockpile was torn, EPA
constructed a temporary containment berm around the waste
stockpile to prevent potential contamination runoff, and repaired
the torn liner (TAT, 1991). During this operation, additional
buried material located two feet below ground surface (with a
total pesticides concentration of 103 mg/kg) was identified at
the northern corner of the stockpile (TAT, 1991).
In August of 1990, a groundwater sampling investigation in the
vicinity of the former warehouse and chemical burial trench was
performed by Westinghouse Environmental and Geotechnical
Services, Inc. for Fred Webb Grain, Inc. Four 2-inch stainless
steel wells were installed in source areas 4 and 5. Analyses of
groundwater samples collected from the Westinghouse wells
revealed elevated levels of endrin, 4,4 DDD.
2-2
-------
5 9 0016
In December 1990 approximately 1,500 cubic yards of contaminated
soils were removed fror. the stockpile and transported to a
permitted landfill in Alabama. Approximately 700 cubic yards
were left in the stockpile on-site. Or.-site survey work was
conducted in October 1^91 to better define two additional
trenches which were previously identified. Samples were
collected of the additional burial areas in mid-November 1991.
January 21, 1992, .an EPA removal action was taken to excavate
approximately 2000 cubic yards of contaminated materials and
soils which were placed in the stockpile. In September 1992 a
removal of the remainder of the contaminated soils was conducted.
During the September 1992 removal approximately 3,000 cubic yards
of contaminated soil was bagged and placed in the FCX warehouse.
The remaining 11,600 cubic yards of contaminated soils would
remain in 'the stockpile located in source area 5.
The actual treatment of approximately 15,000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil was completed in May 1996.
C. Enforcement Activities
The FCX Site was listed on the National Priority List in March of
1989.
In October and November of 1988, the EPA and the State of North
Carolina joined in legal action to secure the remaining assets of
the bankrupt FCX Corporation prior to their disbursement to the
investors. The proceedings occurred within the Federal
Bankruptcy Court in Raleigh, North Carolina. In July 14, 1992 a
Trust Agreement was entered, which provided that FCX could not
abandon the property at the FCX-Washington Site and that a
portion of the remaining assets were to be divided between the
FCX-Washington Site and the FCX Statesville Site. The actual
allocation for the FCX Washington Site was $1,750,000.00.
In March 30, 1992 the Agency entered into a consent decree with
Fred Webb Inc. The settlement was for $540,000.00, to be paid
over a five year period.
2-3
-------
5 9 OU17
III. HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Pursuant to CEI CLA §113(K) (2) (E) (I-v) and §117, the RI/FS Report
and the ProposcJ Plan for the FCX Washington Site were released
to the public lor comment on April 20, 1993. These documents were
made available to the public in the administrative record located
in the information repository maintained at the EPA Docket Room
in Region IV and at the Brown Library in Washington, North
Carolina.
The notice of availability for these documents was published in
the Washington Daily News on August 22, 1996. A public comment
period on the documents was held from August 22, 1996 to
September 20, 1996. A copy of the notice was mailed to the
public. In addition, a public meeting was held on August 29,
1996. At this meeting, representatives from EPA answered
questions about problems at the Site and the remedial
alternatives under consideration.
Other community relations activities included;
* Community Relations Plan finalized on February 6, 1991
and a copy was placed in the information repository.
* Issuance of a Fact Sheet on the RI/FS process in
September 1991.
* Public meeting on October 3, 1991, to discuss the
superfund process. The meeting was announced by a
display ad that appeared in the newspapers on September
26, 1991.
* Public notice was mailed to citizens informing them
that EPA was beginning the second phase of removal
activities at the Site.
* Issuance of a Fact Sheet updating the RI/FS activities
in December 1992.
* Issuance of a Fact Sheet on the Proposed Plan in April
1993.
* Proposed Plan Public Meeting for the ground water
remediation held on May 4, 1993. The meeting was
announced by display ad on April 20, 1993.
* Notice mailed to citizens and appeared in area
newspaper on May 17 1993 announcing 30-day extension of
public comment period which was extended until midnight
June 18, 1993.
3-1
-------
5 9 0018
An announcement for the August 29, 1996 proposed plan
public meeting was placed in the Washington Daily News
on August 22, 1996.
The public meeting was held on August 29, 19.96 at the
City Council Chambers, Washington, North Carolina.
3-2
-------
59 0019
IV. SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION WITHIN SITE STRATEGY
The PCX Washington Site has been divided into units or phases,
referred to as "operable units". The operable units (OUs) st
this Site are:
OU One: Contaminated ground water.
OU Two: Residual Soil Contamination.
This approach was taken because the soil and source contamination
was addressed via a time-critical removal action. This removal
action.addressed all soil/source contamination to the point no
further remediation is required.
4-1
-------
GU20
V. SPdMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The Remedial Investigation (RI) at the PCX Washington Site
included the characterization of the following routes of
contaminant migration: soil, groundwater, surface water and
sediment contamination.
A. Soil Investigation
The Remedial Investigation included a thorough soil investigation
that encompassed the sampling of soils within each of the source
areas identified at the Site. The results of the investigation
were used to facilitate the four stage removal action being
conducted at the Site.
The actual' removal of contaminated soil was conducted in three
stages.
In January of 1989 2,200 cubic yards of pesticide
contaminated soil and debris were excavated and stockpiled
on Site.
In January of 1992 EPA excavated an additional 2,000 cubic
yards of contaminated soil and added it to the existing
stockpile.
The third stage of the removal action began in September of
1992, during which 3,110 cubic yards of the existing
stockpile was bagged and placed in the on-site warehouse for
storage, and an additional 11,600 cubic yards of
contaminated soil was excavated and stockpiled on-site.
The fourth stage consisted of treatment of the contaminated
soils stored on Site via thermal desorption.
The removal action was implemented to the extent no restrictions
are placed on the future use of the Site. Locations of the final
removal are depicted in Figures 5-1, 2, 3 and 4. The risk
characterization of the soils remaining on site is addressed in
Section VI of this document.
5-1
-------
5 9 OU21
•
I
-N-
60
SCALE IN FEET
120
fCX-C-OOS 0>
rcx-c-wj A
FCX-C-04JKI A
FCX-C-04JR2 A
Fcx-v-045 •
Fcx-c-004 9
FCX-C-044 A
Fcx-c-044ft A
Fcx-c-044
-------
5 9 0022
A rcx-c-003
FCX-C-008 «
FCX-C-021 O
FCX-C-034 A
FCX-V-026 •
• FCX-V-005
\
-N-
75
SCALE IN FEET
« FCx-C-002
« FCX-C-022
« FCX-C-023
A FCX-C-024
A FCX-C-029
A FCX-C-030
* FCX-C-031
• FCX-V-028
FCX-C-007
« FCX-C-012
A FCX-C-015
FCX-C-018
FCX-C-040
« FCX-C-041
A FCX-C-045
'Soa Stockpile)
SepUc Tank
Septic Tank Liquid)
.Septic Tank Sludge)
Septic Tank Pit)
Red Granular Uoterid)
Pil Water)
150
IFCX-V-004
LEGEND
WASHMCTON art UUITS
— — — SOURCE AREA BOUNOMW
EXCAVATED AREA
CROUNONATER EMCOUHTtREO
FCX-C-001A
IFCX-V-OOI
n SAinc LOCATION
RA OMMCTDBZATION SAUPU
RA COTKIMTION SUflT
RA VERT1CATDN SAtf\£
SOURCE: EPA
TDD f04-92lO-OOJ8-442S
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
SOURCE AREA 3 EXCAVATION / SAMPLE LOCATIONS
COM repout PROGRAMS CORPORATION
PCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLJNA
RQURENO.
5-2
-------
5 9 OU23
160
• ftt-C-013
fot-c-025
FOC-C-OX
UCATDN
S*MPU
RA oormuvw SWPIE
M VEWTOJ10W MMPl£
COM FB)EnM. ARCS IV
SOURCE AREA 4 EXCAVATION / SAMPLE LOCATIONS
con rmcBAL MDCIUIB
PCX WASHINGTON SFTE
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
RQUREMO.
5-3
-------
5 9 0024
i
-N-
Fcx-v-030
FCX-V-OUB
65
SCALE IN FEET
130
LEGEND
WASHNCTON OTY UUTTS
SOURCE AREA BOUNDARY
.. SURFACE WATER
'•VV-N TREELME
EXCAVATED AREA
GROUNOWATER ENCOUNTERED
Rl SAHPtI LOCATKM
CONnRMATON SAMPLE
VERIf CATON SAUPLE
SOURCE: EPA
TOOl 04-9210-0038-4425
COM FEDERAL ARCS IV
SOURCE AREA 5 EXCAVATION /SAMPLE LOCATIONS
COM ra>DUL PROGRAMS CORPORATIOM
e
FOX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA
FIGURE NO.
5-4
-------
5 9 0025
VI. SUMMARY OP SITE RISKS
The PCX Washington Site is releasing contaminants into the
environment. The Baseline Risk Assessment(BRA)Report presents
the results of a comprehensive risk assessment that addresses the
potential threats to public health and the environment posed by
the Site under current and future conditions, assuming that no
remedial actions take place, and that no restrictions are placed
on future use of the Site. This document addresses risks
attributable to soil, sediment, and air only; risks associated
with groundwater exposure routes were reported previously.
The Baseline Risk Assessment Report consists of the following
sections: identification of chemicals of potential concern;
toxicity assessment; human exposure assessment, risk
characterization; and environir:ntal assessment. All sections are
summarized below.
A. Chemicals of Potential Concern
Data collected during the RI was reviewed and evaluated to
determine the chemicals of potential concern at the Site which
are most likely to pose risks to the public health. These
contaminants were chosen for each environmental media sampled.
Once these chemicals of concern were identified, exposure
concentrations in each media were estimated. Exposure point
concentrations were calculated using the lesser of the 95 percent
upper confidence limit concentration or the maximum detected
value as the reasonable maximum exposure (RME) point
concentration. Exposure point concentrations for the chemicals
of potential concern are shown in Appendix C of the Remedial
Investigation Report.
B. Exposure Assessment
The exposure assessment evaluates and identifies complete
pathways of exposure to human population on or near the Site.
Current and future exposure scenarios include ingestion of and
dermal contact with the on-site soils/sediments and inhalation of
fugitive dust. This Site is unique in the fact that there are
varying uses through out the Site. For that reason the risk is
characterized by individual source area. Further detail and
mathematical calculations can be reviewed in the Baseline Risk
Assessment. Table €-2 provides the exposure assumptions that
were used in the BRA.
6-1
-------
9 0026
TABLE 6-2
EXPOSURE ASSUMPTIONS
Body Weight (kg)
Exposure Frequency
(days/year)
Exposure Duration
(years)
Ingestion Rate
(Soil) (ing/day)
Exposed skin Area
(cm')
Inhalation Rate
(mVday)
Child
Resident
16
350
6
200
5000
15
Adult
Resident
70
350
24
100
5170
20
Adult
Worker
70
250
25
50
1980
20
C. Toxicitv Assessment
Under current EPA guidelines, the likelihood of adverse effects
occurring in humans from carcinogens and noncaxcinogens are
considered separately. These are discussed below. Tables 6-3
and 6-4 summarize the carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic toxicity
criteria for the chemicals of potential concern.
Cancer slope factors (CSFs) have been developed by EPA for
estimating excess lifetime cancer risk associated with exposure
to potentially carcinogenic chemicals. CSFs, which are
expressed in units of (mg/Kg-day)-1, are multiplied by the
estimated intake dose of a potential carcinogen, in ing/kg-day, to
provide an upperbound estimate of the excess lifetime cancer risk
associated with exposure at that intake level. The term
"upperbound" reflects the conservative estimate of the risks
calculated from the slope factor. Use of this approach makes
underestimation of the actual cancer risk highly unlikely.
Cancer potency factors are derived from the results of human
epidemiological studies or chronic animal bioassays to which
animal-to-human extrapolation and uncertainty factors have been
applied.
Reference Doses (RfDs) have been developed by EPA for indication
of the potential for adverse health effects from exposure to
chemicals exhibiting noncarcinogenic effects. RfDs, which are
6-2
-------
S 9 OU27
Table ..~ •,
Cancer Slope Factors, Tumor Sites ana EPA Cancer Classifications tor
Chemicals of Potential Concern
FCX Washington Site
Washington. North Carolina
Chemical of
Potential Concern
1.2-Dichtoroethane
,2-Dichloropropane
,2.4-Trichkxobenzene
2-Methytnaphthalene
2-Methylphenol
2.3.7.8-TCDD TECl
2.4,5-Triclorophenol
3,3-Oichlorobenzidene
4.4--DDD (p.p'-DDD)
4.4--DDE (p.p'-DDE)
4.4'-DDT (p.p'-DDT)
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Alpha-chtordane
Aluminum
Anthracene
Antimony
Arsenic
larium
lenzene
lenzo(a)anthracene
Senzo(b &/or k)fluoranthene
Jenzo(g,h,i)perylene
3enzo(a)pyrene
Jeryilium
Beta-BHC
Sis(2-«thylhexyt)phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
^admium
Carbazote
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Chromium VI
Chrysene
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Oelta-BHC
Oibenzo(a.h)anthracene
Dibenzofuran
Cancer oiupe factor
CSFo
9.10E-02 i
6.80E-02 h
NA
NA
NA
1.56E+05 h
NA
4.50E-01 i
2.4E-01 i
3.4E-01 i
3.4E-01 i
NA
NA
1.7E+01 i
6.30E+00 i
ABSeff
80%
80%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
1.3E+00 i 50%
NA
NA
NA
1.50E+00 i
NA
2.90E-02 i
7.30E-01 e
7.30E-01 i
NA
7.30E+00 i
4.30E+00 i
1.80E+00 i
1.40E-02 i
NA
NA
2.0E-02 h
NA
6.10E-03 i
NA
7.30E-03 e
NA
NA
NA
1.30E+00
7.30E+00 e
NA
20%
50%
20%
20%
20%
80%
50%
50%
50%
50%
20%
50%
50%
50%
20%
50%
80%
80%
20%
50%
20%
20%
20%
50%
50%
50%
CSFd
1.1E-01
8.5E-02
NA
NA
NA
3.1E+05
NA
9.0E-01
4.8E-01
6.8E-01
6.8E-01
NA
NA
3.4E+01
1.3E+01
2.6E+00
NA
NA
NA
7.5E*00
NA
3.6E-02
1.5E*00
1.5E+00
NA
1.5E*01
2.2E*01
3.6E+00
2.8E-02
NA
NA
4.0E-02
NA
7.6E-03
4.2E+01
1.5E-02
NA
NA
NA
2.6E+00
1.5E+01
NA
CSFi
9.1E-02
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.16E*05
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.7E+01
6.3E+00
1.29E+00
NA
NA
NA
1.51E+01
NA
2.9E-02
6.1E-01
6.1E-01
NA
6.1E+00
8.4E»00
1.8E+00
NA
NA
6.3E+00
NA
NA
8.1E-02
NA
6.1E-03
NA
AIA
NA
NA
6.1E*00
NA
Tumor Sites
Several sites
NA
NA
NA
NA
Liver
NA
NA
.ung, liver, thyroid
Liver, thyroid
Liver
NA
NA
Several tumor sites
Jver
Liver
NA
NA
NA
Skin
NA
.eukemia
-orestomach
-orestomach
NA
"orestomach
All sites
Liver
Liver
Leukemia in rats
Lung
Liver
NA
Liver
NA
Forestomach
NA
NA
NA
Liver
Forestomach
NA
EPA
Class
B2
0
0
0
0
B2
D
0
B2
82
B2
0
D
B2
B2
B2
0
0
D
A
D
A
B2
62
D
B2
B2
B2
B2
C
B2
B2
0
62
D
62
0
D
0
B2
B2
D
Sources:
i- IRIS
h- HEAST
e-ECAO
w - Withdrawn from IRIS or HEAST
a • HEAST Alternate
EPA Cancer Classes:
A - Human carcinogen
B - Probable human carcinogen
C - Possible human carcinogen
D - Not classifiable as a human carcinogen
CSFo - Cancer Slope Factor (oral). (mg/kg/day)-1
CSFd • Cancer Slope Factor (dermal). (mg/kg/day)-1
ABSeff • Absorption efficiency: 20% inorganics. 50% semnriolatiles. 80% volatiles
NA • Not applicable (no data)
Toxicity value surrogates:
pyrene used for acenaphthytene. benzo(g.h.i)perylene. and phenanlhrene
naphthalene used for 2-methfynaphthalene
gamma BHC used for delta BHC
benro(b)nuoranlhene used for benzo(k)fiuoranthene
endosulfan used for endosulfan I and endosulfan sulfale
endrin used for endrm ketone. endrin aldehyde
-------
5 9 0028
Table 6-3 -
Cancer Slope Factors, Tumor Sites and EPA Cancer Classifications (or
Chemicals of Potential Concern
PCX Washington Site
Washington. North Carolina
Chemical of
Potential Concern
Jieldrin
)i-n-butytphthalate
>i-n-octytphthalate
•ndosutfan 1 (alpha)
Lndosulfan sulfate
•ndrin
: ndrin aldehyde
•ndrin ketone
Lthytbenzene
:luoranthene
Huorene
Gamma-BHC (Lindane)
Gamma-Chlordane
Heptachlor
Heptachtor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
ndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
riethoxychlor
Naphthalene
Nickel
'entachlorophenol
3henanthrene
Pyrene
Selenium
Silver
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Total xytenes
Toxaphene
Trichloroethene
Vanadium
Zinc
Cancer Slope Factor
CSFo
1.60E+01 i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.30E+00 h
1.3E+00 i
4.5E+00 i
9.10E*00 i
1 .60E+00 i
7.80E-02 i
7.30E-01 e
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1 .2E-01 i
NA
NA
NA
NA
5.20E-02 e
NA
NA
1.10E+00 i
1.10E-02 w
NA
NA
ABSeff
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
60%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
80%
80%
50%
20%
20%
20%
20%
50%
50%
20%
50%
50%
50%
20%
20%
80%
80%
80%
50%
80%
20%
20%
CSFd
3.2E»01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.6E+00
2.6E»00
9.0E+00
1.8E+01
2.0E+00
9.BE-02
1.5E«00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.4E-01
NA
NA
NA
NA
6.5E-02
NA
NA
2.2E*00
1.4E-02
NA
NA
CSFi
1.6E*01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.29E+00
4.55E+00
9.10E*00
1 .6E»00
7.7E-02
6.1E-01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.0E-03
NA
NA
1.1E»00
6.0E-03
NA
NA
Tumor Sites
Liver
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Liver
jver
.iver
Jver
.iver. thyroid, kidney
.iver
Forestomach
NA
Kidney
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Several sites
NA
NA
NA
NA
Liver
NA
NA
Liver, thyroid
Liver
NA
NA
EPA
Class
B2
D
D
0
D
D
D
D
0
0
0
B2
B2
B2
B2
B2
62
B2
D
B2
0
0
D
D
D
B2
0
D
D
D
NA
0
0
62
NA
D
0
Sources:
i- IRIS
h- HEAST
e-ECAO
w - Withdrawn from IRIS or HEAST
• • HEAST Alternate
EPA Cancer Classes:
A - Human carcinogen
B - Probable human carcinogen
C - Possible human carcinogen
D - Not classifiable as a human carcinogen
CSFo - Cancer Slope Factor (oral). (mg/kg/day)-l
CSFd - Cancer Slope Factor (dermal). (mg/kg/day)-1
ABSeff - Absorption efficiency: 20% inorganics. 50% semivntatiles. 80% volatiles
NA - Not applicable (no data)
Toxicity value surrogates:
pyrene used for acenaphthytene. benzo(g.h.i)perytene. and phenanthrene
naphthalene used for 2-metWynaphthalene
gamma BHC used for delta BHC
benzo(b)fluoranthene used for benzo(k)fluoranthene
endosulfan used for endosulfan I and endosulfan sulfate
endrin used for endrin ketone, endrin aldehyde
-------
5 9 0029
Table 6-4
Reference Doses arid Target Sites for
Chemicals of Potential Concern
PCX Washington Site
Washington, North Carolina
Chemical of
Potential Concern
)ieldrin
)i-n-butylphthalate
)ki-octylphthalate
indosulfan 1 (alpha)
•ndosutfan sulfate
Endrin
•ndrin aldehyde
Endrin ketone
Ethytbenzene
Huoranthene
Fluorene
Gamma-BHC (Lindane)
Gamma-Chlordane
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
lndeno( 1 ,2.3-cd)pyrene
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Methoxychlor
Naphthalene
Nickel
Bentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Selenium
Silver
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Total xylenes
Toxaphene
Trichloroethene
Vanadium
Zinc
Reference Dose
RfDo
5E-05
1E-01
2E-02
6E-03
6E-03
3E-04
3E-04
3E-04
1E-01
4E-02
4E-02
3E-04
6E-05
5E-04
1E-05
8E-04
2E-04
NA
3E-01
NA
2E-02
3E-04
5E-03
4E-02
2E-02
3E-02
3E-02
3E-02
5E-03
5E-03
1E-02
2E-01
2E+00
NA
6E-03
7E*-03
3E-01
i
i
h
i
i
j
i
i
i
i
i
i
h
e
i
h
i
w
i
i
j
i
i
i
j
i
i
e
i
i
ABSeff
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
80%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
80%
50%
50%
20%
20%
20%
20%
50%
50%
20%
50%
50%
50%
20%
20%
80%
80%
80%
50%
80%
20%
20%
RfDd
3E-05
5E-02
1E-02
3E-03
3E-03
2E-04
2E-04
2E-04
8E-02
2E-02
2E-02
2E-04
3E-05
3E-04
7E-06
6E-04
1E-04
NA
6E-02
NA
5E-03
6E-05
3E-03
2E-02
4E-03
2E-02
2E-02
2E-02
1E-03
1E-03
8E-03
2E-01
2E+00
NA
5E-03
1E-03
6E-02
RfDi
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.86E-01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.43E-05
8.57E-05
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.14E-01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Target Sites / Effects
.iver lesions
ncr. mortality
Not specified
Kidney
-------
5 9 0030
Table 6-4
Reference Doses and Target Sites for
Che.nlcals of Potential Concern
FCX Washington Site
Washington, North Carolina
Chemical of
Potential Concern
1 ,2-Oicnloroethane
1 ,2-DichIoropropane
,2.4-TrichIorobenzene
2-M ethylnaphthalene
2-Methytphenol
2.3.7.B-TCDD TEQ
2.4.5-Triclorophenol
3.3-Dichlorobenzidene
4.4<-DDD
-------
5 9 0031
expressed in units of mg/kg-day, are estimates of acceptable
lifetime daily exposure levels for humans, including sensitive
individuals. Estimated intake dose of chemicals from
environmental media can be compared to the RfD. RfDs are derived
from human epidemiological studies or animal studies to which
uncertainty factors have been applied. These uncertainty factors
help ensure that the RfDs will not underestimate the potential
for adverse noncarcinogenic effects to occur.
In the case of lead, EPA recommends the use of the Agency's
Uptake Biokinetic model which predicts blood-lead levels for
children ages 0.5-7 years under various exposure scenarios and
lead concentrations.
D. Risk Characterization
The risk characterization step of the baseline risk assessment
process integrates the '.'jxicity and exposure assessments into
quantitative and qualitacive expressions of risk. The output of
this process is a characterization of the site-related potential
noncarcinogenic and carcinogenic health effects.
Potential concern for noncarcinogenic effects of a single
contaminant in a single medium is expressed as the hazard
quotient (HQ), or the ratio of the estimated intake derived from
the contaminant concentration in a given medium to the
contaminant's reference dose. By adding the HQs for all
contaminants within a medium or across all media to which a given
population may be reasonably exposed, the hazard Index (HI) can
be generated. Calculation of a HI in excess of unity indicates
the potential for adverse health effects. Indices greater than
one will be generated anytime intake for any of the chemicals of
concern exceeds its Reference Dose (RfD). However, given a
sufficient number of chemicals under consideration, it is also
possible to generate a HI greater than one even if none of the
individual chemical intakes exceeds their respective RfDs.
Carcinogenic risk is expressed as a probability of developing
cancer as a result of lifetime exposure to a contaminant
concentration in a given medium. Excess lifetime cancer risks
are determined by multiplying the intake level with the cancer
potency factor. EPA's acceptable target range for carcinogenic
risk is one-in-ten-thousand (1E-4) to one-in-one-million (1E-6).
Neither a cancer slope factor nor a reference dose is available
for lead. Instead, blood lead concentrations have been accepted
as the best measure of exposure to lead. The EPA has developed a
biokinetic /uptake model to assess chronic and nonchronic
exposure of children to lead. The uptake/biokinetic model
estimates total lead uptake resulting from diet, inhalation, and
ingestion of soil/dust, water, paint, and placental transport to
the fetus. The uptake/biokinetic model calculates the uptake and
6-3
-------
5 9 0052
blood lead levels for the most sensitive population, children
ages 0.5 to 7.years old. EPA uses a blood lead leve"1. of 10
micrograms per deciliter (ug/dl) as the benchmark tc evaluate
lead exposure.
Current use
As a result of the varying uses of the Site the risk
characterization is quantified by individual source area, which
are summarized in Table 6-5.
E. Environmental Assessment
Chemicals of potential concern are found in surface soils,
subsurface soils, and sediments, and surface waters. Potential
exposure pathways for chemicals in soils include dermal contact,
soil ingestion, inhalation of airborne particulates, inhalation
of chemical vapors, and exposure via bioaccumaulation within the
food chain. Significant uptake via the dermal route would be
limited to lipophilic compounds which can cross the epidermis.
The contaminants of potential ecological concern were selected
based on comparison of the concentration of the chemicals in
environmental media with background concentrations and /or
available comparable toxicity data. Table 6-6 list the
contaminants of potential ecological concern and the rationale
for their selection.
The elevated chemical levels in surface waters•indicate that
these chemicals may have a potential impact upon terrestrial and
aquatic organisms. The results of the ecological sampling in the
adjacent wetlands are discussed in the RI report. Dry conditions
at the time of the sampling limited the scope of the
investigation. Based only on one site sample compared to a
background sample, a small impact on the benthic community in the
study area was identified. Fish tissue analyses indicate that
higher levels of DDD, DDE, and DDT are present in fish collected
from the study site. Species diversity and equitability
measurements of the macroinvertebrate communities at stream
stations down gradient of the Site are generally less than those
of the control stream stations, both benthic communities appear
to be healthy in terms of diversity.
6-4
-------
TABLE 6-6
CONTAMINANTS OF POTENTIAL ECOLOGICAL CONCERN
PCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
PARAMETER
BERYLLIUM
NICKEL
LEAD
ZINC
MERCURY
MANGANESE
ALDRIN
HEPTACHLOR
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE
AIJWA-BHC
BBTA-BHC
OAMMA-BHCfUNDANEJ
DELTA-BMC
DIELDRIN
4.4- DDT (P.P- DDT)
4.4 -DDE (P.P- DDE)
4.4- ODD (P.P- ODD)
Media
>
f\\
SS
ss
SS
sw
SD
SS
SW
SD
SS
SW
SD
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS •
SS
SS
SD
SS
SD
SS
SD
Control
ui"
0.51
1.9-4.6
7.1-150
NA
NA
14-48
NA
14-48
ND(0.t2-0.60)
NA
ND(O.I2-0.60)
10-110
NDfl.8-2.2)
ND(t.8-2.2)
ND(l.8-2.2)
ND(l.8-2.2)
NDM.8-2.2)
N DTI .8 -2.2)
NDrl.8-2.2)
0.61-12
5.1-110
5.1-110
1.9-29
1.9-29
ND(J.8-4.J)
ND(3.8-4.3)
tUa|*ot Defect*
H\
0.22-2.20
2-140
2J-420
9-35
11-210
74-3100
15-62
51-500
0.13-4.1
0.31
0.29-0.76
14-590
1.6-240
0.98-370
2.7-90
7.9
2.7-1*
2.4-28
85
2.6-950
6.8-31011
10-4000
3.7-9000
12-450
62-12000
8.8-560
A**«|*
... !«"'
OJ3
16
67.71
22
81
401
51
147
1.04
0.31
0.53
99
65J3
84.74
19.28
7.9
10.85
15.20
85
148.34
352S
730
658.29
131
1658
101.73
!'
ft*VMt*
V , V«. *
' ; rft
27/42
23/42
42/42
3/3
919
42/42
3/3
8/9
9/42
in
2/9
42/42
6/42
5/42
8/42
1/42
2/42
2/42
1/42
21/42
35/42
6/9
39/42
4/9
23/42
8/9
~so^ * r ,,"' -'" '
\ , : •.*• r " ^ •
>»fi*tt1*f4*t»cftt*MM "„:,, , ,. -
ss" * ? >•*£*<>*. s^Sv ^. - ^> ,
* A ^ , <• S O, V
Exeectit 2x b*d|rond eooeettntioa hi ioil
l?MM*jla 9> tt*j»&*iriMMjl rnnn«B««*l£AA t» AM!
Cmtib AmMcM Water Qvilkr Criteria (AWQC)
Eieteds EfTectt Ranta - Me4Iaa (ER-M) for ledimenl
_ • » §k -i. • -.•*••
Esntdi AWQC
Etcccdi ER-M fortedimcil.
Extcedi 2i Ucfcireand eooeeitntioa la toil
EieecibAWQC
Eteeeib ER-Lfor»e4iaciL
Eioecdi 2tlMck|re«*d cenee«tntio« !• toil
Exceed* 2i baekf romd cooecitniiea i» toil
_ .».. . *_•!! •!
Excccdi 2i b»ct|ro»nd eonecBlration !• toil
Exctedt 2» (ttctirovnd conceatrilioa la toil
Bnacdl 2*B*ektrMa4 MfMtRMtiM li foil
Exccedj 2i b*diro«*d eeooeatnllo* la foil
Exeeedi 2i badiromMl eoeceatnlio* la ioil
Exeeetfa 2f bccktrotnd eoaeeatnliou la toil
Exoeeth 2i badt|ro«ad eoaeeattalia* h ioil
Exceed* ER-Lfortriimeal
Exceeds 2t back|r
-------
TABLE 6-6(continucd)
CONTAMINANTS OF POTENTIAL ECOLOGICAL CONCERN
PCX WASHINGTON SITE
WASHINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
PARAMETER
ENORIN
TOXAPHENE
CAMMA-CHLORDANE
ALPHA -CM LOR DANE
RNDRIN KETONE
ntS(Z-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHAtATE
nENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
OIRYSENE
RENZOfB A/OR K)FLUORANTHENE
ni-NZO-A-PYRENE
INDENO(I.2.1-CD) PYRENE
DIBENZCXAJOANTHRACENE
TEOfTOXIC. EQUIV. VAtUE. FROM l-TEF/89)
(DIOXIN)
Media
in
SS
SD
SS
SS
SD
SS
SD
SS
SS
SS
SD
SS
SD
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Control
m
ND(3.8-4.3)
ND(3.8-4.3)
120
ND(l.9-2.3)
ND(1.9-2.3)
ND(!.6-2)
NDfl.6-2)
NDf3.7-4.3)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
ND(350-440)
NDf350-440)
NA
R*at«ofP*tedi
ft)
1.2-5100
30-1100
17-78000
9.3-1700
9.7-77
5.2-1500
9J-J4
9.5-1100
410-160000
41-3500
400-2100
37-5200
100-2200
89-5500
300-3700
410-1700
75-3500
3.6-11
*A*t*i«
. m '-....
971.35
565
18777
337.92
35.45
238.92
18.93
264.25
63953
999
1250
1064
914
1375
1582
1055
1159
7.3
ft****?
J X < - -
; tt>
12/42
119
tra
20/42
6/9
24/42
3/9
10/42
4/42
12/42
2/9
16/42
5/9
11/42
5/42
2/42
6/42
m
•.-<* ;*** > -<\A^O--, % % /\;
itatioritiirotlMMM ,
-* !>-*' s &•. \
'•''*. *"
Exceeds 2i Nefc|rMo4 cMoeetntioa hi toil
Enecdt ER-M forMdimenL
Ezccetntlo« hi toil
Eneedi 2t b«c*t rwiad coMenlntlon in loil
Exceed* ER-M for tediaeat
Exoeedi 2t baekiroand eoneentnlion in toil
Eueedi ER-Lfor*cdimeat
Exoeedt 2i bcekireiad eonoeilralioa la foil
Exeeedi 2s b*etf ro«Bd eoncealnlioa In toil
Eieeedi 2« b*ck(roand eoneenlniion in toil
Eioeedi 2* Uclgroood eoaeenlrilion in toil
Exeeedi 2i txckiroand eoaeenlration In toil
1. SSiiiurfieeioiLSWbiarfioBwiltr. SD* sediment.
2. Control itmplei: S»rf«ee foil; SS-1. SS-2.SS- 3. SS-4.SS-S. COG Contaminant of Concern
Sediment: Same M turf toe toib.
Surf not toil were collected dirinf Mired tad April 1992. Sirftee
-------
5 9 0055
F. Conclusions
The assessment concluded that the total incremental lifetime
cancer risk is within or below EPA's acceptable target range for
all receptors in Source Areas 1-5, farmland, Mt. Pleasant Canal,
wetlands, and Onsite Drainage Ditch. Unacceptable non-cancer
effects are not expected for any human receptor in any of the
areas evaluated.
The ecological assessment concluded that the chemicals present in
soils, sediments, and surface waters have the potential to
negatively impact terrestrial and aquatic organisms, however both
benthic communities appear to be healthy in terms of diversity.
Base on these conclusions, there is a need for further ecological
evaluation at the Site. However, further ecological evaluation
should be delayed until the recent removal action has had
sufficient time to impact the environmental setting. Therefore
further ecological evaluation will be delayed until the five year
review.
6-5
-------
5 9 0056
VII. THE SBL^CTBP RFMEPY
Based upon consideration of the requirements of CERCLA, the NCP,
and public and state comments, EPA has selected No further Action
for the on-site soils. The risk associated with this Site has
been calculated to be within the accepted risk range determined
to be protective of human health and the environment. A five
year review will be conducted which will include a thorough
ecological assessment.
7-1
-------
5 9 -OU37
Appendix I
Responsiveness Summary
The Responsiveness Summary is the official record of how the
Agency responded to public comments as a part of the decision
making process. The responsiveness summary also provides the
decision makers of the lead Agency with the public's views, so
that they are considered in the final decision.
This document is segregated into three components; summary of the
community's involvement, the Agency's response to comments
received at the proposed plan public meeting and the Agency's
response to written comments received form concern parties during
the process.
Background of Community involvement and Concerns
The public coiic-arns regarding this Site have been minimal. This
is probably the result of the Agency's rather extensive community
relations efforts, and the fact that the contaminated source and
soils were removed by the time critical removal.
Several public meetings were held. The first meeting was held on
October 3, 1991 to discuss the superfund process, the proposed
plan meeting for OU1 was held on May 4, 1993, and the proposed
plan public meeting for OU2 was held on August 29, 1996. Several
fact sheets were prepared and distributed through out the
process. The Administrative Record was made available to the
public on August 22, 1996. Announcements of each meeting were
advertised in the local newspaper and press releases prepared.
Public Meeting Comments
The community concerns that were expressed as a result of the
August 29, 1996 proposed plan public meeting are as follows:
Comment: A representative of the Pamlico-Tar River
Foundation ask how were we sure that all the contaminated
soil on the site had been treated?
Response: The Agency conducted a risk assessment on the
soils remaining in place to determine if they presented a
problem, and the results revealed that the remaining soils
posed no risk to human health.
Comment: What happen to the treated soils and what is the
status of the groundwater.
-------
Response: The treated soil^, were gi\^n to the Department of
Transportation. The grounciwater remediation is a separate
component is presently being designed and will be completed
by the spring of 1997.
Comment: What is the time frame for the overall cleanup?
Response: We estimate thirty years as a rule for costing
purposes, however we are uncertain how long the actual pump
and treat will take.
Comment: Does the groundwater portion take into
consideration the in situ complexity of the chemicals with
natural soils in the area and what the ultimate permeation
rate for the aquifer is?
Response: We set the remediation goals to be protective of
groundwater. To do that we take into consideration the
coefficients and partitioning factors.
Comment: Are the existing soils below those levels
considered to be harmful?
Response: Correct.
Comment: The concentrations remaining in those soils is
extremely small and would be tied up in the soils and would
never present a problem to groundwater.
Response: Correct.
Response to Written Comments
There were no written comments received during the comment
period.
------- |