United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste And
Emergency Response
(5102 G)
SUPERFUND:
EPA/540/R-93/020
September 1992
PB93-963221
Progress at
National
Priority
List Sites
MASSACHUSETTS
1992 UPDATE
Pnnir-U on Re<-y. l>jd
-------
-------
If you wish to purchase copies of any additional State volumes, contact:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 486-4650
The complete set of the 49 State reports may be ordered as PB93-963250.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
A Brief Overview of Superfund v
Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Accelerated Cleanup Model ix
How Superfund Works x
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book xi
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
.XV
THE NPL REPORT
Progress to Date xix
THE NPL FACT SHEETS i
THE GLOSSARY
Terms used in the NPL Book. G-l
-------
INTRODUCTION
A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SUPERFUND
During the second half of the Twentieth
Century, the environmental conse-
quences of more than 100 years of industrial-
ization in the United States became increas-
ingly clear. Authors such as Rachel Carson
wrote passionately about the often-hidden en-
vironmental effects of our modern society's
widespread use of chemicals and other haz-
ardous materials. Their audience was small at
first, but gradually their message spread.
Growing concern turned to action, as people
learned more about the environment and be-
gan to act on their knowledge
The 1970s saw environmental issues burst
onto the national scene and take hold in the
national consciousness. The first Earth Day
was observed in 1970, the year that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was
founded. By the end of the 1970s, Love Canal
in New York and the Valley of the Drums in
Kentucky had entered the popular lexicon as
synonyms for pollution and environmental
degradation.
Superfund Is Established
The industrialization that gave Americans the
world's highest standard of living also created
problems that only a national program could
address. By 1980, the U.S. Congress had
passed numerous environmental laws, imple-
mented by the EPA, but many serious hazard-
ous waste problems were slipping through the
cracks.
Responding to growing concern about public-
health and environmental threats from uncon-
trolled releases of hazardous materials, the
U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive En-
vironmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA). Popularly known as
Superfund, CERCLA had one seemingly
simple job—to uncover and clean up hazard-
ous materials spills and contaminated sites.
A Big Job
Few in Congress, the EPA, the environmen-
tal community, or the general public knew in
1980 just how big the nation's hazardous ma-
terials problem is. Almost everyone thought
that Superfund would be a short-lived pro-
gram requiring relatively few resources to
clean up at most a few hundred sites. They
were quite mistaken.
As the EPA set to work finding sites and
gauging their potential tp harm people and
the environment, the number of sites grew.
Each discovery seemed to lead to another,
and today almost 36,000 hazardous waste
sites have been investigated as potential haz-
ardous waste sites. They are catalogued in
the EPA's computerized database, CERCLIS
(for the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
-------
INTRODUCTION
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Informa-
tion System).
The damage to public health and the environ-
ment that each site iri CERCLlS might cause
is evaluated; many sites have been referred to
State and local governments for cleanup. The
EPA lists the nation's most serious hazardous
waste sites on the National Priorities List, or
NPL. (These Superfund sites are eligible for
federally-funded cleanup, but whenever pos-
sible the EPA makes polluters pay for the
contamination they helped create.) The NPL
now numbers 1,275 sites, with 50 to 100
added each year. By the end of the century,
the NPL may reach as many as 2,100 sites.
Superfund faces some of the most complex
pollution problems ever encountered by an
environmental program. Improperly stored or
disposed chemicals and the soil they contami-
nate are one concern. More difficult to correct
are the wetlands and bays, and the groundwa-
ter, lakes, and rivers often used for drinking
water that are contaminated by chemicals
spreading through the soil or mixing with
storm water runoff. Toxic vapors contaminate
the air at some sites, threatening the health of
people living and working near by.
Superfund aims to control immediate public
health and environmental threats by tackling
the worst problems at the worst sites first.
Wherever possible, Superfund officials use
innovative treatment techniques—many de-
veloped or refined by the EPA—to correct
hazardous materials problems once and for
all. Many of the treatment techniques they use
did not exist when the program was created.
The EPA Administrator had challenged Su-
perfund to complete construction necessary
for cleanup work at 130 NPL sites by the end
of the 1992 federal fiscal year. By September
30, 1992, the end of fiscal year 1992, con-
struction had been completed at a total of 149
NPL sites. Superfund is well on its way of
meeting the Administrator's goal of complet-
ing construction at 200 NPL sites by the end
of fiscal year 1993, and 650 sites by the end
of fiscal year 2000.
Quick Cleanup at
Non-NPL Sites
Long-standing hazardous waste sites are not
Superfund's only concern. The EPA also re-
sponds to hazardous spills and other emergen-
cies, hauling away chemicals for proper treat-
ment or disposal. Superfund teams perform or
supervise responses at rail and motor vehicle
accidents, fires, and other emergencies in-
volving hazardous substances. They also
evacuate people living and working near by,
if necessary, and provide clean drinking water
to people whose own water is contaminated.
Removal crews also post warning signs and
take other precautions to keep people and ani-
mals away from hazardous substances.
Superfurut employee prepares equipment for groundwaler
treatment.
VI
-------
INTRODUCTION
Quick Cleanups, or Removals, are not limited
to emergencies. When cleanup crews at con-
taminated sites find hazardous substances that
immediately threaten people or the environ-
ment, they act right away to reduce the threat
or to remove the chemicals outright. As the
EPA implements the Superfund Accelerated
Cleanup Model (SACM), more and more sites
will undergo quick cleanups, and many of
these will be cleaned up completely without
ever being included on the NPL. (See
"Streamlining Superfund: The Superfund Ac-
celerated Cleanup Model.")
Some of Superfund's most significant gains in
public health and environmental protection
have been won by the removal program. As of
March 31, 1992, the Emergency Response
Superfund employee removing drums from a Superfund site.
Program had logged more than 2,300 removal
completions since Superfund was established.
The Public's Role
Superfund is unique among federal programs
in its commitment to citizen participation. Al-
though the EPA is responsible for determin-
ing how dangerous a site is and how best to
clean it up, the Agency relies on citizen input
as it makes these decisions.
Community residents are often invaluable
sources of information about a hazardous
waste site, its current and previous owners,
and the activities that took place there. Such
information can be crucial to experts evaluat-
ing a site and its potential dangers.
Residents also comment on EPA cleanup
plans by stating their concerns and prefer-
ences at public meetings and other forums and
in formal, written comments to Agency pro-
posals. The EPA takes these comments and
concerns seriously, and has modified many
proposals in response to local concerns. For,
ultimately, it is the community and its citizens
that will live with the results of the EPA's de-
cisions and actions; it is only fair that citizens
participate in the process.
A Commitment to
Communication
The Superfund program is very serious about
public outreach and communication. Com-
munity relations coordinators are assigned to
each NPL site to help the public understand
the potential hazards present, as well as the
cleanup alternatives. Local information re-
positories, such as libraries or other public
buildings, have been established near each
NPL site to ensure that the public has an op-
portunity to review all relevant information
and the proposed cleanup plans.
The individual State volumes contain sum-
mary fact sheets on NPL sites in each State
and territory. Together, the fact sheets provide
a concise report on site conditions and the
progress made toward site cleanups as of
March 1992. The EPA revises these volumes
periodically to provide an up-to-date record of
program activities. A glossary of key terms
relating to hazardous waste management and
Superfund site cleanup is provided at the back
of this book.
VII
-------
INTRODUCTION
Superfund is, of course, a public program, and
as such it belongs to everyone of us. This vol-
ume, along with other State volumes, com-
prises the EPA's report on Superfund
progress to the program's owners for the year
1992.
VIII
-------
INTRODUCTION
STREAMLINING SUPERFUND: THE SUPERFUND
ACCELERATED CLEANUP MODEL
Historically, critics and supporters alike
have measured Superfund's progress
by the number of hazardous waste sites de-
leted from the NPL. Although easy enough to
tally, this approach is too narrow. It misses
the major gains Superfund makes by reducing
major risks at the nation's worst hazardous
sites long before all clean-up work is done
and the site deleted. It also ignores the Re-
moval Program's contributions to meeting
Superfund's twin mandates of maximizing
public health and environmental protection.
Renewing Superfund's commitment to rapid
protection from hazardous materials, the EPA
is streamlining the program. The Superfund
Accelerated Cleanup Model, or SACM, will
take Early Actions, such as removing hazard-
ous wastes or contaminated materials, while
experts study the site. SACM also will com-
bine similar site studies to reduce the time re-
quired to evaluate a site and its threats to
people and the environment This way, imme-
diate public health and environmental threats
will be addressed while long-term cleanups
are being planned.
Emergencies such as train derailments and
motor vehicle accidents will continue to be
handled expeditiously. Teams of highly
trained technicians will swing into action
right away, coordinating the cleanup and re-
moval of hazardous substances to ensure pub-
lic safety as quickly as possible.
Breaking With Tradition
The traditional Superfund process begins with
a lengthy phase of study and site assessment,
but SACM will save time by combining sepa-
rate, yet similar, activities. Each EPA Region
will form a Decision Team of site managers,
risk assessors, community relations coordina-
tors, lawyers, and other experts to monitor the
studies and quickly determine whether a site
requires Early Action (taking less than five
years), Long-term Action, or both.
While the site studies continue, the Decision
Team will begin the short-term work required
to correct immediate public health or environ-
mental threats from the site. Besides remov-
ing hazardous materials, Early Actions in-
clude taking precautions to keep contaminants
from moving off the site and restricting access
to the site. Early Actions could eliminate most
human risk from these sites, and Superfund
will further focus its public participation and
public information activities on site assess-
ment and Early Action.
Long-Term Solutions
While Early Actions can correct many hazard-
ous waste problems—and provide the bulk of
public health and environmental protection—
some contamination will take longer to cor-
rect. Cleanups of mining sites, wetlands, estu-
aries, and projects involving incineration of
contaminants or restoration of groundwater
can take far longer than the three to five years
envisioned for Early Actions. Under SACM,
these sites will be handled much as they are
now.
Also under SACM, the EPA will continue its
pursuit of potentially responsible parties who
may have caused or contributed to site con-
tamination. Expedited enforcement and
procedures for negotiating potentially respon-
sible party settlements will secure their par-
ticipation. Superfund personnel will continue
to oversee clean-up work performed by poten-
tially responsible parties.
IX
-------
INTRODUCTION
HOW SUPERFUND WORKS
Each Superfund site presents a different
set of complex problems. The same haz-
ardous materials and chemicals often con-
taminate many sites, but the details of each
site are different Almost always, soil is con-
taminated with one or more chemicals. Their
vapors may taint the air over and around the
site. Contaminants may travel through the soil
and reach underground aquifers which may be
used for drinking water, or they may spread
over the site to contaminate streams, ponds,
and wetlands. The contaminating chemicals
may interact with each other, presenting even
more complicated cleanup problems.
Superfund's cleanup process is arduous and
exacting. It requires the best efforts of hun-
dreds of experts in science and engineering,
public health, administration and manage-
ment, law, and many other fields.
The average NPL site takes from seven to ten
years to work its way through the system,
from discovery to the start of long-term
cleanup. Actual cleanup work can take years,
decades if contaminated groundwater must
be treated. Of course, imminent threats to
public health or the environment are cor-
rected right away.
The diagram to the right presents a simplified
view of the cleanup process. The major steps
in the Superfund process are:
• Site discovery and investigation to iden-
tify contaminants and determine whether
emergency action is required;
• Emergency site work such as removing
contaminants for proper treatment or dis-
posal, and securing the site to keep people
and animals away, if warranted by condi-
tions at the site;
• Site evaluation to determine how people
living and working nearby, and the envi-
ronment, may be exposed to site contami-
nants;
• Detailed studies to determine whether con-
ditions are serious enough to add the site to
the National Priorities List of sites eligible
for federally funded cleanup under Super-
fund;
• Selection, design, and implementation of a
cleanup plan, after a thorough review of
the most effective cleanup options, given
site conditions, contaminants present, and
their potential threat to public health or the
environment.
• Follow-up to ensure that the cleanup work
done at the site continues to be effective
over the long term.
The Superfund Process
From the earliest stages, EPA investigators
work hard to identify those responsible for the
contamination. As their responsibility is es-
tablished, the EPA negotiates with these "re-
sponsible parties" to pay for cleaning up the
problem they helped create. This "enforce-
ment first" policy saves Superfund Trust Fund
monies for use in cleanups where the respon-
sible parties cannot be identified, or where
they are unable to fund cleanup work.
-------
THE VOLUME
How to Use the State Book
I he site fact sheets presented in this book
M^ are comprehensive summaries that cover
a broad range of information. The fact sheets
describe hazardous waste sites on the NPL and
their locations, as well as the conditions
leading to their listing ("Site Description").
The summaries list the types of contaminants
that have been discovered and related threats
to public and ecological health ("Threats and
Contaminants"). "Cleanup Approach" pres-
ents an overview of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or planned. The fact
sheets conclude with a brief synopsis of how
much progress has been made in protecting
public health and the environment. The
summaries also pinpoint other actions, such as
legal efforts to involve polluters responsible
for site contamination and community con-
cerns.
The fact sheets are arranged in alphabetical
order by site name. Because site cleanup is a
dynamic and gradual process, all site informa-
tion is accurate as of the date shown on the
bottom of each page. Progress always is being
made at NPL sites, and the EPA periodically
will update the site fact sheets to reflect recent
actions and will publish updated State vol-
umes. The following two pages show a ge-
neric fact sheet and briefly describe the infor-
mation under each section.
How Can You Use
This State Book?
You can use this book to keep informed about
the sites that concern you, particularly ones
close to home. The EPA is committed to
involving the public in the decision making
process associated with hazardous waste
cleanup. The Agency solicits input from area
residents in communities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely to be affected
not only by hazardous site conditions, but also
by the remedies that combat them. Site clean-
ups take many forms and can affect communi-
ties in different ways. Local traffic may be
rerouted, residents may be relocated, tempo-
rary water supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a site can help
citizens sift through alternatives and make
decisions. To make good choices, you must
know what the threats are and how the EPA
intends to clean up the site. You must under-
stand the cleanup alternatives being proposed
for site cleanup and how residents may be
affected by each one. You also need to have
some idea of how your community intends to
use the site in the future, and you need to know
what the community can realistically expect
once the cleanup is complete.
The EPA wants to develop cleanup methods
that meet community needs, but the Agency
only can take local concerns into account if it
understands what they are. Information must
travel both ways in order for cleanups to be
effective and satisfactory. Please take this
opportunity to learn more, become involved,
and assure that hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your community's
concerns.
XI
-------
THE VOLUME
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Provides the dates when the
site was Proposed, made Final,
and Deleted from the NPL.
SITE RESPONSIBILITY
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties taking responsibility
for cleanup actions at the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRESS
Summarizes the actions to
reduce the threats to nearby
residents and the surrounding
environment and the progress
towards cleaning up the site.
SITE NAME
STATE
EPA ID* ABCOOOOOOO
Site Description
£XXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXX
xxx xxxxx;
xxxxxxx xx:
EPA REGION XX
COUNTY NAME
LOCATION
Other Names:
:xxxx xx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx X xxx xxx:
XXX XX XXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX^SSmtXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxn5»»k_xxx xxxxxx xx xxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxx
Site Responsibility:
Threats and Contaminants
Response Action Status
XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXX X
Site Facts:
XXXXXX XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX :
xxxxxx xxx:
xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx
^*N(XXXXXX XXX XXXXXX
Environmental Progress
: xxxx x xxx xx:
Site Repository
XXXXXX XXX ;
SITE REPOSITORY
Lists the location of the primary site repository. The site
repository may include community relations plans, public
meeting announcements and minutes, fact sheets, press
releases, and other site-related documents.
XII
-------
THE VOLUME
SITE DESCRIPTION
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes descrip-
tions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have con-
tributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
THREATS AND CONTAMINANTS
The major chemical categories of site contamination are noted, as well as
which environmental resources are affected. Icons representing each of the
affected resources (may include air, groundwater, surface water, soil, and
contamination to environmentally sensitive areas) are included in the margins
of this section. Potential threats to residents and the surrounding environ-
ments arising from the site contamination also are described.
CLEANUP APPROACH
This section contains a brief overview of how the site is being cleaned up.
RESPONSE ACTION STATUS
Specific actions that have been accomplished or will be undertaken to clean
up the site are described here. Cleanup activities at NPL sites are divided
into separate phases, depending on the complexity and required actions at the
site. Two major types of cleanup activities often are described: initial,
immediate, or emergency actions to quickly remove or reduce imminent
threats to the community and surrounding areas; and long-term remedial
phases directed at final cleanup at the site. Each stage of the cleanup strategy
is presented in this section of the summary. Icons representing the stage of
the cleanup process (initial actions, site investigations, EPA selection of the
cleanup remedy, engineering design phase, cleanup activities underway, and
completed cleanup) are located in the margin next to each activity descrip-
tion.
SITE FACTS
Additional information on activities and events at the site are included in this
section. Often details on legal or administrative actions taken by the EPA to
achieve site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with
the site cleanup process are reported here.
XIII
-------
THE VOLUME
The "icons," or symbols, accompanying the text allow the reader to see at a glance which envi-
ronmental resources are affected and the status of cleanup activities at the site.
Icons in the Threats
and Contaminants
Section
Contaminated Groundwater resources
in the vicinity or underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used as a drink-
ing water source.)
Contaminated Surface Water and
Sediments on or near the site. (These
include lakes, ponds, streams, and
rivers.)
Contaminated Air in the vicinity of
the site. (Air pollution usually is
periodic and involves contaminated
dust particles or hazardous gas emis-
sions.)
Contaminated Soil and Sludges on or
near the site. (This contamination
category may include bulk or other
surface hazardous wastes found on the
site.)
Threatened or contaminated Environ-
mentally Sensitive Areas in the vicinity
of the site. (Examples include wet-
lands and coastal areas or critical
habitats.)
Icons in the Response
Action Status Section
Initial, Immediate, or Emergency
Actions have been taken or are
underway to eliminate immediate
threats at the site.
Site Studies at the site to determine
the nature and extent of contamination
are planned or underway.
Remedy Selected indicates that site
investigations have been concluded,
and the EPA has selected a final
cleanup remedy for the site or part of
the site.
Remedy Design means that engineers
are preparing specifications and
drawings for the selected cleanup
technologies.
Cleanup Ongoing indicates that the
selected cleanup remedies for the
contaminated site, or part of the site,
currently are underway.
Cleanup Complete shows that all
cleanup goals have been achieved for
the contaminated site or part of the
site.
XIV
-------
A SUMMARY OF THE STATE PROGRAM
xv
-------
Superfund
Activities in
Massachusetts
The State of Massachusetts is located within
EPA Region 1, which includes the six States of
y\ New England. The State covers 58,527 square
miles. According to the 1990 Census, Massa-
chusetts experienced a 5 percent increase in population between 1980 and 1990, and is ranked thir-
teenth in U.S. population with approximately 6,016,000 residents.
The Massachusetts Oil and Hazardous Material Release Prevention and Response Act of
1983, amended in 1986, grants the State the authority to make polluters liable for cleanup activities at
Superfund sites regardless of fault or actual contribution to the hazardous conditions of the site. In
practice, the State prefers to give polluters the opportunity to clean up the site. If the polluters are
unable or unwilling to participate, the State may opt to conduct cleanup activities itself and recover
the cost of cleanup at a later time. State bonds fund program and site activities, including investiga-
tions, studies, design activities, removals, emergency response actions, long-term cleanup actions,
operation and maintenance activities, and the 10 percent contribution required from the State under
the Federal Superfund program. Administration and personnel costs are financed by the Environmen-
tal Challenge Fund, which is funded by penalties, fines, and money obtained through cost recovery
activities. The State requires public notification of site study results within 30 days of completion.
Currently, 25 sites in the State of Massachusetts have been listed as final on the NPL. One new site
has been proposed for listing in 1992.
The Depertment of Environmental Protection
implements the Superfund Program in the State of Massachusetts
Activities responsible for hazardous
waste contamination in the State of
Massachusetts include:
Federal
Facilities
Manufacturing
Facilities
Waste
Processing,
Storage and
Disposal
Facilities
Chemical
Production
Facilities
Facts about the 26 NPL sites
in Massachusetts:
Immediate Actions (such as removing
hazardous substances or restricting
site access) were performed at 22
sites.
Seventeen sites endanger sensitive
environments.
Twenty-four sites are located near
residential areas.
XVII
March 1992
-------
MASSACHUSETTS
Most Sites Have Multiple Contaminants and
Contaminated Media:
Media Contaminated at Sites
Contaminants Found at Sites
Air
Surface
Water
Sediments
Soil
Ground-
water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of Sites
The Potentially Responsible
Party Pays...
In the State of Massachusetts, potentially re-
sponsible parties are paying for or conducting
cleanup activities at all 18 sites.
Percentage of Sites
Heavy Metals
VOCS
PCBs
Creosotes
Presticides/Herbicides
Other *
Dioxin
Asbestos
Radiation
Plastics
Petrochemicals/Explosives
Gases
88%
85%
46%
27%
19%
15%
12%
8%
4%
4%
4%
4%
"Other contaminants include cyanide, non-
volatile organic compounds and clorinated
organics.
For Further Information on NPL Sites and
Hazardous Waste Programs in the State of
Massachusetts Please Contact:
EPA Region 1 Superfund Community For information concerning
Relations Section community involvement
•s
National Response Center
The Department of Environmental
Protection: Waste Site Cleanup
Program
EPA Region 1 Superfund Waste
Management Division
EPA Superfund Hotline
To report a hazardous
waste emergency
For information about the
State's responsibility in the
Superfund Program
For information about the
Regional Superfund Program
For information about the
Federal Superfund Program
(617) 565,2713
(800:) 424-8802
(617)292-5851
(617) 573-5707
(800)424-9068
March 1992
XVIII
-------
THE NPL REPORT
PROGRESS TO DATE
The following Progress Report lists all
sites currently on, or deleted from, the
NPL and briefly summarizes the status of ac-
tivities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup
process are arrayed across the top of the chart,
and each site's progress through these steps is
represented by an arrow (O) indicating the
current stage of cleanup.
Large and complex sites often are organized
into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to
address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and
surface water pollution, or to clean up differ-
ent areas of a large site. In such cases, the
chart portrays cleanup progress at the site's
most advanced stage, reflecting the status of
site activities rather than administrative ac-
complishments.
O An arrow in the "Initial Response" cate-
gory indicates that an emergency
cleanup, immediate action, or initial ac-
tion has been completed or currently is
underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to pro-
vide immediate relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize
a site to prevent further contamination.
O A final arrow in the "Site Studies" cat-
egory indicates that an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of the
contamination at the site currently is on-
going or planned.
O A final arrow in the "Remedy Selection"
category means that the EPA has se-
lected the final cleanup strategy for the
site. At the few sites where the EPA has
determined that initial response actions
have eliminated site contamination, or
that any remaining contamination will
be naturally dispersed without further
cleanup activities, a "No Action" rem-
edy has been selected. In these cases,
the arrows are discontinued at the
"Remedy Selection" step and resume in
the "Construction Complete" category.
^ A final arrow at the "Remedial Design"
stage indicates that engineers currently
are designing the technical specifica-
tions for the selected cleanup remedies
and technologies.
^> A final arrow in the "Cleanup Ongoing"
column means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and cur-
rently are underway.
O A final arrow in the "Construction Com-
plete" category is used only when all
phases of the site cleanup plan have
been performed, and the EPA has deter-
mined that no additional construction
actions are required at the site. Some
sites in this category currently may be
undergoing long-term operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure
that the cleanup actions continue to pro-
tect human health and the environment.
/ A check in the "Deleted" category indi-
cates that the site cleanup has met all
human health and environmental goals
and that the EPA has deleted the site
from the NPL.
Further information on the activities and
progress at each site is given in the site "Fact
Sheets" published in this volume.
XIX
-------
Progress Toward Cleanup at NPL Sites in the State of Massachusetts
Site Name
ATLAS TACK CORP.
BAIRD & MCGUIRE
BLACKBURN & UNION PROVILEGES
CANNON ENGINEERING CORP. (CEC)
CHARLES-GEORGE RECLAMATION
TRUST LANDFILL
FORT DEVENS
FORT DEVENS - SUDBURY TRAINING
GROVELAND WELLS
HAVERfflLL MUNICIPAL LANDFILL
HOCOMONCO POND
INDUSTRI-PLEX
IRON HORSE PARK
NEW BEDFORD SITE
NORWOOD PCBS
NYANZA CHEMICAL WASTE DUMP
OTIS AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE/
CAMP EDWARDS
PLYMOUTH HARBOR/
CANNON ENGINEERING CORP.
PSC RESOURCES
RE-SOLVE, INC.
ROSE DISPOSAL PIT
SALEM ACRES
SHPACK LANDFILL
SDLRESIM CHEMICAL CORP.
SULLIVAN'S LEDGE
County
BRISTOL
NORFOLK
NORFOLK
PLYMOUTH
MIDDLESEX
WORCESTER
MIDDLESEX
ESSEX
ESSEX
WORCESTER
MIDDLESEX
MIDDLESEX
BRISTOL
NORFOLK
MIDDLESEX
BARNSTABLE
PLYMOUTH
HAMPDEN
BRISTOL
BERKSHIRE
ESSEX
BRISTOL
MIDDLESEX
BRISTOL
NPL
Final
Final
Prop.
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Date
02/21/90
09/09/83
02/07/92
09/01/83
09/01/83
11/15/89
02/21/90
09/01/83
06/10/86
09/01/83
09/01/83
09/01/84
09/01/83
06/01/86
09/01/83
11/15/89
09/01/83
09/01/83
09/01/83
06/01/86
06/01/86
06/01/86
09/01/83
09/01/84
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
NPL Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete Deleted
:=>
o
-------
Progress Toward Cleanup at NPL Sites in the State of Massachusetts (continued)
Site Name
W. R. GRACE & COMPANY, INC.
(ACTON PLANT)
WELLS G&H
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
County NPL Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete Deleted
MIDDLESEX Final 09/01/83 o => O O O
MIDDLESEX Final 09/01/83 ^ => ^>
X
X
8
Sites
with
Studies
Underway
3
Sites
with
Remedy
Selected
6
Sites
with
Remedy
Design
7
Sites
with
Cleanup
Ongoing
2
Sites
with
Construction
Complete
Note: Cleanup status reflects actual site activities rather than administrative accomplishments.
B)
O
CD
ro
-------
ATLAS TAG
MASSACHUSE
EPA ID# MAD001026&L&
EPA REGION 1
Bristol County
Fairhaven
Site Description
The Atlas Tack Corporation formerly manufactured cut and wire tacks, steel nails, and
similar items on a 12-acre site in Fairhaven. From the 1940s until the late 1970s, wastes
containing cyanide and heavy metals, including high levels of arsenic, were discharged into an
unlined acid neutralizing lagoon approximately 200 feet east of the manufacturing building
and adjacent to a saltwater tidal marsh in Buzzards Bay Estuary. The area is residential and
commercial. Approximately 7,200 people live within 1 mile, and 15,150 live within 3 miles of
the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/21/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater has been shown to be contaminated with cyanide and toluene
that leached from the site lagoons. The on-site soil is contaminated with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), including toluene and ethyl benzene, as well as heavy
metals, including beryllium, mercury, and nickel. Nearby residents risk potential
exposure through direct contact with the soil or by drinking water from
contaminated wells. The marsh south of the lagoon and estuarine areas in
Buzzards Bay are contaminated.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the
entire site.
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The EPA currently is conducting an investigation into the nature
and extent of the contamination at the site. The EPA site investigation will define
the contaminants of concern, and alternatives for the final cleanup will be
presented when the investigation is completed, scheduled for mid-1993.
Environmental Progress
The EPA has determined that the public and the environment are not at immediate risk
while studies at the Atlas Tack Corp. site are being conducted and the final cleanup
alternatives are being determined.
Site Repository
Fairhaven Public Library, Center Street, Fairhaven, MA 02719
March 1992
ATLAS TACK CORP.
-------
BAIRD & M
MASSACHUS
EPA ID# MAD00104/1987
EPA REGION 1
Norfolk County
South Street in northwest Holbrook
Site Description
The Baird & McGuire facility is situated on a 20-acre site in Holbrook and operated as a
chemical mixing and batching company from 1912 to 1983. Later activities included mixing,
packaging, storing, and distributing various products, including pesticides, disinfectants, soaps,
floor waxes, and solvents. Some of the raw materials used at the site were stored in a tank
farm and piped to the laboratory or mixing buildings. Other raw materials were stored in
drums on site. Waste disposal methods at the site included direct discharge into the soil, a
nearby brook, wetlands, and a former gravel pit. Hazardous wastes historically were disposed
of in an on-site lagoon and cesspool. Also included on site were two lagoons open to rain and
large areas of buried wastes such as cans, debris, and lab bottles and hundreds of bottles of
chemicals. The lagoon area has been capped with clay. The on-site buildings were in various
states of disrepair and unsecured; the EPA has since demolished all but one of the buildings
and the tank farms. The tank farm area has been temporarily capped. The site is completely
fenced and has an operating groundwater recirculation system to contain the groundwater
plume. The site is 500 feet west of the Cochato River, which was diverted into the Richardi
Reservoir, a water system serving nearly 90,000 people in the towns of Holbrook, Randolph,
and Braintree. Currently, the Cochato River is not being used as a supply source for the
Richardi Reservoir. The South Street well field, part of the municipal water supply for
Holbrook, is within 1,500 feet of the site and was shut down in 1982.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with pesticides and organic and inorganic
chemicals. Studies found significant levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
other organic compounds, arsenic, and pesticides including DDT and chlordane in
the Cochato River sediments. The contamination is highest on site or within
approximately 500 feet downgradient of the current site fence. Site soils were
found to be contaminated with VOCs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
other organic compounds, pesticides, dioxin, and heavy metals such as lead and
arsenic. Dioxin also has been detected in area wetland soils. The last operating
well in the South Street well field was shut down in 1982 because of unacceptably
high levels of organic contamination. The area of the site is fenced; however, high
levels of pesticides in site soils and sporadic dioxin contamination pose an
imminent threat to public health through accidental ingestion of or direct contact
with the contaminated soils or groundwater. The groundwater plume continues to
contaminate the Cochato River sediments; however, no significant health risk was
found, based on human contact with contaminated sediments. Contaminated
sediments were found to be acutely toxic to aquatic life.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in five stages: immediate actions and four long-term remedial
phases addressing the cleanup of the groundwater, soil, and sediments and the provision of an
alternate water supply.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA completed a hydrological study in connection
with this site. The initial response action taken included the removal of 1,020
cubic yards of hazardous waste, 1 ton of waste creosote, 25 gallons of waste coal
tar, 155 pounds of solid hazardous waste, 47 drums of flammable liquids and solids, and two
drums of corrosives. Additional activity included construction of a clay cap, installation of a
groundwater interception/recirculation system, installation of 5,700 feet of fencing, and
extensive soil, groundwater, surface water, and air sampling. The site was graded, capped, and
seeded. The site is secured by a fence to limit contact with contaminants.
Groundwater: This remedy involves pumping groundwater and treating it at an
on-site treatment plant. Treated groundwater will be discharged to the aquifer
located on site. On- and off-site groundwater monitoring will be implemented. A
new 300,000 gallon-per-day groundwater pump and discharge treatment plant was constructed
and is expected to begin operations in 1992. Cleanup activities are expected to be completed
in late 1992.
March 1992 4 BAIRD & MCGUIRE
-------
Soil: This remedy involves the excavation and removal of approximately 130,000
cubic yards of contaminated soils and destruction of contaminants in the soil by
incineration. Wetlands will be restored where contaminated soils are excavated.
The unnamed brook will be relocated. Air quality will be monitored during construction and
implementation of the incineration system. Design of the incineration system is continuing,
and a series of tests to determine the operating procedures that will most effectively destroy
soil contaminants was completed in 1989 at the EPA's research facility in Arkansas.
Cleanup activities are expected to begin in 1992 and are scheduled for completion in 1997.
Sediments: The groundwater discharge is believed to be partially responsible for
contamination of Cochato River sediments and adjoining wetlands. Field
investigations in 1987 and 1988 determined that contaminated groundwater and
surface runoff from the site continue to be the principal sources of contamination of the
wetlands adjacent to the site. The EPA conducted an investigation into the nature and extent
of the surface water and sediment contamination at the site. The investigation defined the
contaminants of concern and recommended alternatives for final surface water and sediment
cleanup. The investigation also determined that site contaminants were being effectively
trapped in river sediments and were not migrating down-river. The investigation was
completed in late 1989. Approximately 1,500 cubic yards of sediments will be excavated and
incinerated on site. Design of cleanup actions was completed in 1991, with work scheduled to
begin in 1993 and be completed in 1994.
Water Supply: In 1990, the EPA selected a remedy that will reactivate the
Donna Road Aquifer, thereby replacing the lost demand caused by
contamination. The design of this remedy began in 1991 and is expected to be
completed in 1993.
Site Facts: Between 1954 and 1977, the company was fined at least 35 times by various
State and Federal agencies for numerous violations. A citizen complaint of an oily substance
on the Cochato River initiated a site inspection, which reported surface water, groundwater,
and wetlands contamination. In 1983, the City of Holbrook revoked Baird & McGuire's
permit to store chemicals and ordered it to dismantle the existing storage facilities. The EPA
issued Notice Letters to parties potentially responsible for the site contamination. A cost
recovery case against the four potentially responsible parties was filed in 1983. The case was
settled on an ability-to-pay basis in 1987. A final Consent Decree was issued by the EPA and
was signed by the potentially responsible parties.
Environmental Progress
The initial cleanup, including the construction of a fence, and continuing actions described
above have greatly reduced the potential of exposure to contamination and continue to
reduce contamination levels at the Baird & McGuire site, making the area safer while it
awaits final cleanup activities.
BAIRD & MCGUIRE 5 March 1992
-------
Site Repository
Holbrook Public Library, 2 Plymouth Street, Holbrook, MA 02343
March 1992
BAIRD & MCGUIRE
-------
BLACKBUR
UNION PRI
MASSACHUSE
EPAID# MAD982191C
EPA REGION 1
Norfolk County
Walpole
Other Names:
South Street Site
haffer Realty Trust
Site Description
The Blackburn and Union Privileges site, approximately 30 acres in size, is located in a
primarily residential area. Since the 17th century, industrial and commercial facilities have
been active on six of 24 lots in this area. The current owners of these properties are Shaffer
Realty Nominee Trust and BIM Investment Trust. Once known as the Blackburn Privilege
and the Union Factory Privilege, these two areas were originally part of 10 distinct water
privileges established along the Neponset River in the 17th century. Snuff, iron, nails, cotton,
and wool were produced at the Union Privilege site; a tannery also was located in this area.
Power was generated by a dam on the Blackburn privilege for the production of machinery,
cotton, yarn, batting, and lamp wicking. Industrial and commercial processes conducted during
the 17th and 18th centuries involved various hazardous substances, including chromium,
arsenic, and mercury. Beginning in 1915, Standard Woven Fabric Co. manufactured asbestos
brake linings which involved the crushing of raw asbestos. A pile of asbestos still remains on
site. In 1937, the plant was closed and the properties were sold to Kendall Co., which used
the site for various cotton and fabric production processes. The wastewater resulting from
these operations was disposed of in two lagoons and then discharged to a sanitary sewer after
cotton fibers had settled out. Kendall ended its use of the first lagoon as a disposal area in
1982; the second lagoon received non-contact cooling waste until 1985. Municipal wells within
4 miles of the site draw water from the School Meadow Brook/Mine Brook aquifer and
supply drinking water to an estimated 19,500 people of the Town of Walpole. The nearest of
these wells is within a mile of the site. The site lies within the boundaries of the Neponset
River drainage basin; this river bounds the southern portion of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Threats and Contaminants
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 02/07/92
On-site soils, sediments, and groundwater are contaminated with inorganic
chemicals, including asbestos, lead, arsenic, and nickel, and both volatile and
non-volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Injesting or coming into direct contact
with contaminated soils, sediments, or groundwater could be a public health risk.
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and one long-term remedial
phase addressing cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1988, Shaffer Realty Nominee Trust and BIM
Investment Trust removed buried tanks and disposed of them off site. An
investigation to determine the nature and extent of asbestos contamination in
soils also was conducted. A cleanup design is expected to be completed in 1992 followed by a
second removal action.
Entire Site: In 1994, an investigation is scheduled to begin to explore the nature
and extent of the remaining contaminants at the entire site. Once the investigation
is completed, proposed cleanup alternatives will be recommended.
Site Facts: The EPA issued an Unilateral Administrive Order to Shaffer Realty Nominee
Trust and BIM Investment Trust in 1988 which required these potentially responsible parties
to perform removal actions and conduct an investigation to determine the extent of asbestos
contamination in soils. A second Unilateral Administrative Order was issued to Shaffer Realty
Trust and W.R. Grace to clean up the asbestos contaminated soil.
Environmental Progress
The removal of site contaminants in 1988 has reduced the risks posed to the safety and
health of the nearby population while investigations are underway and activities are being
planned for permanent cleanup of the site.
Site Repository
Not established.
March 1992 8 BLACKBURN AND UNION PRIVILEGES
-------
CANNON
ENGINE
CORPO
(CEC)
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD079510780
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Plymouth County
Bridgewater
Other Names:
annons Bridgewater
Superfund Site
The Cannon Engineering Corporation (CEC) site is situated on 6 acres between Route 24
and First Street in Bridgewater. In 1974, Cannon developed the site to transport, store, and
incinerate hazardous wastes, but the facility currently is inactive. On-site structures included
21 storage tanks, three buildings, an office/warehouse, and an incinerator. The operation was
licensed in 1979 to store motor oils, oils and emulsions, solvents, lacquers, organic and
inorganic chemicals, plating waste, clay and filter media containing chemicals, plating sludge
solids, and pesticides. The facility had a license to operate from 1974 until 1980, when alleged
waste mishandling and reporting violations prompted the Massachusetts Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs (EOEA) to revoke it. The facility was placed in receivership when its
owners were found guilty of illegal storage and disposal. Operations ceased in 1980, leaving
behind about 700 drums and 155,000 gallons of liquid waste and sludge in bulk storage. The
on-site soils, sediments, buildings, groundwater, and surface waters are contaminated with
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, and metals to varying degrees. The Cannon site is
associated with three other NPL sites: Tinkham Garage, Sylvester, and Plymouth Harbor.
The Tinkham Garage and Sylvester sites are located in New Hampshire. Approximately 1,000
people live within 1 mile of the Cannon Engineering Corporation site in this residential and
light industrial area. The nearest residence is 1/8 mile from the site. There are 13 homes
within a 1-mile radius that depend on well water. The closest municipal well is in Raynham, 1
mile from the site. Bridgewater's municipal wells are 3 miles to the east of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site air contained trace amounts of VOCs including benzene and
methylene chloride. Groundwater also was found to contain VOCs including
toluene, as well as heavy metals. Soil and sediments contained PAHs, PCBs,
dioxin, and pesticides in addition to VOCs and heavy metals. The surface water
was polluted with heavy metals including high levels of iron, selenium, lead,
manganese, and silver. Direct contact with and accidental ingestion of
contaminated material posed a potential public health threat. Inhaling VOCs and
contaminated fugitive dust were potential health threats. The site is fully fenced to
reduce the potential for contact with contaminants. Sensitive areas that could have
been subject to contamination associated with the site include wetland areas to the
south and Lake Nippenicket to the west of the site.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
concentrating on source control and migration of contaminants at the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1982, the State removed 155,000 gallons of sludge and liquid
wastes and approximately 700 drums and incinerated the materials off site. In
1988, the EPA and the parties potentially responsible for the site contamination
provided for the removal and disposal of numerous hazardous materials abandoned at the
site. A fence surrounding the site was erected in 1989.
Entire Site: The remedy for the site was selected in 1988 and entails two cleanup
phases, source control and restricting the migration of contaminants. Source
control elements included: fencing the area to restrict unauthorized access to
contaminated soils; treating certain contaminated soil on site by heating it to remove
contaminants and burning PCB-contaminated soils off site; installing a groundwater
monitoring system; decontaminating and removing buildings and associated structures;
sampling and treating other soils as necessary; and restorating wetlands disturbed during site
cleanup. Key features of the migration control remedy included restricting the use of
groundwater at the site and installing additional groundwater monitoring wells to keep
apprised of the movement of contaminants. In 1990, cleanup activities were undertaken by
the parties potentially responsible for site contamination, with oversight from the EPA and
the State. Four hundred tons of PCB-contaminated soil were incinerated off site, 11,330 tons
of soils containing VOCs were treated on site, 1,200 tons of steel and 1,300 tons of concrete
were shipped for recycling, 360 cubic yards of hazardous debris were sent to an approved
disposal facility, and 480 cubic yards of non-hazardous debris were shipped to a demolition
March 1992 10 CANNON ENGINEERING CORPORATION
-------
materials landfill. Cleanup activities were completed in 1991. The testing of debris from the
demolished incinerator for dioxin and subsequent removal was completed in 1991. The
incinerator was shipped off-site to an EPA regulated disposal facility. Once contaminated soils
were removed, the groundwater began to naturally attenuate. Long-term groundwater
monitoring began in 1991 and will continue on a quarterly basis until 1993, at which time an
evaluation of the wells will be performed. A five year review is expected to be conducted in
1995.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was entered by the U.S. District Court in Boston in 1989 for
the potentially responsible parties to conduct engineering designs and cleanup actions at the
site.
Environmental Progress
The initial cleanup actions described above have removed contaminated materials from the
site and have restricted site access, reducing the risk of exposure to hazardous substances at
the Cannon Engineering Corp. site. The cleanup activities conducted have reduced movement
of contaminants off site, as well as removed materials that are causing pollution.
Site Repository
Bridgewater Public Library, 15 South Street, Bridgewater, MA 02324
CANNON ENGINEERING CORPORATION
11
March 1992
-------
CHARLES
RECLAIM
TRUST
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD003809266
EPA REGION 1
Middlesex County
30 miles northwest of Boston
Other Names:
ge C Landfill
><=>>
Site Description
From the late 1950s until 1967, the Charles-George Reclamation Trust Landfill, located 1
mile southwest of Tyngsborough and 4 miles south of Nashua, NH, was a small municipal
dump. A new owner expanded it to its present size of approximately 55 acres and accepted
both household and industrial wastes from 1967 to 1976. The facility had a license to accept
hazardous waste from 1973 to 1976 and primarily accepted drummed and bulk chemicals
containing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and toxic metal sludges. Records show that
over 1,000 pounds of mercury were disposed of and approximately 2,500 cubic yards of
chemical wastes were landfilled. The State ordered closure of the site in 1983. That same
year, the EPA listed the site on the NPL and the owner filed for bankruptcy. Samples from
wells serving nearby Cannongate Condominiums and some nearby private homes revealed
VOCs and heavy metals in the groundwater. Approximately 500 people live within a mile of
the site in this residential/rural area; 2,100 live within 3 miles. The nearest residents are 100
yards away. The site is bordered by Flint Pond Marsh and Flint Pond to the east, Dunstable
Brook to the west, and the condo complex to the southeast. Seasonal livestock grazing occurs
in the area.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The air on the site is contaminated with VOCs including benzene and vinyl
chloride. Benzene, tetrahydrofuran, arsenic, and 2-butanone have been detected in
the groundwater. Domestic wells contained benzene. Sediments have been shown
to contain low levels of benzo(a)pyrene. People face a potential health threat by
drinking contaminated groundwater or inhaling landfill gas on the site. Flint Pond
Marsh, Flint Pond, and Dunstable Brook are nearby wetlands threatened by
contamination migrating from the site.
12
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in five stages: initial actions and four long-term remedial phases
focusing on providing an alternate water supply, capping the site, controlling the migration of
contaminants, and treating leachate in the groundwater.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In response to the discovery of contaminated well water in the
adjacent condominium complex in 1983, the EPA installed an insulated
aboveground pipeline to supply residents with an alternate water supply. In 1983
and 1984, the EPA installed a security fence and 12 gas vents, and the site was regraded to
cover exposed refuse.
Water Supply: At the end of 1983, the EPA approved a remedy that would
provide a permanent water supply to the affected residents. With EPA funds, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers installed 4 miles of ductile iron water pipe,
constructed a pump station and water storage tank, and arranged for chlorination services.
This project was completed in 1988.
Capping: In 1985, the EPA completed a study on capping the landfill and
selected the following remedy: installation of a full synthetic membrane cover and
a surface water diversion and collection system, which will keep rainwater from
spreading contamination; construction of a gas collection system venting to the atmosphere;
and creation of a leachate collection system around the entire site. Periodic mowing,
landscaping, and inspection/maintenance services also will be provided. The Corps of
Engineers completed construction of the full synthetic landfill cap in 1990.
Migration of Contaminants: In 1988, the EPA selected a remedy to restrict
the movement of contaminants off site. Features include: pumping contaminated
shallow groundwater and treating it biologically, along with the leachate collected
from the landfill cap system; collecting and incinerating gas vented from the landfill;
excavating and solidifying 500 cubic yards of contaminated sediments from Dunstable Brook
and placing them under the landfill cap; and groundwater monitoring. The Corps of
Engineers completed the design in 1991 and awarded a construction contract in early 1992.
Construction of a gas treatment flare and one of two groundwater extraction remedies is
scheduled to begin in 1992. Additional design work will be performed to upgrade the landfill
gas flare after it has begun operation. Cleanup of the sediments is not currently anticipated
due to new information about the levels of contamination and the degree of risk posed by the
contaminants.
CHARLES-GEORGE 13 March 1992
RECLAMATION TRUST LANDFILL
-------
Leachate: This remedy involves extraction of a contaminated groundwater plume
in the eastern portion of the site and combining it with leachate collected from
the landfill cap system for treatment. A biologically based cleanup technology may
be used. The parties potentially responsible for contamination of the site have performed
groundwater and leachate monitoring as part of their cleanup agreement with the EPA. The
parties also have performed groundwater treatability studies to be incorporated in the Corps'
design documents. The first of three interim leachate treatment remedies has been
completed, and the second is expected to begin in late 1992. The design of the permanent
leachate and groundwater treatment plant is expected to be completed in 1994 at which time
cleanup activities will begin.
Site Facts: In May 1983, the EPA issued a Notice Letter to the Charles-George
Reclamation Trust, requesting its cooperation in the cleanup. An Administrative Order was
signed with the potentially responsible parties to perform treatability studies and
groundwater/leachate monitoring with assistance from the EPA.
Environmental Progress
Providing a water supply system, installing a fence, capping the landfill area, and controlling
the spread of leachate have provided a safe drinking water source and reduced the potential
for exposure to hazardous materials at the Charles-George Reclamation Trust Landfill site,
making the site safer while it awaits further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Littlefield Public Library, 25 Middlesex Road, Tyngsborough, MA 01879
March 1992 14 CHARLES-GEORGE
RECLAMATION TRUST LANDFILL
-------
FORT DEV
MASSACHUS
EPAID# MA72100;
EPA REGION 1
Worcester County
35 miles west of Boston
Other Names:
South Post
Central Post
North Post
Site Description
Fort Devens is 35 miles west of Boston. It covers 9,416 acres at the intersection of four
towns: Ayer and Shirley in Middlesex County, and Lancaster and Harvard in Worcester
County. Founded in 1917, the Fort trains active duty personnel to support various Army
units. It also has custody of Fort Devens-Sudbury Training Annex, 12 miles to the southwest,
which was listed on the NPL in 1990. Fort Devens can be divided into three areas: the
2,300-acre Central Post, which is flanked by the 1,500-acre North Post and the 5,616-acre
South Post. Studies have revealed 54 potential hazardous waste sites on Fort land. Among
them are the 15-acre explosive ordnance disposal range (South Post), where explosives and
unusable munitions have been detonated or burned in open unlined pits since 1979 and
where soil sampling has led to the discovery of heavy metals, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and explosives residues; the 50-acre sanitary landfill (Central Post), where household
wastes, military refuse, asbestos, construction debris, waste oil, and incinerator ash have been
dumped since the 1930s; and a firefighting training area (North Post), where the possibility
for petroleum, oil, and lubricant contamination exists, as evidenced by stained asphalt,
concrete, and soil. The area is largely rural/residential. Approximately 21,700 Fort employees
and Ayer residents obtain drinking water from wells within 3 miles of the landfill; a Fort
Devens well is 1,670 feet from the landfill. An 8-mile section of the Nashua River lies within
the Fort's boundaries. The 630-acre Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge is in the east-central
portion of Fort Devens on land the Army deeded to the Department of the Interior in 1973.
An 83-acre wetland is in the refuge northeast of the ordnance range.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/15/89
15
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
Monitoring wells near the landfill indicate groundwater contamination from heavy
metals including cadmium, lead, mercury, iron, and arsenic. The soil near the
explosive ordnance disposal range is contaminated with heavy metals as well as
VOCs and explosive residues. Heavy metal contaminants, including arsenic,
chromium, nickel, and lead also are found in the surface water near the landfill.
Potential threats exist for the 630-acre wildlife refuge containing an 83-acre
wetland, which is in the center of Fort lands; the base drinking water wells; the
Plow Shop pond located in Ayer; and the Nashua River, along with its surrounding
habitat.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four long-term remedial phases focusing cleanup of the
contaminated groundwater, soils, and sediments at the Shepley's Hill Landfill, Cold Spring
Brook Landfill, South Post, and additional contaminated areas.
Response Action Status
Shepley's Hill Landfill: An investigation by the Army began in 1991 to consider
the extent and nature of contamination; recommendations for cleanup strategies
are scheduled to be made in late 1993. Two additional potential sites are included
Cold Spring Brook Landfill: The Army began an investigation in 1991 to
determine the nature and extent of contamination. Cleanup alternatives for the
site are scheduled to be completed in late 1993. An additional four potential sites
in this area will be reviewed to determine whether in-depth studies are needed.
South Post: A preliminary site investigation by the Army is underway at several
sites located on the 5,616-acre South Post to determine whether additional studies
are needed. If additional studies are needed, a full scale investigation to determine
the nature and extent of contamination is expected to begin in late 1992. Recommended
cleanup strategies are expected to be developed in 1994.
Additional Contaminated Areas: In 1992, the EPA began investigations of
several areas located on the Central Post. These investigations will determine
whether possible contamination warrants a detailed study of the site. There are as
many as 54 potential areas of concern located at the Central Post. Several investigations have
been completed at a number of areas and more sections will undergo investigations in 1992.
March 1992 16 FORT DEVENS
-------
Site Facts: Fort Devens is participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially
funded program established by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1978 to identify,
investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DOD
facilities. An Interagency Agreement between the Army and the EPA is expected to be
signed in June 1991 outlining the legal framework for the cleanup.
Environmental Progress
After adding the Fort Devens site to the NPL, the EPA assessed the actions being taken by
the Army and has determined that there are currently no immediate threats to public health
or the environment. Some intermediate actions may be deemed necessary based on the
investigations while the site awaits further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Ayer Library, 26 East Main Street, Ayer, MA 01432
FORT DEVENS
17
March 1992
-------
FORT DE
SUDBUR
TRAININ
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD980520670
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Middlesex County
4 square miles in Middlesex Co.
includes portions of the towns of
Maynard, Hudson, and Stow
Other Names:
Waste Area 7
V Waste Area 9
PCB Spill
U.S. Army Natick R&D Labs
Sudbury Annex
The Fort Devens-Sudbury Training Annex is a U.S. Army military installation occupying over
4 square miles in Middlesex County and includes portions of the towns of Sudbury, Maynard,
Hudson, and Stow. Established in the early 1940s, the Annex has served variously as an
ammunition depot, an ordnance test station, and a troop training and laboratory disposal
center. It is now under the custody of Fort Devens, located 12 miles to the northeast. Fort
Devens also is listed on the NPL. The Army has identified 11 potentially contaminated areas
on the site containing explosive residues, chemical laboratory wastes, oil lubricants, and other
toxic materials. In 1985, 100 to 200 gallons of oil containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
spilled from an out-of-service transformer in a remote abandoned area of the Annex. Four
other electrical transformer units in a remote section of the Annex were found with bullet
holes and dents that had permitted PCB-containing fluids to escape. In 1986, monitoring wells
downgradient from Waste Areas A7 and A9 were reported to be contaminated with
trichloroethane and benzene. Area A7 is a 20-acre gravel pit used from the 1940s to the
1980s as a laboratory dump, an all-purpose dump, and a burning ground. Area A9 is a 7-acre
parcel used by the State since the 1950s for fire training. The two areas are separated by an
unnamed tributary of the Assabet River. White Pond, which provides water to 12,000
residents of Maynard, is within 3 miles downstream of Waste Area A5, a 70-square-foot pit
where laboratory solvents were buried from 1973 to 1979. Approximately 35,700 people
obtain drinking water from public and private wells within 3 miles of the waste areas. A
private well is 1,600 feet from the waste areas. The area is mainly agricultural, with
interspersed residential areas. A freshwater wetland is within 600 feet of the pond.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 02/21/90
18
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
IA
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
including benzene from chemical lab wastes and oils. The soil is contaminated with
PCBs. People in the area are at potential risk from contaminated private and
municipal wells and through direct contact with contaminated soil. Nearby
freshwater wetlands could be subject to contamination from the site. Puffer Pond,
located along the northern boundary of the site, is being considered for
recreational development.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in five stages: initial actions and four long-term remedial phases
addressing cleanup of the groundwater (Waste Areas A7 and A9), the PCB spill area (Waste
Area A4), and additional contamination areas.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The Army responded to the 1985 PCB spill by removing 300
gallons of Aroclor and approximately 86 tons of PCB-contaminated soil to an
EPA-approved facility. Workers similarly removed the four additional
transformers discovered, along with some contaminated soil around them.
Groundwater (Waste Area A7): The Army to began an in-depth study of
groundwater contamination in Waste Area A7 in 1991. Recommended remedies
for cleanup are expected to be chosen by late 1993.
Groundwater (Waste Area A9): The Army began an in-depth study of
groundwater contamination in Waste Area A9 in 1991. Recommended remedies
for cleanup are expected to be chosen by 1994.
PCB Spill Area (Waste Area A4): The Army began a detailed study of
groundwater and soil contamination in the PCB spill area in late 1991. Findings
and recommended cleanup remedies are expected to be chosen in late 1993.
Additional Contamination Areas: In 1992, the Army began to study the nature
and extent of contamination at 65 additional areas of the site. A detailed
investigation will be performed at several areas of the site to determine if a more
thorough evaluation of remedies is necessary. Proposed cleanup alternatives for these areas
are expected to be recommended by 1995.
FORT DEVENS-SUDBURY TRAINING ANNEX 19 March 1992
-------
Site Facts: An Interagency Agreement between the EPA and the Army will be signed soon,
outlining the legal framework for the site cleanup. The Sudbury Training Annex is
participating in the Installation Restoration Program, a specially funded program established
by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1978 to identify, investigate, and control the
migration of hazardous contaminants at military and other DOD facilities.
Environmental Progress
Initial activities have removed sources of contamination, reducing the potential for exposure
to hazardous materials at the Fort Devens-Sudbury Training Annex site. The EPA has
addressed the actions taken by the Army and has determined that there are no immediate
threats to public health and the environment. Some immediate actions may be deemed
necessary, based on the site investigation, while the site awaits further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Goodnow Library, 21 Concord Street, Sudbury, MA 01776
March 1992
20
FORT DEVENS-SUDBURY TRAINING ANNEX
-------
GROVELA
WELLS
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD980732317
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Essex County
Groveland
The Groveland Wells site includes the watershed and aquifer supplying two contaminated
municipal water wells, as well as three properties known to be polluting groundwater and soil
in the area. The entire site area covers 850 acres. Groveland's production wells #1 and #2
were the sole source of drinking water for the town. Both were shut down in 1979, when the
State detected trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination. The Town instituted emergency
conservation measures and temporarily obtained water hookups from neighboring
communities. Groveland developed well #3 along the Merrimack River in the early 1980s,
but the water supply still falls short of the town's needs and growth trends. The EPA
currently is trying to initiate cleanup of hazardous waste materials from the highly
contaminated Valley Manufacturing Co. site, where metals and plastic parts have been made
since 1963. Operators used subsurface disposal systems and underground tanks that dispersed
liquids into buried leachfields. They also routinely dumped hazardous materials on the
ground. From 1964 to 1972, as much as 20 gallons per month of these materials were
released. Chemicals released in these ways included cutting oils, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and acid bath wastes. An estimated 5,000 people live within 3 miles of the site in
this residential area. The EPA has built a groundwater treatment facility plant at well #1. As
of early 1989, the plant has continuously provided a treated public water supply to the town.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with VOCs and heavy metals including lead and
arsenic. Soil is contaminated with trichloroethelene (TCE). The greatest threat is
posed by drinking water from contaminated wells, a danger that has been
minimized by the provision of an alternate water supply. Highly contaminated soil
found on the Valley Manufacturing Co. property could pose a risk to the workers
involved in site cleanup activities.
21
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions supply and two long-term
remedial phases focusing on groundwater migration and source control.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA installed a groundwater treatment facility for
Groveland's municipal well station #1. Valley Manufacturing Co., under a State
order, installed a groundwater treatment system just north of the Old Mill Pond.
The treatment system intercepts and treats a defined area of groundwater contamination.
The EPA has been treating water from municipal supply well #1 with carbon adsorption to
remove VOCs since 1989. The treatment plant operated as a public water supply from
August through November 1987 and again from the spring through fall of 1988. It went on
line again in early 1989 and is expected to operate on a continuous basis for the life of the
facility.
Groundwater Migration: The EPA began its initial study of site contamination
and cleanup options in 1983. The initial study was completed in 1985. In 1990, the
EPA began conducting an additional study referred to as a "supplemental
management of migration" study to evaluate movement of groundwater contaminants and
what further cleanup activities are needed. This was used to develop a permanent remedy to
address contamination throughout the Johnson Creek aquifer. In 1991, this investigation was
completed and the remedy for cleanup was selected. The remedy calls for extraction and
treatment of contaminated groundwater. Organic contaminants in the groundwater will be
treated by ultraviolet light/oxidation. Technical designs for cleanup are expected to begin in
late 1992.
Source Control: A supplemental study based on the initial studies referred to
above narrowed the focus of contamination to one location, and the following
remedy for the Valley area was selected: in-place vacuum extraction of VOCs
from 20,000 cubic yards of site soils and capture of those contaminants by activated carbon
treatment (a proven, innovative technology); pumping groundwater on the site and treating it
by air stripping, followed by passing through a carbon-containing filter to recapture the
contaminants; reinjecting some of the cleaned water into the ground "above" the site to speed
saturated soil cleanup; discharging the rest of the cleaned groundwater to the aquifer "below"
the site; treatment of air emissions from the cleanup process; groundwater monitoring; and
sealing or disconnecting all lines to the acid bath finishing process disposal system. Incidental
treatment of inorganic compounds and other contaminants will be provided as necessary in
order to operate the VOC contaminant treatment system efficiently and meet discharge
permit limits. The EPA will use the results of the vacuum extraction pilot study to complete
the supplemental evaluation of alternatives. Engineering design of the remedy began in early
1991, and cleanup activities are scheduled to start in late 1992.
March 1992 22 GROVELAND WELLS
-------
Site Facts: The Town of Groveland sued the potentially responsible parties and settled with
one of them to undertake a study of the nature and extent of contamination. The nearby
Haverhill site has been determined to be contributing to the groundwater contamination and
has been separately added to the NPL. In May 1992, a Unilateral Administrative Order was
issued to require the potentially responsible parties to initiate the technical designs for
cleanup of the groundwater migration and to initiate the actual cleanup activities.
Environmental Progress
Initial construction of water treatment facilities has provided a safe drinking water source,
and the various cleanup actions taking place at the Groveland Wells site have reduced the
possibility of exposure to hazardous materials and continue to reduce contamination in
groundwater. The EPA has identified the final cleanup remedies to address the groundwater
migration and cleanup activities expected to begin in late 1993.
Site Repository
Langley-Adams Library, Main Street, Groveland, MA 01834
GROVELAND WELLS
23
March 1992
-------
HAVERHILL
MUNICIPAL
LANDFILL
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD980523336
EPA REGION 1
Essex County
2 miles southeast of
downtown Haverhill
Site Description
Haverhill Municipal Landfill is a 71-acre industrial and municipal facility, which lies adjacent
to the Merrimack River. Trimount Bituminous Products operated the site as an industrial
landfill beginning in the late 1930s and started to accept municipal wastes in the 1960s. Two
of the landfill's three tracts were used for disposal of municipal and commercial refuse, while
the third received liquid wastes and sludges. Wastes included steel drums, tires, and
flammables, including lacquers, paints, oils, and glues. These materials either were dumped on
the surface of the site or were deposited into shallow pits. Sludges and liquids were dumped
near the river, which borders the site on the north. Resulting land erosion carried liquid
wastes into the river. Monitoring wells a short distance upgradient from the river showed
contamination. Until 1975, the landfill was operated in an unsanitary manner with little
compaction of refuse. The facility closed in 1981. Since 1981, the landfill has accepted sludges
generated by the Haverhill Wastewater Treatment Plant. The sludge is mixed with sand
and/or loam and then spread over the surface of the landfill. Numerous reports have cited lax
security on the property; dirt bikers have been observed riding on the site. The area is
residential; the two nearby towns, Haverhill and Groveland, have a combined population of
approximately 51,400.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Chromium and arsenic have been found in liquids on site. The soil is contaminated
with benzoanthracene, dibenzofuran, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A
nearby creek is contaminated with VOCs and manganese. Drums found on the site
contained material contaminated with VOCs including toluene and xylene. The
groundwater is contaminated with VOCs and heavy metals including arsenic, lead,
mercury, manganese, and chromium. Potential threats include drinking
contaminated groundwater or exposure to surface waters in a nearby creek.
24
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup alternatives for the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1979, two public water supply wells in Groveland were closed
due to possible contamination. In 1990, the EPA discovered two drums of
unknown material on the site. Tests revealed the contents of the drums to be
contaminated with VOCs. The contaminated drums were stabilized and were removed from
the site by the site owner.
Entire Site: An in-depth study of the nature and extent of the contamination at
the site is scheduled to start in 1993. The results of the study, scheduled for
completion in 1995, will identify recommended cleanup strategies.
Environmental Progress
As a result of the closing of the two contaminated public water supply wells and the removal
of contaminated drums, the EPA determined that the public is not at risk while the Haverhill
site awaits further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Not established.
HAVERHILL MUNICIPAL LANDFILL
25
March 1992
-------
HOCOMONC
POND
MASSACHUSETT
EPA ID# MAD980732341
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Worcester County
West borough
The Hocomonco Pond site, consisting of approximately 23 acres, included a recreational pond
that was closed by the State in 1980. From 1928 to 1946, the site was used as a wood-treating
operation. The business consisted of saturating wood products with creosote for preservation,
During the operations, wastewater was discharged into a pit lagoon. The lagoon was
excavated on the property to store spillage and waste from the wood-treating operation. As
this lagoon became filled with waste creosotes, sludges, and water, its contents were pumped
into a low depression, also known as Kettle Pond. The wood-treatment facility operated until
the mid-1940s, when it was converted into an asphalt mining plant. Discarded aggregate and
asphalt are common throughout the site. The last use of the site was as a cement plant where
dry cement was distributed in bulk. The surface water and groundwater have shown creosote
contamination. Approximately 2,500 people, who depend on groundwater as a drinking water
supply, and 14,000 people, who use the surface water for other purposes, live within 3 miles
of the site. The nearest residences are 2,000 feet from the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, soil, and sediments from the pond and its shore are
contaminated with heavy metals including arsenic and chromium, creosotes, and
carcinogenic compounds. Public health risks include the possibility of direct contact
with or accidental ingestion of the contaminated soil, sediment, and groundwater.
26
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on interim source
control and groundwater treatment.
Response Action Status
Interim Source Control: The cleanup alternatives that the EPA selected include
site grading, capping, and relocation of the storm drain pipe currently located next
to the east side of the former lagoon. The parties potentially responsible for site
contamination completed relocation of the storm drain pipe, site grading, and capping in
1990.
Landfill and Groundwater Treatment: Cleanup alternatives for the landfill
area were selected in 1985 for the Kettle Pond area. The remedies include
dewatering the pond and lowering the groundwater level in the immediate area.
Soil and waste excavation will be based primarily on visible contamination criteria. Additional
removal of contaminants will take place based on the sampling and analysis of soil conducted
during excavation. Hocomonco Pond and a discharge stream will be dredged and
contaminated sediments disposed of on site. Removal and on-site disposal of contaminated
materials at three isolated areas of contamination, air and water quality monitoring, and
post-closure activities are consistent with Federal regulations. The cleanup design is expected
to be completed in 1993. The parties potentially responsible for the site contamination are
conducting a further investigation into the groundwater contamination, after which the EPA
will determine if additional remedies for treating the contaminated groundwater are
necessary. The investigation is scheduled to be completed in 1993.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was filed in the U.S. District Court in 1987, allowing the
potentially responsible parties to conduct preliminary investigations into site contamination.
Environmental Progress
Following the listing of this site on the NPL, the EPA completed a site assessment and
determined that the site presently poses no immediate threat to public health or the
environment. Current efforts to control movement of contaminants and to remove
contamination sources will further reduce potential threats. Hocomonco Pond is safe while it
awaits future groundwater cleanup actions.
Site Repository
Westborough Public Library, West Main Street, Westborough, MA 01581
HOCOMONCO POND 27 March 1992
-------
EPA ID* MAD07658c§
Site Description
Other Names:
ark Phillip Trust
Woburn Site
Industri-Plex 128 Site
The Industri-Plex site is a 250-acre industrial park. From 1853 to 1931, the site was used for
manufacturing chemicals such as arsenic insecticides, acetic acid, and sulfuric acid for local
textile, leather, and paper manufacturing industries. Chemicals manufactured by other
industries at the site include phenol, benzene, and toluene. From 1934 to 1969, the site was
used to manufacture glue from raw animal hides and chrome-tanned hides. From 1969 to the
present, the site has been developed for industrial use. Excavation in the 1970s uncovered
and mixed 130 years of accumulation of industrial by-products and wastes. Residues from
animal hides used in the manufacture of glue were buried in pits on the site property. Process
wastewater was settled on site and was discharged to the municipal sewer. Many of the pits,
piles, and lagoons are continuously leaching toxic metals into the environment. Many of the
wastes in the soil were relocated and mixed into piles near swampy areas on the property.
The site currently consists of streams and ponds, active and abandoned manufacturing
facilities, and waste deposits buried on the site. Animal hide residues are found on
approximately 20 acres of the site in four different piles. Portions of stockpiled wastes
sloughed off, releasing hydrogen sulfide gases to the atmosphere and toxic metals and soils to
the pond and wetlands. Residences are located within 1,000 feet of the site, and more than
34,000 people live within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including benzene and toluene, and with arsenic. The soil is contaminated with
heavy metals including arsenic, chromium, and lead. Also, a pervasive "rotten egg"
odor has been caused by hydrogen sulfide gas generated by the decay of the buried
animal hides from glue manufacturing wastes. Exposure can occur through contact
with contaminated soil. However, since the site is mostly vacant now, with plans for
industrial and commercial use, the potential exposure most likely is limited to
workers on the site during future construction. The contaminated groundwater has
the potential to migrate to two Woburn municipal drinking wells, which are
currently closed.
28
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: initial actions and two long-term remedial phases
focusing on site stabilization and cleanup of groundwater contamination.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The EPA installed a 10,000-foot fence to restrict site access in
1986. Extensive damage to the main areas of the fence occurred, and drums were
dumped illegally on the site. Areas of the fence requiring repairs were identified
by the EPA, and work to re-secure the site was completed in 1988. Warning signs were
posted.
Site Stabilization: In 1986, the EPA selected the cleanup activities that will be
conducted by the parties potentially responsible for site contamination. To address
the problem of approximately 1,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils and sludges
at the site, the site will be graded, a permeable soil cover cap will be installed over certain
areas, institutional controls will be implemented, water quality will be monitored, and
post-closure activities will be maintained, consistent with hazardous waste regulations. To
address groundwater contamination at the site, an interim remedy of extracting and treating
the groundwater will be implemented. The treatment will remove VOCs and metals.
Ultimately, treated water will be discharged to the surface water and the aquifer. This will
help disperse remaining contaminants. Treatment will be followed by groundwater monitoring.
Remedies selected in connection with odors and air contamination include stabilization of the
side slopes of the various piles, installation of a gas collection layer, installation of a synthetic
and impermeable membrane cap to prevent rainwater from entering the piles and gases from
escaping without treatment, treatment of gases with either activated carbon or thermal
oxidation (the final treatment selection will be decided after the impermeable cover has been
installed), implementation of an air quality monitoring program, and routine maintenance.
The potentially responsible parties began designing the cleanup remedies in 1989. Once the
design phase is completed, expected in 1992, cleanup activities will begin. Design for the site
cap and localized groundwater pump and treatment for VOCs and arsenic is expected to be
finalized in 1992. Construction of these remedies is anticipated later in 1992.
Groundwater Contamination: An investigation into the extent and nature of
groundwater contamination is underway and is expected to be completed in 1993.
The study will identify the level of metals and organics in the contamination plume
and also will determine the effectiveness of the extraction and treat system and thus
determine what additional remedies may be required for cleanup of site groundwater.
Site Facts: In 1979, in response to illegal filling of wetlands, the EPA obtained a court order
to stop further development activities. The EPA and the State entered into a Consent Order
with Stauffer Chemical in 1982, whereby Stauffer was to conduct an investigation and
recommend cleanup action. In 1988, the EPA and the potentially responsible parties signed a
Consent Decree to implement the remedy for stabilizing the site and to reimburse the EPA
for past costs and future oversight costs.
INDUSTRI-PLEX 29 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
Initial actions of fencing and posting warning signs around the site have restricted access to
the Industri-Plex site and made it safer until the final cleanup begins. Upon completion of the
final cleanup remedies, the soil and groundwater contamination levels at the Industri-Plex site
will be reduced to meet established health and ecological standards for the site.
Site Repository
Reading Public Library, 64 Middlesex Library, Reading, MA 01867
March 1992
30
INDUSTRI-PLEX
-------
IRON
HORSE
PARK
MASSACHUSETT
EPAID# MAD051787323
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Middlesex County
North Billerica
Other Names:
Boston and Maine RR
n Horse Park/RSI, Inc. Dump
Park/John Manvllle Dump
Shaffer Landfill
Billerica Landfill
Pond St. Landfill
The Iron Horse Park site, a 533-acre industrial complex, includes manufacturing and railyard
maintenance facilities, open storage areas, landfills, and wastewater lagoons. A long history of
activities at the site, beginning in 1913, has resulted in the contamination of soil,
groundwater, and surface water. An asbestos landfill is located to the northwest and adjacent
to the lagoons area. Middlesex Canal runs along the length of the northern boundary. It is
drained by Content Brook, which runs through residential areas into the Shawseen River east
of the site. Richardson Pond lies north of the site and is also drained by the Content Brook.
An unnamed brook, which runs northerly through the site near wastewater lagoons, drains
into a marshland near the asbestos landfill. Approximately 61,000 people live within a 3-mile
radius of the site. There are four day care centers or nursery schools, two housing units for
the elderly, and a walk-in clinic in the area. A trailer park and condominium complex are
located within a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater and surface water sporadically are contaminated with organic
and inorganic chemicals, asbestos, and heavy metals including arsenic, cadmium,
lead, and selenium. The soil at the site is contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs), petrochemicals, and the same heavy metals as those found in
the groundwater. The majority of surface water contamination is located in the
vicinity of Shaffer Landfill. People are at risk by coming in direct contact with or
accidentally ingesting contaminated water, soil, or sediments. Environmentally
sensitive marshland and wetlands are located near the site and could be subject to
contamination.
31
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: initial actions and three long-term remedial phases
focusing on cleanup of the lagoon areas, Shaffer Landfill, and groundwater and surface
water.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1984, the EPA removed asbestos deposits from various areas
on the site and covered an asbestos landfill with gravel, stone, and topsoil. The
EPA then seeded and fenced the area. By covering the asbestos landfill, the EPA
eliminated the potential for inhalation of fugitive asbestos dust particles.
Lagoon Areas: The remedy selected by the EPA to be performed by the owners
to clean up the lagoons involves excavation and on-site treatment of contaminated
soil and sludge by bioremediation, with the residue disposed of in the lagoon area.
This action will be followed by covering the area with clean soil and establishment of a
vegetative cover. The owner then will decontaminate the lagoon system piping and pumps.
Development of the design and specifications for these remedies was completed in 1991 and
site cleanup activities began shortly thereafter.
Shaffer Landfill: In accordance with a State Consent Agreement, the Shaffer
Landfill area has been closed. The owners have installed a two-layer cover over
the landfill, the bottom layer consisting of low-permeability clay material and a top
layer of soil capable of supporting vegetation. In addition, a gas collection and a gas
vent/flare system have been installed to reduce odors from the landfill. The EPA is
completing an investigation of the Shaffer Landfill area that evaluates the current cover and
considers other capping options. The study was completed in early 1991, and cleanup methods
were selected including reconstruction of the landfill cap, and collection and off-site
treatment and disposal of leachate. Development of the design and specifications for these
remedies is expected to begin in late 1992.
Groundwater and Surface Water: An EPA investigation currently is underway
to evaluate the levels and the extent of groundwater and surface water
contamination, potential sources, and the possible means of migration. A work
plan for a supplemental investigation is being developed with field activities scheduled to
begin in late 1992. The study and selection of final cleanup technologies are expected to be
completed in 1994.
Site Facts: A Consent Agreement was reached in 1984 between the State and the owners
for closure of the Shaffer Landfill area. The agreement established a series of cleanup
activities and a schedule for their implementation at the landfill. In 1990, the potentially
responsible parties assumed responsibility for designing the cleanup approach for the lagoon
areas, under a Consent Decree with the State.
March 1992 32 IRON HORSE PARK
-------
Environmental Progress
The removal of asbestos materials and the construction of a fence surrounding the landfill
have reduced the exposure potential at the Iron Horse Park site while it awaits further
cleanup activities. The installation of a cap also will control odors and eliminate the migration
of contaminants into the surface water and groundwater on and off site. Further planned
activities will reduce contamination levels at the site, making it safe to area residents and the
environment.
Site Repository
Billerica Public Library, 25 Concord Road, Billerica, MA 01821
IRON HORSE PARK
33
March 1992
-------
NEW .(
/ i-V-T-7^ - \ £_, «»*^ Bristol County
MASSACHUSfTTjSL ^ \ S^>\ 55milessouthofBoston
EPA ID# MAD980731335
Site Description
The 18,000-acre New Bedford Site is an urban tidal estuary consisting of a harbor and bay
that are highly contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and heavy metals.
Manufacturers in the area used PCBs while producing electric capacitors from 1940 to 1978.
Until the late 1970s, when the use of PCBs was banned by the EPA, factories discharged
industrial process wastes containing PCBs into the harbor. PCB contamination in the New
Bedford Harbor area is widespread as a result of poor disposal practices. The harbor is
contaminated for at least 6 miles, from the upper Acushnet River to Buzzards Bay.
Approximately 98,500 people are living within 3 miles of the site. A 5-acre northern portion
of the Acushnet River Estuary is contaminated with high levels of PCBs and has been
identified as the hot spot area of the site. The contamination of the harbor and bay
sediments by high concentrations of PCBs and heavy metals has resulted in closing the area
to lobstering and fishing and has limited recreational activities and harbor development.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
PCBs and heavy metals, notably cadmium, lead, copper, and chromium, were
identified in sediments, soil, and marine life. Levels of PCBs in some marine life
exceed the regulatory limit for PCBs. The major potential public health risks in the
hot spot area involve direct contact with contaminated sediments and eating
contaminated fish and shellfish from the area. There is an increased carcinogenic
risk for people who eat PCB-contaminated fish from the harbor and estuary on a
daily or weekly basis. Currently, fishing is restricted in these areas to minimize the
potential risk. There also is an increased risk to public health from eating
lead-contaminated plant or animal life. The risk to plant or animal life is greatest
for bottom-dwelling organisms that have direct contact with contaminated
sediments.
34 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in three stages: an initial action and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on the hot spot area and the remaining contaminated areas.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: In 1982, the Coast Guard erected signs warning the public of the
presence of PCBs in the harbor and industrial areas. The State intensified efforts
to restrict access to the harbor. Bilingual warning signs in English and Portuguese
were posted along the New Bedford and Fairhaven shoreline. When the signs were destroyed
by winter weather, the EPA replaced them. In 1985, 2,000 feet of chain-link fence at two
recreational facilities were erected to keep people out of the contaminated areas.
Hot Spot Area: In 1985, the Army Corps of Engineers began to evaluate
alternatives for addressing harbor contamination. In 1988, the investigation was
expanded, allowing the Corps to conduct demonstrations of dredging equipment
and construction and testing of disposal facilities in the estuary, while continuing to carry out
site sampling, analysis, and research. Hydraulic dredges were tested, sediment disposal
facilities were constructed, and extensive environmental monitoring was conducted to
determine whether removal and construction activities could occur without spreading
contaminants. The engineering study conducted by the Corps will be used by the EPA to
formulate the cleanup approach for the site. The EPA's selected remedy for the hot spot
area includes removal and incineration of contaminated sediments to permanently reduce the
migration of contaminants throughout the harbor area. Specifically, this alternative calls for
the removal of 10,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments from the hot spot area at
depths up to 4 feet, and then dewatering the sediments. Wastewater produced during
dewatering will be treated prior to discharge into the harbor. Contaminated sediments will be
treated at a transportable incinerator. The cleanup of the hot spot areas has been broken
into two phases. Design of the remedy for the first phase began in 1990 and was completed in
1991. The design of the second phase also was completed in 1991 and cleanup activities
began that same year.
Remainder of the Site: The EPA currently is evaluating different alternatives
for cleaning up the remainder of the site. The results of this study were released in
1990. The EPA is expected to issue a cleanup plan in 1992, after which final
cleanup activities can begin.
Site Facts: In 1982, the EPA entered into Consent Agreements with two companies to
address the PCB problem on their properties.
NEW BEDFORD SITE 35 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
Although much work has yet to be done due to the enormity of this project, progress has
been made toward final cleanup of the harbor and surrounding areas. The initial actions have
restricted exposure to contaminated seafood and have reduced the potential of exposure to
hazardous substances at the New Bedford Site.
Site Repository
New Bedford Free Library, 613 Pleasant Street, Bedford, MA 02740
March 1992
36
NEW BEDFORD SITE
-------
NORWOOD
MASSACHUSEl
EPA ID# MAD980670566
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Norfolk County
Kerry Place in Norwood
Other Names:
Grant Gear, Inc.
Dean Street Site
The Norwood PCBs site is located on 26 acres of mainly commercial and industrial
properties. The site is bordered by Route 1, the Dean Street access road, Meadow Brook,
Pellana Road, and Dean Street. The site consists of several parcels of land, including the
Grant Gear facility, which currently produces gears for industry; properties in Kerry Place; an
automobile dealership; and associated parking areas and adjacent fields. In 1979, the site was
subdivided. The northeastern portion of the site, approximately 9 acres in size, was purchased
by Grant Gear Realty Trust and leased to Grant Gear Works, Inc. The southern and western
portions of the site were further subdivided, a major portion of which was named Kerry
Place. Most of the lots now are occupied by commercial and light industrial buildings.
Beginning in the 1940s, previous owners or operators of the Grant Gear building used
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the production of electrical transformers and other
electrical components. In 1983, the State detected high levels of PCBs in the soil on the site,
and the EPA conducted an emergency removal of contaminated soil. Approximately 8,000
people live within a mile of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
The on-site groundwater is contaminated with PCBs and volatile organic chemicals
(VOCs) such as trichloroethylene (TCE), and vinyl chloride. On-site soil and
sediments are contaminated with PCBs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
and heavy metals. People may face health risks by coming in direct contact with or
accidentally ingesting on-site soil and sediments. Increased risk may be posed to
human health if on-site groundwater, left untreated, were used as a drinking water
source. The concentrations of PCBs in the sediments in Meadow Brook may pose
an increased risk to aquatic organisms. Exposure to PCB-contaminated soils also
may pose a threat to animal life inhabiting the site area.
37
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1983, the EPA conducted an emergency removal of over 500
tons of highly contaminated soil from the site and transported it to an approved
disposal facility. In 1986, the State installed a 4-foot-high wire mesh fence around
a 1 1/2-acre portion of the northwestern and southwestern corners of the Grant Gear
property and covered contaminated soils within the fenced areas. The cover consisted of a
filter-fabric liner and 6 inches of crushed stone.
Entire Site: The remedies selected by the EPA to clean up the site include
excavating soils, dredge material, and sediments and treating them by solvent
extraction of PCBs, with on-site disposal; flushing or replacing the site drainage
system; cleaning equipment surfaces; collecting groundwater and treating it by removing the
contaminants using air filtering to convert volatile chemicals to a gas (activated carbon will be
used before or after the air filtration step to remove PCBs); and restoring the wetlands after
minimizing the effects on the wetlands during the cleanup of Meadow Brook sediments. The
EPA is preparing the technical specifications and design for the cleanup. These activities will
commence once the design phase is completed, expected in 1994. Pre-design activities,
including treatability studies, are being conducted currently.
Site Facts: The State originally investigated the site in response to a telephone call from an
area resident.
Environmental Progress
The initial cleanup actions described above have removed contaminated sources and
restricted access to the site, thereby reducing the potential of exposure to hazardous
substances at the Norwood PCBs site. These completed actions have made the area safer
while it awaits planned cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Morrill Memorial Library, Walpole Street, Norwood, MA 02062
March 1992 38 NORWOOD PCBS
-------
NYANZA MC
7 —h^-^J ^^Et«r Middlesex County
WASTE DUMP1—~^ ...-i ^^*, Me9uncoRoaainAshla°d
Site Description
MASSACH USETT -cw. Dump
EPA ID# MAD990685422 •rf^M*^*
The Nyanza Chemical Waste Dump site is a 35-acre parcel of land adjacent to an active
industrial complex. From 1917 to 1978, the site was used to produce textile dyes,
intermediates, and other products. Nyanza, Inc. operated on this site from 1965 until 1978,
when it ceased operations. Large volumes of industrial wastewater containing high levels of
acids and numerous organic and inorganic chemicals including mercury were generated by
these companies. The wastes were partially treated and discharged into the Sudbury River
through a small stream, referred to as Chemical Brook. Over 45,000 tons of chemical sludges
generated by Nyanza's wastewater treatment processes, along with spent solvents and other
chemical wastes, were buried on site. The area that contains the largest amount of buried
waste and exposed sludge is referred to as the Hill section. The current owner leases the old
plant grounds to various businesses. The estimated population within 3 miles is 10,000 people.
D—~- «-u-r* TU- -, • u • AA A^ u NPL LISTING HISTORY
Responsibility: This site is being addressed through Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Federal actions. Final Date: Q9/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
IV
The groundwater, soil, sediments, and surface water are contaminated with heavy
metals and chlorinated organics. The groundwater and soil also are contaminated
with spent solvents and chemical wastes. The potential health threats include direct
contact and accidental ingestion of contaminated surface water, groundwater, or
soil. Wetlands nearby are contaminated with mercury, and fish in the Sudbury
River exceed the regulatory guidelines for mercury. Two downstream reservoirs,
designated as backup water supplies, also contain sediment with high mercury
contamination levels.
39 March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in four stages: initial actions and three long-term remedial phases
focusing on source control and soil cleanup, cleanup of the groundwater, and cleanup of
surface water and sediments.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1987 and 1988, the EPA excavated an underground storage
vault containing 12,025 tons of material; 300 tons of contaminated soils were
incinerated, and an additional 356 tons of soils were excavated and disposed of off
site.
Source Control and Soil: The remedy selected by the EPA to control the
source of the contamination and to clean up the soil includes: excavating all
outlying sludge deposits and contaminated soils and sediments associated with
these deposits; consolidation of this material with the Hill sludge deposits; capping of the Hill
area to prevent water from entering; construction of a groundwater and surface water
diversion system on the upgradient side of the Hill; backfilling the excavated areas to original
grade and establishing a vegetative cover in the wetland areas; and constructing a more
extensive groundwater monitoring system to allow for future evaluation of the cap.
Approximately 60 percent of the 13-acre cap in an area of existing lagoons, sludge pits, and
buried building debris has been covered with earth from on-site excavations in clean areas.
The remaining portion of the area to be capped was excavated to bedrock to create a cell for
the disposal of contaminated soils and solidified sludges from the on- and off-site remediation
areas. The fencing of the site is completed. More than 65,000 cubic yards of contaminated
soil were excavated and placed in the cell in 1990. Construction of the site cap was completed
in 1991. All cleanup actions are expected to be completed in late 1992.
Groundwater: The EPA selected a remedy to cleanup the off-site groundwater
contamination in 1991. The selected remedy was to pump and treat the
contaminated groundwater from most contaminated portions of the plume for five
years. Once this is completed, the EPA will determine whether additional measures are
necessary. Technical design for the selected remedy began in early 1992 and cleanup actions
are expected to begin in 1994.
Surface Water and Sediments: The EPA also is studying the contamination of
the surface water and sediments of the Sudbury River. The study will define the
contaminants and will recommend alternatives for the final cleanup. Preliminary
sampling has proven that sediment, surface water, and fish are contaminated with heavy
metals. It is scheduled to be completed in mid-1992.
March 1992 40 NYANZA CHEMICAL WASTE DUMP
-------
Environmental Progress
The initial actions described above have reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous
substances by controlling the pathway of contamination migration and isolating wastes under
an impermeable cap. The EPA is currently re-posting the river with signs warning against the
consumption of fish due to contamination. These completed actions have made the Nyanza
Chemical Waste Dump site safer while actions continue and the EPA investigates methods to
address surface water and sediment contamination.
Site Repository
Ashland Public Library, 66 Front Street, Ashland, MA 01721
NYANZA CHEMICAL WASTE DUMP
41
March 1992
-------
OTIS AIR
GUARD
CAMPE
MASSACHUSETT
EPA ID# MA2570024487
EPA REGION 1
Barnstable County
Falmouth
Other Names:
DOD/MMR/USAF Sani Landfill
"<^DOD/MMR/Base Landfill
POD/MMR/USAF Sani Landfill
DOD/MMR/Current Fire Training Area
DOD/MMR/Former Firefighting
Training Area
Site Description
The Otis Air National Guard Base (ANGB) and Camp Edwards site covers approximately
21,000 acres, today known as the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR). Although the
occupants and property boundaries have changed several times since MMR was established in
1935, the primary mission has always been to provide training and housing to Air Force or
Army units. A review of past and present operations and waste disposal practices identified
potentially contaminated areas, including eight that cover 3,900 acres on the southern portion
of MMR. Six. of the eight areas are located within Otis ANGB property boundaries: Former
Fire Training Area, Current Fire Training Area, Base Landfill, Non-destructive Testing
Laboratory Leach Pit, Fly Ash Disposal Area, and a plume of contaminated groundwater
from a sewage treatment plant, which extends 2 miles south. The two remaining waste areas,
the Unit Training Equipment Site and Property Disposal Office Storage Yard, are at Camp
Edwards, which currently is leased to the Army. The materials found at the eight areas are fly
ash, bottom ash, waste solvents, waste fuels, herbicides, and transformer oil. While the
Non-destructive Testing Laboratory operated (1970 to 1978), waste solvents, emulsifiers,
penetrants, and photographic developers were deposited in the sewer system. Effluent from
the sewage treatment plant was discharged into sand beds, where it seeped into groundwater.
In 1984, the U.S. Geological Survey detected contaminants in the monitoring wells
downgradient of the plant. In 1983 and 1984, the Air Force detected volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) in on-site monitoring wells near the Base Landfill and Current Fire
Training Area. Monitoring by the Air National Guard and the State Department of
Environmental Quality has detected VOCs in more than 200 private wells and in one town
well. The EPA has designated the Cape Cod aquifer underlying MMR as a sole source
aquifer, under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The municipalities of Bourne and Sandwich and
the Air Force base have an estimated population of 36,000 people and have drinking water
wells within 3 miles of hazardous substances at the site. Irrigation wells also are within 3
miles. Ashumet Pond, less than 1 mile from the Former Fire Training Area, is used for
recreational activities.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/15/89
42
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with VOCs, including trichloroethane,
tetrachloroethylene, and dichloroethylene. To date, the wells are not contaminated.
However, people could be at risk if they accidentally drink or come into direct
contact with contaminated groundwater. A fresh water wetland is 3,600 feet
downstream from the site.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in 11 stages: initial actions and 10 long-term remedial phases.
Initial work at the site focuses on Chemical Spill Area Ten, Chemical Spill Area Four, Fuel
Spill Area Two, Fire Training Area One, Storm Drainage Area Swale Two, Fuel Spill Area
One, Base Landfill, and the Remaining Priority One, Two, and Three Areas.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: Water lines were installed in 1986 to private residences affected
by groundwater contamination. In 1990, contaminated sediment was pumped from
the site and removed.
Chemical Spill Area Ten: The National Guard Bureau (NGB) is studying the
nature and extent of contamination at the site. The investigation will define the
contaminants and will recommend alternatives for cleanup. The study is expected
to be completed in 1994.
1992.
Chemical Spill Area Four: In 1992, the remedy to cleanup the Chemical Spill
Area Four was selected. The cleanup action to address this area is a groundwater
extraction and treatment system. Cleanup activities are expected to begin in late
Fuel Spill Area Two: The NGB currently is investigating the contamination at
this site to determine the best cleanup strategy. The study is scheduled to be
completed in 1994.
Fire Training Area One: The NGB is conducting a study of the area to define
the contaminants and to recommend alternatives for final cleanup. The
investigation is expected to be completed in 1994.
Storm Drainage Area Swale Two: The NGB is investigating this area to
determine the nature and extent of contamination. The study is scheduled for
completion in 1994.
OTIS AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE/
CAMP EDWARDS
43
March 1992
-------
Fuel Spill Area One: The NGB is conducting a study of the contaminants at
this area. The study is expected to be completed in 1993.
Base Landfill: The NGB began a study of the contamination at the Base
Landfill in 1991. The study, which will define the contaminants of concern and
recommend cleanup alternatives, is scheduled to be completed in late 1992.
The Remaining Priority One Areas: The NGB is investigating the remaining
priority one areas to determine the nature and extent of contamination. This
investigation is expected to be completed in 1994.
The Remaining Priority Two Areas: The NGB is conducting an investigation
of these areas to determine the contaminants of concern. The study is scheduled
to be completed in 1994.
The Remaining Priority Three Areas: The NGB is investigating the nature
and extent of contamination at these areas. The study is scheduled to be
completed in 1994.
Site Facts: The Army and Air Force, through the NGB, are participating in the Installation
Restoration Program, a specially funded program established by the Department of Defense
(DOD) in 1978 to identify, investigate, and control the migration of hazardous contaminants
at military and other DOD facilities. The Air Force has investigated Air Force property only.
The NGB, which represents both the Army and Air Force, is coordinating a second
investigation that addresses the entire facility.
Environmental Progress
Following listing of this site on the NPL, the EPA completed a site assessment, in
coordination with the Army, Air Force, and the NGB and determined that the site presently
poses no immediate threat to public health. The Otis Air National Guard Base/Camp
Edwards site is safe while it awaits further cleanup activities. In addition, installation of water
supply lines to residents affected by groundwater contamination has reduced that potential
health threat.
Site Repository
Jonathon Bourne Library, 19 Sandwich Road, Bourne, MA 02532
March 1992 44 OTIS AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE/
CAMP EDWARDS
-------
PLYMOU
CANNO
ENGINE
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD980525232
EPA REGION 1
Plymouth County
1 1/2 miles northwest of Plymouth
Site Description
The Plymouth Harbor/Cannon Engineering Corp. site covers 2 1/2 acres in Cordage Industrial
Park. The site is located near the towns of Plymouth and Kingston. The facilities consist of
three above ground storage tanks and the foundation of a razed building. Each storage tank
is surrounded by a 6- to 8-foot-high earthen berm. The northernmost tank is about 50 feet
from Plymouth Harbor, while the central and southern tanks are about 180 feet from the
Harbor. The storage tanks were originally constructed in the 1920s and used for storing fuel
and oil that were unloaded from barges. In 1975, the company obtained a license to store
motor oils, industrial oils and emulsions, solvents, lacquers, organic and inorganic chemicals,
cyanide and plating wastes, plating sludge, oily solids, pesticides, and clay and filter media with
chemicals. Cannon Engineering Corp. transported and stored hazardous wastes at the
Plymouth facility and incinerated the wastes at its Bridgewater facility until 1980, when the
facilities went into receivership. Approximately 50,000 people live in the two communities
surrounding the site; 33,000 people live within a 3-mile radius of the site, and about 300
people work within 1/2 mile of the site. The area has a number of beaches, summer cottages,
public recreation, and tourist areas. The historic area of Plymouth Rock is located 1 1/2 miles
southeast of the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' action.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site soil and off-site sediments were contaminated with low levels of
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and lead. Pesticides also were present in
the on-site soil. The site is fenced to limit access. There is no longer a health
threat from contaminated on-site soils. Plymouth Harbor is used for boating and
water sports.
45
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control and sampling program investigations.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, Salt Water Trust removed the contents and then
cleaned and decontaminated the south tank. The contents of the central tank
were removed by the EPA. A total of 44,022 gallons of oil-phase waste and
139,877 gallons of aqueous-phase waste were transported to disposal facilities for incineration.
Sludge pumping operations began at the completion of the oil and aqueous waste removal.
An estimated 52,750 gallons of sludge and 8,000 gallons of toluene were removed from the
tanks and shipped for disposal at an approved facility.
Source Control: The remedies selected by the EPA included: removing the
tanks and their pipes and disposing of them at an approved facility; conducting
additional sampling at the site to determine the distribution of contaminants;
sampling of groundwater, surface water, and sediment near the site; and assessing flood plains
to determine possible effects on cleanup actions. After evaluation, the EPA issued a
document in 1985 listing the final decision on the method of cleanup chosen, and in 1986 and
1987, the EPA cleaned the interiors of the three empty storage tanks and dismantled them.
The pipework, foundations, and 33 drums of wastes already on the site were transported to a
licensed disposal facility. Soil was excavated from two locations on the site, placed in drums,
disposed of, and replaced with clean fill. Once the tanks and other materials were removed,
the EPA sampled soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediments for the presence and
distribution of remaining contamination at the site. A Flood Plains Assessment Report was
prepared and evaluated for the site. The site was fenced at that time. All cleanup activities
were completed in late 1987, and the EPA is expected to delete the site from the NPL in
1992.
Sampling Program Investigations: The EPA studied the results of the
sampling program to evaluate any possible human health and environmental risks.
Based on this evaluation, the EPA is satisfied that the site poses no threat to
human health and the environment. The preliminary site Close Out Report, filed in March
1992, confirms the EPA's findings.
Site Facts: A history of complaints of odors and reports of leaks from the storage tanks on
the site prompted the State and the EPA to investigate the site. In 1983, a Consent
Agreement was reached with Salt Water Trust, the owners of the site. According to the
agreement, the site owners would clean the south tank, and the EPA would clean the central
tank.
March 1992 46 PLYMOUTH HARBOR/
CANNON ENGINEERING CORP.
-------
Environmental Progress
The actions described above have eliminated the potential of exposure to hazardous
substances and removed the sources of contamination at the Plymouth Harbor/Cannon
Engineering site. All cleanup activities have been completed. A Five-Year Review and Close
Out Report were completed in 1992, and the EPA expects to delete the site from the NPL in
late 1992.
Site Repository
Plymouth Public Library, 11 North Street, Plymouth, MA 02360
PLYMOUTH HARBOR/
CANNON ENGINEERING CORP
47
March 1992
-------
PSC RESOUR
MASSACHUSE
EPA ID# MAD980731
EPA REGION 1
Hampden County
Palmer
Site Description
The 3 1/2-acre PSC Resources site operated in the 1970s as a waste oil refinery and solvent
recovery plant. The facility reclaimed drained oils and solvents from Massachusetts collection
points, treated them with heat, and sold them as lube oil base stock, road spray, and heavy
fuel mixes. Millions of gallons of waste were left behind in tanks and lagoons when the
current owner abandoned the plant in 1978. After a spill in 1982, the EPA discovered several
leaking tanks and containment dikes, as well as saturated soils. Surface waters, wetlands, and
groundwater are directly threatened by the waste. Approximately 4,500 people live within 3
miles of the site. The Quaboag River is located 200 feet southwest of the site and is used for
swimming and fishing. The property is near a residential and commercial district and is
adjacent to the town athletic field. The Palmer business district is 1/4 mile from the site.
Site Responsibility:
This site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
Shallow groundwater contamination consists mostly of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) including benzene and methylene chloride. Polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), including Aroclor-1248 and Aroclor-1260, and lead have been found in soil
samples. The surface water and oil in the dikes contain the heavy metals arsenic
and lead, as well as benzene and PCBs. Oil in a rainwater catch basin contains
PCBs and tetrachloroethylene. People may be exposed to contaminants by inhaling
air, coming in direct contact with or accidentally ingesting contaminated water or
soil, or by eating contaminated fish. Municipal well fields for the towns of Palmer
and Monson are upgradient of the site, and the threat to drinking water from
groundwater contaminants has not been absolutely defined. Contaminants have
been detected in the soils and shallow groundwater in the nearby wetlands. The
site is located in a 100-year flood plain, providing conditions for flooding to wash
contaminants from the site into the Quaboag River.
48
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: The tanks were emptied of over 1 million gallons of hazardous
wastes between 1979 and 1984. In 1986, the Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP), cleaned and removed the tanks. The DEP also fenced the site
in 1986. Repair and reinforcement of the fence was completed in the fall of 1991 by the
EPA. The repair was necessary to limit unauthorized access and to extend the fence to
include the debris pile and spill area on the western and southern sides of the site. Warning
signs also were installed along the fence and on facility buildings.
Entire Site: The DEP has studied the nature and extent of the contamination at
the site. The investigation defined the contaminants and recommended
alternatives for the final cleanup. The study was completed in May 1991, and a
proposed plan for cleanup activities was distributed for public comment. The proposed
remedy calls for the use of in-situ stabilization of the on-site contaminated soils and
sediments, followed by capping. The final cleanup remedy is expected to be selected in 1992.
Site Facts: In 1982, acting under authority of the Clean Water Act, the EPA asked the
owner to contain the oil discharge, determine the contents of 22 tanks, and investigate the
possibility of groundwater contamination. The owner complied with all requests.
Environmental Progress
The removal of hazardous wastes and installation of a fence described above have reduced
the potential of exposure to hazardous substances, making the PSC Resources area safer
while it awaits further cleanup activities.
Site Repository
Palmer Public Library, 455 North Main Street, Palmer, MA 01069
PSC RESOURCES
49
March 1992
-------
RE-SO
MASSAC
EPA ID# M
EPA REGION 1
Bristol County
North Dartmouth
Site Description
The Re-Solve, Inc. site is a former waste chemical reclamation facility situated on 6 acres of
land. Between 1956 and 1980, Re-Solve handled a variety of hazardous materials, including
solvents, waste oils, organic liquids and solids, acids, alkalines, inorganic liquids and solids, and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Residues from the distillation tower, liquid sludge waste,
impure solvents, and burned tires were disposed in four on-site unlined lagoons. The lagoon
contents were burned periodically to reduce the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) content.
An oil waste that accumulated at the bottom of the degreaser distillation still was disposed of
on one portion of the site through landfarming. This oil waste also was spread throughout the
site to control dust. Cooling water from the distillation tower was discharged to a shallow
on-site lagoon. In 1974, the State issued Re-Solve a license to collect and dispose of
hazardous waste. In 1980, the State agreed to accept Re-Solve's offer to surrender its
disposal license on the condition that all hazardous waste be removed from the site. In 1981,
legal action resulted in all drums, debris, and buildings being removed, but the contents of the
four lagoons remained. Approximately 300 people live within a 1-mile radius of the site. Two
residences are located within 150 yards of Re-Solve. The Re-Solve, Inc. site is bounded by
wetlands, and the land surrounding the site is predominantly zoned for single family
residential use. The bottoms of the lagoons are situated in the water table, and some
contaminants have migrated to groundwater. All residences obtain their water from private
wells located on their property.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through a
combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/01/83
50
March 1992
-------
Threats and Contaminants
m
Groundwater is contaminated with VOCs, PCBs, and lead. Sediments are
contaminated with PCBs and arsenic. Soil contains PCBs, arsenic, and VOCs
including trichloroethylene (TCE), vinyl chloride, methylene chloride, and toluene.
Surface water is contaminated with PCBs and VOCs. Fish from the river and
ponds contain PCBs, zinc, and mercury. Trespassers may be threatened by coming
in direct contact with or accidentally ingesting contaminated soil, sediments,
groundwater, or surface water. Also, people who eat contaminated fish may be at
risk. The Copicut River, located about 500 feet from the site, has been designated
for the protection and propagation of fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife. The site
is located over an aquifer that serves as a recharge area for part of a nearby town
where a new municipal well is planned. Contaminants are moving off site in
surface runoff and groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in four stages: an emergency action and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on controlling the sources of contamination and cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Emergency Action: In 1985, the EPA removed sludges from the lagoons and
excavated approximately 16,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil for off-site
disposal in a federally approved landfill.
Source Control: To control the source of the contamination at the site, the
EPA selected a remedy that included removing the contents of the four unlined
lagoons, excavating soil from hot spots, and excavating soil from the former oil
spreading area for disposal at an off-site approved facility. The entire site was capped to
prevent contact with surface and groundwater. These remedies were completed in 1987. In
addition, the EPA removed 148 drums of hazardous waste. The site was fenced to limit
access to the contaminated areas.
Additional Source Control Measures: The remedies selected by the EPA to
prevent the migration of contaminants include excavating 22,500 cubic yards of
PCB-contaminated soil located above the groundwater table, treating the soil on
site by removing the contaminants by dechlorination, and then placing the soil back on site
with 18 inches of gravel capping; excavating 3,000 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated
sediments from wetland areas and treatment by dechlorination; conducting studies to
determine if the dechlorination process can be used on a full-scale level; and restoring the
wetlands. The pilot soil treatment plant began operations in 1992. The technical specifications
and design for the cleanup are being prepared by the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination. The cleanup activities will commence once the design phase is completed,
expected in 1993. Also, emissions from the soil excavation and treatment will be monitored,
and groundwater and surface water will be monitored quarterly to evaluate the effectiveness
of the cleanup.
RE-SOLVE, INC. 51 March 1992
-------
Entire Site: Remedies selected along with source control measures to address
contamination at the rest of the site include pumping the groundwater to keep
the contaminant plume from moving, treating it by exposing the water to air to
evaporate the contaminants, carbon filtering to recapture the contaminants, and discharging
the treated water back into the aquifer; monitoring the groundwater, surface water, and
wetlands; and controlling the future use of groundwater. A pilot test addressing the
management of contaminant migration was completed in 1990. The design for the selected
cleanup remedies, also being performed by the potentially responsible parties, is scheduled to
be completed in 1993. Fish sampling will be performed at downgradient stations. Drinking
wells also will be monitored for traces of contamination. The cleanup of PCB sediments will
require disturbing and temporarily losing the wetlands. These effects are unavoidable;
however, a wetlands restoration program will be implemented. A plan for the wetlands
restoration is currently being developed as part of the cleanup design phase.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree was signed in 1988 under which the parties potentially
responsible for contamination of the site agreed to conduct the cleanup activities and to
reimburse the government for past costs and future oversight costs.
Environmental Progress
Removal of the contamination sources such as soils and sludges from the site, along with
restricting access to the site with a security fence, have reduced the health risks and
environmental threats posed by the Re-Solve, Inc. site while design of final cleanup actions
are underway.
Site Repository
Southworth Public Library, 732 Dartmouth Street, Dartmouth, MA 02748
March 1992
52
RE-SOLVE, INC.
-------
ROSE DISPOSAL
PIT
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD980524169
EPA REGION 1
Berkshire County
Lanesborough
Site Description
The Rose Disposal Pit site is a 1 1/2-acre waste disposal area. The site occupies a section of a
14-acre residential lot bordering Balance Rock State Park, which is forest land, and the
former Balance Rock Cafe; cropland and pastures also are nearby. Beginning in 1951 and
continuing through 1959, waste oils and solvents from the General Electric Plant in nearby
Pittsfield were disposed of in an open trench at the site. In 1980, the State Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering inspected the site and found 15,000 cubic yards of soil
contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Two plumes of contaminated groundwater were discovered moving to the east and south
away from the disposal area. Approximately 100 people live within a mile of the site and may
be affected by the contaminated drinking water.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with PCBs and VOCs including trichloroethylene
(TCE), benzene, and vinyl chloride. The sediments, soil, and surface water at the
site and a nearby wetland are contaminated with PCBs and VOCs. VOCs, as well
as vinyl chloride, a known human carcinogen, have been found in downgradient
drinking wells. The contaminant plumes extend from the pit eastward into the park
and to the south, to be carried off by a small unnamed stream.
53
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on management and control of contaminant migration.
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: GE erected a storm fence and covered the site with plastic in
1984. GE then pumped out a pocket of contaminated oil found beneath the
surface to prevent rain or snow from further spreading the contamination. An
alternate permanent water supply also was provided to the restaurant and residences affected
by the plume.
Source Control and Migration Management: The selected remedy is
intended to control the source of contamination and control and manage the
migration of contaminants. GE will perform all cleanup work. Source control
includes excavation and on-site incineration of approximately 43,000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and sediment. Soil in the disposal area will be excavated below the water
table. The intent of treating soils in the saturated zone is to remove PCBs from the source
area. Source control remediation is estimated to take two years after the design is completed.
Migration of contaminants will be controlled by active restoration of the shallow aquifer by
air filtering the VOCs to a gas and then using carbon adsorption to remove the airborne
contaminants. Groundwater will be treated to reduce contaminants to levels that will meet
drinking water standards. Sediments and surface water in the small pond located near the
disposal area also will be treated, and the pond will be restored to its original wetlands
character after remediation. Treatment of the VOCs will render the PCBs relatively immobile
in the saturated zone of the disposal area. If PCBs are not present in the groundwater,
institutional controls, including deed restrictions, may not be necessary. These remedial
activities are scheduled to begin in early 1993 after design work is completed. Incineration will
involve the use of an innovative form of on-site incineration that will include an initial
thermal extraction phase instead of a chemical extraction phase to separate contaminants
from soil.
Site Facts: In 1984, the EPA issued a joint enforcement order requiring GE to conduct
removal activities at the site. In 1989, the EPA and GE signed a Consent Decree to perform
the cleanup and to reimburse the EPA for past and future oversight costs.
Environmental Progress
The installation of a fence, the covering of the site, and the provision of an alternate water
supply have reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous materials, making the Rose
Disposal site safer while it awaits the planned actions to control the source and migration of
contaminants and restoration of the site soils and nearby wetlands.
March 1992 54 ROSE DISPOSAL PIT
-------
Site Repository
Lanesborough Public Library, Main Street, Lanesborough, MA 01970
ROSE DISPOSAL PIT
55
March 1992
-------
SALEM A
MASSACHUSE
EPA ID# MAD98Q525;
EPA REGION 1
Essex County
Salem
Site Description
From 1946 through 1969, 4 acres of the 235 Salem Acres site received sludge, grit, and grease
from the South Essex Sewerage District through an agreement with the owners. This sludge
contained tannery waste. The sludge was placed in eight unlined, uncovered disposal pits.
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds, arsenic, and
chromium were found to be present in the pits. Residential housing borders the site on the
south and the east. Approximately 65,000 people live within 1 mile, and 127,000 people live
within 3 miles of the site. One of the disposal pits is approximately 20 feet from Strongwater
Brook. The site lies on the divide of two drainage basins that channel both surface water and
groundwater directly into two major aquifers.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The on-site soils and sludge are contaminated with PCBs, volatile and semi-volatile
organic compounds, arsenic, and chromium. The sludge pit areas now are fenced,
and access to them is restricted. Emergency capping of the pits in 1987 by the EPA
has largely eliminated them as a current source of exposure.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: initial actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
56
March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Initial Actions: In 1988, the EPA covered the sludge pits with a high density,
polyethylene synthetic cap, removed the liquid wastes from the disposal pits to an
off-site storage facility, and constructed concrete cut-off walls to prevent further
releases into the wetlands. In 1990, repairs were made to a monitoring well and a security
fence on site, and signs were posted to further restrict access.
Entire Site: The South Essex Sewerage District is conducting an investigation into
the nature and extent of the soil and sludge contamination. The investigation will
define the contaminants of concern and will recommend alternatives for final
cleanup. The investigation is planned to be completed in mid-1992. The selection of a final
cleanup remedy is expected by late 1992.
Site Facts: On May 26, 1987, the EPA signed a Consent Order with the South Essex
Sewerage District to have the District perform the studies to examine the nature and extent
of contamination and the technical options for cleanup.
Environmental Progress
The EPA has assessed conditions at Salem Acres and has determined that the initial capping
actions, combined with the site security measures taken, have reduced the potential for
exposure to contamination while the site awaits the results of the investigation for final
cleanup alternatives.
Site Repository
Salem Public Library, 370 Essex Street, Salem, MA 01970
SALEM ACRES
57
March 1992
-------
SHPACK
MASSACHUS
EPA ID# MAD9805|6397<
EPA REGION 1
Bristol County
On the Attleboro/Norton town line
Site Description
The Shpack Landfill covers 8 acres, 5 1/2 acres of which are within the Town of Norton, and
the remaining 2 1/2 acres are in the City of Attleboro. The landfill was operated from 1946
until 1965, when a court order forced its closing. This landfill received domestic and industrial
waste, including inorganic and organic chemicals, as well as radioactive waste. The area near
the site includes a wooded swamp. Approximately 40,000 people live within a 3-mile radius of
the site. Municipal water supplies for both townships do not extend to the area around the
site. Therefore, residents in this area use private drinking water wells, most of which withdraw
water from the bedrock aquifer. The distance from Shpack Landfill to the nearest residential
well is about 150 feet. There are 27 private wells within a mile of the site that serve 103
people. The two municipal water supply well fields for Norton are situated in the shallow
aquifer and are located 3 miles east and 5 1/4 miles northeast of the area. Municipal well
fields for Attleboro also are completed in the shallow aquifer and are located 12,000 feet and
24,000 feet west of the study area. The Shpack Landfill directly borders the currently
operating 50-acre Attleboro Landfill.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/84
Final Date: 06/01/86
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater has been shown to contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
including vinyl chloride, and trichloroethylene (TCE), as well as heavy metals,
including chromium, barium, copper, nickel, manganese, arsenic, cadmium, and
lead. Sediments on the edge of the swamp and soils contain radionuclides including
radium and uranium. Surface water in the swampy area is contaminated with
radium and alpha and beta particles, as well as organic compounds. The site is
fenced to limit access. People who trespass on the site may be exposed to
contamination by coming in direct contact with or accidentally ingesting
contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil, or sediments. In addition,
contaminants may be transported off site by flooding of the swamp.
58
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup
alternatives for the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An investigation into the nature and extent of the contamination at
the site was begun by the potentially responsible parties in 1990. Through sampling
and characterization of soil, sediments, surface water, and groundwater, the
investigation will define the contaminants of concern and will recommend alternatives for the
final cleanup. The investigation is planned to be completed in 1995.
Site Facts: The Shpack Landfill currently is under the supervision of the U.S. Department
of Energy.
Environmental Progress
Fencing the area has reduced the potential of exposure to hazardous substances on the
Shpack Landfill site while the investigation into the cleanup alternatives is taking place.
Site Repository
Norton Conservation Commission, 70 East Main Street, Norton, MA 01237
SHPACK LANDFILL
59
March 1992
-------
EPA REGION 1
Middlesex County
CHEMIC" —* Lowe,.
CORP.
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID#MAD000192393
Site Description
The Silresim Chemical Corporation site covers approximately 5 acres in an industrial area.
Starting in 1971, Silresim began reclaiming a variety of chemical wastes, waste oil, solvents,
and sludges containing heavy metals. In 1977, Silresim declared bankruptcy and abandoned
the site, leaving behind 30,000 decaying drums and several large storage tanks. The State
began to clean up the site in 1978. The site is located a mile south of the central business
district of Lowell and several hundred feet from the nearest residential area. Approximately
10,000 people live within 1 mile, and an estimated 24,000 people live within 3 miles of the
site. Groundwater flows generally to the northwest towards Meadow Brook, which drains into
the Concord and then the Merrimack River. The Merrimack River is the source of water for
three neighboring cities.
... „ ...... rr. . . . . . .. . , . NPL LISTING HISTORY
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
Proposed Date: 07/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
semi-volatile organic compounds, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and
heavy metals. The soil is polluted with VOCs, semi-volatile organic compounds,
pesticides, and PCBs. Low levels of dioxin are also present in the soil. People could
be exposed to contaminants by coming in contact with off-site soils and
groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
This site is being addressed in two stages: interim actions and a long-term remedial phase
focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
60 March 1992
-------
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: Before the site was listed on the NPL, the State removed all
chemical wastes in aboveground storage containers, fenced the site, and
dismantled buildings. In 1983, the EPA monitored the air and sampled soils,
finding contamination both on and off site. The EPA raised the height of the fence from 6 to
8 feet. The EPA covered highly contaminated areas with 9 inches of crushed gravel and a
clay cap. This work was finished in 1984. In 1986, damage to the original fence was repaired.
Subsequent sampling revealed an additional area of soil contamination that the EPA then
enclosed. In 1986, the EPA discovered dioxin, so the fence was relocated to prevent public
access, and a temporary gravel cover was laid over the contaminated soil to prevent contact.
Entire Site: The potentially responsible parties and the EPA conducted
investigations into the contamination and assessed the alternative technologies for
cleanup. Activities included: groundwater, surface water and sediments sampling;
monitoring; well installation; and sampling vents for air contamination. Surface soil testing
and sampling beneath the clay cap and outside the fence determined the extent of soil
contamination. These activities were completed in mid-1991, and remedies for final cleanup
were selected in late 1991. Soil will be treated by a vapor extraction system and through
stabilization. Stabilized soil will then be capped. The groundwater will be extracted and
treated by air stripping.
Site Facts: The EPA negotiated with a group of the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination to conduct the studies to determine the nature and extent of contamination
and to develop alternative cleanup technologies. In the past, some residents and doctors of
the community had attributed health effects to site contamination.
Environmental Progress
Initial actions to fence the site and to cap or cover areas of contamination have reduced the
potential for accidental exposure and the further migration of contamination from the
Silresim Chemical site. These actions have eliminated the immediate threats posed by the site
while alternatives for addressing groundwater and soil contamination have been identified and
are awaiting the technical design phase to begin, expected in 1993.
Site Repository
Pollard Memorial Library, 401 Merrimack Street, Lowell, MA 01850
SILRESIM CHEMICAL CORP. 61 March 1992
-------
SULLIVAN'®
LEDGE
MASSACHUSE
EPA ID# MAD980731343
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Bristol County
New Bedford
The 12-acre Sullivan's Ledge disposal area, in the northwestern corner of New Bedford,
operated as a quarry until about 1932. In 1935, the City of New Bedford acquired the site
through tax title foreclosure. Between the 1940s and the 1970s, local industries used the
quarry pits and adjacent areas for disposal of hazardous material and other wastes including
electrical capacitors, fuel oil, volatile liquids, tires, scrap rubber, demolition materials, brush
and trees. After a fire at the site in the 1970s, the City backfilled the only existing open pit
and covered all exposed refuse. In 1982, when the Massachusetts Department of Public
Works drilled test borings as part of a plan to build a commuter parking lot, electrical
capacitors, which may have caused polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) contamination, were
unearthed. Approximately 98,500 people live within 3 miles of the site in this residential area.
Within a mile of the site are two nursing homes and three schools. The New Bedford
Municipal Golf Course is immediately north of the site. An unnamed stream borders the site
and discharges into Middle Marsh, which is on the golf course. Immediately north of the
marsh lie railroad tracks, the Apponagansett Swamp, and the City of New Bedford municipal
landfill.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/01/83
Final Date: 09/01/84
Threats and Contaminants
ZEJ
In 1982, the EPA detected PCBs in ambient air. Volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) in the on-site and immediately off-site groundwater increase with depth.
Inorganic compounds and PCBs also are present in the groundwater. The soil is
contaminated with PCBs and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The soils
along the eastern and southern boundaries contain the highest contaminant
concentrations. Soils have eroded from the site into the unnamed stream and have
been transported from the site. Sediments in the unnamed stream, Middle Marsh,
four golf course water hazards, and a portion of the Apponagansett Swamp are
contaminated with PCBs. People may become exposed to the contaminated dusts
stirred up at the site. At the busy golf course, people may be exposed to
contaminants in soil and sediments, particularly from dry intermittent stream beds.
62
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being cleaned up in three stages: an initial action and two long-term remedial
phases aimed at cleanup of the entire site and the Middle Marsh.
Response Action Status
Initial Action: The City of New Bedford constructed a fence around the
Sullivan's Ledge Landfill in 1984 to 1985 to limit the potential for exposure to
hazardous materials at the site.
Disposal Area: The EPA has chosen the following remedies for cleaning up the
disposal area portion of the site: (1) prepare the site for cleanup activities by
establishing security measures, connecting the site to power lines, and furnishing
sanitary facilities; (2) excavate, solidify, and dispose of soils on the site; (3) excavate, solidify,
and dispose of sediments from the stream and the golf course water hazards; (4) construct an
impermeable cap over an 11-acre area to cover the quarry pits and contain the contaminated
surface soils and sediments that would be solidified and placed on site; (5) divert and line a
portion of the unnamed stream to prevent water from being pulled into extraction wells; (6)
install an active pumping system to collect contaminated shallow bedrock groundwater, a
passive collection system to collect contaminated seeps and shallow groundwater, and a
treatment system to treat collected groundwater; (7) restore and enhance the wetlands to
reasonably similar hydrologic and botanical conditions that existed prior to excavation; (8)
monitor the site with 5-year reviews; and (9) use institutional controls to ensure that the
bedrock groundwater will not be used for drinking water, since it cannot be cleaned to
drinking water standards. The design actions began in 1991, and cleanup work is scheduled to
begin in 1994. Pre-design activities, including treatability studies, are currently underway.
Middle Marsh: In 1989, the EPA began a study of the contamination in the
Middle Marsh sediments. In 1991, the EPA released results of the studies
undertaken, and indicated significant PCB accumulation in wildlife in and around
Middle Marsh. While sediments in the Marsh also were found to be heavily contaminated
with PCBs, the threat to human health was judged to be negligible. A decision on the
appropriate cleanup remedy was reached in late 1991. The EPA chose the following remedy
for Middle Marsh: (1) prepare the area for cleanup activities by establishing security
measures and clearing land; (2) excavation of contaminated sediments from portions of the
Middle Marsh and adjacent wetland; (3) screening and dewatering of the excavated
sediments; (4) disposal of the excavated materials beneath the cap to be constructed at the
Sullivan's Ledge Disposal Area; (5) restoration of the affected wetlands; (6) institutional
controls to prevent future residential use of and restrict access to the area; and (7) long-term
environmental monitoring. In the event that the Sullivan's Ledge Disposal Area would be
unavailable, the EPA also selected a contingency remedy. This contingency remedy would
include the same site preparation, excavation, wetlands restoration, institutional controls and
long-term monitoring as the remedy described above. However, under the contingency
remedy, excavated sediments would be treated by solvent extraction and would be replaced
within Middle Marsh. Design work of these selected remedies is expected to begin in 1993.
SULLIVAN'S LEDGE 63 March 1992
-------
Site Facts: An agreement was reached with 14 potentially responsible parties to pay for
cleanup of the Sullivan's Ledge disposal area.
Environmental Progress
Fencing the area has limited the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the
Sullivan's Ledge Landfill while awaiting further cleanup actions to address contaminated
sediments and groundwater resources.
Site Repository
New Bedford City Hall, City Planning Department, 133 Williams Street, New Bedford,
MA 02740
March 1992
64
SULLIVAN'S LEDGE
-------
W. R. GRACE
CO., INC.
(ACTON PLA
MASSACHUSETTS
EPA ID# MAD001002252
A REGION 1
Middlesex County
Off Independence Road
Acton and Concord
Site Description
The W. R. Grace and Company site covers approximately 200 acres. The site was the former
location of the American Cyanamid Company and the Dewey & Almy Chemical Company.
These companies produced sealant products for rubber containers, latex products, plasticizers,
resins, and other products. Operations at the W. R. Grace facility included the production of
materials used to make concrete, container sealing compounds, latex products, and paper and
plastic battery separators. Effluent wastes from these operations flowed into several unlined
lagoons (the Primary Lagoon, Secondary Lagoon, North Lagoon, and Emergency Lagoon),
and solid and hazardous wastes were buried in or placed onto an on-site industrial landfill and
several other disposal areas. These other waste sites include the Battery Separator Lagoons,
the Battery Separator Chip Pile, the Boil Lagoon, and the Tank Car Area. In addition, the
by-products of some chemical processes were disposed of in the Slowdown Pit. Discharge to
all lagoons and the Battery Separator Area ceased in 1980. Investigations in 1978 indicated
that two municipal wells, Assabet #1 and #2, were contaminated. As a result of these
findings, the Town took precautionary action and closed the two wells. The site is bounded in
part by Fort Pond Brook and by the Assabet River.
Site Responsibility: This site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
IT
Groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy
metals including lead, arsenic, chromium, and nickel. Sediments are contaminated
with cadmium. The soil and sludge are contaminated with arsenic, vinyl chloride,
and benzene. Trespassers may be at risk by coming in direct contact with or
accidentally ingesting contaminated groundwater, surface water, sediments, soil, or
sludge.
65
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach —
The site is being addressed in four stages: interim actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on aquifer restoration, landfill and lagoon closure, and residual
contamination.
Response Action Status
Interim Actions: The parties potentially responsible for site contamination
removed tanks from the site in 1982 and 1983.
Aquifer Restoration: The potentially responsible parties have installed an
aquifer restoration facility. This has been in operation since 1985 to stop the
discharge of contaminated groundwater into the Assabet River, Fort Pond Brook,
and various other ponds. Supplemental studies will be conducted at a later date to evaluate
the effectiveness of the aquifer restoration facility. If necessary, modifications will be made to
upgrade the facility.
Landfill and Lagoon Closure: The EPA's recommended cleanup plan includes:
excavating and transporting off-site for incineration the highly contaminated
material from the Slowdown Pit; excavating and stabilizing the material in the
Slowdown Pit, the Primary Lagoon, Secondary Lagoon, North Lagoon, and Emergency
Lagoon by mixing it with cement, lime, and fly ash to form a solid; excavating the soils from
the Battery Separator Lagoons, Boiler Lagoon, and Tank Car area; placing both the
stabilized and non-stabilized materials excavated from the site in the existing industrial landfill
and covering these materials with a cap to prevent surface water or rain water from coming
into contact with the buried contaminants; closing the Chip Pile area; modifying the Aquifer
Restoration System to address emission controls; and monitoring each area. The design for
this remedy is being conducted in phases, the final portion of which is expected to be
completed in 1993.
Residual Contamination: A future investigation is scheduled in 1994 to
evaluate if any remaining contamination exists at the landfill and lagoon closure
area. If cleanup goals were not met from the first set of remedies, other
alternative methods will be evaluated to address the remaining contamination.
Site Facts: The company entered into a Consent Decree with the EPA in 1980 to conduct a
study of the site and to carry out cleanup activities. Since 1973, residents in South Acton
have filed complaints about periodic odors and irritants in the air around the W. R. Grace
plant.
March 1992 66 W. R. GRACE & CO., INC. (ACTON PLANT)
-------
Environmental Progress
The interim cleanup action involving removal of tanks and the installation of an aquifer
restoration facility has reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous substances in
groundwater and leaking tanks, making the W. R. Grace area safer while selected cleanup
activities are being designed and constructed.
Site Repository
Action Public Library, 486 Main Street, Action, MA 01720
W. R. GRACE & CO., INC. (ACTON PLANT)
67
March 1992
-------
WELLS G &
MASSACHUSE
EPAID# MAD98073216
Site Description
EPA REGION 1
Middlesex County
City of Woburn
Wells G & H were two municipal wells developed in 1964 and 1967 to supplement the water
supply of the City of Woburn. The site covers a total area of 330 acres. The wells supplied 30
percent of the city's drinking water. In 1979, city police discovered several 55-gallon drums of
industrial waste abandoned on a vacant lot in the vicinity of the site; these drums
subsequently were removed. As a result of this finding, the nearby wells were tested and
found to be contaminated. Both of the wells were shut down in 1979. Five separate
properties on the site were found to be the contributing sources of contamination to the
aquifer that supplied the water to these two municipal wells. The population of Woburn is
approximately 36,600 people. The area surrounding the site is predominantly residential; some
non-residential properties are fenced to limit unauthorized access. The site includes
commercial and industrial parks, as well as recreational areas and some residential gardens.
The Aberjona River flows through the middle of the site. Surface water runoff from the site
is directed through drainage systems toward the river and its tributaries.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/01/82
Final Date: 09/01/83
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Sediments in the
Aberjona River are contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
and heavy metals such as chromium, zinc, mercury, and arsenic. Soil is
contaminated with PAHs, PCBs, VOCs, and pesticides. Children also use an
undeveloped portion of Olympia Nominee Trust, located near the site, for riding
dirt bikes. People are at risk if they accidentally touch or swallow contaminated
groundwater, soil, or sediments in the Aberjona River. The site is located on land
that serves as a recharge area for the aquifer from which the Woburn Municipal
Wells G & H drew water.
68
March 1992
-------
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term remedial
phases focusing on source control and contaminant migration and cleanup alternatives for the
central aquifer and the Aberjona River.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: One of the parties potentially responsible for site
contamination secured their own property with a fence and a guard. Drums
containing PCB sludge and soil were removed to an approved facility. One of the
potentially responsible parties was required to investigate and remove the pure
tetrachloroethylene (PCE) found in a well on their property.
Source Control and Contaminant Migration: The EPA's selected remedy
includes excavating and incinerating 2,100 cubic yards of contaminated soils on
site and backfilling the excavated areas; treating additional contaminated soil in
place by extracting soil vapors for treatment with activated carbon; and pumping
contaminated groundwater from the five source areas and removing the contaminants by
using a stream of air that is forced through the water. Contaminants removed by the air
stream will be further treated prior to being released into the atmosphere. The EPA
negotiated with the potentially responsible parties to prepare the technical specifications and
design for the cleanup. The potentially responsible parties have begun pre-design activities at
four of the properties. Design work at two of the five properties began and construction is
expected to be completed in 1993 on these two properties. All design work is expected to be
completed in 1994.
Central Aquifer: In 1993, three of the five parties potentially responsible for site
contamination are scheduled to perform a study to explore the nature and extent
of contamination in the central aquifer area beyond the various other source area
property boundaries within the Wells G & H area. The study plans to evaluate a way to
cleanup the contamination that has migrated from the source areas. Completion of the study
is scheduled for 1994.
Aberjona River Study: The EPA is conducting an investigation into the risk to
human health and the environment within the Aberjona River and the upper
Mystic Lake. If risks are found, a more complete investigation of contamination
and cleanup alternatives will be undertaken. The investigation is expected to be completed in
1994.
Site Facts: The EPA has signed a Consent Decree with three of the potentially responsible
parties to conduct a study of contamination at the Central Aquifer area.
WELLS G & H 69 March 1992
-------
Environmental Progress
The removal of contaminated materials and the fencing of one portion of the Wells G & H
site have reduced the potential for exposure to hazardous materials at the site while it awaits
the design of the soil and groundwater treatment remedy and the final results of the
investigation into the possible alternatives for cleanup of the remaining site contamination.
Site Repository
Thompson Public Library, 45 Pleasant Street, Woburn, MA 01801
March 1992
70
WELLS G & H
-------
GLOSSARY
Terms Used in the NPL Book
This glossary defines terms used throughout the NPL Volumes. The terms and
abbreviations contained in this glossary apply specifically to work performed
under the Superfund program in the context of hazardous waste management. These
terms may have other meanings when used in a different context. A table of common
toxic chemicals found at NPL sites, their sources, and their potential threats is located
on page G-15
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH
(less than 7.0), that are used in chemical manu-
facturing. Acids in high concentration can be
very corrosive and react with many inorganic
and organic substances. These reactions possi-
bly may create toxic compounds or release
heavy metal contaminants that remain in the
environment long after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A
legal and enforceable agreement between the
EPA and the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties (PRPs)
agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules,
responsibilities, and enforcement options that
the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the
government; it does not require approval by a
judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A
legally binding document issued by the EPA,
directing the parties potentially responsible to
perform site cleanups or studies (generally, the
EPA does not issue Unilateral Orders for site
studies). This type of Order is not signed by the
PRPs and does not require approval by a judge.
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown
of contaminants in soil or water by exposing
them to air.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Dis-
ease Registry (ATSDR): The Federal
agency within the U.S. Public Health Service
charged with carrying out the health-related
responsibilities of CERCLA.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile
organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air
through the contaminated material in a pressur-
ized vessel. The contaminants are evaporated
into the air stream. The air may be further
treated before it is released into the atmosphere.
Ambient Air: Any unconfined part of the
atmosphere. Refers to the ah' that may be
inhaled by workers or residents in the vicinity of
contaminated air sources.
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs): Federal, State, or
local laws which apply to Superfund activities at
NPL sites. Both emergency and long-term
actions must comply with these laws or provide
sound reasons for allowing a waiver. ARARs
must be identified for each site relative to the
characteristics of the site, the substances found
at the site, or the cleanup alternatives being
considered for the site.
G-1
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand,
or gravel capable of storing water within cracks
and pore spaces, or between grains. When
water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient
quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used
for drinking or other purposes. The water
contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
A "sole source aquifer" supplies 50 percent or
more of the drinking water of an area.
Artesian (Well): A well made by drilling into
the earth until water is reached, which, due to
internal pressure, flows up like a fountain.
Asbestos: A mineral fiber that can pollute air
or water and is known to cause cancer or
asbestosis when inhaled.
Attenuation: The naturally occurring process
by which a compound is reduced in concentra-
tion over time through adsorption, degradation,
dilution, or transformation.
Background Level: The amount of a sub-
stance typically found in the air, water, or soil
from natural, as opposed to human, sources.
Baghouse Dust: Dust accumulated in
removing particulates from the air by passing it
through cloth bags in an enclosure.
Bases: Substances characterized by high pH
(greater than 7.0), which tend to be corrosive in
chemical reactions. When bases are mixed with
acids, they neutralize each other, forming salts.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used
to prevent the migration of contaminants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some
contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living
tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people, as they
breathe contaminated air, drink contaminated
water, or eat contaminated food.
Biological Treatment: The use of bacteria
or other microbial organisms to break down
toxic organic materials into carbon dioxide and
water.
Bioremediation: A cleanup process using
naturally occurring or specially cultivated
microorganisms to digest contaminants and
break them down into non-hazardous compo-
nents.
Bog: A type of wetland that is covered with
peat moss deposits. Bogs depend primarily on
moisture from the air for their water source, are
usually acidic, and are rich in plant residue [see
Wetland].
Boom: A floating device used to contain oil
floating on a body of water or to restrict the
potential overflow of waste liquids from
containment structures.
Borehole: A hole that is drilled into the
ground and used to sample soil or ground-water.
Borrow Pit: An excavated area where soil,
sand, or gravel has been dug up for use else-
where.
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a
synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated
materials. The surface of the cap generally is
mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in
which contaminants are removed from ground-
water and surface water by forcing water
through tanks containing activated carbon, a
specially treated material that attracts and holds
or retains contaminants.
Carbon Disulfide: A degreasing agent
formerly used extensively for parts washing.
This compound has both inorganic and organic
G-2
-------
GLOSSARY
properties, which increase cleaning efficiency.
However, these properties also cause chemical
reactions that increase the hazard to human
health and the environment.
Carbon Treatment: [see Carbon Adsorp-
tion].
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of
holes in a landfill where waste is dumped,
compacted, and covered with layers of dirt.
CERCLA: [see Comprehensive Environmen-
tal Response, Compensation, and Liability Act].
Characterization: The sampling, monitoring,
and analysis of a site to determine the extent and
nature of toxic releases. Characterization
provides the basis for acquiring the necessary
technical information to develop, screen, ana-
lyze, and select appropriate cleanup techniques.
Chemical Fixation: The use of chemicals to
bind contaminants, thereby reducing the poten-
tial for leaching or other movement.
Chromated Copper Arsenate: An insecti-
cide/herbicide formed from salts of three toxic
metals: copper, chromium, and arsenic. This
salt is used extensively as a wood preservative
in pressure-treating operations. It is highly toxic
and water-soluble, making it a relatively mobile
contaminant in the environment
Cleanup: Actions taken to eliminate a release
or threat of release of a hazardous substance.
The term "cleanup" sometimes is used inter-
changeably with the terms remedial action,
removal action, response action, or corrective
action.
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops
accepting wastes and is shut down under Federal
guidelines that ensure the protection of the
public and the environment.
Comment Period: A specific interval during
which the public can review and comment on
various documents and EPA actions related to
site cleanup. For example, a comment period is
provided when the EPA proposes to add sites to
the NPL. Also, there is minimum 3-week
comment period for community members to
review and comment on the remedy proposed to
clean up a site.
Community Relations: The EPA effort to
establish and maintain two-way communication
with the public. The goals of community
relations programs include creating an under-
standing of EPA programs and related actions,
assuring public input into decision-making
processes related to affected communities, and
making certain that the Agency is aware of, and
responsive to, public concerns. Specific com-
munity relations activities are required in
relation to Superfund cleanup actions [see
Comment Period].
Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA): Congress enacted the
CERCLA, known as Superfund, in 1980 to
respond directly to hazardous waste problems
that may pose a threat to the public health and
the environment. The EPA administers the
Superfund program.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of
water, such as streams or rivers, come together.
Confined Aquifer: An aquifer in which
groundwater is confined under pressure that is
significantly greater than atmospheric pressure.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
Consent Decree: A legal document, ap-
proved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between the EPA and the parties
potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the
potentially responsible parties are required to
perform, or the costs incurred by the govern-
ment that the parties will reimburse, and the
roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of
non-compliance by potentially responsible
parties. If a settlement between the EPA and a
potentially responsible party includes cleanup
actions, it must be in the form of a Consent
Decree. A Consent Decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order
on Consent].
Containment: The process of enclosing or
containing hazardous substances in a structure,
typically in a pond or a lagoon, to prevent the
migration of contaminants into the environment.
Contaminant: Any physical, chemical,
biological, or radiological material or substance
whose quantity, location, or nature produces
undesirable health or environmental effects.
Contingency Plan: A document setting
out an organized, planned, and coordinated
course of action to be followed in case of a
fire, explosion, or other accident that releases
toxic chemicals, hazardous wastes, or radioac-
tive materials into the environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract
between the EPA and the States, wherein a State
agrees to manage or monitor certain site cleanup
responsibilities and other activities on a cost-
sharing basis.
Cost Recovery: A legal process by which
potentially responsible parties can be required
to pay back the Superfund program for money
it spends on any cleanup actions [see Poten-
tially Responsible Parties].
Cover: Vegetation or other material placed
over a landfill or other waste material. It can
be designed to reduce movement of water into
the waste and to prevent erosion that could
cause the movement of contaminants.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood pre-
serving operations and produced by distilla-
tion of tar, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Con-
taminating sediments, soils, and surface
water, creosotes may cause skin ulcerations
and cancer through prolonged exposure.
Culvert: A pipe used for drainage under a
road, railroad track, path, or through an embank-
ment.
Decommission: To revoke a license to
operate and take out of service.
Degradation: The process by which a chemi-
cal is reduced to a less complex form.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes,
soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Deletion: A site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL when Superfund response actions at the
site are complete. A site is deleted from the
NPL when a notice is published in the Federal
Register.
De minimis: This legal phrase pertains to
settlements with parties who contributed small
amounts of hazardous waste to a site. This
process allows the EPA to settle with small, or
de minimis contributors, as a single group rather
than as individuals, saving time, money, and
effort.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes, soils,
or chemicals.
G-4
-------
GLOSSARY
Dike: A low wall that can act as a barrier to
prevent a spill from spreading.
Dioxin: An organic chemical by-product of
pesticide manufacture which is known to be one
of the most toxic man-made chemicals.
Disposal: Final placement or destruction of
toxic, radioactive, or other wastes; surplus or
banned pesticides or other chemicals; polluted
soils; and drums containing hazardous materials.
Disposal may be accomplished through the use
of approved secure landfills, surface impound-
ments, land farming, deep well injection, or
incineration.
Downgradient: A downward hydrologic
slope that causes groundwater to move toward
lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgradi-
ent of a contaminated groundwater source are
prone to receiving pollutants.
Ecological Assessment: A study of the
impact of man-made or natural activity on living
creatures and their environment,
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated,
that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer, or
industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes
discharged into surface waters.
Emission: Pollution discharged into the
atmosphere from smokestacks, other vents, and
surface areas .of commercial or industrial facili-
ties.
Emulsifiers: Substances that help in mixing
materials that do not normally mix; e.g., oil and
water.
Endangerment Assessment: A study
conducted to determine the risks posed to public
health or the environment by contamination at
NPL sites. The EPA or the State conducts the
study when a legal action is to be taken to direct
the potentially responsible parties to clean up a
site or pay for the cleanup. An endangerment
assessment supplements an investigation of the
site hazards.
Enforcement: EPA, State, or local legal
actions taken against parties to facilitate
settlements; to compel compliance with laws,
rules, regulations, or agreements; or to obtain
penalties or criminal sanctions for violations.
Enforcement procedures may vary, depending
on the specific requirements of different
environmental laws and related regulatory
requirements. Under CERCLA, for example,
the EPA will seek to require potentially
responsible parties to clean up a Superfund
site or pay for the cleanup [see Cost Recov-
ery].
Erosion: The wearing away of land surface
by wind or water. Erosion occurs naturally
from weather or surface runoff, but can be
intensified by such land-related practices as
farming, residential or industrial develop-
ment, road building, or timber-cutting. Ero-
sion may spread surface contamination to off-
site locations.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh
water from rivers and salt water from
nearshore ocean waters are mixed. These
areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt
marshes, and lagoons. These water ecosys-
tems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and
wildlife.
Evaporation Ponds: Areas where sewage
sludge or other watery wastes are dumped and
allowed to dry out.
Feasibility Study: The analysis of the
potential cleanup alternatives for a site. The
feasibility study usually starts as soon as the
remedial investigation is underway. In this
volume, the feasibility study is referred to as a
site study [see also Remedial Investigation].
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
Filtration: A treatment process for remov-
ing solid (participate) matter from water by
passing the water through sand, activated
carbon, or a man-made filter. The process is
often used to remove particles that contain
contaminants.
Flood Plain: An area along a river, formed
from sediment deposited by floods. Flood
plains periodically are innundated by natural
floods, which can spread contamination.
Flue Gas: The air that is emitted from a
chimney after combustion in the burner
occurs. The gas can include nitrogen oxides,
carbon oxides, water vapor, sulfur oxides,
particles, and many chemical pollutants.
Fly Ash: Non-combustible residue that results
from the combustion of flue gases. It can
include nitrogen oxides, carbon oxides, water
vapor, sulfur oxides, as well as many other
chemical pollutants.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain
system constructed of perforated pipes, which is
used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft
coal into gas for use as a fuel.
General Notice Letter: [See Notice Letter].
Generator: A facility that emits pollutants
into the air or releases hazardous wastes into
water or soil.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, gener-
ally in response to a Special Notice letter, made
by a potentially responsible party, consisting of
a written proposal demonstrating a potentially
responsible party's qualifications and willing-
ness to perform a site study or cleanup.
Groundwater: Water that fills pores in soils
or openings in rocks to the point of saturation.
In aquifers, groundwater occurs in sufficient
quantities for use as drinking and irrigation
water and other purposes.
Groundwater Quality Assessment: The
process of analyzing the chemical characteris-
tics of groundwater to determine whether any
hazardous materials exist.
Halogens: Reactive non-metals, such as
chlorine and bromine. Halogens are very
good oxidizing agents and, therefore, have
many industrial uses. They are rarely found
by themselves; however, many chemicals
such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
some volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
and dioxin are reactive because of the pres-
ence of halogens.
Hazard Ranking System (HRS): The
principal screening tool used by the EPA to
evaluate relative risks to public health and the
environment associated with abandoned or
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS
calculates a score based on the potential of
hazardous substances spreading from the site
through the air, surface water, or groundwater
and on other factors such as nearby popula-
tion. The HRS score is the primary factor in
deciding if the site should be on the NPL.
Hazardous Waste: By-products of society
that can pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment
when improperly managed. Hazardous waste
possesses at least one of four characteristics
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxic-
ity), or appears on special EPA lists.
Heavy Metals: Metallic elements with high
atomic weights, such as arsenic, lead, mercury,
and cadmium. Heavy metals are very hazardous
even at low concentrations and tend to accumu-
late in the food chain.
4
Herbicide: A chemical pesticide designed to
control or destroy plants, weeds, or grasses.
G-6
-------
GLOSSARY
Hot Spot: An area or vicinity of a site contain-
ing exceptionally high levels of contamination.
Hydrocarbons: Chemical compounds that
consist entirely of hydrogen and carbon.
Hydrology: The properties, distribution, and
circulation of water.
Hydrogeology: The geology of groundwater,
with particular emphasis on the chemistry and
movement of water.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge
confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
Incineration: A group of treatment technolo-
gies involving destruction of waste by controlled
burning at high temperatures, e.g., burning
sludge to reduce the remaining residues to a
non-burnable ash that can be disposed of safely
on land, in some waters, or in underground
locations.
Infiltration: The movement of water or
other liquid down through soil from precipita-
tion (rain or snow) or from application of
wastewater to the land surface.
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid
flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treatment
plant.
Injection Well: A well into which waste
fluids are placed, under pressure, for purposes
of disposal.
Inorganic Chemicals: Chemical sub-
stances of mineral origin, not of basic carbon
structure.
Installation Restoration Program: The
specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its hazardous
waste sites and controlling the migration of
hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Intake: The source from where a water supply
is drawn, such as from a river or water body.
Interagency Agreement: A written agree-
ment between the EPA and a Federal agency
that has the lead for site cleanup activities,
setting forth the roles and responsibilities of the
agencies for performing and overseeing the
activities. States often are parties to interagency
agreements.
Interim (Permit) Status: Conditions under
which hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities, that were operating
when regulations under the RCRA became
final in 1980, are temporarily allowed by the
EPA to continue to operate while awaiting
denial or issuance of a permanent permit. The
facility must comply with certain regulations
to maintain interim status.
Lagoon: A shallow pond or liquid waste
containment structure. Lagoons typically are
used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges,
liquid wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfarm: To apply waste to land or incor-
porate waste into the surface soil, such as
fertilizer or soil conditioner. This practice
commonly is used for disposal of composted
wastes and sludges.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is
placed in or on land. Sanitary landfills are
disposal sites for non-hazardous solid wastes.
The waste is spread in layers, compacted to the
smallest practical volume, and covered with soil
at the end of each operating day. Secure chemi-
cal landfills are disposal sites for hazardous
waste. They are designed to minimize the
chance of release of hazardous substances into
the environment [see Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act].
Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by
which soluble chemical components are dis-
solved and carried through soil by water or
some other percolating liquid.
G-7
-------
GLOSSARY
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through
or drains from waste, carrying soluble compo-
nents from the waste.
Leachate Collection System: A system
that gathers liquid that has leaked into a landfill
or other waste disposal area and pumps it to the
surface for treatment.
Liner: A relatively impermeable barrier
designed to prevent leachate (waste residue)
from leaking from a landfill. Liner materials
include plastic and dense clay.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct,
often incremental, steps that are taken to solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the
complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into several of these phases.
Long-term Response Action: An action
which requires a continuous period of on-site
activity before cleanup goals are achieved.
These actions typically include the extraction
and treatment of groundwater and monitoring
actions.
Marsh: A type of wetland that does not
contain peat moss deposits and is dominated by
vegetation. Marshes may be either fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetland].
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, con-
taminants, water, or other liquids through porous
and permeable soils or rock.
Mill Tailings: [See Mine Tailings].
Mine Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left from
mining operations. Tailings often contain high
concentrations of lead, uranium, and arsenic or
other heavy metals.
Mitigation: Actions taken to improve site
conditions by limiting, reducing, or controlling
toxicity and contamination sources.
Modeling: A technique using a mathematical
or physical representation of a system or theory
that tests the effects that changes on system
components have on the overall performance of
the system.
Monitoring Wells: Special wells drilled at
specific locations within, or surrounding, a
hazardous waste site where groundwater can be
sampled at selected depths and studied to obtain
such information as the direction in which
groundwater flows and the types and amounts of
contaminates present.
National Priorities List (NPL): The
EPA's list of the most serious uncontrolled or
abandoned hazardous waste sites identified
for possible long-term cleanup under Super-
fund. The EPA is required to update the NPL
at least once a year.
Natural Attenuation: [See Attenuation].
Neutrals: Organic compounds that have a
relatively neutral pH, complex structure and,
due to their organic bases, are easily absorbed
into the environment. Water is the most
commonly known neutral, however, naphtha-
lene, pyrene, and trichlorobenzene also are
examples of neutrals.
Nitroaromatics: Common components of
explosive materials, which will explode if
activated by very high temperatures or pres-
sures; 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene (TNT) is a
nitroaromatic.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter
notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A
Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day formal
period of negotiation during which the EPA is
not allowed to start work at a site or initiate
enforcement actions against potentially respon-.
sible parties, although the EPA may undertake
certain investigatory and planning activities.
G-8
-------
GLOSSARY
The 60-day period may be extended if the EPA
receives a good faith offer from the PRPs
within that period. [See also Good Faith Offer].
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC): The
predesignated EPA, Coast Guard, or Depart-
ment of Defense official who coordinates and
directs Superfund removal actions or Clean
Water Act oil- or hazardous-spill corrective
actions.
Operation and Maintenance: Activities
conducted at a site after a cleanup action is
completed to ensure that the cleanup or
containment system is functioning properly.
Organic Chemicals/Compounds:
Chemical substances containing mainly
carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is
discharged into receiving waters.
Overpacking: Process used for isolating
large volumes of waste by jacketing or encap-
sulating waste to prevent further spread or
leakage of contaminating materials. Leaking
drums may be contained within oversized
barrels as an interim measure prior to removal
and final disposal.
Pentachlorophenol (PCP): A synthetic,
modified petrochemical that may be used as a
wood preservative because of its toxicity to
termites and fungi. It is a common component
of creosotes and can cause cancer.
Perched (groundwater): Groundwater
separated from another underlying body of
groundwater by a confining layer, often clay or
rock.
Percolation: The downward flow or filtering
of water or other liquids through subsurface
rock or soil layers, usually continuing down-
ward to groundwater.
Pesticide: A substance or mixture of sub-
stances intended to prevent, destroy, or repel any
pest. If misused, pesticides can accumulate in
the foodchain and contaminate the environment.
Petrochemicals: Chemical substances
produced from petroleum in refinery operations
and as fuel oil residues. These include
fluoranthene, chrysene, mineral spirits, and
refined oils. Petrochemicals are the bases from
which volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
plastics, and many pesticides are made. These
chemical substances often are toxic to humans
and the environment.
Phenols: Organic compounds that are used in
plastics manufacturing and are by-products of
petroleum refining, tanning, textile, dye, and
resin manufacturing. Phenols are highly poison-
ous.
Physical Chemical Separation: The
treatment process of adding a chemical to a
substance to separate the compounds for further
treatment or disposal.
Pilot Testing: A small-scale test of a pro-
posed treatment system in the field to determine
its ability to clean up specific contaminants.
Plugging: The process of stopping the flow of
water, oil, or gas into or out of the ground
through a borehole or well penetrating the
ground.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater
flowing from a specific source. The movement
of the groundwater is influenced by such factors
as local groundwater flow patterns, the character
of the aquifer in which groundwater is con-
tained, and the density of contaminants [see
Migration].
Pollution: Generally, the presence of matter
or energy whose nature, location, or quantity
produces undesired health or environmental
effects.
G-9
-------
GLOSSARY
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs):
PAHs, such as pyrene, are a group of highly
reactive organic compounds found in motor oil.
They are a common component of creosotes and
can cause cancer.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A
group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications,
carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope immersion oils, and caulking
compounds. PCBs also are produced in certain
combustion processes. PCBs are extremely
persistent in the environment because they are
very stable, non-reactive, and highly heat
resistant. Chronic exposure to PCBs is believed
to cause liver damage. It also is known to
bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. PCB use and
sale was banned in 1979 with the passage of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and
biphenyls, are a group of highly reactive organic-
compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Poly vinyl Chloride (PVC): A plastic made
from the gaseous substance vinyl chloride. PVC
is used to make pipes, records, raincoats, and
floor tiles. Health risks from high concentra-
tions of vinyl chloride include liver cancer and
lung cancer, as well as cancer of the lymphatic
and nervous systems.
Potable Water: Water that is safe for drink-
ing and cooking.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs):
Parties associated with a Superfund site who
may be liable for the cost of remedying the
release of hazardous substances. This may
include owners or operators of the site or trans-
porters who disposed of materials at the site.
PRPs may admit liability, or liability may be
determined by a court of law. PRPs may sign a
Consent Decree or Administrative Order on
Consent to participate in the site cleanup without
admitting liability.
Precipitation: The removal of solids from
liquid waste so that the solid and liquid portions
can be disposed of safely; the removal of
particles from airborne emissions. Electro-
chemical precipitation is the use of an anode or
cathode to remove the hazardous chemicals.
Chemical precipitation involves the addition of
some substance to cause the solid portion to
separate.
Preliminary Assessment: The process of
collecting and reviewing available information
about a known or suspected waste site or release
to determine if a threat or potential threat exists.
Pump and Treat: A groundwater cleanup
technique involving the extracting of contami-
nated groundwater from the subsurface and the
removal of contaminants, using one of several
treatment technologies.
Radionuclides: Elements, including radium
and uranium-235 and -238, which break down
and produce radioactive substances due to their
unstable atomic structure. Some are man-made,
and others are naturally occurring in the envi-
ronment. Radon, the gaseous form of radium,
decays to form alpha particle radiation, which
cannot be absorbed through skin. However, it
can be inhaled, which allows alpha particles to
affect unprotected tissues directly and thus cause
cancer. Radiation also occurs naturally through
the breakdown of granite.
RCRA: [See Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act].
Recharge Area: A land area where rainwater
saturates the ground and soaks through the earth
to reach an aquifer.
G-10
-------
GLOSSARY
Record of Decision (ROD): A public
document that explains which cleanup
alternative(s) will be used to clean up sites
listed on the NPL. It is based on information
generated during the remedial investigation
and feasibility study and consideration of
public comments and community concerns.
Recovery Wells: Wells used to withdraw
contaminants or contaminated groundwater.
Recycle: The process of minimizing waste
generation by recovering usable products that
might otherwise become waste.
Remedial Action (RA): The actual con-
struction or implementation phase of a
Superfund site cleanup following the remedial
design [see Cleanup].
Remedial Design: A phase of site cleanup
where engineers design the technical specifi-
cations for cleanup remedies and technolo-
gies.
Remedial Investigation: An in-depth
study designed to gather the data necessary to
determine the nature and extent of contamina-
tion at a Superfund site, establish the criteria
for cleaning up the site, identify the prelimi-
nary alternatives for cleanup actions, and
support the technical and cost analyses of the
alternatives. The remedial investigation is
usually done with the feasibility study. In this
volume, the remedial investigation is referred
to as a site study [see also Feasibility Study].
Remedial Project Manager (RPM): The
EPA or State official responsible for oversee-
ing cleanup actions at the site.
Remedy Selection: The selection of the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few
sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site
contamination, or that any remaining con-
tamination will be naturally dispersed without
further cleanup activities, a "No Action"
remedy is selected [see Record of Decision].
Removal Action: Short-term immediate
actions taken to address releases of hazardous
substances [see Cleanup].
Residual: The amount of a pollutant re-
maining in the environment after a natural or
technological process has taken place, e.g.,
the sludge remaining after initial wastewater
treatment, or the particulates remaining in air
after the air passes through a scrubber.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA): A Federal law that established
a regulatory system to track hazardous sub-
stances from the time of generation to dis-
posal. The law requires safe and secure
procedures to be used in treating, transport-
ing, storing, and disposing of hazardous
substances. RCRA is designed to prevent
new, uncontrolled hazardous waste sites.
Retention Pond: A small body of liquid
used for disposing of wastes and containing
overflow from production facilities. Some-
times retention ponds are used to expand the
capacity of such structures as lagoons the
store waste.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land
into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land and spread contaminants
from its source.
Scrubber: An air pollution control device
that uses a spray of water or reactant or a dry
process to trap pollutants in emissions.
Sediment: The layer of soil, sand, and
minerals at the bottom of surface waters such
as streams, lakes, and rivers, that absorbs
contaminants.
G-11
-------
GLOSSARY
Seeps: Specific points where releases of
liquid, usually leachate, form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower
edges of landfills.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in
the ground used for the storage of liquids,
usually in the form of leachate, from waste
disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves
the pit by moving through the surrounding
soil.
Septage: Residue remaining in a septic tank
after the treatment process.
Sinkhole: A hollow depression in the land
surface in which drainage collects; associated
with underground caves and passages that
facilitate the movement of liquids.
Site Characterization: The technical pro-
cess used to evaluate the nature and extent of
environmental contamination, which is neces-
sary for choosing and designing cleanup mea-
sures and monitoring their effectiveness.
Site Inspection: The collection of informa-
tion from a hazardous waste site to determine
the extent and severity of hazards posed by the
site. It follows, and is more extensive than, a
preliminary assessment. The purpose is to
gather information necessary to score the site,
using the Hazard Ranking System, and to
determine if the site presents an immediate
threat that requires a prompt removal action.
Slag: The fused refuse or dross separated
from a metal in the process of smelting.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial
or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Slurry Wall: Barriers used to contain the flow
of contaminated groundwater or subsurface
liquids. Slurry walls are constructed by digging
a trench around a contaminated area and filling
the trench with an impermeable material that
prevents water from passing through it. The
groundwater or contaminated liquids trapped
within the area surrounded by the slurry wall
can be extracted and treated.
Smelter: A facility that melts or fuses ore,
often with an accompanying chemical change,
to separate the metal. Emissions from smelters
are known to cause pollution.
Soil Gas: Gaseous elements and compounds
that occur in the small spaces between par-
ticles of soil. Such gases can move through
or leave the soil or rock, depending on
changes in pressure.
Soil Vapor Extraction: A treatment
process that uses vacuum wells to remove
hazardous gases from soil.
Soil Washing: A water-based process for
mechanically scrubbing soils in-place to remove
undesirable materials. There are two ap-
proaches: dissolving or suspending them in the
wash solution for later treatment by conven-
tional methods, and concentrating them into a
smaller volume of soil through simple particle
size separation techniques [see Solvent Extrac-
tion].
Stabilization: The process of changing an
active substance into inert, harmless material,
or physical activities at a site that act to limit
the further spread of contamination without
actual reduction of toxicity.
Solidification/Stabilization: A chemical
or physical reduction of the mobility of
hazardous constituents. Mobility is reduced
through the binding of hazardous constituents^
into a solid mass with low permeability and
resistance to leaching.
G-12
-------
GLOSSARY
Solvent: A substance capable of dissolving
another substance to form a solution. The
primary uses of industrial solvents are as
cleaners for degreasing, in paints, and in
Pharmaceuticals. Many solvents are flam-
mable and toxic to varying degrees.
Solvent Extraction: A means of separating
hazardous contaminants from soils, sludges,
and sediment, thereby reducing the volume of
the hazardous waste that must be treated. It
generally is used as one in a series of unit
operations. An organic chemical is used to
dissolve contaminants as opposed to water-
based compounds, which usually are used in
soil washing.
Sorptlon: The action of soaking up or
attracting substances. It is used in many
pollution control systems.
Special Notice Letter: [See Notice Let-
ter].
StillbOttom: Residues left over from the
process of recovering spent solvents.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile
contaminants from a substance [see Air Strip-
ping].
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid
runoff for drainage or disposal.
Superf und: The program operated under the
legislative authority of the CERCLA and
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) to update and improve environ-
mental laws. The program has the authority to
respond directly to releases or threatened re-
leases of hazardous substances that may endan-
ger public health, welfare, or the environment
The "Superfund" is a trust fund that finances
cleanup actions at hazardous waste sites.
Surge Tanks: A holding structure used to
absorb irregularities in flow of liquids, including
liquid waste materials.
Swamp: A type of wetland that is dominated
by woody vegetation and does not accumulate
peat moss deposits. Swamps may be fresh or
saltwater and tidal or non-tidal [see Wetlands].
Thermal Treatment: The use of heat to
remove or destroy contaminants from soil.
Treatability Studies: Testing a treatment
method on contaminated groundwater, soil, etc.,
to determine whether and how well the method
will work.
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, color-
less liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as
a solvent and as a metal degreasing agent.
TCE may be toxic to people when inhaled,
ingested, or through skin contact and can
damage vital organs, especially the liver [see
Volatile Organic Compounds].
Unilateral [Administrative] Order: [see
Administrative Order].
Upgradient: An upward hydrologic slope;
demarks areas that are higher than contaminated
areas and, therefore, are not prone to contamina-
tion by the movement of polluted groundwater.
Vacuum Extraction: A technology used to
remove volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
from soils. Vacuum pumps are connected to a
series of wells drilled to just above the water
table. The wells are sealed tightly at the soil
surface, and the vacuum established in the soil
draws VOC-contaminated air from the soil
pores into the well, as fresh air is drawn down
from the surface of the soil.
G-13
-------
GLOSSARY
Vegetated Soil Cap: A cap constructed with
graded soils and seed for vegetative growth, to
prevent erosion [see Cap].
Vitrification: The process of electrically
melting wastes and soils or sludges to bind the
waste in a glassy, solid material more durable
than granite or marble and resistant to leaching.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs):
VOCs are manufactured as secondary petro-
chemicals. They include light alcohols, acetone,
trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene,
dichloroethylene, benzene, vinyl chloride,
toluene, and methylene chloride. These poten-
tially toxic chemicals are used as solvents,
degreasers, paints, thinners, and fuels. Because
of their volatile nature, they readily evaporate
into the air, increasing the potential exposure to
humans. Due to their low water solubility,
environmental persistence, and widespread
industrial use, they are commonly found in soil
and groundwater.
Waste Treatment Plant: A facility that
uses a series of tanks, screens, filters, and
other treatment processes to remove pollut-
ants from water.
Wastewater: The spent or used water from
individual homes or industries.
Watershed: The land area that drains into a
stream or other water body.
Water Table: The upper surface of the
groundwater.
Weir: A barrier to divert water or other liquids.
Wetland: An area that is regularly saturated
by surface or groundwater and, under normal
circumstances, is capable of supporting
vegetation typically adapted for life in satu-
rated soil conditions. Wetlands are critical to
sustaining many species of fish and wildlife.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes,
and bogs. Wetlands may be either coastal or
inland. Coastal wetlands have salt or brackish
(a mixture of salt and fresh) water, and most
have tides, while inland wetlands are non-
tidal and freshwater. Coastal wetlands are an
integral component of estuaries.
Wildlife Refuge: An area designated for
the protection of wild animals, within which
hunting and fishing are either prohibited or
strictly controlled.
G-14
-------
GLOSSARY
Some Common Contaminants at NPL Sites
Contaminant
Category
Example
Chemical Types
Sources
Health
Threats*
Heavy Melafs
Volatile Organic
Compounds
(VOOs)
Herbicides
PoiychJorinated
Creosotes
Radiatfon
(Radionudides}
Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium,
Cadmium, Cobalt, Copper,
Chromium, Lead, Manga-
nese, Mercury, Nickel,
Silver, Selenium, Zinc
Trichloroethylene (TCE),
Perchloroethylene (PCE),
Acetone, Benzene,
Ketone, Methyl chloride,
Toluene, Vinyl Chloride,
Dichlorethylene
Chlordane, DDT 4-4, DDE,
Heptachlor, Aldrin, Endrin,
Atrazine, Dieldrin, Toxa-
phene
Polyaromatic hydrocar-
bons (PAHs), Polynuclear
aromatics (PNAs),
Phenolic Tars, Pentachlo-
rophenol (PCP)
Radium-226, Radon,
Uranium-235, Uranium-
238
Electroplating, batteries,
paint pigments, photogra-
phy, smelting, thermom-
eters, fluorescent lights,
solvent recovery
Solvents and degreasers,
gasoline octane enhanc-
ers, oils and paints, dry
cleaning fluids, chemical
manufacturing.
Agricultural applications,
pesticide and herbicide
production
Electric transformers and
capacitors, insulators and
coolants, adhesives,
caulking compounds,
carbonless copy paper,
hydraulic fluids.
Wood preserving, fossil
fuel combustion
Mine tailings, radium
products, natural decay of
granites
Tumors, cancers, and kidney,
brain, neurological, bone and
liver damage
Cancers, kidney and liver
damage, impairment of the
nervous system resulting in
sleepiness and headaches,
leukemia
Various effects ranging from
nausea to nervous disorders.
Dioxin is a common by-product
of the manufacture of pesti-
cides and is both highly toxic
and a suspected carcinogen.
Cancer and liver damage.
Cancers and skin ulcerations
with prolonged exposure
Cancer
Sources: Toxic Chemicals—What They Are, How They Affect You (EPA, Region 5)
Glossary of Environmental Terms (EPA, 1988)
'The potential for risk due to these contaminants is linked to a number of factors; for example, the length and level of exposure
and environmental and health factors such as age.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1993 —341 _835/ 83024
G-15
------- |