United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R05-88/072
September 1988
$EPA
Superfund
Record of
Petersen Sand & Gravel, IL
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R05-88/072
3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Title end Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
.etersen Sand & Gravel, IL
rst Remedial Action - Final
5. Report Date
09/14/88
7. Authors)
8. Performing Organization Rept. No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C)
(G)
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, s.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. Type of Report & Period Covered
800/000
14.
IS. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
Petersen Sand and Gravel (PSG) is a 20-acre mining site and a former disposal area
located north of Libertyville, Illinois. The site is part of a tract of land owned
since 1979 by the Lake County Forest Preserve District (LCFPD). PSG is bordered by the
Des Plaines River to the west, forest preserve land and residences to the east, and
agricultural land and small business to the north and south. The site consists of three
Lisposal areas including.a three- to four-acre landfilled area reportedly containing
instruction debris, trees and tires; an area that contained 400 to 500 55-gallon drums
rf paint and solvent wastes; and an area that contained approximately 500 drums of
solvents and 1,000 paint cans. The entire site is approximately 20 feet below the
elevation of the Des Plaines River due to mining operations which are still continuing
and are expected to continue until the early 1990s. LCFPD is planning to construct a
recreational lake at the site when mining operations cease. Raymond Petersen purchased
the property in 1952, which included a 30-acre parcel east, and a 20-acre parcel west of
the river, and began the sand and gravel operations at the site later that year.
Between 1955 and 1958, unknown refuse was disposed of in the four-acre landfill. In
1971 the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) investigated reports of illegal
dumping and subsequently ordered immediate closure of the site. In 1973, the Illinois
(See Attached Sheet)
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
Record of Decision
Petersen Sand & Gravel, IL
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Media: none
Key Contaminants: none
b. Identlfiers/Open-Ended Terms
c. COSATI Reid/Group
|vailabllity Statement
19. Security Class (This Report)
None
20. Security Class (This Page)
None
21. No. of Pages
34
22. Price
iSee ANSI-Z39.18)
See Instructions on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)
Department of Commerce
-------
fc>A/ROD/R05-88/072
Petersen Sand & Gravel, IL
First Remedial Action - Final
16. ABSTRACT (continued)
Pollution Control Board ordered complete waste removal and covering of the refuse.
Additional reports cited that numerous drums were not removed. These wastes, consisting
of 55-gallon drums of paint and solvent waste, were removed in 1977. An inspection
conducted in 1980 detected no additional buried drums. The Lake County Grading Company
(LCGC) took over the mining operations in 1983, and discovered additional buried drums
of solvents and paint cans. These containers were removed from the area that year,
along with contaminated soil. In 1984, the site was placed on the National Priorities
List. A 20-acre area in the northwest corner of the site was the focus of concern. The
final remedial investigation report conducted by IEPA was completed in April 1988,
indicating no presence of contaminants at levels of concern, thus a feasibility study
was not necessary. The investigation analyzed over 150 organic and inorganic compounds,
and only maganese and iron exceeded secondary MCLs.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action, since the findings
in the RI indicated that previous removal actions were adequate and that no unacceptable
r'isk remained on site. However, a lake will be constructed onsite, therefore, surface
water and sediment monitoring is recommended both before and after the lake is in
place. Ground water and precipitation collected in the mining pits will continue to be
discharged to the Des Plaines River in compliance with the NPDES permit until the mining
Perations cease. There are no capital or O&M costs associated with this remedial
tion.
-------
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
SITE NAME AND LOCATION
Petersen Sand and Gravel Site, Libertyville, Illinois
STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
This decision document presents the selected remedial alternative for the
Petersen Sand and Gravel (PSG) site developed in accordance with the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability'Act of
1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 and consistent with the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan to the extent practicable.
This decision is based upon the contents of the Administrative Record for
the PSG site.
The State of Illinois concurs with the selected remedial alternative.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REMEDY
The results of the Remedial Investigation (RI) show that the previous
removal actions were adequate to protect human health and the environment,
and that no unacceptable risk remains at the site. Therefore, the selected
remedy for this site is "No Further Action".
The site owner, Lake County Forest Preserve District (LCFPD), intends to
construct a recreational lake in the sand and gravel pit, which will flood
the site area. Although the RI report, Endangerment Assessment, concluded
that development of the lake should not pose any unacceptable risks, it is
impossible to fully predict future conditions if a lake were developed. In
order to ensure the safety of future users of the lake and aquatic life,
the Agency has recommended to Lake County that, at a minimum, surface water
be monitored before and after the lake is constructed.
DECLARATION
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment and
attains Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant and
appropriate to this site. The statutory preferences for cost-
effectiveness, permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies
are not applicable to the "No Further Action remedy". Because this remedy
will not result in hazardoys substances remaining on-site above health-
based levels, the 5-year review will not apply to this action.
Date / ' Valdas V. Ad&mkus
Regional Administrator
-------
-2-
Attachments: 1) Summary of Remedial Alternative
2) Community Relations Responsiveness Summary
3) Administrative Record Index
-------
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency P.O. Box 19276. Springfield. IL 6:794-y:76
217/782-6761
Refer to: L0978090001 Lake County
Petersen Sand and Gravel Libertyville
Compliance
August 4, 1988
STATE OF ILLINOIS - RECORD OF DECISION
Site Name and Location
Petersen Sand and Gravel
Libertyville, Illinois
Statement of Basis and Purpose
This decision document represents the State of Illinois' decision, through the
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, to select the remedial action as
outlined in the Record of Decision and the Declaration for the Record of
Decision issued in connection with the above-captioned matter. The selected
remedial action for the above reference site was developed in accordance with
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA), and to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Control Act (NCP). The attached Index identifies the
documents which comprise the administrative record upon which the selection of
the remedial alternative is based.
Description of the Remedy
The findings of the Remedial Investigation (RI) show that the previous removal
actions were adequate to protect human health and the environment, and that no
unacceptable risk remains at the site. Therefore, no further remedial action
will be done at the site.
The site owner, Lake County Forest Preserve District (LCFPD), intends to
construct a recreational lake in the sand and gravel pit which will flood the
site area. Although the RI report Endangerment Assessment concluded that
development of the lake should not pose any unacceptable risks, it 1s
impossible to fully predict future conditions if a lake were developed. In
order to ensure the safety of future users of the lake and aquatic life, the
Agency has recommended to Lake County that at a minimum surface water be
monitored before and after the lake is constructed.
-------
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency P. O. Box 19276. Springfield. IL 62794-l>276
Page 2
Declaration
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, and
attains Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant and
appropriate (ARARs). Cost effectiveness and utilization of "permanent
solutions and alternative treatment technologies are not applicable to the no
further action alternative.
Because this remedy will not result in hazardous substances remaining on-site
above health-based levels, a review will not be conducted within five years
*(as mandated by CERCLA and SARA) after commencement of the remedial action to
ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human
health and the environment.
*///**
Date
r.
Director
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
JL/jab/1824j/42-43
Attachment: Administrative Record Index
-------
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency P. O. Box 19276. Springfield. !L 62794-4276
INDEX OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
Preliminary Assessment Report (PA)
Site Investigation Report (SI)
Removal Documents (Chemical Waste Management report)
QA/QC Data from Laboratory (at IEPA, LPC files)
Data Summary Sheets (Refer to Remedial Investigation)
Health and Safety Plan
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
RI/FS Work Plan
Summary of changes to Work Plan
Changes in Scope of Work (Memos)
Remedial Investigation (RI)
Community Relations Plan
PRP Search Document
Response to Public Comment - Responsiveness Summary
Transcript of Public Meeting
Record of Decision (ROD)
Amendments to ROD (if applicable)
Pollution Control Board Opinion and Order
Court Order
JL/jab/1824j/44
-------
ATTACHMENT I
-------
PETERSEN SAND AND GRAVEL SITE
LIBERTYVILLE, ILLINOIS
SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION
JULY 1988
-------
Site Name. Location and Description
The Petersen Sand and Gravel pit is located north of Libertyvi1le, Illinois;
northeast of the intersection of routes 21 and 137 with the main entrance from
route 137 (see Figure 1). The pit, as well as land to the west and some land
to the east, Is owned by Lake County Forest Preserve District (LCFPD). The
pit is mostly fenced and is bordered by the Des Plaines river to the west; by
route 137 to the south; by River Road, forest preserve land and residences to
the east and by agricultural land and small businesses to the north. An area
of about 20 acres in the northwest corner of the pit was the focus of the
Remedial Investigation. This area was used for the disposal of miscellaneous
debris and hazardous materials including paint, paint waste and solvents.
Disposal activities have primarily occurred at three locations:
1) Disposal Area 1 (DA-1) i; a 3-4 acre landfilled area which reportedly
contains construction debris, trees, tires etc.
2) Disposal Area 2 (DA-2) contained 400-500 fifty five gallon drums of paint
and solvent wastes which were removed in 1977.
3) Disposal Area 3 (DA-3) contained approximately 500 drums of solvents and
1000 paint cans which were removed In 1983.
Sand and gravel mining has left the base of the pit approximately 20 feet
below the elevation of the adjacent Des Plaines River. Mining operations are
continuing with completion expected In the early 1990's. At this time, LCFPD
plans to construct a recreational lake in the sand and gravel pit which will
flood the site area (see Figure 2).
Nearby populations Include residents to the east of River Road within a half
mile of the site and south of route 137 within three fourths mile of the
site. A mobile trailer on the west edge of the site is used as a residence.
Libertyville township is located approximately 1.5 miles south of the site.
Approximately 15 private wells east of the Des Plaines River within 1 mile of
the site draw groundwater from the upper outwash aquifer.
Site History and Enforcement Activities
In 1952, Raymond Petersen purchased approximately 30 acres of land west, and
20 acres of land east of the Des Plaines River. Later that same year, Mr.
Petersen began sand and gravel operations on both parcels of property.
Operations on the west side were abandoned in 1960.
Between 1955 and 1958, Mr. Petersen started allowing dumping of refuse in a 3
to 4 acre worked-out portion of the gravel pit on the east side of the river.
The refuse supposedly consisted primarily of construction debris, trees,
tires, and other nonhazardous materials. It is unknown when Mr. Petersen
began accepting hazardous materials such as paint, paint waste, and solvents
at the site.
-------
\ Petersen
Sand and Gravel
Figure 1: Location Map
Petersen Sand and Gravel Site
Libertyville, Illinois
-------
Figure 2 Proposed Lake Location
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
Study Area
Discharge Pipe
Sump Pond
Shoreline of Proposed Lake
Elev 648
Des Plalnes
River
300 600
FEET
Illinois Routel 137
-------
In 1971 Petersen requested and was denied a landfill permit. Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) investigated reports of illegal dumping
and ordered immediate closure of the site. In 1973, the Illinois Pollution
Control Board ordered Petersen to remove some of the wastes and cover refuse,
among other requirements. Local residents reported in 1976 that approximately
500 drums of waste had not been removed. Between 400-500 55 gallon drums of
paint and solvent wastes were removed from the site in 1977 by Mr. Petersen at
the advice of the Illinois Attorney General.
In 1979 the Lake County Forest Preserve District purchased a tract of land
along the east bank of the Des Plaines River which included the pit.' They are
planning to make the area into a recreational lake after mining operations are
completed by Lake County Grading.
In 1980 metal detection surveys and sampling was done by thn United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). No additional, buried drums were
detected. The site received a Hazard Ranking System (MRS) score of 44.16 on
June 1, 1983.
ป
The Lake County Grading Company, which took over the mining operation in 1983,
discovered buried drums during grading operations. Later that year,
approximately 500 dr.ims of solvents and 1000 paint cans, along with
contaminated soils were removed by a clean-up contractor for the Lake County
Forest Preserve District.
In 1984 Petersen Sand and Gravel was rescored and In the October 15, 1984,
Federal Register second proposed update to the NPL.
In 1985, IEPA and USEPA signed a cooperative agreement for the IEPA to perform
a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the site.
In January, 1986 Planning Research Corporation (PRO began RI/FS work under
contract with the IEPA. Field investigations by the IEPA and USEPA took place
between October 1986 and December 1987. A final RI Report was completed in
April 1988. Review of the report Indicated that contaminants were not present
at levels of concern, therefore, a FS was not necessary.
Community Relations History
A Community Relations Plan was developed by the IEPA and finalized in
September 1985. In March 1986 after PRC Engineering began RI/FS activities a
Fact Sheet was written explaining the site background and the RI/FS process.
In 1986 a repository was established at Cook Memorial Library In Libertyville
and an Informational public meeting was held. The LCFPD and Lake County
Health Department (LCHD) have been kept Involved and informed throughout the
Rl. During May and June 1988 meetings were held with the LCHD, LCFPD and Lake
County Board to summarize the Rl findings and the preferred alternative. On
June 13, 1988 the Proposed Plan was distributed and placed Into the repository
following publication of a brief analysis of the Proposed Plan. This
publication also provided notice of the June 21, 1988 Public Hearing and the
-------
period for submission of comments. The Public Hearing was held at the
Libertyville Township Hall. A response to comments received during the
comment period Is included In the Responsiveness Summary. The Administrative
Record has been placed in the repository.
Site Characteristics
Site Geology
Two major stratigraphic units have been identified on site: an upper outwash
unit underlain by a clay till unit.
The upper outwash unit consists^ of sand and gravel with interbedded silts and
clays. Much of this unit has been removed by mining in the pit area. The
clay zone is present in the uppermost part of the outwash unit at elevations
of 615 to 640 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and 1s continuous over=most of
the site. This zone thins to the south and southwest and is not present 1n
the area of the sump pond. The clay zone is overlain by a thin layer (less
than 15 feet) of sands and gravels which remained after mining operations were
completed.
The clay till unit appears to be continuous over the site and seems to be
connected to the clay zones In the outwash unit at several locations. The top
of this till is at an elevation of approximately 590-600 feet AMSL.
Site Hydroqeoloqy
The hydrogeologic units underlying the site are comparable to the geologic
units: outwash aquifer and clay till aquiclude. The outwash aquifer consists
of sand and gravel to sllty sand with extensive zones of clay. The clay till
aquiclude consists of stiff sllty clay.
The sump pond 1s located 1n the southwest corner of the site where the upper
clay zones are absent. Water from the sump pond 1s pumped nightly into the
Des Plaines River at a rate of 1.7 million gallons per night to de-water the
pit so tha.t mining can continue. This significantly reduces surface water
levels on site which recover during the day as groundwater flows toward the
ponds and sump from surrounding aquifer materials. The groundwater flow
pattern toward the sump pond reflects the regular pumping of the sump pond.
Groundwater elevations on site range from 625 to 628 feet AMSL and the average
horizontal hydraulic conductivity in the outwash aquifer was found to be 2.5 x
10~* cm/sec. The average groundwater flow rate beneath the site was
estimated to be 11 feet per year.
Remedial Investigation Summary
The Rl included collection of ground and surface water samples, seeps,
subsurface DA-3 liquid, surface and subsurface soil samples and sediment
samples. See figures for sample locations (Figures 3, 4 and 5). This section
summarizes a much more detailed analysis presented in the Rl report.
-------
Figure 3
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
1100
00
Disposal Disposal ซMW-J
/ Area 2 A ./Area 3
ป / r MW-IR^
n. \r *f
\ .--
^fMW-S
&
MW- WELLS BY PRC
O- WEUS BY OTHERS
DA- DISPOSAL AREA BOHEHOIE BY PRC
ซA. BASAL AOXNCLUOE BOREHOLE BY PRC
UW- BOREHOLE BY PRC
W. 8. OflO- BOREHOLE BY OTHERS
CROSS SECTION
SAMPLING LOCATIONS FOR
MONITORING WELLS
AND BOREHOLES
\ ฉMW-6R
^^ ^r
ฐ ^^/** Disposal/ " ปBA-7
^V^Area I/ ,
/ 4 ffiMW-7R/
I ซDA-1/
\Vi
100
BA-8
BA-6 ^_^ ฎMW'9
y^*ซ^^^ ^s>^-,_,
VoA-i/ / ซซ
^/4'MW.4R.BA.Slx^Mw.3 0,Aj
BA-4
ฎMW-3R . -
^BA-3-
MW-7
V \ <(n
r\
-------
Figure 4
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
Ugwitf
SURFACE SOL SAMPLE
A SEOIUCHT SAUPIE
A SURFACE WATER SAMPLE
DISPOSAL AREA 1 WATER SAMPLE
D SEEP SAUPIE
PETEHSEN SANO ft GRAVEL
. Ulinoii
SAMPLING LOCATIONS FOR
SUHFACE SOIL. SURFACE
WATER AND SEDIMENT
iซn iuo itoo i
no wo wo >ooo MOO iปo
a 100 no xn 400 too
PHC ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT. INC
-------
Figure 5
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
BACKGROUND SURFACE SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS
Adapted from U.S. Geological Survey, Libertyville Quadrangle, 1980
-------
The findings of the Rl indicate the following: Geophysical surveys and
borings indicate that buried metals remain on site only at disposal area one.
Sampling across the site, however, revealed several compounds in soil and
water all of which were detected at very low concentrations. Analytical
results are summarized below.
A) Groundwater: (See Table 1)
1) Groundwater samples were analyzed for over 150 organic and inorganic
compunds which make up the Hazardous Substance List (HSL). Of the
samples representative of drinking water, only iron and manganese
exceeded Federal Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCL's)
developed for taste and odor. These levels are-not health based
levels and are also exceeded in groundwater -upgradient of the site.
The Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for nickel in drinking
water was slightly exceeded in some samples although no unacceptable
risk was calculated using more accurate health effects information.
No other contaminants exceeded any established State or Federal
standards or criteria for drinking water.
B) Surface Soils: (See Tables 2, 3 and 4)
1) Inorganic materials such as aluminum, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,
cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, potassium, sodium,
titanium, vanadium and zinc exceeded background levels, but none were
significantly higher or at levels of concern.
2) The family or organic compounds known as polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH's) were found in soil samples at low concentrations.
3) Low levels of 1,1,1-trichloroethane, tetrachloroethene and toluene,
often found in solvents and oils, were found in a limited number of
samples.
4) Low concentrations of pesticides were found in several locations.
5) Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) was found in one location at a low
concentration.
D. Subsurface Soils: (See Tables 3 and 4)
1) The subsurface soil samples from previous disposal areas showed
inorganic levels similar to surface soil levels.
2) Toluene was found in boreholes and monitoring wells at low
concentrations.
E. Surface Water/Seeps:
1) Surface seep, samples from near DA-3 and a surface water sample from
the sump pond showed no significant contamination.
-------
Source:
Table 1
PRC RI (4/4/88)
COMPARISON OF SAMPLE CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS
IN THE BACKGROUND WELL TO ON-SITE WELL DATA
Range of1
Background
Samples
Range
of On-Site
Samples
Compound
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Sodium
Thallium
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
1.1 Dichloroethene
Methylene chloride
Toluene
Acetone
2-Butanone
Di-n-butylphthlate
2-Methyl naphthalene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
ND -[108]
ND
ND - [1.4]
[20] - [37]
ND
ND
99,600 - 103,000
ND
ND
ND
ND
[45] 124
ND - [1.8]
72,200 - 84,000
122 - 128
ND
ND
[2,710] - 4,140
ND
16,400 - 17,800
ND
ND
ND
20- 37
ND
ND
ND - 2J
ND - 14
ND .
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND - 5.2
[25] - [80]
ND
ND
10,500 - 304,000
ND
ND-[17] -
ND -[13]
ND
[58] - 3960
ND - [3.9]
39,000 - 111,000
[8.5] - 695
ND
ND - [24]
[2,730] - 5,850
ND
7,880 - 22,000
ND
ND
ND
ND 76
ND-2J
ND- 1J
ND-3J
ND - 500 B
ND - 13
ND - 3JB
ND - 4J
ND-9J
Number of Times
Outside Upper
Background
Range/Number
of Times Detected
0/0
0/0
4/5
4/9
0/0
0/0
9/11
0/0
4/4
5/5
0/0
10/12
3/3
3/11
7/10
0/0
6/6
3/10
0/0
4/10
0/0
0/0
0/0
1/9
1/1
1/1
1/2
7/14
1/1
1/1
2/2
5/5
-------
COMPARISON OF SAMPLE CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS
IN THE BACKGROUND WELL TO ON-SITE WELL DATA
Notes:
1 Based on two samples
ND - Not detected
If the result is a value greater than or equal to the instrument detection limit but
less than the CLP contract required detection limit, the value is listed in brackets
(i.e. [1001]).
PRC evaluated only the filtered inorganic sample analysis <
n (the number of samples) ซ 2 for background samples
n (the number of samples) ซ 10 for remaining samples
PRC evaluated all data from both sampling phases for the organics
n (the number of samples) = 2 for background samples
n (the number of samples) - 20 for remaining samples
-------
Table 2
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
COMPARISON OF INORGANIC CONIANI NAMI CONCENTRATIONS
IN BACKGROUND AND ON-SITE SOIL SAMPLES
(All results are presented in mg/kg)
95X Confidence
Naxinun Value-
Maximum Value-
Compound
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium '
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
'Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Sodium
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Motes:
1
2
3
Mean
Background Sample
4272.
12.06
36.6
0.38
0.87
104,820
6.89
7.4
19.49
17.677
18.54
62.94
98
19.69
735
59.74
215
15.2
69.4
Indicates those maximui
measured in background
The value presented is
Interval for Mean
Background Samples
1556 11.734
5.19 - 28.03
4.55 294.2
0.18 0.82
0.40 1.91
81,781 134,350
3.56 13.33
3.61 15.11
11.12 34.18
8530 - 36.632
10.68 32.20
50,940 77,777
520 1550
10.34 - 37.5
298 - 1812
1.54 - 2320
167 276
7.59 - 30.38
27.54 174.93
i concentrations which exceed the 95
samples.
a geometric mean of four samples.
N - 34 samples: SS-01 through SS-34, SB-01. DA-2-001, OA-3
All On-Site
Soil Samples
16.400*
20
164
1.5*
5.8*
129.000
38*
25*
55*
58.600*
92.7*
70.800
1920*
44
2.290*
317
265
41*
271*
percent confidence
-001. and SO-001
On-Site Soil Locations
Not Within Proposed Lai
9.860
11.0
164.0
0.82
1.3
95.700
25*
11
27
20.200
92.7*
53,500
1920*
20
2000*
283
233
25
236*
interval around the mean
,
N 8 samples: SS-01. SS-03. SS-04. SS-05, jfl^SS-11, SS-16, and SS-26.
-------
Table 3
Source: PRimBI (4/4/88)
SAMPLE RANGE AND ll^PH CONCENIRAIIONS
Of METALS IN SOIL
Cheซnicaf
Aluminum
Ant imony
Arsenic
Bariin
Beryllium
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Thallium
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
Notes:
a
b
c
d
Typical Range
in Soil
(mg/kg)
,_c
2 10
1 - 50
100 3.000
0.1 40
0.01 0.7
1 1.000
1 40
2 100
.
2 - 200
20 3.000
--
5 500
.
0.1 2.0
0.01 5
--
--
20 500
10 300
Source: W.L. Linday. 19
Sources: H.J.N. Bowen,
Marsh, and J.M. Kla. 198:
Indicates data not avail i
NO indicates not detectet
Concentration.
Range in Soil
(mg/kg)
10.000 300,000
0.2 - 150
o.i m
100 3,000
0.1 40
0.01 7
5 3,000
0.05 65
2 250
1000 550,000
<1 - 888
20 18,300
0.1 1.530
0.1 38
0.01 8
3 500
1 2,000
Concentration Range
in Background
Surface Soils
from Petersen Sand
and Gravel Site
(mg/kg)
2.530 10,700
N0d
7.8 24
11 187
0.28 0.78
HO 1.7 (1 of 4 NO)
89.800 -130.000
4.4 12
4.5 13
16 33
HO 12.2 (3 of 4 NO)
12,500 33,800
15 31
56.000 -74.500
575 - 1,300
NO 0.048 (3 of 4 HO)
14 35
490 1710
NO
HO - 1.7 (3 of 4 HO)
1.95 -271
0.34 - 0.82
176 256
11-29
38 -135
Concentration Range
in Surface Soils
from Petersen Sand
and Gravel Site
(mg/kg)
1,470 16,400
NO
3.4 20 (1 of 30 NO)
7.3 - 164
0.25 1.1 (4 of 30 NO)
0.86 2.7 (22 of 30 NO)
2,720 129,000
4.1 - 25
2.7 23
9.2 55
HO
7,860 58,600
4.2 - 92.7
1,620 70,800
413 1,920
NO
4.8 44 (1 of 30 - NO)
222 2.290
NO
NO
26 317
NO
61 265
5.7 30
25 - 271
Concentration Range
in Borehole Soils
from Petersen Sand
and Gravel Site
(mg/kg)
1,390 10.700
NO 119 (16 of 17 NO)
.2.8 - 12
4.7 - 99
0.23 1.5 (3 of 17 NO)
0.72 - 5.8 (14 of 17 NO)
11,200 151.000
1.6 38
3 - 25
7.8 - 45
NO
9.010 62,000
5.3 84
7,580 -67,500
394 - 2.020
NO
NO 34 (1 of 17 NO)
393 2,540 (1 of 17 HO)
NO 1.2 (16 of 17 NO)
NO - 26 (16 of 17 NO)
136 -285
NO
15 - 229
5.4 41
13 - 147
Sources: H.J.M. Bowen, 1979. Environmental Chemistry of the Elements. URE. A.M.. and others. 1983. Environmental Chemistry. Parr, J.f.. P.B.
-------
Table 4
Sample Range of Organic* In Soli
Source: PRC Rl (4/4/88)
Organic
Compound!
Volatile*
1.1.1-Trlchloroethine
Mpthylene Chloride
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Trlchloroethene
Acetone
?-Butanone
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Cthylbenzene
Total Xylenes
Acids
T-WThylpheno)
Rcnzolc Acid
Base/Neutrals
Bis(2-F.thylhexy1)
Phathalate
DI-N-Butyl-Phthalate
Fluoranthene
Benzola(Anthracene
Ren*o(a)Pyrene
(Irnzo(b)Fluorenthene
BpniolklFluoranthene
Chrysene
Anthracene
Phcnanthrene
Pyrene
Benzyl Alcohol
Pesticides and FCBs
DTeTiTFTn
4,4-DDE
4.4-ODD
4,4-DDT
Aroclor-1248
Concentration Range In
Surface Soils from Petersen
Sand and Gravel Site
ug/fcg .
49-130(27 of 30-ND)
4-32(20 of 30-ND)
2-5(27 of 30-ND)
2-56(22 of 30-ND)
2-5(25 of 30-ND)
6-110(24 of 30-ND)
6-21(20 of 30-ND)
24-730(16 of 30-ND)
490-590(28 of 30-ND)
100-120(26 Of 30-ND)
150-690(25 of 30-ND)
110-280(27 of 30-ND)
94-250(27 of 30-ND)
130-250(27 of 30-NO)
180-190(28 of 30-ND)
100-340(26 of 30-ND)
120(29 of 30-ND)
120-420(26 of 30-ND)
100-520(25 of 30-ND)
140-310(28 of 30-ND)
75(29 of 30-ND)
6.7-8.4(27 of 30-NO)
3.5-5.1(27 of 30-ND)
5.4-31(27 of 30-ND)
450(29 of 30-ND)
Concentration Range In Haste Area
Borehole Soils from Petersen
Sand and Gravel Site
ug/fcg
Concentration Range In inn well
Borehole Soils from Petersen
Sand and Gravel Site
ug/fcg
2-15(1 of 18-ND)
1 (17 of 18-ND)
4-290
5-17
2(17 of 18-ND)
8(17 of 18-ND)
17(17 of 18-ND)
500(17 of 18-ND)
100(17 of 18-ND)
62-200(14 of 18-ND)
2-3(5 of 8-ND)
1-17(1 of 8-ND)
2-4(5 of 8-ND)
8-120(4 of 8-NO)
7-35
12(7 of 8-ND)
160(7 of 8-ND)
80-430(4 of 8-ND)
Notes:
(71 of 30-ND)
The compound was not detected In 27 of a total of 30 samples which were analyzed for the compound.
-------
F. Sediment:
1) A sediment sample from the sump pond showed no significant
contamination.
G. Subsurface DA-3 Liquid:
1) The liquid sample from an 11 foot depth at DA-3 contained low levels
of benzene and xylene.
Based on the data review, the Petersen Sand and Gravel site has levels of
contamination that exceed background levels in both soil and surface water,
and to a lesser extent, the groundwater.
Endanqerment Assessment
The contaminants identified by investigations were evaluated to determine the
level of risk to public health and the environment.
The following six exposure scenarios were evaluated to determine the level of
risk for present use of the site:
1) Ingestlon of contaminated soils by trespassers on the site.
2) Direct contact with contaminated soil by trespassers.
3> Inhalation of contaminated air by trespassers and off-site residents.
4) Ingestlon of contaminated groundwater by people.
5) Ingestlon of contaminated surface water on-site by people.
6) Direct contact with and Incidental Ingestlon of contaminated surface
water on site by aquatic life.
The following exposure scenarios were also evaluated to determine the level of
risk if a recreational lake were developed:
1) Ingestion of contaminated soil by people using the proposed lake
recreational area.
2) Direct contact with contaminated soil by people using the proposed
lake.
3) Direct contact with or Ingestlon of contaminated surface water in
proposed lake by aquatic life.
4) Ingestlon of contaminated aquatic life from the proposed lake by
humans.
-------
Table 5
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
SUMMARY Of IOIAL IMCREMEHIAL CARCINOGENIC RISKS FOR
THE PETERSEM SAND AND GRAVEL SITE BY EXPOSURE PATHUAY
UNDER TNREE SITE USE CONDITIONS
(Page 1 of 4)
Exposure Pathway
Ingest Jon of Sold
Exposed Population
Children 6 to 12 years of
age trespassing on the alta.
Priiant Uat
Incremental Carcinogenic
Risk Summation
Worst Case Probable Case
5E-07 2E-08
6-9
Direct Contact with
Soils
Children 6 to 12 and adults
13 to 45 years of age
trespassing on the sit*.
1E-09
7E-10
(2E-09)c
6-11
Inhalation of
Particulates and
Votatiles
Children and adults 6 to 45 years
of age trespassing on the sit*
and children and adults 1 to 70
year of age living near the sit*.
3E-09
6-17
Comments
The largest contributors to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: worst case -
PCBs (2E-07) and
Benzopyrene (2E-07) and
probable case PCBs (IE-
08) and Benzo(a)pyrene (IE-
08).
The largest contributors to
the total (child plus adult
exposure) incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: PCBs (8E-10);
Benzo(a)pyrene (7E-10); and
Benzo(b*k) fluoranthene
(2E-10).
The largest contributors to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: nickel (2E-09);
cadnium (8E-10); and
beryllium (U-10).
-------
Source:
(4/4/B8)
SUMMARY OF TOTAL INCREHEHTAL CARCINOGEMIC RISKS FOR
THE PETERSEN SAND AND GRAVEL SITE BY EXPOSURE PATNUAY
UNDER THREE SITE USE CONDITIONS
(Page 2 of 4)
exposure Pathway
Ingest ion of Ground
Water
Direct Contact with
Surface Uater
Exposed Population
Children and adult* 1 to 70
year* of apt Ingesting water
fro* wells located near the site.
Incremental Carcinogenic
Risk Summation
Worst Case Probable Case
2E-04
Source
Table
6-19
Children and adults 6 to 45 year*
of age trespassing on the site
and children and adults 1 to 70
years of age living near the site.
NA
Comments
The largest contributors to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: arsenic (2E-04)
and 1.1-Dichloroethene (JE-
OS). (Note: carcinogenic
risk s based on samples
from on-site monitoring
wells. Actual risks
associated with off-site
wells may be lower.
A single surface water
sample from the on-site
sunp pond showed only I
inorganics that exceeded
secondary maximum
containment levels (iron,
manganese, and sulfate) and
no organic*.
Total 2E-04
-------
Source:
Table 5
PRC RI (4/4/88)
SUMMARY OF TOIAL INCREMENTAL CARCINOGENIC RISKS FOR
THE PEIERSEM SAND AND GRAVEL SITE BY EXPOSURE PATHWAY
UNDER THREE SITE USE CONDITIONS
(Page 3 of 4)
Exposure Pathway
Exposed Population
Future Use
Incremental Carcinogenic
Risk Summation
Worst Case Probable Case
Proposed Recreational Lake
Source
Table
Comments
Direct Contact with
Surface Uater
Children 1 to 70 years of age
Ingest ion of Aquatic
Life
Ingestion of Sol la
Children and adults 1 to 70
years of age who consuM
fish fro* the proposed
recreational lake.
Children 1 to 12 years of age
visiting the sltt.
2E-07
2E-06
4E-07
Direct Contact with
Soils
Children and adults 1 to 70
years of age who visit the
proposed recreational lake
4E-09
1E-09
(5E-09r
NA Exposure is expected to be
minimal. No surface water
samples taken form the Des
Plaines River near the site.
Analysis of water pumped
into the river from the on-
cite sump ponded into the
river from the on-site pond
showed no organics.
6-6 The largest contributors to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk from this
pathway are: DOT (1E-07);
benio(b+k)fluoranathene (4E-
06); and ODD (JE'08).
6-10 Thซ largest contributor to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk from this
pathway under probable case
conditions is PCBs (4E-07);
under worst case conditions
is PCBs (2E-06).
6-15 The largest contributors to
the total (child plus adult
exposure) incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: PCBs (56-09);
DDE (4E-12); and ODD (5E-
12).
-------
TabTTB
Source: PRC RI (4/4/88)
Exposure Pathway
Inhalation of
Particulates and
Volatile*
Ingest ion of
Ground Water
Exposed Population
SUMMARY OF TOTAL INCREMENTAL CARCINOGENIC RISKS FOR
THE PETERSEN SAND AND GRAVEL SUE BT EXPOSURE PATHWAY
UNDER THREE SITE USE CONDITIONS
(Page 4 of A)
Incremental Carcinogenic
Risk Surmation
Worst Case Probable Case
future Use Proposed Recreational lake
Children and adults 1 to 70
years of age visiting the site
or living near the site.
Children and adults 1 to 70
years of ,age ingesting water
from wells located near the
site.
IE-OS
2E-W
Source
Table
6-18
6-19
Total 2E-04
future Use
Mo Recreational Lake
Incremental carcinogenic risks are the same as described above under
concerning 1ngest1on of groundwater: In the future groundwater wells
Garments
The largest contributor to
the total incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway is nickel (IE-OB).
The largest contributors
to the total incremental
carcinogenic risk for this
pathway are: arsenic (2E-
04) and 1,1-dichloroethene
(3E-05). [Note:
carcinogenic risks are based
on samples from on-site
monitoring wells. Actual
risks associated with off-
site wells may be lower.
present use with the following change
may be completed on site. In this
case, the total Incremental carcinogenic risk described above for Ingestlon of groundwater (based on the
results from on-slte monitoring wells) accurately reflects anticipated conditions.
b
c
net calculated
not applicable
The incremental carcinogenic risk sumiation Is the SUM of the individual compound specific incremental carcinogenic risks (presented in the Source Tables -
see Footnote 6) calculated for each compounds which Met the selection criteria described In Section 6.1 for the medium of concern.
These tables contain the individual exposure pathway and compound specific exposure doses, potency factors and incremental carcinogenic risks.
The Incremental carcinogenic risks (ICR) presented for the direct contact with soils pathway represent the ICR for adults (1E-09), the ICR for children <7t-
10). and the ICR for adults and children combined (2E-09).
The incremental carcinogenic risks (ICR) presented for the direct contact with soils pathway represent the ICR for adults (4E-09). the ICR for children (IE-
09). and the ICR for adults and children combined (5EO9).
-------
In summary, the endangerment assessment concluded that exposure to
contaminants at or released from the Petersen Sand & Gravel site present a
very minimal risk to human and aquatic life. There were no unacceptable
noncarcinogenic or carcinogenic, present or future risks to the public health
(see Table 5).
The results of the sampling of surface and subsurface soils, groundwater and
surface water as well as sediment from a sump pond revealed low levels of
contaminants. The endangerment assessment indicated that there is a very
limited or minimal risk to the public health and the environment.
Documentation of Significant Changes
There are no significant changes from the preferred alternative described in
the Proposed Plan.
The Selected Remedy
The findings of the RI show that the previous removal actions were adequate to
protect human health and the environment, and that no unacceptable risk
remains at the site. Therefore, no further action is recommended at the
Petersen Sand and Gravel site.
Although the RI report concluded that development of a recreational lake
should not pose any unacceptable risks. It is impossible to fully predict
future conditions when a lake Is developed on the site. In order to ensure
the safety of aquatic life and future users of the lake. It is recommended
that surface water and sediments be monitored before and after the lake Is in
place. A plan for this monitoring Is being developed by Lake County.
Groundwater and precipitation which collects in the pit is currently being
discharged from a sump pond to the Des Plaines River to prevent water from
filling the pit so that mining can continue. This discharge will be monitored
under lEPA's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit-
program to ensure that contaminants are not released to the river. The
monitoring requirements for this permit are currently under review by IEPA.
Statutory Determinations
Cost effectiveness and utilization of permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies, are not applicable to the no further action
alternative.
Protection of Human Health and the Environment
Because this remedy will not result in hazardous substances remaining onsite
above health-based levels, this remedy 1s protective of human health and the
environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Illinois Department of Health concur with the
assessment that the site poses no unacceptable risk to human health and the
environment.
-------
Compliance with applicable, or relevant and appropriate, State and Federal
requirements.
Iron and manganese 1n some groundwater samples including groundwater which has
not been affected by the site, exceeded the Federal SMCL's for drinking
water. These SMCL's are intended as guidelines for the State in their
oversight of Public Water Systems and are not Intended to be Federally
enforceable. The AWQC for nickel in drinking water was exceeded in some
samples, however, no unacceptable risk was estimated by the Endangerment
Assessment. No other Federal or State environmental standards or criteria are
exceeded at the site.
-------
ATTACHMENT II
-------
Community Relations Responsiveness Summary
Petersen Sand and Gravel Site
Llbertyville, Illinois
July, 1988
The purpose of this community relations response summary Is to document
milestone community relations activities along with citizen comments and
questions and Agency responses.The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
has been responsible for conducting a coordinated community relations program
for this site. Community relations activities have been administered
throughout the Remedial Investigation and the presentation of the
alternative. In accordance^with CERCLA Section 117, a seven week public
comment period. Informal meetings and a public hearing were held to acquire
public comment.
The selected remedy of no further action was presented In the June, 1=988
Proposed Plan and at the public hearing. There has been no negative public
reaction to the selected remedy before or during the comment period and Lake
County officials have Indicated their agreement wi.th the Agencies decision.
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
Remedial Investigation (RI)
A community relations plan was submitted to and approved by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 1n September, 1985. During the
Initial assessment citizen concerns regarding the site were Identified and.
addressed. The major concerns seemed to come from county officials and
efforts have been made to maintain coordination between IEPA and county
government agencies through one-to-one contacts and Informal meetings.
Milestone community relations activities conducted during the remedial
Investigations Include:
- Developed a formal procedure for responding to citizen Inquiries
- Informal meetings with county officials
- Established and maintained an Information repository
- Press releases, media contacts and public meetings
Hearing Process
The dates of the public comment period, the date and the location of a public
hearing and a summary of the Proposed Plan were announced through a legal
notice 1n two area newspapers.
-------
Page 2
The Petersen Proposed Plan, which includes a description of the investigation
findings and conclusions, was mailed to those on the community relations
mailing list and was available along with a the Administrative Record at the
Lake/Cook Memorial Library in Llbertyville. Before the public hearing, five
meetings were held with Interested groups which Included four meetings with
county officials and one meeting with the news media.
The public hearing was held at the Llbertyville Township Hall at 359 Merrill
Court on Tuesday, June 21, 1988 to discuss the Remedial Investigation and the
preferred alternative. Approximately one dozen people were at the hearing.
Following presentations by IEPA and their contractor, only one county official
expressed comments.
Comments raised during the public comment period, which are relevant to the
Proposed Plan, are summarized below. The comment period was held from May 23
to July 12, 1988.
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSE
Question: What 1s the extent of contamination found In the soil at the site
and the risks associated with the soil and proposed lake?
Low concentration
areas as well as
organic chemicals
naturally In the
site with on site
higher. However,
solvents as well
minimal or small
the proposed lake
levels of contamination were found in all three disposal
at other locations in the grid area. Inorganic and some
such as polycycllc aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH's) occur
soils. By a comparison of background levels near the
levels. Inorganic chemicals were not significantly
other organic chemicals such as PCB, pesticides and
as Inorganic chemicals were at levels that present a
risk to the public health and the environment Including
As part of the Endangerment Assessment in the Remedial Investigation
modelling was done to estimate the concentrations of contaminants that
would be released to the proposed lake. The estimates Indicate that
concentrations would be low enough to present minimal risk to public
health and the environment.
Question: Why was the RI done?
A preliminary assessment and site Inspection was done by the USEPA and the
site scored high enough by the Hazardous Ranking System to be placed on the
Superfund Program National Priorities List (NPL). Under the law, sites on the
NPL must, at a minimum, undergo a Rl to determine whether conditions warrant
remedial action.
-------
Page 3
Question: How did we know that no more drums exist at the site?
Soil borings were conducted at the three disposal sites and 23 other
locations and subsurface surveys to determine the existence of metal drums
under the site were conducted over a 20 acre grid. Results of these
Investigations do not Indicate the presence of burled drums.
Question: Why was the east side of the pit also studied?
A study area of approximately 20 acres was chosen to Include three known ,
waste disposal areas as well as adjacent areas with unknown past
activities. This was necessary to determine whether other areas were
affected by known waste areas and whether unknown wastes were present
since very little 1s known about past operations at the site.
Question: How do we know that the sand and gravel operation north of the site
has not caused the site contamination?
It Is known that paint, paint waste.and solvents have been Illegally
landfllled at the Petersen pit and several drums of waste have been
removed. No Illegal waste disposal activities are known to have occurred
at the sand and gravel operation to the north, therefore, no wastes are
present which would be released.
The Petersen pit Is on the east side of the Oes Plalnes river while the
northern operation 1s on the west. If contaminants existed at and were
released from the northern operation they would have to migrate through
the river to affect the Petersen site. There Is no evidence that this has
happened.
Question: Who will do the post-RI monitoring?
Since the post monitoring of surface water Is to ensure protection If a
recreational lake Is developed, the monitoring does not directly deal with
this Superfund proj.ect-goals and objectives. The County has agreed to do
monitoring before, during, and after the proposed lake Is developed to
ensure that there 1s no adverse Impact to the public health and the
environment.
BM:2250j,l,3
-------
ATTACHMENT III
-------
INDEX OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
Preliminary Assessment Report (PA)
Site Investigation Report (SI)
Removal Documents (Chemical Waste Management report)
QA/QC Data from Laboratory (at IEPA, LPC files)
Data Summary Sheets (Refer to Remedial Investigation)
Health and Safety Plan
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)
RI/FS Work Plan
Summary of changes to Work Plan
Changes in Scope of Work (Memos)
Remedial Investigation (RI)
Community Relation* plan
Response to Public Comment - Responsiveness Summary
Transcript of Public Meeting
Record of Decision (ROD)
Amendments to ROD (if applicable)
Pollution Control Board Opinion and Order
Court Order
------- |