Superfund Record of Decision: Ohio River Park Superfund Site, Neville Island, PA (9/27/1996)


                                 PB96-963910
                                 EPA/ROD/R03-96/227
                                 October 1996
EPA  Superfund
       Record of Decision:
       Ohio River Park Superfund Site,
       Neville Island, PA
       9/27/1996

-------
SUPERFUND PROGRAM
RECORD. OF DECISION
        ., • *:/'.

Ohio River Park Site

Operable Unit One
Neville Island
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
                              September 1996

-------
                        RECORD OF DECISION

                  OHIO RIVER PARK SUPERFUND SITE

                           DECLARATION
SITE NAME AND LOCATION

Ohio River Park Superfnnd Site
Neville  Township
Allegheny County,  Pennsylvania


STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

     This Record of Decision (ROD)  presents the selected remedial
action plan for the Ohio River Park Superfund Site (the "Site")
in Allegheny County,  Pennsylvania which was chosen in accordance
with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,  Compensation,  and
Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"),  as amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization act of 1986, 42 U.S.C.  § 9601
("SARA"),  and. to the extent practicable,the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan ("NCP"),  40
C.F.R. Part 300.  This decision is based upon and documented  in
the contents of the Administrative Record.   The attached index
identifies the items which comprise the Administrative Record.

     The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania concurs with the selected
remedy.


ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE

     Pursuant to duly delegated authority,  I hereby determine,
pursuant to Section 106  of CERCLA,  42 U.S.C. §  9606,  that actual
or threatened releases of hazardous substances  from this Site,  as
specified in Section VII," Summary of Site Risks,  in the ROD,  if
not addressed by implementing the response action selected, may
present an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public
health, welfare, or the  environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY

     The remedial action plan in this document  is presented  as
the permanent remedy for controlling the  buried waste  and
contaminated soil at the Site.   This remedy is  comprised of  the
following components:

•    Capping of concentrated waste areas  with a multilayer cap
     designed in accordance with Pennsylvania Residual Waste
     Management Regulations.

-------
      Capping areas not  covered with  the multilayer  cap  and  not
      covered with adequate  vegetative  cover  with an
      erosion cap.

      Installing a surface water  control system  to control
      transport  of surface soil both  on- and  off-site.

      Abandoning the existing  on-site oil well in accordance with
      Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Well Regulations.

      Installing a passive gas collection system to  ensure the
      integrity  of the cap.

      Deed restriction preventing residential use of the Site.

      Long-term  monitoring of  groundwater,  surface water, and
      sediment.
 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS'

      Pursuant.to duly delegated authority,  I  hereby determine
 that  the  selected remedy is  protective,  of human health and the
 environment,  complies with Federal  and  State  requirements  that
 legally are  applicable or relevant  and  appropriate  to the
 remedial  action,  and is cost-effective.  The  selected remedy
 utilizes  permanent solutions and alternative  treatment
 technologies to the maximum  extent  practicable,  and satisfies  the
 statutory preference for remedial actions in  which  treatment that
 reduces toxicity,  mobility,  or  volume is a  principal element.

      Because this remedy will result in hazardous substances
 remaining on site above health-based levels,  a  review will be
 conducted within five (5) years after the commencement of  the
 remedial  action to ensure that  human health and the environment
 continue  to  be adequately protected by  the  remedy.
-Thomas  C.  Vol^agma^~""^                        Date
Director of  Hazardous Waste  Management
Division

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS

                        PART  I - DECLARATION


I.     SUE NAME AND LOCATION

H.    STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

m.    ASSESSMENT OF THE SITE

IV.    DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY

V.    STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS


                     PART II-  DECISION SUMMARY

I.     SITE NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION                              1

H.    SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES                         3

Dl    HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION                          6

IV.    SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE RESPONSE ACTION                           6

V.    SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS                                7

      A Surface Features                                                   7
      B. Geology                                                        7
      C. Hydrology                                                       9
      D. Climate                                                         9

VI.   NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION                             9

      A Air Quality                                                      10
      B. Surface Soil Contamination                                          10
      C. Subsurface Soil Contamination                                        15
      D. Buried Waste                                                    18

      SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS                                          22

      A Human Health Risks                                               22
           1. Data Collection and Evaluation                                  24
           2. Exposure Assessment                                         26
           3. Toxicity Assessment                                          27

-------
4. Human Health Effects 30
5. Risk Characterization 38

B. Ecological Risk Assessment 39

DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 40

DC COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 43

A. Overall Protection Of Human health And Environment 44
B. Compliance With Applicable or Relevant and Apropriate Requirements 45
C. Reduction Of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume Through Treatment 48
D. Implementability 48
E. Short Term Effectiveness 49
F. Long Term Effectiveness and Permanence 49
G. Cost 49
H. State Acceptance 50
I. Community Acceptance ' 50

X. SELECTED REMEDY AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 50

A. Multilayer Cap Performance Standards 50
B. Erosion Cap Performance Standards 52
C. On-Site Oil Well Performance 52
D. Gas Collection System Performance Standards 52
E. Surface Water Runoff and Erosion Control System Performance Standards 52
F. Operation and Maintenance Performance Standards 52
G. Monitoring Program Performance Standards 52
H. Institutional Control Performance Standards 53

XI. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 53

A. Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment 53
B. Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements 54
C. Cost Effectiveness 54
D. Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment (or Resource
Recovery) Technologies to the Maximum Extent Practicable 54
E. Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element 54

XH. DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES 54

-------
                   PART  III - RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY                   55
I.      ORAL COMMENTS AND WRITTEN STATEMENTS FROM APRIL 15,1996
       PUBLIC MEETING                                                        56
H.     WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT
       PERIOD                                                                 64
       A. Comments from General Public                                             64
       B. Written comments received from Neville Land Company                        65

                                     TABLES
Table 1 - Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds in Surface Soil                               12

Table 2 - VOCs in Surface Soil                                                      13

Table 3 - Pesticides in Surface Soils '                                                14

Table 4 - VOCs in Stibsurface Soils                                                  16

Table 5 - SVOCs in Subsurface Soils                                                  18

Table 6 - Analytical Results for Waste Material Samples                                  24

Table 7 - Reasonable Maximum Exposure Point Concentrations                             24

Table 8 - Exposure Assessment Factors                                                28

Table 9 - Slope Factors and Reference Doses                                           30

Table 10 - Human Health Risks at the Site                                             3 9

Table 11 - Estimated Cost of Alternatives                                              49


                                    FIGURES

Figure 1 - Site Location                                                             2

Figure 2 - Location of Buried Wastes                                                   4

Figure 3 - Types of Waste Disposed by Location                                         5

Figure 4 - Site Features                                                              8

-------
Figure 5 - Surface Soil Sampling Locations                                                 11




Figure 6 - Subsurface Soil Sampling Locations                                              17




Figure 7 - Total SVOC Concentration at Each Sampling Location                              20




Figure 8 - Location of Waste Material Samples                                              21

-------
RECORD OF DECISION

OHIO RIVER PARK SITE

PART II  -  DECISION SUMMARY


I.   SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION

The Site consists of approximately 32 acres on the western end of Neville Island, approximately
10 miles downstream of the City of Pittsburgh (Figure 1). The Ohio River borders the Site to the
north and the Back Channel of the Ohio River borders it to the south.  The Site is accessible from
the mainland via the new Coraopolis Bridge, linking the Town of Coraopolis with Neville Island.
The Ohio River Park Site has been identified in some documents, mostly preceding EPA
involvement, as Neville Island This Record of Decision ("ROD") will refer to the Site as the
"Ohio River Park Site", or "the Site".

The Ohio River Park Site is defined as/all areas found presently, or in the future, to be impacted
by contamination that resulted from hazardous waste disposal operations previously conducted at
this location. This ROD addresses buried waste and soil contamination at the Site, which
includes: 1) industrial waste (primarily tar waste)  disposed in fifty-four disposal trenches; 2)
industrial, construction, and municipal waste disposed in piles; and 3) contaminated soil.  This
Record of Decision does not address groundwater cleanup at the Site. Although the Proposed
Plan identified potential groundwater cleanup options, EPA agreed to provide the Potentially
Responsible Parties ("PRPs") with the opportunity to provide additional hydrologic data prior to
selecting the groundwater cleanup remedy for the Site. The groundwater cleanup remedy will be
documented in a subsequent ROD.

Land use on Neville Island is generally industrial/commercial, although there are some
residential areas. The middle section of the island east of the Site and west of Highway 1-79 is
mostly residential and commercial while the eastern end of the island is heavily industrialized.
Most of Neville Island's 930 residents live in the area between the Coraopolis Bridge and
Highway 1-79. The nearest residence is located approximately 450 feet from the Site.
According to the 1990 census, the population within an approximately four-mile radius of the
Site is 18,058 people. The eastern end of the island, approximately two miles east of the Site,  is
occupied by petrochemical facilities,  coal coking facilities and abandoned steel facilities.

The Site consists primarily of open fields surrounded by trees and underbrush which form a
perimeter adjacent to the river. The major structures on the Site include a maintenance building,
asphalt-covered parking lots, roadways and walkways, concrete foundations, a pipeline,
underground utilities, and an abandoned oil  well derrick.  The Site is located almost completely
within the 100-year floodplain but above the ordinary high water elevation.

-------
    ,y\>.*-- :- >»*". , .^" ' _:^"L»-^:' »•. ^nX ,
                                     SCALE 1.24000
                                          o
                  1000
                              loop   :ooo    30oc    4onc   sooc
                                                         	! MIL-


                                                          6000    '000 '•££•
REFERENCE:


        UNITED  STATES

     GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

    AMBRIDGE QUADRANGLE
          PENNSYLVANIA
 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
OATS
               Figure 1 - Site Location
               IAPPR. 3T
                       JAM
                               ino. NO.
                                         1-1

-------
II. SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

Prior to the 1940's, the predominant land use at the Site was agricultural. Beginning in the mid-
1930's until the mid-1950's, a portion of the Site was used for municipal landfill operations
including the disposal of domestic trash and construction debris. Industrial waste disposal
activities were conducted at the Site from 1952 through the 1960's.

Available information indicates that Pittsburgh Coke and Chemical Company ("PC&C")
disposed of much of the industrial waste at the Site. PC&C began production of coke and pig
iron on the eastern end of the island in 1929, operated a cement products plant during the 1930's,
and produced coal coking by-products during the 1940's. Between 1949 and 1955, PC&C's
Agricultural Chemicals Division manufactured pesticides. Two methods of waste disposal were
used by PC&C at the Site: wet wastes were placed into trenches and dry wastes were piled on the
surface. Fifty-four trenches have been identified as being used for disposal of tar acid, tar
decanter, and occasionally agricultural chemical wastes. Figures 2 and 3 show the approximate
disposal locations of various wastes at the Site. PC&C operations ceased in 1965-66. PC&C
merged into Wilmington Securities, Inc., the parent corporation of the Neville Land Company.
/
In 1977, Neville Land Company donated the Site area to Allegheny County. Allegheny County
began construction of a park on the Site in 1977 and completed the construction in 1979. The
park was never opened to the public, however, and was subsequently dismantled. During the
course of the work, approximately 13,000 cubic yards of various wastes were discovered at the
Site. While most of these materials were excavated and removed from the Site, some materials
were reburied. After this discovery, Allegheny County transferred the title to the land back to
Neville Land Company. A small portion of the property, including the Buckeye Pipeline gas
pipe easement, was not transferred to Neville Land Company.

Based on information and data collected from 1977 through 1989 by Allegheny County, EPA,
the Neville Land Company, and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
(("PADER"), now the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection ("PADEP")), EPA
proposed to include the Site on the National Priorities List of Superfund sites on October 16,
1989. The analytical data collected were used to evaluate the relative hazards posed by the Site
using EPA's Hazard Ranking System ("HRS"). EPA uses the HRS to calculate a score for
hazardous waste sites based upon the presence of potential and observed hazards. If the final
HRS score exceeds 28.5, the Site may be placed on the National Priorities List, making it
eligible to receive Superfund monies for remedial cleanup. This Site scored 42.24, and was
placed on the list on August 30,1990.

In October 1991, EPA and Neville Land Company, the owner of the Site, entered into an
Administrative Order on Consent in which the Neville Land Company agreed to conduct a
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study ("RI/FS") of the Site with EPA and State oversight
The Remedial Investigation ("RT) Report for the Site, based on the 1992 and 1993 field
sampling, was approved by EPA in June 1994. The Ecological Risk Assessment was completed
in November 1994 and the Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment was completed in January

-------
       0    150    300
GOO
             SCALE IN FEET
               OHIO
                                                   ASPHALT ROAD-
           FORMER DISPOSAL  TRENCH NUMBER-AND LOCATION


           END DUMPING AREAS
NOTE:

me roRHER DISPOSAL TRENCH AND END DUMPING LOCATIONS ARE INFERRED
AND WERE IDENTIFIED USING THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATA
PRESENTED AS TABLE 4-S.

THIS flGURE WAS PREPARED USING IHE REPORT ENTITLED:
'DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE NEVILLE ISLAND 5//F." AUGUST, 1981, ERT.  INCORPORAIIO
           APPROXIMATE
           WATER LINE
                                                                                  —FENCE
                                                                                                                   ABANDONED
                                                                                                                   MAINTENANCE
                                                                                                                   BUILDING
                                                                                        Figure 2 - Location or Bui led Wastes
                                                             MSM
     8/"/9J
"•"'••«*    IT/9J
Projtct
riunbrn

1920-OOJ

-------
493007a
              1JO
300
  >—
600
               SCALE IN FEET
                                                 OHIO
                                                                        GRAVEL
                                                                         ROAD
                                                      ASPHALT ROAD
  EXPLANATION
          COAL  COKING WASTES

          FOUNDRY SAND PILES

          DESULFURIZATION WASTES

  •_-_-_1  CALCIUM CARBONATE  WASTES

          MUNICIPAL  WASTES
  NOTE:
  PERIOD OF DISPOSAL:  1952 TO 1965
  me WASTE DISPOSAL BOUNDARIES AND THE TYPES OF WASTES DISPOSED OF ARE BASEP ON HISTORICAL
  DATA ACQUIRED FROM PCAC ANNNUAL REPORTS. EMPLOYEE INTERVIEWS' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, AND
  OHIO RIVER PARK SUBCONTRACTOR REPORTS.   THE DISPOSAL  BOUNDARIES AND THf WASTE TYPES
  ARE INFERRED.
  THIS FIGURE WAS PREPARED USING THE REPORT ENTITLED:
  'DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE NEVILLE ISLAND SITE.* AUGUST.  1981.  ERT, INCORPORATED.
                                                                                 APPROXIMATE
                                                                                 WATER LINE
                                                                                                                      FENCE
                                                                                                                      ABANDONED
                                                                                                                      MAINTENANCE
                                                                                                                      BUILDING
                                                                       Figure 3 - Types of Waste Disposed

                                                                                 by Location
                                                                   Oro»rv
                                                                            HSH
                                                                                       Appr'cb
                                                                                                 KB
                                                                      Oattl  8/10/93
Project
llunbcn

4920--OOJ
Rev

 0

-------
1995. Based on these documents, Neville Land Company submitted a Feasibility Study ("FS")
in April 1995 describing the remedial action objectives and comparing cleanup alternatives for
the Site. In April 1996,  EPA presented a Proposed Plan, which utilized the Feasibility Study,
and evaluated four alternatives to remediate contamination at the Site.

III.   HIGHLIGHTS  OF  COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

The documents which EPA used to develop, evaluate, and select a remedial alternative for the
Site have been maintained at the Coraopolis Memorial Library, State and School Streets,
Coraopolis, PA  and at the EPA Region 3, Philadelphia Office.

The RI/FS arid Proposed Plan for the Ohio River Park Site were released to the public on April
2,1996. The notice of availability for these documents was published in the Tribune Review on
April 2,1996, and in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on April 4,1996.  A 30-day public comment
period began on April 2,1996 and was initially scheduled to conclude on May 1,1996.  By
request, the public comment period was extended until June 12,1996.

A briefing for the Board of County Supervisors and a  public meeting were held during the"
public comment period on April 15,1996. At the meeting, representatives from EPA answered
questions about me .Sit?-and the remedial alternatives under consideration.  Approximately 100
people attended th€ meeting, including residents from the impacted area, local government
officials, and news media representatives. A summary of comments received during the public
comment period and EPA's responses are contained in Part HI of this document.

The initial Proposed Plan contemplated remediation of all the affected media: soils, waste
material, groundwater, surface water, and sediments. In response to concerns raised before and
during the comment period, EPA decided to issue a ROD to address the soils and waste material
at this time, and to make the decision pertaining to other media after additional studies have been
completed.

IV.  SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE RESPONSE ACTION

As with many Superfund sites, the problems at the Ohio River Park Site are complex. Prior to
this ROD, the Site was divided into two areas or Operable Units ("OUs").  Operable Unit One
("OU-1") included the entire Site except for a one-acre portion on the southeast comer consisting
of an approach to the Coraopolis Bridge and a meadow along the Back Channel of the river.
This one-acre area has been designated Operable Unit Two ("OU-2"). EPA issued a ROD for
OU-2 on March 31,1993 that states no action is required in this area.

While the Proposed Plan issued for OU-1 addressed contamination found in soil, groundwater,
surface waters and sediments at the Site, EPA has determined that OU-1 and, therefore, this
ROD will be limited to contamination in the buried waste and soil at the Site. The contamination
found in the groundwater, surface water, and sediments will be addressed separately as Operable
Unit Three ("OU-3"). A subsequent ROD will identify me appropriate cleanup requirements for

-------
OU-3 after completion of additional studies.

V. SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS

A. Surface Features

The Site is mostly open area with a few improvements. The Site is protected by a metal fence
with a gate at die entrance, an abandoned Asphalt road located at the curve of Grand Avenue
(Figure 4). The road leads to an approximately two-acre asphalt parking lot surrounded by
meadows at the entrance to a park. The asphalt surface has not been maintained and is cracked in
many places with several visible depressions and holes. The road goes further to a small parking
lot in front of a former park administration building. Between this building and the Ohio River,
the terrain is covered by trees, which form the border of the Site along the river. The central
portion of the Site includes open meadows sparsely covered with brush and is encircled by an
abandoned asphalt biking path. Along the river banks, and at the western end of the island, trees
and brush become denser, and woods gradually replace the meadow. An abandoned oil well
derrick is located along the Ohio River bank in the north-central part of the Site. The western
part of the Site, including the steep terraces on the river banks, is densely covered with trees.

The configuration ofth$ Site was changed in 1977-79 when, during construction of the
recreational park, approximately 13,000 cubic yards of materials were excavated and the area
was leveled and covered with soil. Aerial photography and Remedial Investigation sampling
revealed locations of dumping areas (see Figure 2) and the types of wastes disposed (see Figure
3). Two methods of waste disposal were utilized at the Site. Wet wastes were placed into 54
trenches and dry wastes were piled on the surface and/or incinerated at the Site. Most of the
manufacturing and municipal wastes were disposed at the south-central portion of the Site
beneath the currently existing parking lot, in the meadows, and along the Back Channel river
banks. Steep river ledges at the western part of the Site were created by piles of foundry sand
and demolition debris.

B. Geology

The Ohio River Park Site lies within the Allegheny Plateau section of the Applachian Plateau
Physiographic Province. The Allegheny Plateau is characterized by gently folded, parallel,
northeast-southwest trending folds. At the Site, the bedrock is identified as the GHenshaw and
Casselman Formations of the Pennsylvanian Age Connemaugh Group. These formations are
primarily composed of interbedded shale, siltstone and sandstone with thin beds of limestone and
coal. The Glenshaw Formation, which is me lower member of the Connemaugh Group and the
Casselman Formation, which is the upper member of the Connemaugh Group is separated by the
Ames Limestone in Western Pennsylvania.

Like most stream valleys in Western Pennsylvania, the Ohio River consists of unconsolidated
sediments overlying bedrock. Neville Island is a portion of a dissected river terrace that was
deposited by the ancestral Ohio River. The unconsolidated sediments at me Site are

-------
49201 Id
                                         rOIRT ROAD
                                          .-ASPHALT WALK LOOP
                                                            r CONCRETE PILINGS  (TYPICAL)

                                                              - CONCRETE  SLAB (TYPICAL)
                                                                                    ABANDONED OIL WELL.
                                                                                    DERRICK AND SUPPORT BUILDING
                                                                                                                                   GRAVEL AND
                                                                                                                                   ASPHALT ROAD


                                                                                                                                     DECONTAMINATION
                                                                                                                                     PAD
                                                                                               FORMER
                                                                                               CORAOPOUS BRIDGE
         Q     150    300
600
                 SCALE  IN  FEET
  SOURCE:

  ENSR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
  REPORT OF THE OHIO RIVER SITE, NEVILLE TOWNSHIP. PENNSYLVANIA. UAY 1994.
  FIGURE NUMBERS 2-2 AND 6-2.
                                                                                                                         Figure 4 - Site Features
                                                                          AS SHOWN
                                                                                                                  3/10/95
DRAWN BY:   T.W
                                                                                          BY:  L.O.H.
•"» NO.:  30087-001
                TO. NO.:
                           1-5

-------
approximately 60 feet thick and in the Ohio River Channel 20 feet thick. At the site, the upper
portion of the unconsolidated sediments consist of approximately 25 feet of fill, and Quartemaiy
fluvial deposits of clay, silt and sand. The lower 35 feet consists of glaciofluvial deposits of
sand and gravel with minor amounts of silt and clay that were deposited from glacial meltwaters
during the Pleistocene interglacial stages. The top of bedrock at the Site appears to gently slope
toward the south-southwest.

Fill is found throughout the Site, with the exception of the eastern boundary where it is absent.
Former trenches in the south-central portion of the Site extend to a maximum depth of 12 feet.
Foundry sand disposed in the western part of the Site is up to 27 feet deep.

C. Hydrology

The Site is bounded by the Back Channel of the Ohio River to the south and by the Main
Channel of the Ohio River to the north. The flow rate in the river has varied from 108,000 cubic
feet per minute (measured at Sewickley in 1957) to 4,440,000 cubic feet per minute (measured
at Sewickley in 193 5). Since approximately 90 percent of the flow occurs in the Main Channel,
the minimum and maximum flow in the Back Channel are approximately 10,800 and 44,400
cubic feet per minute, respectively. The Ohio River is navigable and chemicals, coal, and coke
are routinely transported on the river by barges.

The Site sediments constitute an unconfined surficial aquifer that extends beneath the Ohio River
and is interconnected to the river. Bedrock, consisting of shale, siltstone and fine-grained,
micaceous sandstone, underlies these sediments. The groundwater in the sand/gravel aquifer
beneath the Site discharges primarily to the Main and Back Channels of the Ohio River.
However, this aquifer interconnects with groundwater beneath the river and on the shores.
Groundwater is used as a source of drinking water by several municipalities which flank the
Ohio River. The nearest one is the municipality of Coraopolis. The Coraopolis well field is
located approximately 750 feet southwest from the western boundary of the Site, along the Back
Channel. The well field consists of seven wells mat produce an average of 127 cubic feet per
minute.

D. Climate

The climate of Allegheny County is classified as humid continental. The annual average
precipitation is 37 inches, and it is evenly distributed throughout the year. The mean annual
temperature is approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit

VI. NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION

The primary objective of the Remedial Investigation was to characterize the nature and extent of
hazardous substances present at the Ohio River Park Site. As a part of this effort, the RI
identified and evaluated Site-related contaminants, their potential migration routes, and exposure
pathways for human and ecological receptors.

-------
A. Air Quality

On-site ambient air monitoring was conducted between November 9 and November 18,1992.
During the air quality investigation, a meteorological station was established at the Site. The
station collected 349 consecutive hours of meteorological data measuring speed and direction of
winds. Data on temperature and precipitation were obtained from the National Weather
Service station, which is located at the Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, approximately
four miles from the Site.

Samples were collected during four days from four sampling stations, one prevailing upwind and
three downwind. The laboratory analysis of collected samples revealed trace concentrations of
naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, and selected volatiles in air samples. However, because
these compounds were found in both upwind and downwind samples, and are generally present
in the region, they do not appear to originate at the Site.

B. Surface Soil Contamination

Twenty-nine surface soil samples were taken from 0 to 1.5 feet below the surface and 11 were
taken from 0 to 2 feet below. Figure 5'presents surface soil sampling locations.

Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds

Semi-volatile organic compounds ("SVOCs") were detected with the highest levels in the south
central portion of the Site. Numerical data on their detection frequency and concentration are
provided in the Table 1.

The SVOCs which were most prevalent and represent the highest concentrations were
Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons ("PAHs"), the only group of contaminants detected across the entire
Site. PAHs were found in 37 of 40 soil sample locations. The PAHs found at the highest
concentrations were fluoranthene (97,000 parts per billion ("ppb") at location NSSF-3),
naphthalene (34,000 ppb at location NSSG-4), phenanthrene (100,000 ppb at location NSSF-3),
pyrene (63,000 ppb at location NSSF-3), benzo(a)anthracene (35,000 ppb at location NSSF-3 ) ,
and benzo(a)fluoranthene (42,000 ppb at location NSSF-3).

The highest total PAH concentration was 449,000 ppb and was detected at location NSSE-3.
Semi-volatile organic compounds other than PAHs were found in some parts of the Site at
significantly lower concentrations: Phenolic compounds were detected in the trench area at a
maximum concentration of 2,140 ppb at location NBS-39-1; and phthalate compounds were
found on the eastern part of the Site at a maximum concentration of 71,000 ppb at location
ERTS-48-1. PAH confounds are, therefore, the primary contaminants in surface soils.
10

-------
  492062b
                                                                                                   0     150   300
600
                                                     FORMER
                                                     CORAOPOUS BRIDGE
                                                                                                                    NSSM-1
                                                                                                              NSSM-3
 EXPLANATION:
 •NSSE-I     SURFACE SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION


SOURCE:

 ENSR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING.  REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
 REPORT OF THE OHIO ffVf/f  SITE. NEVILLE TOWNSHIP. PENNSYLVANI\ UAY 1994.
 FIGURE NUMBER 4- 1.
OrrSITE. BACKGROUND. AND/OR DUPLICATE SAMPLE LOCATIONS FOR THE
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION ARE NOT SHOWN AS SAUPLE LOCATIONS.
                                                                                       11
                                                                                                  Figure 5 - Surface Soil Sampling Locations
                                                                                                        bMUWM I"1""" "'•   I.W.   I**1 *"•'• J00tt/-00l
                                                                                                     3/10/95  jtfPB BY:  Lp.H.  |na MO.:     \-\\

-------
Table 1 - Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds in Surface Soil
COMPOUND
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Fluorene
Fluoranthene
Naphthalene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Benzo (b) fluoranthene :,
Benzo (k) fluoranthene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenz (a,h) anthracene
Indeno (1 ,2,3-cd) pyrene
2,4,6 - Trichlorophenol
2,4 - Dichlorophenol
Phenol
2-Methylnaphthalene
Dibenzofuran
Carbazole
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Di-n-butylphthalate
Diethylphthalate
Di-n-octylphthalate
DETECTION
FREQUENCY
AT 40
tOCATIONS
12
1
J-
27
16
36.
30
27
34
34
33
34
28
30
33
10
28
6
3
1
19
15
12
17
4
2
1
MINIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
)
160
.
120J
120J
70J
53J
76J
60J
140J
140J
100J
21 OJ
66J
75J
21 OJ
60J
260J
120J
_
120J
150J
120J
180
63J
150J
.
MAXIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
(ppb)
4.900J
520J
18.000J
4.500J
97,000
340.000J
20,000
100,000
63,000
35,000
42,000
20,000
25,000
34,000
3,600J
19,000
970
2.000J
1.200J
13.000J
11.000J
3.100J
71,000
180J
1100
57J
Data qualifier: "J" - The reported concentration is an estimated value.
                         12

-------
                             Table 2 - VOCs in Surface Soil
COMPOUND
Toluene
Trichloroethene
Chloroform
Tetrachloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Benzene .
1 ,1 ,1-Trichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethene
2-Butanone
Xylenes
4-Methyl-2-pentanone r, >
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
1,1-Dichloroethene
DETECTION
FREQUENCY
AT 40 LOCATIONS
28
27 >
16
15
14
8
6
4
1
/
1
1
1
1
1
MINIMUM
DETECTED
{JOWCENT8ATIQN
to**
3J
3J
3J
3J
2J
3J
3J
4J
_
—
_
—
_
—
MAXIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
(«*>
29J
29J
17J
8J
14J
22J
8J
9J
4J
3J
10J
4J
4J
5J
Data qualifer: "J" - The reported concentration is an estimated value.
 Volatile Organic Compounds

Volatile organic compounds ("VOCs") were detected in surface soil at concentraf ons below 30
ppb across the Site.  The VOC data are summarized in Table 2. The most common VOCs were
toluene and trichloroethene.

Pesticides

Pesticides were detected at the highest concentrations in the central portion of the Site. The data
are summarized in Table 3.  No organophosphate pesticides were detected during the Remedial
Investigation. The following organochlorine pesticides were detected: gamma-chlordane at 900
ppb at location NSSE-3; alpha-chlordane at 450 ppb at location NSSE-3; aldrin at 260 ppb at
location NSSG-4; heptachlor at 240 ppb at location NSSE-3; DDT at 360 ppb at location
SSSN-3;  and hexachlorides (0-BHC and y-BHC) at 1,800 ppb at location NSSE-3.
                                           13

-------
Other Contaminants
Herbicides were detected in 26 of 40 surface soil samples. The herbicide 2,4-D was detected in
17 locations, ranging from 22 ppb to 10,000 ppb at location NSSD-2. The herbicide 2,4,5-TP
was detected at 10 surface locations at concentrations from 3 ppb to 3,900 ppb at location
NSSH-2. Concentrations of 2,4,5,-T ranged from 15 ppb to 2,900 ppb at location NSSD-2.
                         Table 3 - Pesticides in Surface Soils
PESTICIDE
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
delta-BHC
gamma-BHC
Heptachlor
Aldrin
Heptachlor epoxide
Endosulfan 1
Dieldrin
4,4'-DDE
Endrin
Endosutfan II
4,4'-DDD
Endosulfan Sulfate
4,4'-DDT
Methoxychlor
Endrin Ketone
Endrin Aldehyde
alpha-Chlordane
gamma-Chlordane
DETECTED
FREQUENCY
AT 40 LOCATIONS
18
9
12
16
10
19
12
1
12
10
5
9
4
4
21
2
6
1
28 •
25
MINIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
(PI*)
0.45JP
2.1JP
0.6JP
0.87J
3.0
0.71JP
0.58JP
_rT
0.72JP
0.33J
0.75JP
0.4JP
0.55JP
2.4JP
0.31JP
0.98JP
0.27JP
_LM
0.27JP
0.36JP
MAXIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
(PPb)
830X
1800X
41 OX
2100X
240
260
47
17JP
140P
25JP
12JP
54P
21 OP
48JP
360C
590PX
74P
6.2J
450C
900C
                                           14

-------
PESTICIDE
alpha-BHC
DETECTED
FREQUENCY
AT 40 LOCATIONS
18
MINIMUM -
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION

0.45JP
MAXIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
feffr)
830X
Data qualifers: "P" - There was greater than 25% difference between the columns.
"X" - The compound could not be confirmed using gas chromatography/mass
spectrometer ("GC/MS").
"J" - The reported result is an estimated value.
"C" - The compound was confirmed using GC/MS.

Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCCD) was detected in seven of 11 locations. The following samples showed
concentrations above the EPA Region El potential action level based on human health risks of
0.019 ppb for commercial/industrial soils: 0.42 ppb at location NSSI-3; 0.069 at location NSSE-
3; 0.056 at location NSSI-1; and 0.041 at location NSSG-3.

Polychlorinated biphenyls ("PCBs") were detected at 15 out of 40 surface soil samples. Three
samples collected at the north-western part of the Site had concentrations above the EPA Region
HI action level based'on human health risk of 370 ppb for the commercial/industrial soil: at
location NSSE-1, the concentration was 1,260 ppb; at location NSSA-2, the concentration was
490 ppb; at location NSSC-1, the concentration was 410 ppb.

Metals and cyanide concentrations did now show a specific spacial pattern. The concentrations
were similar to the background concentrations and only slightly above mean surface soil
concentrations in the United States. A few samples showed elevated concentrations including
arsenic (43.3 parts per million ("ppm") at location NSSC-1), and beryllium (5.1 ppm at location
NSSW-1).

C. Subsurface Soil Contamination

Nine subsurface soil samples were collected during the Remedial Investigation at the Site at
locations shown in Figure 6. These samples were collected from one to two foot intervals
ranging in depth from 4 to 32 feet below ground surface.

VOCs were detected in five out of nine subsurface soil samples at the Site. Table 4 summarizes
the sampling results. Benzene was detected at 11,000 ppb at location NB-42 at a depth of 30-32
feet.
15

-------
Table 4 - VOCs in Subsurface Soils
COMPOUND
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Benzene
Xylenes
2-Butanone (MEK)
Chlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichloroethene
DETECTION
FREQUENCY
AT 9 LOCATIONS
4
2>
3
3
2
2
1
MINIMUM ,
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
{ppb)
6J
4J
17
11J
970J
3J
-
MAXIMUM
DETECTED
CONCENTRATION
to**
2,700
86J
11.000J
580
1.000J
150
3J
Data qualifer: "J" - The reported concentration is an estimated value.
SVOCs, including PAHs, phenolics, aiid phthalates, were detected in six out of nine samples
located along the Back Channel and at the south central portion of the Site. Table 5 summarizes
detection frequency, iid concentration ranges of particular SVOCs. Figure 7 shows the total
concentration of particular groups of SVOC contaminants at each location. The highest
concentration of total PAHs was 38 ppm, at location NB-46 near the waste trench areas.
Background levels of PAHs, collected east of the Coraopolis Bridge, were approximately ten
times lower. Phenolic compounds were detected at three of the nine samples. The highest
concentration of phenolics was 28,000 ppb which was detected along the Back Channel at
location NB-42 at a depth of 30-32 feet. Phthalate compounds were detected at five sample
locations, ranging from 67 ppb at the background sample to 15,500 ppb at the trench area at
location NB-46 at a depth of 14-16 feet.

Pesticides were generally detected at concentrations of less than 1 ppm in the subsurface soils.
Three pesticides were detected above 1 ppm at two locations: DDT was detected at 1.5 ppm at
location NB-46 at a depth of 14-16 feet, and alpha-BHC and beta-BHC were detected at 7.9 ppm
and 5.9 ppm, respectively, at location NB-44 at a depth of 8-10 feet.

Herbicides were detected in subsurface soil in lower concentrations than in surface soils.
Concentrations of the herbicide 2,4-D ranged from 120 to 2,100 ppb; concentrations of 2,4,5-T
ranged from 31 to 370 ppb.

Metals and cyanide were found in similar concentrations to those found in surface soils. The
concentration of lead was similar to the background sample. The highest concentration of
mercury was 0.66 ppm at location NB-48. Cyanide was detected in three out of nine Site
samples in concentrations ranging from 4.4 ppm to 5.8 ppm (location NB-48 at 10 to 12 feet).
Neither mercury or cyanide were detected in the Site-specific background sample.
16